Say what? Iran accuses US of meddling!

[timeforpeace]

President Obama, as we saw the other night, has gone out of his way not to interfere or make provocative statements. Just goes to show you, no matter what he does, Iran will twist it:



"Iran accused the United States on Wednesday of "intolerable" meddling in its internal affairs, alleging for the first time that Washington has fueled a bitter postelection dispute. Opposition supporters marched in Tehran's streets for a third straight day to protest the outcome of the balloting.

The Iranian government summoned the Swiss ambassador, who represents U.S. interests in Iran, to complain about American interference, state-run Press TV reported.

The English-language channel quoted the government as calling Western interference "intolerable."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090617/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

He might as well support the protestors now since what we were worried about happening, accusations of meddling in their affairs, happened anyway. The protestors' goals are his goals philosophically, meaning free elections, free press, freedom from repression. Ironically, France and Germany have both issued strongly worded condemnations yet not been criticized like this.

[billyoc]

1. We ARE meddling.

[supernova]

5. Yeah, because twitter *didn't*

go down for scheduled maintenance the other night.

:eyes:

That's what I call dysfunctional and passive-aggressive.

I agree with the OP, POTUS should just come out and directly support the protesters now.

[billyoc]

9. No, because people are running easily traceable Tor servers that the Revolutionary Guard

can use as evidence that the Americans are behind the protesters.

[Ohio Joe]

14. There is evidence of that? - nt

[billyoc]

16. Evidence that people are doing it? They're bragging about it openly, playing at revolutionaries

and they're going to get a lot of dissidents slaughtered.

It would have been better to let the Europeans handle this, but that's not the American way.

[EFerrari]

19. It's devolved into a big game for some people.

I know I've been really annoying about this but, sheesh, it's not a game. :(

[Ohio Joe]

21. You implied the US govt. is doing it

I've seen no one from the govt bragging about doing it. Can you provide a link to the govt bragging about it?

[aquart]

24. Or doing it. As the revolt shows, people and gov't are NOT the same.

[billyoc]

27. You INFERRED that. I don't think the U.S. Gov't is meddling, and I didn't imply it.

[Ohio Joe]

30. uhh, the OP is about...

Iran claiming the US govt is interfering. You said we are... WTF did you mean then?

[billyoc]

32. You Twitter fetishists playing at revolutionaries.

[Ohio Joe]

37. too funny

You can't put in much more then a subject line (and are to rude to bother putting in a "nt"), first claim the US govt is behind the trouble in Iran (and yes, you did, there was no other context to take it), then claim they are bragging about it, then decline to show proof, then back off from it and now... your going to not only call me a "twitter fetishist"... oh the irony, just too rich... but what now? Claiming I'm behind all this? Damn... I really need to start getting paid for all the crap I'm accused of doing.

[billyoc]

38. NO, I didn't claim the U.S. Government was behind it, nor do I think that. In fact...

Oh! Not only does he leave out the "nt", but he puts in ellipses!

[Ohio Joe]

39. It is called context

Since you have now backed off of your claim, one can only guess that you were unable to write what you meant. It changes nothing, it is plain to see. Regardless, are you up for trying to elaborate on what you actually do mean? Perhaps with some proof as well instead of just wild claims?

[billyoc]

40. As I told you before, that was not my claim originally, and that was not what I thought.

I don't want to link to DU threads bragging about this.
Are you really trying to tell me that you haven't read threads here on DU bragging about this?


Really?

[Ohio Joe]

42. Yes really

If I knew WTF you were talking about I would be trying so f'ing hard to drag it out of you. I hate to tell you but there are a crapload of threads about twitter and Iran. I know only enough about twitter to know its a pretty stupid way for anyone to get their news... or anything believable. So, I've only read threads that look like they might contain something concrete instead of rumors.

[billyoc]

44. Well, OK! We agree that Twitter a pretty stupid way for anyone to get their news.

The thing that the Americans(tm) are doing is setting up proxy servers(Tor servers) for people to use for Twittering.

These servers are supposed to be anonymous, but they're easily traced by network security people. So, some people
here on DU have been bragging about setting these servers up for the protesters to use. The Iranian security services
can then use the fact that the IP addresses are in America(tm) to take to the head mothterfuckers in charge and say,
"Look, it's the fucking Americans(tm)! We have to send in the tanks, it's 1953 all over again!!"

Now, as far as proving this, there's some kind of rule about linking to other DU posts when you're criticizing the posters, and I don't want to hear from the proprietors about it.

[Ohio Joe]

46. Now I see what your trying to say

I think whats going to happen there is going to happen regardless though. The people of Iran know what kind of government they have and what they are capable of doing. A handful of twitter accounts is a pretty lame excuse if they start bringing out the tanks and I don't expect anyone is going to buy it. I find this whole blaming twitter for what is happening to be non-sense.

[aquart]

23. ARE the Europeans handling it?

Let me know what wonderful things they have done.

[billyoc]

28. It doesn't matter whether or not they ARE handling it, you CAN'T.

[anonymous171]

35. Americans =/= American government. nt

[aquart]

2. Yet the real busy hand here appears to be Russian.

Russians reported to be training Basij troops.

[Hannah Bell]

4. That's on one side. What's on the other?

[aquart]

22. Well, I don't do "fair and balanced."

I tend to think shooting students, invading and trashing colleges, and reporting that 141% of a town has voted is just WRONG.

Let me know what balances that.

[EFerrari]

17. And Chavez "reportedly" sent riot police. Is there a source? n/t

[aquart]

25. Haven't heard that. Heard 5000 Hezbollah came in just before the election.

And that Russian has been training the Basij. Nothing about anything as far away as Venezuela. Sounds really dumb.

[EFerrari]

29. Is there a good source for either of those things?

We know that the Saudis are pouring money in because they openly have supported Mousavi.

[aquart]

41. Define "good source."

The student I'm following believes the Ansar to be Hezbollah because they look like Arabs (keeping in mind that Persians think Arabs are inferior scum), speak Arabic and don't understand Farsi (which, come to think of it, they would if they were Iranian Arabs...something which has been suggested), and are doing what the Iranian police and military are refusing to do: hurt and kill Iranians. It could all be true, or it could be a wishful myth they need to tell themselves: that their own people wouldn't shoot to kill. There is, however, a common understanding that Iran has two armies, the regular army which defends the nation from outside attack, and Khameini's (?) own army which he uses to maintain internal control. There was even a tweet saying the police are so little trusted by the Supreme Leader that they have no guns in their holsters. The plain clothes basij have guns. We saw the photographs.

As for the Russian training, I don't know what the sources are for that belief since I don't speak or read Farsi. The current government is on very cozy terms with Russia, so it's a reasonable assumption to make.

I also saw, for the first time, a tweet from this student claiming that Hamas is with Hezbollah in Iran. I have no idea how he would be able to make such a distinction or how he would obtain evidence for it. (And the more tired he gets, the more sucky his English.)

Disclaimer: I'm using terms as I saw them used, like Basij and Ansar, but I could be off. Anyone with better knowledge PLEASE feel free to correct my usage and information. I'm learning as I go.

[EFerrari]

43. I am learning, too, aquart, just how much I don't know about Iran.

I guess my deal is to try to be a little careful because both sides seem to use rumor as a very finely honed tool. :)

[aquart]

45. Just found this site which is trying to help with the terms.

<https://sites.google.com/site/tatsumairanupdate/> Had no idea the Ansar Hezbullah and Lebanese Hezbullah are considered different. Where is Ansar?

[EFerrari]

47. I don't know. I have to look it up!

lol

:hi:

Thank you for the link.

[babylonsister]

3. And that's precisely why Obama doesn't want to interfere and give

the Iranians actual ammo. If the rethugs would get their heads out of their butts, they'd realize that.

[EFerrari]

20. You know, there are people in the State Department who are not

on board with Obama. I noticed it during that OAS summit in Tobago. Obama went out of his way to be positive and the State Department official with him would pipe up after him and undercut what he'd said. Now, we have this very public report about the State Department intervening at Twitter. Why was that made public, I have to ask?

There's other stuff, too, in Bolivia and Nicaragua that I know of, but these mofos bear watching because they seem not to be pulling in sync with Obama. And it's not just "good cop, bad cop", either.

[babylonsister]

31. Do you know of anyone in the State Dept. that has criticized

Obama for his desire not to meddle with the Iranian election? All I've heard from are rethugs who think that way, and even people like Buchanan support us staying out of it.

I wasn't aware of anything untoward happening in Tobago. I wonder if they were chastised for piping up? I think Obama is quite capable of speaking for himself and think he'd be angry if someone went against what he said.

As for making twitter available, I guess some could take that as interfering, but all they did was ask the powers that be to rearrange their maintenance schedule. I for one was glad; there needs to be some outlet to get news out of what's going on there. I'm sure the ruling class in Iran would disagree.

[EFerrari]

36. It was fine for State to contact Twitter, not fine for it to be leaked and printed in the NYTs.

That's just provocative. Why was that made public? It probably wasn't even necessary. There would probably have been an outcry had they not postponed their maintenance. Instead, there's a high profile article in the NYTs about how the State Department is conferring with Twitter and Facebook and others regarding implementing US diplomatic goads. :crazy:

As far as Tobago, we were watching the proceedings pretty carefully in the LatAm forum. The senior guy from State at the event was putting out hawkish statements about Cuba to the press after Obama went out of his way to be measured -- as he usually is about foreign relations.

The thing is, everybody automatically thinks about CIA when they think about messing around with foreign governments when State is just as active and not entirely separate from the intel community. I hope that kid that leaked the Twitter contact gets spanked.

[GodlessBiker]

6. To not act is to act. We would be meddling no matter what we did.

It's how we act (read meddle) that matters.

[Caliman73]

7. So, because they are accusing us of meddling, we should actually do it?

That is like saying, since the grumpy, crazy old neighbor accuses you of stealing fruit from his trees, we should actually do so. I think the President is making a wise decision supporting the right to protest, but not challenging the legitimacy of the current government. It is just arrogant to think that we have any right to interfere with the operations of sovereign nations.

[monmouth]

8. Maybe they were watching John McLame...n/t

[HeresyLives]

10. That was the plan from the beginning.

To accuse the US of meddling - in an attempt to reunite the people against 'outsiders'.

Only Iranians have Twitter, and they know it isn't true. Another tech triumph. :)


edited for clarity.

[Still Sensible]

11. Predictable. Without the Great Satan

the mullahs and Ahmanutjob don't have an outside bogeyman to stir up anger at. True or not, the claim was IMO inevitable. I suppose they may feel they have enough media back under their censored control that they'll get some traction with their audience and try to turn some of the anger currently aimed at themselves to the west... as usual.

[lamp_shade]

12. McCain, Pence, et al..... SHUT UP!!!

[Liberal_Dog]

13. The Good Ol' USA Would Never Do Anything Like That

I demand that the Iranians apologize immediately for that outrageous and irresponsible statement. :sarcasm:

[aquart]

26. Sorry, this isn't our show. It's Russia's.

But I can't help being thrilled that Hezbollah is once more making itself beloved amongst another nation.

[blindpig]

15. Maybe this has something to do with it:

Non violence as a political action technique can be used for anything. During the 1980s, NATO drew its attention on its possible use to organize the Resistance in Europe after the invasion of the Red Army. It’s been 15 years since CIA began using it to overthrow inflexible governments without provoking international outrage, and its ideological façade is philosopher Gene Sharp’s Albert Einstein Institution. Red Voltaire reveals its amazing activity, from Lithuania to Serbia, Venezuela and Ukraine.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article30032.html

[EFerrari]

18. And this:

Yet on Monday afternoon, a 27-year-old State Department official, Jared Cohen, e-mailed the social-networking site Twitter with an unusual request: delay scheduled maintenance of its global network, which would have cut off service while Iranians were using Twitter to swap information and inform the outside world about the mushrooming protests around Tehran.

snip

Mr. Cohen, a Stanford University graduate who is the youngest member of the State Department’s policy planning staff, has been working with Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and other services to harness their reach for diplomatic initiatives in Iraq and elsewhere.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/world/middleeast/17media.html?_r=1&em

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. the U.S has supported some paramilitary groups and exile groups. But I don't know of any evidence

that the U.S. has any significant involvement with the on-the-ground pro-democracy movement that we are currently witnessing.

As Stephen Zunes*, a staunch critic of American Middle policy, an Iranian expert and a longtime supporter of better relations with Iran and fierce opponent of any interference in Iranian internal affairs, said in his article on alternet:

http://www.alternet.org/world/140639/iran%27s_stolen_election_has_sparked_an_uprising_--_what_should_the_u.s._do/?page=entire

" Congress in recent years has approved millions of dollars in funding to support various Iranian opposition groups to promote “regime change.” However, most of these groups are led by exiles who have virtually no following within Iran or any experience with the kinds of grassroots mobilization necessary to build a popular movement that could threaten the regime's survival. By contrast, most of the credible opposition within Iran has renounced this U.S. initiative and has asserted that it has simply made it easier for the regime to claim that all pro-democracy groups and activists are paid agents of the United States.

In an effort to head off such a popular uprising and discredit pro-democracy leaders and their supporters, Iran's reactionary leadership has been making false claims, aired in detail in a series of television broadcasts beginning in 2007, that certain Western nongovernmental organizations that have given workshops and offered seminars for Iranian pro-democracy activists on the theory and history of strategic nonviolent struggle are actually plotting with the U.S. government to overthrow the regime. On several occasions, Iranian authorities have arrested and tortured these activists, forcing them to sign phony confessions allegedly confirming these allegations.

Some Western bloggers and other writers, understandably skeptical of U.S. intervention in oil-producing nations in the name of "democracy," have actually bought into these claims by Iran's hardline clerics that prominent nonviolent activists from Europe and the United States -- most of whom happen to be highly critical of U.S. policy toward Iran -- are somehow working as U.S. agents. These conspiracy theories have in turn been picked up by some progressive websites and periodicals, which repeat them as fact. Unfortunately, such accusations do little more than strengthen the hand of Iran's repressive regime, weaken democratic forces inside the country, and strengthen the argument of U.S. neoconservatives that only U.S. intervention -- and not nonviolent struggle by the Iranian people themselves -- is capable of freeing the county.

Historically, individuals and groups with experience in effective mass nonviolent mobilization tend to come from the left and carry a skeptical view of government power, particularly governments with a history of militarism and conquest. Conversely, large bureaucratic governments used to projecting political power through military force or elite diplomatic channels have little understanding or appreciation of mass popular struggles. As a result, the dilemma for U.S. policy-makers is that the most realistic way to democratize Iran is through a process the United States cannot control.

The U.S. government has historically promoted regime change through military invasions, coups d'etat and other kinds of violent seizures of power by an undemocratic minority. Nonviolent "people power" movements, by contrast, promote regime change through empowering pro-democratic majorities. Unlike fomenting a military coup or supporting a military occupation, which are based upon control over the population and repression of potential political opponents, nonviolent civil insurrections -- as a result of being based upon a broad coalition of popular movements -- are virtually impossible for an outside power to control.

In any case, the Obama administration does not seem to be very interested in promoting such a “people power” revolution."

Stephen Zunes* is a professor of Politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco and serves as a senior policy analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus.

link to full article:

http://www.alternet.org/world/140639/iran%27s_stolen_election_has_sparked_an_uprising_--_what_should_the_u.s._do/?page=entire

[Hannah Bell]

48. wonder what happened to 2008's 60 million, then - & 2009's 65 million...

http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1131&Itemid=2

that kind of money must be buying something....

.02% of iranian gdp...


& that's just on-the-books money to iranian pro-democracy ngo's.

[Douglas Carpenter]

50. as the title to the article states - the pro-democracy forces in Iran don't want the money

If this money is going to groups like Human Rights Watch - it does not appear to be going to the homegrown grassroots movements that are now marching in the streets for democracy and greater freedom.

Iranian NGOs to U.S.: “Don’t Send us Money.”

Written by Arash Hadjialiloo

Monday, 02 June 2008

Washington D.C.- Massachusetts Representative Bill Delahunt ended the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight hearing by echoing words he heard from Iranian Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in response to increased American pro-democracy funding: "We hear from Iran, for example, ‘don't send us money, it stigmatizes us.'"

snip:"According to the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), the Fiscal Year 2008 Iran democracy fund, for which Congress appropriated $60 million dollars (President Bush had called for $75 million) is set to be eclipsed by another $65 million requested for Fiscal Year 2009. The POMED report refers to the funding as "a source for great controversy," due to accusations that it allows the Iranian regime to "cast all democracy activists as foreign agents in its efforts to crack down on dissent."

These sentiments resonated with the subcommittee and with witness Kenneth Roth, the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. When asked by Representative Delahunt if the funds in Iran provided a "mixed blessing, overall net plus, or a negative" for Iranian NGOs,

link:

http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1131&Itemid=2

[EFerrari]

52. "Plus, we have plenty from the Saudis" they didn't add. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

53. but no evidence that any foreign money has anything to do with hundreds of thousands of Iranian

taking to the street and demanding greater freedom and democracy at great personal risk to themselves.

If some governments are helping fund NGO's such as Human Rights Watch, that may very well cast a stigma on Human Rights Watch and such groups - but the people taking to the streets are obviously doing so for their own domestic concerns and putting themselves in danger and no doubt the well being of their careers and their families on the line.

Foreign governments are obviously not paying people to demonstrate. It would be easier for these people to just be quiet and stay home.

Having said all of this, I will repeat as I have stated before that nothing, absolutely nothing would harm the pro-democracy forces in Iran more than to appear as stooges for the United States. President Obama is being prudent to keep any official U.S. government condemnation of the Islamic Republic of Iran and any official messages of support for the pro-democracy movement very restrained. To do otherwise would only undermine pro-democracy forces and strengthen the hand of the hardline reactionaries and place these brave souls who are taking to the streets in even graver danger.

[EFerrari]

54. I think I agree with all of that although, if the Saudis put money into

the campaign, where do they stop?

I agree with you that the people on the street are there now and they matter. And, agree about Obama's position. The last thing the opposition needs is to be seen as acting in the interests of the United States.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. in spite of everything, Saudi Arabia and Iran have a great deal of trade and other relations

as do all the other Gulf states. Iranian produce fills the super markets of Saudi Arabia and the UAE and Bahrain. Flights go back and forth between Iranian cities and Saudi and other Gulf cities several times a day. There are embassies and consulates for each others countries all across the Gulf and Iran. There are large numbers of Iranians, working and visiting the Gulf all the time and large numbers of Gulf Arabs visiting Iran all the time.

It is a reality of politics all over the world, that a certain amount of money, frequently described as aid, sent by all major states that have the ability and means to do so - attempting to influence events and policies.

[Hannah Bell]

59. what, would you like a public announcement & budget?

Last year Congress approved $66 million of Secretary Rice’s $85 million request aimed at promoting civil society in Iran, which includes funding for cultural and academic exchanges, public diplomacy efforts, and broadcast programs like Voice of America and Radio Farda.

The portion of this money allocated to civil society groups—roughly $30 million—reaches Iranian activists indirectly through undisclosed third-party channels like U.S.- or Europe-based NGOs and exile groups.

“We know the more we talk about it the more the Iranian government uses it as a witch hunt to detain these people ,” says the senior State Department official. He says the money is not aimed at groups bent on overthrowing the current regime but rather on groups with a “broad spectrum of agendas and philosophies,” adding that the focus is “on how the government of Iran can more fully reflect the opinion of Iranians.”

The number of Iranian NGOs that receive U.S. funds is in the tens, not the hundreds or thousands (though some experts deny that any Iranian NGO has received U.S. funds). The money requested specifically for civil society will increase from $30 million to $75 million next year.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13503/


What do you think, the US gov's going to say, "We're funding Iranian NGO X in hopes of destabilizing the gov't," & NGO X is going to say, "We got 1 million from the US this year."?


Once you've repeatedly seen the same pattern: denial of involvement, then revelation of involvement years later, you stop believing in public pronouncements during the event.

iraq is on one side of iran, afghanistan on the other, budget for iranian operations increased over the last few years, but du-ers, contra history, are convinced the current action is entirely homegrown, organized by brave college kids on twitter.

[Douglas Carpenter]

60. They are on the streets in spite of American influence, not because of it.

Were the anti-Viet Nam War protest of the 1960's dupes for the Soviets?
Most of my political activety for the last few years has been with Palestinian-solidarity work and other work opposing American policy in the Middle East. If you check my Journal, you will see that is what 80% of my posting about. No doubt some people think I'm a dupe for the "terrorist".

I have never met a prouder and more nationalist people than the Iranians.
They are not dupes for the Americans. They overthrew the Shah because of their desire for self-determination. They seek to at least reform the current order because they want greater freedom and democracy.

I wrote an old retired Iranian-academic friend and former Tudeh (Iranian Communist Party) activist who still has large numbers of contacts inside Iran asking for his opinion and he replied:

This is a continuation of the revolutionary process that started in 1979. Right now it is the authority of the Khamenei that is in question. If the protests continue at the scale they are proceeding, Khamenei must either give in or order the revolutionary guards to intervene. Either way his authority will be challenged and diminished. And if the process continues the whole system will be challenged and there might even be a civil war.

Again the events of the next few days and week will show where all of this is heading. Right now nobody can claim knowing what will happen. When people act as spontaneous masses the outcome is unpredictable.

There is still no evidence that one million people taking to the streets are doing so because of Washington influence and money.

Are there those in the CIA who would want to encourage such activities for their own agenda? Of course. However in a country with a population of 71 million people, 65 million dollars does not create a domestic movement and certainly does not explain the mass uprising.

A million people risking their careers, and their material well being of themselves and their family are not on the streets to fullfill the goals of American hegemony.



Some reasons they may be taking to the streets are also mentioned in the very same article you quoted:

How has civil society evolved in Iran?

Iranian civil society’s heyday was the late 1990s and early years of this century under former President Khatami, whose government provided subsidies to help develop an NGO sector but failed to put in place safeguards to prevent its dismantlement. “Under Khatami, civil society really went through a renaissance,” says Secor. Ghaemi calls its development “one of the most valuable outcomes of the reform movement” of the former president. Academic and cultural exchanges with Western NGOs and research organizations were common. But after Ahmadinejad came to power in 2005, he refused to renew many of these groups’ licenses and his intelligence ministry had several NGOs shut down. Instead of jailing independent journalists using the judiciary system, as hard-line elements within the Khatami regime were wont to do, Ahmadinejad targeted bloggers and civil society groups. Mostly he has sought to prevent Iranian NGOs from networking together too closely or from corresponding with foreigners. “There’s this paranoia,” Ghaemi says. “The regime thinks any kind of network of NGO activity will lead to collective action that would usher in a 'velvet revolution'.”

What effect has this government pressure had on Iranian activists?

Government restrictions increasingly limit Iranian activists and academics from traveling overseas. Those who do attend conferences abroad fear they will be targeted by Iranian intelligence upon their return. Afshin Molavi, a fellow at the New America Foundation, says Iranians reached by phone now clam up for fear of drawing suspicions from the authorities, even those who work in nonpolitical activities like public health or environment feasibility studies. The number of track-two meetings has decreased under the Ahmadinejad regime, experts say. And the arrests and detentions of four Iranian-Americans, including Haleh Esfandiari of the Woodrow Wilson Center, have led many Western scholars to cancel visits to Iran. “Each new high-profile case injects this new round of fear among scholars abroad that they will be pulled into this unjust dragnet,” says Molavi.

What are some specific examples of this civil society clampdown?

Last March, the Iranian authorities arrested hundreds of teachers and union leaders who participated in a demonstration to protest their low pay. They have also routinely harassed women’s rights leaders active in the “One Million Signatures” campaign, begun last summer to end Iran’s discriminatory laws against women’s empowerment. Despite the clampdown, student activists continue to rally against the regime, even booing President Ahmadinejad during a December 2006 speech he gave at Tehran-based Amirkabir University of Technology and shouting chants of “Death to the Dictator.” “Civil society is still very active in Iran but I know from speaking to Iranians they have pulled back from some of the more politically sensitive topics,” says Isobel Coleman, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

How has this clampdown affected Iran’s blogosphere?

Toward the end of the Khatami era, Iran saw a surge in blogging after the government sacked a number of reformist journalists, many of whom then set up shop online. In October 2004, the Islamic Regime arrested about twenty bloggers, including Arash Sigarchi, who has spent time in jail for charges of insulting the Supreme Leader. Under Ahmadinejad, the government has continued to place restrictions against Iran’s growing cohort of independent bloggers. Restrictions include filters of popular blogs and bans on certain keywords in search engines. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, even reporting about bloggers’ arrests can result in jail time, as journalism student Mojtaba Saminejad found out. Today, many of the most influential and widely read Iranian blogs are by U.S., Canada, or Germany-based expatriates.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13503/

[Hannah Bell]

61. no evidence one million people taking to the streets are doing so because of Washington influence"

"Rose Revolution"



"Orange Revolution"



etc.

[EFerrari]

63. Look at this:

[Hannah Bell]

56. if the 2009 request was for 65 million, the 2008 60 million was spent.

& not on hrw in the us.

there are all sorts of ways to funnel money, & public pronouncements don't always reflect private behavior.


"The portion of this money allocated to civil society groups—roughly $30 million—reaches Iranian activists indirectly through undisclosed third-party channels like U.S.- or Europe-based NGOs and exile groups. “We know the more we talk about it the more the Iranian government uses it as a witch hunt to detain these people ,” says the senior State Department official.

He says the money is not aimed at groups bent on overthrowing the current regime but rather on groups with a “broad spectrum of agendas and philosophies,” adding that the focus is “on how the government of Iran can more fully reflect the opinion of Iranians.”The number of Iranian NGOs that receive U.S. funds is in the tens, not the hundreds or thousands (though some experts deny that any Iranian NGO has received U.S. funds). The money requested specifically for civil society will increase from $30 million to $75 million next year.

Why is the State Department’s policy so controversial?

Experts say the allocation of U.S. funds toward civil society taints those Iranian activists and academics who receive them because of the source: the U.S. government. “It puts a target on the backs of many of these groups and independent academic researchers and creates complications for those in Iran who are advocating for greater openness,” says the New America Foundation’s Molavi. “It takes away the idea that this is truly people-to-people,” says Trita Parsi, director of the National Iranian American Council. “I think exchanges are a great idea, but if you add that these are part of an effort to promote democracy, which Iran reads as regime change, then you’re shooting yourself in the foot.”

Ghaemi of Human Rights Watch says the State Department’s lack of transparency regarding which groups receive funds—for obvious reasons to ensure the aid recipients’ safety—allows the “Iranian intelligence ministry to say any NGO with any interaction with the outside world could be a pawn of U.S. state policy and used as a weapon to justify persecution and prosecution of activists in Iran.”

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13503/.


Council on Foreign Relations: i'd say it's "evidence of us funding".

[Xolodno]

34. You know...

I'm kind of marveling at this a bit. Imagine if this occurred while W was in office? With troops in Afghanistan and Iraq...I wouldn't be surprised if he ordered the "liberation of the oppressed Iranian people". But this administration is simply trying to keep all lines of communication open and some are throwing a fit. If we were blasting and hijacking their airwaves to push the United States agenda...then thats meddling.

If there truly was no harm and no foul in this election, then its the current government of Iran's interest to come clean and open about the results and what transpired after the polls closed.

If they got plenty to hide....better find something quick to disassociate you with the problem and get a believable scape goat....oh wait....

[woo me with science]

49. Their accusations will become much more specific

once they read all the blogs and message board posts about the CIA and Israel! :tinfoilhat:

[jeanpalmer]

51. Seymour Hersh says Bush started a $400 million

covert operation against Iran in late 2007, with Congressional approval, "to undermine the government through regime change." If that's not meddling, I don't know what is. And if you're going to have a covert operation to bring about regime change, it seems like the most logical way, maybe the only way, to accomplish that would be through the election process, unless you are willing to use force.

I don't think Obama has denied meddling. If this covert program is ongoing, he couldn't honestly deny it. I've read his statements and the strongest one I've seen is where he said the US respects Iran's sovereignty. That's hardly a denial of meddling. What I'd like to see is someone ask him about the covert operation and whether it is ongoing and what it is doing. Was it involved in this election? The information about the operation has been out there for quite awhile, so I'm surprised no one has asked Obama about it. If it is still ongoing, it would directly contradict the impression Obama was sending in his Cairo speech.

Even before this covert operation, the US had been conducting kidnappings and pursuing "high-value targets" inside Iran, according to Hersh. So there is a history there that can't be denied. My guess is that's why Obama is not denying it.

This isn't the first time Iran has called out the US on these operations. Iran has accused the US several times of doing these very things.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh

[jeanpalmer]

55. More meddling

May 22, 2007 6:29 PM

The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.

"I think everybody in the region knows that there is a proxy war already afoot with the United States supporting anti-Iranian elements in the region as well as opposition groups within Iran," said Vali Nasr, adjunct senior fellow for Mideast studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/05/bush_authorizes.html#comments

[jeanpalmer]

58. Has US meddling ever stopped?

As described in the "Elections" and "Interventions" chapters, NED successfully manipulated elections in Nicaragua in 1990 and Mongolia in 1996; helped to overthrow democratically elected governments in Bulgaria in 1990 and Albania in 1991 and 1992; and worked to defeat the candidate for prime minister of Slovakia in 2002 who was out of favor in Washington. And from 1999 to 2004, NED heavily funded members of the opposition to President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to subvert his rule and to support a referendum to unseat him.

Additionally, in the 1990s and afterward, NED supported a coalition of groups in Haiti known as the Democratic Convergence, who were united in their opposition to Jean-Bertrand Aristide and his progressive ideology, while he was in and out of the office of the president.{9}

The Endowment has made its weight felt in the electoral-political process in numerous other countries.

NED would have the world believe that it's only teaching the ABCs of democracy and elections to people who don't know them, but in virtually all the countries named above, in whose electoral process NED intervened, there had already been free and fair elections held. The problem, from NED's point of view, is that the elections had been won by political parties not on NED's favorites list.

http://www.iefd.org/articles/trojan_horse.php

[SoCalDem]

62. they can't have it both ways & their people know what's going on

Every public word from our government has been non-commital, and patient. They have cut off access to media, and locked people up, so just how would our country be "influencing" people who cannot watch tv, make or receive calls, and who are out of the loop.