Iran Elections Thread

[Eframepilot]

Why do I have the feeling things are now going to get extremely ugly?

They already are extremely ugly. The only ways the situation could get worse are if either the authorities declare that protestors should be primarily shot rather than beaten, Tiananmen-style (unlikely at this point; they will probably stick to savage beatings and tear gas with only the occasional gunshot) OR if Rafsanjani gets the Assembly of Experts to depose Khameini but the Pasdaran refuses / splits and a full-blown civil war occurs.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I can't remember the last time the religious leadership split like this... probably not since 1979.

[Straha]

I can't remember the last time the religious leadership split like this... probably not since 1979.

Iran-Contra there was a split (funnily enough with Mousavi and Khamenei representing the hard-liners and Rafsanjani representing a softer line), there were other minor splits when Khomeini was still around but he quashed them like ants, and there were fissure lines throughout the late 90s and early 2000s, but nothing at all like this. And they all tended to center around major clerics, Montazeri and Yazdi for instance, not the entire bloody system. (Except for the Velayat-e Faqih, the idea of the Supreme Leader. That's always been suspect.)

[CJvR]

Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaie has withdrawn his complaint about voting irregularities and demand for a recount of the ballots, according to his Web site.

Seems as the regime have bribed/intimidated one rival to back down. The other two remain defiant.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/ ... index.html

[The Spartan]

MSNBC.com

Obama condemns Iran violence
President says he's 'appalled and outraged' by protesters' deaths
The Associated Press
updated 6:30 p.m. CT, Tues., June 23, 2009
WASHINGTON - Dramatically hardening the U.S. reaction to Iran's disputed elections and bloody aftermath, President Barack Obama condemned the violence against protesters Tuesday and lent his strongest support yet to their accusations the hardline victory was a fraud.

Obama, who has been accused by some Republicans of being too timid in his response to events in Iran, declared himself "appalled and outraged" by the deaths and intimidation in Tehran's streets — and scoffed at suggestions he was toughening his rhetoric in response to the criticism.

He suggested Iran's leaders will face consequences if they continue "the threats, the beatings and imprisonments" against protesters. NBC's Chuck Todd asked the president to spell out what consequences Iran might face if its crackdown continues.

But he repeatedly declined to say what actions the U.S. might take, retaining — for now — the option of pursuing diplomatic engagement with Iran's leaders over its suspected nuclear weapons program.

"We don't know yet how this thing is going to play out," the president said. "I know everyone here is on a 24-hour news cycle. I am not."

'Always on the right side of history'
Obama borrowed language from struggles throughout history against oppressive governments to condemn the efforts by Iran's rulers to crush dissent in the wake of June 12 presidential elections. Citing the searing video circulated worldwide of the apparent shooting death of Neda Agha Soltan, a 26-year-old young woman who bled to death in a Tehran street and now is a powerful symbol for the demonstrators, Obama said flatly that human rights violations were taking place.

"No iron fist is strong enough to shut off the world from bearing witness to peaceful protests of justice," he said during a nearly hourlong White House news conference dominated by the unrest in Iran. "Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history."

The eighth extended news conference of Obama's presidency also veered into the intricacies of the health care reform debate, the effectiveness of the economic stimulus package and a revealing personal moment in which he acknowledged he still is an occasional smoker despite trying to quit.


"I would say I'm 95 percent cured, but there are times where I mess up," the president said the day after signing an anti-smoking bill into law. He said he doesn't smoke daily, nor does he light up in front of his children.

The past 10 days in Iran have posed the strongest challenge to that nation's clerical rule since the system was established 30 years ago in the 1979 Islamic revolution. Before Tuesday, Obama mostly kept to a modulated response, calculating that, given Iranians' distrust of American involvement in their country, anything viewed as internal meddling from the White House would do the demonstrators more harm than good.

He also is deeply interested in preserving his promised policy concerning Iran and the threat its nuclear program poses: He contends the danger has only grown through decades of ruptured diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Tehran, particularly in the past eight years under President George W. Bush, and it is time to try to change that by re-establishing direct talks.


Taken to task by some Republicans
But Obama has been taken to task by some Republicans, accused of being too passive. Even with Iran's blackout of foreign press and attempted communications shutdowns, chaotic images of riot police beating and shooting protesters have seized the world's attention. At least 17 people have been killed.

Last Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said: "The president of the United States is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it. He's been timid and passive more than I would like."

Obama chose a less cautious approach on Tuesday, more directly challenging Iran's leaders to ease off and holding out the possibility of consequences if they do not.

"The Iranian government should understand that how they handle the dissent within their own country, generated indigenously, internally, from the Iranian people, will help shape the tone, not only for Iran's future, but also its relationship to other countries," Obama said.

He made clear that one recent overture to Iran — the authorization for U.S. embassies to invite Iranian officials to Independence Day parties — was likely to disappear without changes. "That's a choice the Iranians are going to have to make," Obama said.

Few options left for Obama
With an array of U.S. sanctions already in place against Iran, there are few options at Obama's disposal other than withdrawing his offer to talk. Regardless, Obama said it's too early for him to be more specific. "We are going to monitor and see how this plays itself out before we make any judgments about how we proceed," he said.


Answering a question from a Huffington Post writer that was solicited by the White House in advance, Obama was plainer than ever that the protesters' beliefs that the election was stolen from opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi may be legitimate. The government declared an overwhelming re-election victory for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and, while promising to look into scattered reports of irregularities, has ruled out annulling those results.


"We can't say definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country," Obama said. "What we know is that a sizable percentage of the Iranian people themselves, spanning Iranian society, consider this election illegitimate. It's not an isolated instance, a little grumbling here or there. There is significant question about the legitimacy of the election."

In Obama's comments, there also was a notable shift away from previous respectful references to Iran's most powerful cleric, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as the "Supreme Leader." Obama didn't use the term on Tuesday.

Asked if his stronger language was influenced by pressure from Republicans such as Graham and Sen. John McCain, Obama scoffed: "What do you think?" And he shot back at GOP critics: "Only I'm the president of the United States."

Advisers realize the new tone poses a risk that the U.S. president will become a scapegoat for Iran's leaders — just what Obama has sought to avoid. Administration officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe a sensitive strategy, said the disturbing images of the past few days warranted the tougher stance.

"I congratulate him for that, and we need to keep the pressure on them," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said after the news conference.

Obama speaks. I'm curious to see how this plays out from a US Diplomatic standpoint (to say nothing of how it turns out for the Iranian people).

[Chris OFarrell]

It looks to me like the hardliners are starting to get on top of the situation.

They have enough hardcore people on the ground now that they are appearing to break up the protests before they can mass to a large degree. They have arrested a whole slew of the real logistical people under the figureheads, making it much harder to co-ordinate action against the Government, and they are pushing harder and harder on media censorship and tightening control on phones and the net.

And we have one of the challengers publicly dropping his challenge, which isn't good for a unifying standpoint. IN situations like this, momentum is the all important critical factor. If it slows, you might well have a whole heep of people still VERY pissed off, but they won't actually do anything.
The next logical step would be a general strike, but I'm not sure if the population would be willing to go that way...

[The Spartan]

Yeah, but leaving a whole heap of people pissed off can't be good if/when this happens again.

[Tribun]

As it looks now, they managed to subdue the protest by brutal force. Meaning that for now nothing will change at all. But be hionest: it's not that we expected that things would actually change so fast, the hardliners are simply too powerful for that. But they shouldn't howl in triumph, as their victory is hollow. Ok, they managed to force everyone into silence, but that doesn't mean that the angry people will simply vanish over night. They won't forget this.

I think the one true thing that happened is that they finally got a taste what their state really is: a dictatorship where they have no say. Finally being confronted with the truth is only the first step on a long way.

[The Original Nex]

It took a year to topple the Shah. This isn't near over.

[Straha]

There have been very bloodily suppressed riots outside the old Majlis building in East Tehran. Reports say about ten thousand people showed up over the entire time, and the entire time there were mercilessly cruel beatings of everyone who showed up.

The fact that people would still show up there says something, I think.

It took a year to topple the Shah. This isn't near over.

There were forty days between the most major protests back then too. This is a long haul ordeal, the hard-liners may have the upper hand for the moment, but that wont save them in the long run.

Rezai is out, but I'd guess that's because he is conservative, and had the smallest and most localized power base according to most reports. That means that he's A. easier to threaten and B. easier to bribe. Also his main protection was his close connection to the Revolutionary Guard. If the high level arrests that have been reported are taking place then that connection might be gone and he might not have any safety net to rely on later.

[MarshalPurnell]

Maybe, maybe not. This isn't 1978-1979, and Khameni and Ahmadinejad are not the Shah. There is no chance in hell that protests would go on that long. Either they would succeed, or the government would secure the backing to send in troops and massacre them. The Shah failing to send in the Army was the mistake that cost him his throne, and the mullahs have nothing but contempt for his weakness there.

More importantly still, everyone's expectations of time-frame has been altered significantly as communication and transportation technology has improved. It's going to be plenty easy to lose momentum over the coming weeks, and there are certainly signs that the regime's crackdowns have succeeded in encouraging protesters to stay home. Crowd size seems to have shrunk dramatically and the Basij and riot police had no trouble at all dispersing protests before they organized today. It is also apparent that the arrests and detention of protest leaders and organizers by the hundreds has been largely successful, and the failure of Moussavi or any other moderate political figures to show up in person for days now seems to be demoralizing. The loss of momentum makes it less likely that the moderate opposition will sway enough members of the Guardian Council or the Assembly of Experts to force a political solution, and the diminishing size of the protests makes it less likely that the regime will need to resort to a Tienanmen style massacre to restore order in Tehran. There is the possibility that tomorrow will see a resurgence in the protests, since Moussavi has reportedly called for a protest then in honor of the people slain in the previous week with the backing of some clerics. Still, I suspect the failure to call for and organize a general strike after last Friday was probably the turning point, and the regime is likely to win now.

Even worse, the relatively "soft" tactics it has used against the protests thus far means it may not have squandered all of its legitimacy. If the regime can piece together an absurd tissue of lies about British agitators and Israeli terrorists to explain away the violence, as it seems to be doing, and purges all of the moderate figures in government, then it may manage to regain support among the broader sectors of Iranian society. The students obviously feel their intelligence was insulted by the election, with cause, but the workers and bazaaris may very well accept such a narrative and provide Ahmadinejad with the necessary base of support to have a "successful" presidency.

I would like to be more optimistic, but frankly it seems as if the hardline coup has succeeded. Since Moussavi's election would hardly have threatened the Islamic Republic, it seems likely that this was all about maintaining a more radical and revolutionary direction in Iranian foreign and social policy. That portends nothing good for the Middle East.

[Straha]

Maybe, maybe not. This isn't 1978-1979, and Khameni and Ahmadinejad are not the Shah. There is no chance in hell that protests would go on that long. Either they would succeed, or the government would secure the backing to send in troops and massacre them. The Shah failing to send in the Army was the mistake that cost him his throne, and the mullahs have nothing but contempt for his weakness there.

Considering the number of senior figures who've switched over they might not have a choice, unless they make serious concessions.

More importantly still, everyone's expectations of time-frame has been altered significantly as communication and transportation technology has improved. It's going to be plenty easy to lose momentum over the coming weeks, and there are certainly signs that the regime's crackdowns have succeeded in encouraging protesters to stay home. Crowd size seems to have shrunk dramatically and the Basij and riot police had no trouble at all dispersing protests before they organized today. It is also apparent that the arrests and detention of protest leaders and organizers by the hundreds has been largely successful, and the failure of Moussavi or any other moderate political figures to show up in person for days now seems to be demoralizing. The loss of momentum makes it less likely that the moderate opposition will sway enough members of the Guardian Council or the Assembly of Experts to force a political solution, and the diminishing size of the protests makes it less likely that the regime will need to resort to a Tienanmen style massacre to restore order in Tehran. There is the possibility that tomorrow will see a resurgence in the protests, since Moussavi has reportedly called for a protest then in honor of the people slain in the previous week with the backing of some clerics. Still, I suspect the failure to call for and organize a general strike after last Friday was probably the turning point, and the regime is likely to win now.

I think it wise to withhold judgment on the size of the protests until after the Neda memorial demonstrations tomorrow and after the full news on the Bahrestan protests get out today. Also protests of tens of thousands of people in the face of intense Basij beatings is nothing to scoff at. Says something about the guts the protesters have.

Even worse, the relatively "soft" tactics it has used against the protests thus far means it may not have squandered all of its legitimacy. If the regime can piece together an absurd tissue of lies about British agitators and Israeli terrorists to explain away the violence, as it seems to be doing, and purges all of the moderate figures in government, then it may manage to regain support among the broader sectors of Iranian society.

I very much doubt an "acceptable lie" can come to the fore. Especially as some regime officials are claiming that a BBC reporter hired thugs to kill Neda for a documentary he's shooting. As with all things we must have patience here.

I would like to be more optimistic, but frankly it seems as if the hardline coup has succeeded. Since Moussavi's election would hardly have threatened the Islamic Republic, it seems likely that this was all about maintaining a more radical and revolutionary direction in Iranian foreign and social policy. That portends nothing good for the Middle East.

Again, patience. At least for a couple more weeks. Rafsanjani has yet to make his move, the 'recount' has yet to come out, Qalibaf's calls for allowing peaceful protests have yet to be responded to, and the Neda protest has yet to take place. When these all happen, then pass judgment.

[Chris OFarrell]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009 ... 607797.htm

Rumors are coming through of a very brutal day in Iran, probably the most violent yet...

Print Email Share Add to My Stories Comments (52)

'Blood everywhere' in fresh Iran crackdown
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker for AM

Posted 3 hours 46 minutes ago
Updated 21 minutes ago

There are reports of another brutal crackdown in Iran, with websites, internet bloggers and eyewitnesses all talking of a bloodbath in Tehran.

The reports suggest thousands of police and pro-government militia have used firearms, clubs and teargas to suppress another opposition rally.

There is even one account of a nine-year-old girl being shot.

Iran's ongoing ban on all foreign media makes it impossible to verify many of the accounts but amateur videos posted last night on YouTube appear to show there were fierce clashes between supporters of Iran's opposition and the security forces.

Hundreds of protesters had headed to Tehran's Baharestan Square for another street rally against Iran's presidential election result.

The first reports of what went on there have been broadcast on CNN and Al Jazeera television.

One eyewitness reported riot police beating people, "even police beating women".

Internet accounts too give a chilling picture of the extent of the violence. It is impossible to verify every entry on the microblogging site Twitter.

But some of the tweeters who have shown themselves to be reliable - including foreign reporters with good contacts in Tehran - have posted the following messages in the past 12 hours.

"Lots of reports of heavy gunfire and clashes in Baharestan. One guy is calling it a massacre," one says.

"We heard the women are being beaten so badly they have to amputate their limbs," another says.

"We saw militia with axe chopping people like meat - blood everywhere - like butcher."


'Acts of terror'

And there was this:

"The most disturbing are reports of a nine-year-old girl being shot @ Baharestan and the basij [militia] won't let people near her to help."

The website of Iran's main opposition candidate, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, gives some weight to the other accounts.

"Many people have been beaten and injured at the protests across Tehran today," the website says.

"At Baharestan the police were waiting inside local mosques for the protesters to arrive. At this point many would consider the actions of the basij and police as acts of terror.

"This is amazing that even in the year 2009 such primitive policing still exists."

Much of the protesters' anger has been directed at Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who they describe as a dictator.

But earlier in the day he too appeared in the media on a government-backed TV station to declare Iran would not bow to the opposition demands for a new election.

"I insist on enforcing the rule of law," the Ayatollah said.

"We will only accept the law of the Islamic Republic. Surely our system and our people will not yield to pressure."

And through all this, the man at the centre of the crisis, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has shown no hint of awareness or care about the protests against him.

Iranian television showed him hosting a bilateral delegation from Belarus, smiling and chatting as if there had never been any election at all.

Reports are sketchy at this point, all we have is third party information to go on...but not good.

[wautd]

The radio just mentioned dozens of intellectuals/professors have been taken into custody.

[Starglider]

I was discussing this with an Iranian friend yesterday. He said that the reason why the establishment was so quick to blame the UK specifically was that a) the BBC Persian service is doing a pretty good job of balanced/unbiased reporting in the region, which the regieme hates, and b) the UK has frozen a lot of funds belonging to high-level Iranian officials, and their relatives.

Unfortunately he thinks that the most likely outcome of this is Iran turning into a police state, with the government eventually coming down, but not for another 10+ years. However the prognosis is heavily dependent on the oil price - every time it comes down the regieme is weakened, but unfortunately the natural reaction of the markets to this unrest is to drive the price up.

[Archaic`]

The radio just mentioned dozens of intellectuals/professors have been taken into custody.

Apparently, all those arrested had met the opposition leader in person over the past few days.

[Straha]

Video from the demonstrations yesterday.

A good article from the Tehran Bureau on the Assembly of Experts

The Iranian Constitution is a roadmap in which all roads lead to the Supreme Leader. He exercises control over all branches of the government and every division of the armed forces. He is appointed to the position for life, and his power is tied to age-old traditions of leadership in Shiite Islam. And yet, a single constitutional body can theoretically exercise ultimate power over the position of the Leader. That body is the Assembly of Experts, an 88-member council trusted with the responsibility to elect, and even dismiss, the Supreme Leader.

The first Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, never needed the Assembly, having gained his position through his role in the 1979 Revolution. It was the Assembly of Experts, however, that elected Ayatollah Khamenei, the current Leader, nearly two decades ago. It was a controversial choice, as Khamenei was not yet an Ayatollah, and lacking a major qualification for the position. Since then, the Assembly has existed as a virtually inactive body, meeting twice a year and releasing statements expressing satisfaction with its one, extremely important decision. Today, however, the Assembly once again is the center of attention, as it is perhaps the last governmental body not controlled by the supporters of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the powerful faction that has led his ‘election coup’ in Iran.

To better understand the current role of the Assembly of Experts, some background information is required.

In 2005, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani lost a lack-luster election to Ahmadinejad, a little-known provincial governor who had recently become the mayor of Tehran. Rafsanjani and Mehdi Karrubi, another candidate in those elections, strongly implied that they had lost due to widespread electoral fraud. Karrubi, who a few hours into the counting of the votes seemed to be heading for a run-off with Rafsanjani, famously remarked that he had closed his eyes for a siesta and woken up to discover that Ahmadinejad was now leading him in the polls. Nonetheless, the election results were certified and the defeated candidates accepted the outcome.

Ahmadinjed came to power with the backing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC) and the Basij paramilitary units. These two divisions of the armed forces, unlike the Iranian Army which remains outside the cities, are ideological groups present in all urban and rural regions of the country. Ahmadinjead and some members of his cabinet have belonged to various ranks of the IRGC. They wield an ultra-conservative rhetoric, and many of them are students of a powerful, shadowy cleric, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, who has been linked to a series of publicized political chain-murders. Soon after the 2005 elections, reformist politicians and those close to Rafsanjani began warning that a “Talibanite” faction, the students of Mesbah Yazdi, had begun a systematic takeover of every aspect of the IRGC and the government.

Understanding the connection between Ahmadinejad, Mesbah Yazdi, and the higher ranks of the IRGC is imperative to understanding the current situation in Iran. Information on the topic is particularly sparse, because Mesbah Yazdi is not well-known to the Western media. Muhammad Sahimi has described the relationship in clear detail in his article The Leaders of Iran’s ‘Election Coup.’ Suffice it to say here that Mesbah Yazdi is the confirmed religious leader of the faction supporting Ahmadinejad, he is openly opposed to any democratic aspect of the Islamic Republic, and he is rumored to entertain the ambition of one day assuming the position of the Supreme Leader.

Yet just when it seemed that Rafsanjani’s political life could be over, he made an unexpected gambit. In 2006, he nominated himself to the Assembly of Experts and was elected as the first candidate from the district of Tehran. Mesbah Yazdi, also nominated, earned half as many votes as Rafsanjani, though just enough to get elected.

Elections for the Assembly of Experts are a rare occurrence — they are held every eight years and with minor pomp. As with other elected bodies, all candidates must be approved by the Guardian Council, with the additional requirement that they must also prove their mastery of Islamic law and jurisprudence. Very few fit the bill, even though the theological standards have been lowered a few times. Both Rafsanjani and Mesbah Yazdi tried to get as many loyal candidates as they could into the Assembly. When the results were announced, it seemed that victory was with the so-called “pragmatic” camp associated with Rafsanjani. Rafsanjani’s success was confirmed a year later when Ayatollah Meshkini, the elderly, de-facto chairman of the Assembly passed away, and Rafsanjani nominated himself for the position. Mesbah nominated himself as well, but then withdrew in favor of Jannati, a more popular cleric who is also the head of the Guardian Council. Out of the 80 votes cast, Rafsanjani won 46, thus becoming the chairman. When the Assembly held its next board election two years later, Rafsanjani performed even better, gaining 51 votes, while two members abstained.

Why did the group siding with Mesbah Yazdi not manage to control the Assembly? The most important reason is that Mesbah Yazdi, an ultra conservative (he has openly labeled as non-Islamic such concepts as election, freedom of political parties, and human rights) is not supported by most other prominent conservative clerics. In fact, Ayatollah Khomeini himself was so mistrustful of Mesbah Yazdi and those around him that he banned their organization, the Hojjatiyeh Society. It was only after Khomeini’s death that members of Hojjatiyeh managed to rise to the higher positions of the government. Mesbah Yazdi preaches a government in which the Supreme Leader (vali-e faqih) is in sole control of all aspects of life. Though endearing to Ayatollah Khamenei, the idea does not please other clerics who see themselves as entitled to a share of the power. So few prominent clerics belong to Mesbah’s faction, that during the 2006 election for the Assembly his camp nominated less than 20 candidates altogether.

Another reason for Mesbah’s disappointment is Rafsanjani’s power and influence, based on his long revolutionary history and bolstered by his immense wealth and connections. He did manage to nominate close allies to the Assembly, chief among them Hassan Rouhani, who is connected to the Iranian Army, as opposed to the IRGC. Rafsanjani has also struck a tenuous alliance with another member, Shahroudi, who is the head of Iran’s judiciary branch as well as the Assembly’s vice-chairman. As long as Rafsanjani is in place, Mesbah Yazdi, who is also the only member of his faction somewhat qualified to ascend to the position of the Supreme Leader, will have a very hard time controlling the Assembly.

It has become obvious to the supporters of Mesbah Yazdi and Ahmadinejad that Rafsanjani’s power must be quickly checked, diminished, or even eliminated. Rafsanjani’s political demise could also release from his family’s hold certain profitable economic sectors. The conflict was made apparent when Ahmadinejad finally broke all decorum during his televised presidential debate with Mousavi, and openly accused Rafsanjani, a chief Mousavi supporter, of corruption. The accusation was a declaration of war — and after Ahmadinejad’s rigging of the presidential elections, Rafsanjani is by far the weaker side of the battle.

As Tehran and other cities erupt in protests against Ahamdinejad, it is rumored that Rafsanjani, who has kept quiet since the elections, has traveled to the religious city of Qom to confer with those clerics who oppose Mesbah Yazdi’s complete takeover. Every day in Iran new speculations emerge regarding Rafsanjani’s dealings with the Assembly. Websites supporting Ahmadinejad released the rumor that Rafsanjani has resigned his position (his son has dismissed the claim.) Some say he has managed to enlist the support of the majority of the Assembly’s members, while others report that he has returned from Qom, defeated.

There is a reason why the topic engenders such varied conjectures and attracts such intense attention. According to article 111 of the Iranian Constitution, whenever the Leader becomes incapable of fulfilling his constitutional duties, or loses one of the qualifications of Leadership, or it becomes known that he did not possess some of the qualifications to begin with, he can be dismissed. These qualifications consist of mastery of Islamic jurisprudence, justice and piety, and “the right political and social perspicacity, courage, and prudence.” The power to make the decision for dismissal lies with the Assembly of Experts.

A specific commission within the Assembly is responsible for receiving and reviewing complaints submitted by members. Should the commission find the case to be of sufficient merit, it can call a meeting of the general Assembly. If, however, the commission decides to discard the case, a majority of the members can still call for an emergency meeting. All these proceedings are to be conducted in complete secrecy.

It is highly unlikely that Rafsanjani would be able to push for a dismissal under current conditions. Although he may have gained the votes of the majority of the members in the Assembly’s board elections, there is no indication that the same members would support removing Ayatollah Khamenei from power and risking the wrath of the IRGC. Such a move would utterly destabilize the regime, to which many of the clerics have tied their fortunes. It is a high price to pay, and few clerics, perhaps not even Rafsanjani, would pay it in order to avoid a Mesbah-Ahmadinejad take-over. It bears mentioning that although a majority of the members voted for Rafsanjani as the chairman, 56 of them also voted for Mohammad Yazdi, a close ally of Ayatollah Khamenei and a friend of Mesbah’s, as the vice vice-chairman of the Assembly.

Only if the current conditions deteriorate to a point that the very existence, and not just the legitimacy, of the regime becomes endangered, then the Assembly of Experts may present itself as a last-ditch battleground for the various forces. Until then, Rafsanjani’s position in the Assembly is a bargaining chip with which he can perhaps secure himself a better deal in a game rigged to favor his opponents. It is with that understanding that Ayatollah Khamenei, in this week’s Friday prayers, spoke unveiled threats to the street protesters, while reserving a more pragmatic rhetoric toward Rafsanjani. A riled up public and Rafsanjani with his back against the wall are a dangerous combination to have as one’s opponents.

For now, the only hope of the reformist camp is increasing intensification of the protests (which does not seem to be happening) and the slow enlisting of new, influential supporters within Iran’s governing systems.

There are reports of marches again today, and similar reports of extreme police brutality. See an example of their earlier handiwork here VERY GRAPHIC.

Reports are that the internet has been cut in near totality, so we wont be hearing much for a while. Khamenei is addressing Friday Prayers tomorrow, and then Rafsanjani may, or may not, be giving a speech of his own. There are all sorts of rumours flying about on the second one, but Khamenei will be giving his speech.

Things are dire, but they're still kicking.

[The Original Nex]

See an example of their earlier handiwork here VERY GRAPHIC.

For sure they are being unconscionably brutal. However,as far as this picture is concerned, a reader of Andrew Sullivan wrote in saying:

I am a surgeon, and to me, that photo shows someone who has had an emergency room thoracotomy as an attempt at control of bleeding or for resuscitation, not an ax wound. Other signs that medical care was given are the EKG lead over the eye, and the angiocath placed just below the left clavicle, probably in an attempt to access the subclavian vein. If I am right about the incision being surgical, I don’t see an obvious cause of death here.

[Broomstick]

And the Empire strikes back....

Bad things being reported from Iran again today - wounded protesters being seized at hospitals, and a few other things I've highlighted.

(CNN) -- Iranians wounded during protests are being seized at hospitals by members of an Islamic militia, an Amnesty International official told CNN.
Ayatollah Ahmed Khatami says rioters in Iran will be "firmly" dealt with if they continue to protest.

"The Basijis are waiting for them," said Banafsheh Akhlaghi, western regional director of the human rights group, referring to the government's paramilitary arm that has cracked down on protesters during the violent aftermath of the June 12 presidential election.

Amnesty International has collected accounts from people who have left Iran and expatriates with relatives there who say the Basij has prohibited medical professionals from getting identification information from demonstrators wounded in the streets, Akhlaghi said on Saturday. They are also not allowed to ask how the injuries happened.

Once the patients are treated, the militia removes them from the hospital to an undisclosed location, she said.

Iran has restricted international news agencies, including CNN, from reporting inside the Islamic republic. However, CNN has received similar accounts, including that of a woman who arrived in the United States from Iran with a broken ankle and thumb. Video Watch reports of the crackdown on protesters at their homes »

The woman, who didn't want to be identified for fear of her safety, said she was injured in a rally, but was too scared to go to a hospital. Instead, a doctor came to her home to treat her.

"The point is, when they are being taken to the hospital they don't actually get there," her friend who accompanied her told CNN last week. "Just like the reporters are being told not to report what they really see. Hospitals, administrative levels, are being told to stay out of the public because they're saying you're accusing the regime of being hostile."

Amnesty International is also reporting the detention of at least 70 scholars and eight politicians -- most from former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami's administration -- in addition to several opposition activists and international journalists.

More than two weeks into turmoil, Iran's leaders turned up the heat Friday as a high-ranking cleric warned protesters that they would be punished "firmly" and shown no mercy.

"Rioters and those who mastermind the unrest must know the Iranian nation will not give in to pressure and accept the nullification of the election results," said Ayatollah Ahmed Khatami during Friday prayers in Tehran, according to Iran's state-run Press TV.

"I ask the Judiciary to firmly deal with these people and set an example for everyone," Khatami said.

Khatami also blamed demonstrators for the death of Neda Agha-Soltan, the young woman who emerged as a powerful symbol of opposition after her death a week ago was captured on a cell phone video. Khatami said the foreign media had used Neda for propaganda purposes.

Human Rights Watch, citing interviews with people in Iran, said Friday the Basij is carrying out brutal nighttime raids, destroying property in private homes and beating civilians in an attempt to stop nightly rooftop chants of "Allahu Akbar" (God is great).

Uh... right. This is supposed to be a country run by religious types, but their true colors are showing a bit, don't you think? What kind of Muslim would forbid declaring "Allahu Akbar"?

The nighttime chanting is emblematic of the protests 30 years ago during the Iranian revolution, which toppled the monarchy of the shah.

Ah, yes, they're worried about being overthrown. Sucks when the rabble starts being roused, doesn't it? I guess the beatings will continue until morale improves....

"While most of the world's attention is focused on the beatings in the streets of Iran during the day, the Basiji are carrying out brutal raids on people's apartments during the night," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director for Human Rights Watch.

Residents from northern Tehran neighborhoods told Human Rights Watch that the Basij fired live rounds into the air, in the direction of buildings from which they believed the chants were sounding.

Basij members kicked down doors and "when they entered the homes, they beat" people, a resident said.

The rights group said it had collected similar accounts of violence from several other neighborhoods. Such accounts also are consistent with numerous accounts CNN has received of nighttime roundups of opposition activists and international journalists from their homes. Amateur videos sent to CNN also show members of the Basij, wearing plain shirts and pants and wielding clubs and hoses, dispersing protesters and beating a handful of Iranians at a time.

Unrest in Iran erupted after the presidential elections in which hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner. Ahmadinejad's chief rival, Mir Hossein Moussavi, called the results fraudulent and has asked for a cancellation of the vote.

The Guardian Council, which approves all candidates running for office and verifies election results

[Starglider]

Human Rights Watch, citing interviews with people in Iran, said Friday the Basij is carrying out brutal nighttime raids, destroying property in private homes and beating civilians in an attempt to stop nightly rooftop chants of "Allahu Akbar" (God is great).

Uh... right. This is supposed to be a country run by religious types, but their true colors are showing a bit, don't you think? What kind of Muslim would forbid declaring "Allahu Akbar"?

The literal translation isn't really the meaning of the phrase; according to an Iranian friend of mine, the actual meaning is pretty much 'I am angry' and has been for decades. He said that this unfortunately gives the impression that the protestors are religious fanatics (to Westerners), when in fact they are mostly secular.

[Big Orange]

The shit is coming down now:

British embassy staffers held in Iran over unrest
updated 1 hour, 12 minutes ago

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Local staff members at the British Embassy in Tehran have been arrested, the Foreign Office in London told CNN Sunday, confirming earlier reports from Iran's government-backed Press TV.

Press TV said eight staffers had been seized for their role in the unrest following the disputed presidential elections on June 12. The Foreign Office did not confirm the number of people held.

Earlier Sunday the Foreign Office said it had recently "received a number of, sometimes confused, reports that British nationals or others with British connections had been detained. We continue to raise them with the Iranian authorities."

A spokesman further added: "People with a connection to the UK have been arrested all week."

Last week, Tehran expelled two British diplomats. London responded by kicking out two Iranian envoys.

Iran then recalled its ambassador to Britain, saying it would reconsider its diplomatic ties with the United Kingdom.

Withdrawing an ambassador is a very serious gesture in diplomatic circles.

The Iranian government has long accused other countries, especially Britain, of "meddling" in its affairs, but has offered no proof any outside forces have been involved in the unrest after the disputed June 12 presidential election.

On Wednesday, Iranian authorities said they had arrested several foreign nationals, some with British passports, for allegedly helping foment the disturbances.

At the time, the Foreign Office said it was looking into the claims. It said it was aware that one of the arrested nationals was Washington Times reporter Iason Athanasiadis, who also goes by Jason Fowden.

Athanasiadis holds British and Greek passports.

Meanwhile, the Iranian government will allow a demonstration at Tehran's Ghoba mosque Sunday, CNN has confirmed.

The gathering is officially meant to honor Mohammad Beheshti, a hero of the 1979 Islamic Revolution who was killed in a bombing on this date in 1981.

CNN

This is an act of war.

[The Grim Squeaker]

This is an act of war.

As opposed to the USA embassy during the 79 revolution? Still, this has extremely serious potential, arrested and tossed out of the country or to be held? Guess we'll see.

[The Original Nex]

So far it indicates that only "local staff members" of the embassy have been arrested. It doesn't sound like the government has stormed the British embassy and taken people, but rather they're arresting Iranians who work at the embassy. But yea they're ratcheting up against the UK and USA. Although one wonders if they'll expand their "outrage" at the entire EU now that the whole region is condemning the violence. Even Medvedev is "concerned."

[Broomstick]

It sure is starting to remind me of 1979. The hostage crisis back then extended over 400 days if I recall correctly, all the way in early 1981. Well, why should anyone be surprised? The people in official power now are the ones who instigated that, and didn't Mahmoud Ahmadinejad play a key role in the embassy hostages in 1979?

It's not over. We're getting into a long grind here it looks like.

[Chris OFarrell]

There are some key differences here though.

In '79, damn near the entire country was screaming 'DEATH TO THE GREAT SATAN!' and stormed the Embassy.

Here, most of the population right now couldn't give two hoots about the US or UK, despite the Government painting them as the people responsible for all of this. And they haven't grabbed anyone from the Embassy...yet, no-one on diplomatic passports. Just some poor locals they can beat the crap out of.