Since you have no clue what the “people of Iran prefer”, it would be hoove you to stop writing this foolish like you do.

Calling me a loser seems to fit well with your rather low self-esteem.

http://news.antiwar.com/2009/06/26/obama-moves-to-fund-iranian-dissidents/

All and all, Amadinajad is a populist with significant appeal, apparently to the working class. No one thinks he’s better than Chavez. Both are human beings with many foibles; but they are different.

If you think anyone or thing is great if it has the label “socialist” than yea, Chavez is “great”.

But this is not about the difference between to people. One with considerably more power than the other (Chavez appears to have much more power than Amadinajad).

As far was what protesters say. I don’t think much of going to protesters and asking them what their protesting about. It’s obvious they are, for whatever reason (and they may have many assorted reasons) dissatisfied.

But you can’t tell me what provoked them. You don’t know how many are for real and how many are plants. You must assume that the US and Europe have nothing to do with this. The Iranian people just decided enmasse to revolt because of an election.

If you think for one second these students represent a “socialist” ideal, then you are not up on what’s happening here. I don’t care if some Marxist organization sides with George W. Bush or OBL.

I agree, if your point is not to glorify Amadinajad (but than I wouldn’t glorify Chavez even if the two are different and for different reaons).

We shouldn’t go overboard with the enemy of my enemy is my “friend” or whatever the foolish cliche is.

This is NOT about Amadinajad, who is a relatively minor character who plays to a variety of audiences. So, yes it would be a big mistake to lose sight of the real issues and it’s not by making Amadinajad a “good guy or saint” in reaction to US imperial propaganda.

Amadinajad is not a socialist but to complete that little syllogism, calling oneself a socialist doesn’t make you one and being one does not make you better than, say, Amadinajad.

I really don’t know an election which doesn’t have, at the very least, tampering of one sort or another. When does that line cross? Does it really matter in this case, given the candidates were all vetted by the cleric and that some of these other candidates really have a more repressive past?

So what’t the deal? People are revolting. But why? Do we really know? Why the spontaneous combustian? What energized it? Who’s the leader? Too many questions and no real anwers….yet.

We all know that the media and twitter, etc pounced on this after it happened, but that does not mean it wasn’t the genuine will of the Iranian people to do this. Amadinajad is not Chavez; he isn’t a socialist who has brought extreme improvements to the daily lives of his people, and the results of this election clearly were rigged and falsified – as the people who live their say.

I don’t think it matters who, exactly make up the numbers on the street.

What we know is that the US has been looking to find a hegemonic answer to Iran for decades. We know the US supported Saddam/Iraq during its war with Iran. We know that hundreds of millions just during the last couple of years of Bush were poured in to destablize the government. We know that time and time again, Ahmadinejad is mis-quoted as having said things he never said – all meant to inflame and demonize.

To simply buy the idea that this was an upraising unaided and unabetted by the US empire/Israel seems like the thinking of someone residing in a parallel universe to the planet Earth.

This is an essential point, and I think the overall point of Jacob’s article. Superficial labels like ‘Left’ versus ‘Right’ and ‘Liberal’ versus ‘Conservative’ and ‘Democrat’ versus ‘Republican’ are little more than smoke-screens that tend to conceal the underlying dynamics of class struggle. The interests of those whose incomes are derived primarily from passive ownership are directly opposed to the interests of every other life form on the planet. If I understand correctly, the recent election in Iran is indeed a triumph for approximately 99.9-percent of the human beings on this planet in this regard, and for the innumerable other life forms that depend upon us for their survival.

Does this mean Barack Obama will be forced by the dominant 0.1-percent of the human population to declare war on Iran for daring to vote the wrong way in their own election? I certainly hope not. But if that is what happens, I would also hope that some 80-percent of the human population is prepared to mobilize effectively against that kind of decision. Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s the case.

”Unfortunately, the excitement about the possibility of a mass civil disobedience campaign arising does lead to an astonishing final sentence – the idea that Mousavi could be a Nelson Mandela or a Martin Luther King beggars belief. In fact, the more one learns about Mousavi, the more unsavoury he seems, and the more it bcomes clear that his candidacy is essentially an enterprise of the plutocratic Rafsanjani family. And, as the Angry Arab has pointed out, when Mousavi was prime minister the Iranian state was much more repressive than it is now. In fact, it’s hard to go along with Dabashi’s wholehearted support for the ‘reformists’ who have yet to demonstrate that they are worthy of leadership of such a movement as this’

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/06/what-can-opposition-win.html

‘Lionized by the Western press, Mousavi is an unlikely champion of “reform.” During the period he held the post of prime minister—1981-1989—he presided over mass executions of political dissidents, many of them leftists, as well as the Iran-Iraq War, in which Iran suffered a million casualties, dead and wounded.
Considered a “hardliner” during this period, he has been cast as a reformist and a modernizer in an appeal to the Iranian middle classes. Behind his campaign, however, are right-wing elements within the clerical hierarchy and, most importantly, former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, reportedly the richest man in Iran”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13991

There is a informed discussion on going at Craig Murray’s blog where there are 100 comments so far -

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/06/iran.html

The majority of Iranians are young because their fathers died in the terrible war with Saddam’s Iraq. They don’t care about what the USA wants. They are tired of being dominated by the peasant class. They want more freedom, but they want it Iranian style. When will the US ever learn that American democracy is not a dream for the rest of the world…it is a curse. The Iranians are not interested in US democracy. And no matter who finally comes out on top, you can be sure he will not favor the US any more than Iran has done ever since they threw out the Shah.

I tend to think Admadinejad either actually won the election, or it was too close to let nature takes its course. It’s difficult to tell by the Western media – who insist on interviewing English-speaking youth, often in California. The conservatives in Iran have a large base in the petty merchant class of Iran – these are people who rarely show up in a Western interview.