Talk:Iranian presidential election, 2005
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Iranian presidential election, 2005 is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. |
Nasser Hejazi for president?!That's only a joke!It's like if I announce I'll run for president,Do you right my name there?!--Sina 10:46, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Mohsen Mehralizadeh is not uncertain candidate right now.He will withdraw if he finds a good reformist candidate.As now, he is runner not uncertain.--Sina 11:19, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Ebrahim Yazdi
I don't know Ebrahim Yazdi is an Independent candidate or he is a Reformist candidate. What do you think?--Sina 14:56, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Interesting links
This should be useful: http://sharghnewspaper.com/840227/html/index.htm roozbeh 14:34, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
We have a bunch of vandalism from user 217.219.189.12 , Is there any suggestion for preventing these kind of vandalism?--Sina 21:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Presidency
It is not right to support Rafsanjani becuase we dont want to see Ahmadinejhad as a president. It will be right if we support Rafsanjani to support the way forward in Iran. As I have to mention Rafsanjani is the bigest and most experienced political figure in Islamic Republic of Iran. Ignoring him is like ignoring all the politicians in Iran, including Khatami and Moeen, as about 12 years ago they were appointed by Rafsanjani as Iran's ministers.
I hastily updated the article, or at least the lead section, to account for the result. I haven't been following the election as closely as I'm sure some of us have, but I just wanted us to be up-to-date. Everyking 05:05, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] (Please note: No international observers ...
Well, I'll see if I can come do what I suggested this weekend. Juan Golblado 04:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for putting the note about lack of credible observers in here.
Here are some quotes from the eminent Iranian journalist I mentioned, Amir Taheri, Iran has no independent election commission and there were no impartial observers. Worse, the seven candidates (jokingly dubbed "The Seven Dwarfs") had observers in fewer than a third of polling stations. http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/16027
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and his European colleagues would be foolish to pretend that the election that made Khatami president was somehow more legitimate than the one that gave the victory to Ahmadinejad. The second point that merits mentions is the Khomeinist regime has always used a simulacrum of elections, rather than bloody purges and gulags, to sort out its internecine feuds. The fact that Khamenei's eldest son Mujtaba acted as Ahmadinejad's campaign manager shows that the surprise outcome of the election had been planned long in advance. Khamenei's victory, however, may prove to be the result of a Faustian pact with the well-entrenched and ambitious military elite within the regime.
Created history http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/16308
Taheri has suggested elsewhere, though I haven't re-found it yet, more explicitly that the election results reflect the supreme clerical leadership's view of what they want to do rather than any actual counted votes.
You commented that US and other countries don't have international observers. The OSCE observed the 2004 US elections and described them as free and fair. But the overarching issue is that in the US, France, Poland, the election process is transparent, and all the parties have observers who have no fear about exercising that right. In the US you have the League of Women Voters and other organisations that monitor the integrity of elections quite closely. As a result, the EU which regularly observes elections in less well established democracies and controversial situations, don't waste their time observing elections in US, Poland or France.
I pasted the note in all sections where the election results were discussed because the lack of confirmation of the results, the lack of transparency, calls into question the very legitimacy of the exercise. I put it in as a health warning: we have these very precise sounding figures but what we don't have is any indication that the figures represent anything real.
I wonder if a shorter notice in the four relevant sections with a link to a longer comment in the controversies section would be better? The longer comment would contain the references to Taheri's published articles.
(This is my first time in the Wikipedia discussion area so I hope my method of writing at the top of the entry and drawing a line between it and the original entry is acceptable and clear. I will look for specific guidelines.)
I will check back here later tonight or tomorrow to see if there is any response. Juan Golblado 19:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
This note was pasted several times throughout the text - i've put it here so it doesn't get lost:
- (Please note: No international observers or credibly independent Iranian observers were present during these elections or the run-up to the elections or during any counting of votes. The only figures available are from the Iranian government and are uncorroborated. Independent analysts, including Iranian exile and former executive editor-in-chief of Iran's main daily newspaper prior to 1979, Kayhan, Amir Taheri, say the government figures are meaningless.)
IMHO this would be OK to add to the section Election controversies, but it really should have a reference. i'm not sure how relevant it is - elections in USA, France, Poland, usually have very few international observers - they only have observers from a variety of local political parties - and it seems there were plenty of pre-election polls, which seem at least consistent enough with the official results that meaningless sounds exaggerated - AFAIK the clerical authorities wanted Rafsanjani to win, not Ahmadinejad.
In any case, unless we're going to stick warnings about likely election bias in every section of every election page, then i don't see why we should start for this page.
If there's an online reference to Amir Taheri's statement, then include it (once) in Election controversies. Boud 05:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
