I agree 100% with the first part of that. But it’s not we who’ve missed this point, it’s those characterizing the Mousavi protesters as a “pro-democracy” movement and saying we should support them to support democracy. Hence our pointing out that, actually, there’s no real strong evidence that Ahmadinejad didn’t legitimately win.

We should all keep in mind, of course, that, as pointed out above, this is an extremely limited form of “democracy”. But, despite its limitations, the results need to be respected. And Americans should keep their nose out of Iranians’ affairs. Valid points to be made.

So …. what? That gives the US license to destabilize the regime?

Or Iranian ‘reformists’ to gin up a phony narrative of a stolen election meme in order to topple the theocracy? If that’s so then I think they have done a great disservice to their cause.

So what do you do if the majority of Iranians, as they seem to at this time, prefer the theocracy and Islamic governance? Do you simply subordinate their votes and wishes because you believe yourself peculiarly qualified to know what is best for them too?

Moreover, would you endorse applying similar tactics for Americans who are dissatisfied with their own governance? That they might collaberate with agents of a foreign power who would like to sabotage and subvert it, to accept their money in an orchestrated PsyOps campaign to destabilize, discredit, and deligitimize American governance?

Really?

My point, if not yet abundantly clear, is that abolition of the Iranian theocracy wasn’t on the menu in this election cycle; just as the abolition of the American empire wasn’t a menu option for Americans to choose from in our recent election.

I myself would prefer that it was, but then I don’t get to choose the menu options, I can only select from those on it, and while that is both a frustration and dissappointment to me, I would never consider collaberating with an enemy to topple my own government.

I think most folks, regardless of country, take treason very seriously.

Disgusting.

“Isn’t that the problem 21st journalism these day? ” selling us their agenda in the name of objectivity” and that is exactly what you are doing.”
So what’s my “agenda”? And how am I being unobjective? Examples?

“The information is out there, go look for it. Do not cut and paste.”
So, what, this article was a “cut and paste” job? Where do you suggest I copied it from?

If you’re going to criticize, at least give SOMETHING to back it up. That’s fair.

I think you should practice what your preach. Read, think, and then write..

And if I hear the word objective one more time I am going to get sick.. Isn’t that the problem 21st journalism these day? ” selling us their agenda in the name of objectivity” and that is exactly what you are doing. The information is out there, go look for it. Do not cut and paste..

This ‘democratic’ movement’s protest slogan during last week’s Friday Prayers, moderated by Rafsanjani (Iran’s ‘pragmatic’ reformer and biggest capitalist) was “death to Russia – death to China”. That is how democratic this movement is.

It seems Iran’s middle and upper classes are willing to sell out at any cost in order to get their long-lost social and political freedoms.

Today, what determines the progressive or regressive nature of a political movement (or party) in Iran is its attitude towards neo-liberalism, issues such as privatization, government subsidies, etc. These issues are by no means on this movement’s or the Iranian left’s (i.e. middle-class so-called Marxists outside Iran) radar screen.

“You ask why none of the names of these people is on the letter or published. I answer your questions with another question. DO YOU HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT’S GOING ON IN IRAN? Cause if you did you would know that publishing a name is like signing a death sentence.”

This argument ignores the fact that it was reported as an “Open Letter”, as well as that it was reported signatures were included on the letter.

For the reasons you point out, that’s pretty dubious. But that only strengthens my argument.

Now to address a few of your questions. As you so appropriately pointed out TehranBureau is a blog. As such the editor is able to report on things that would never make it to MSM (since MSM has to verify sources). This is probably why you’ve found the letter from Int. Ministry on blogs but not on MSM. One advantage is that we can get a hold of news otherwise unavailable. A disadvantage is the BS factor that we have to account for.

You ask why none of the names of these people is on the letter or published. I answer your questions with another question. DO YOU HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT’S GOING ON IN IRAN? Cause if you did you would know that publishing a name is like signing a death sentence. Unfortunately since you don’t seem to know this basic fact, it puts the legitimacy of your entire article into question (at least it does for me).

Third, you talk about this letter in Farsi as if it is a great mystery. With almost 5 millions Iranians living outside of Iran, I am sure you can find someone to translate it for you. The fact that you criticize others before even taking the time to translate the letter for yourself again puts your point into question.

Please note, that I think you have valid points, but you should do a little homework before jumping on other sources.

Not too sure how many of my (@rupertbu) Twitter followers will read and agree, but all foreigners must desist from promoting their own agenda.

Iran must resolve for Iranian people.