[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great

[TeachESL]

This is a N.Y. Times article posted at MidEastTruth.com


Rigged Ballots in Iran

Editorial
The New York Times
January 13, 2004

Iran's religious establishment is trying to grab full control of the next Parliament by arbitrarily disqualifying thousands of candidates, many of them leading reformists, including some 80 current legislators seeking re-election next month.

Candidates have been excluded before, but the sweep of the exclusions announced Sunday by the Guardian Council, a clerically appointed body, vastly exceeds past interference. They would eliminate political competition in scores of contests, handing back to religious conservatives the parliamentary majority that voters overwhelmingly denied them four years ago. Though Iranians are demoralized by how little the reformers have accomplished, they should firmly reject such a travesty of democracy.

Iran's supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declined to set aside the exclusions yesterday despite a parliamentary sit-in and resignation threats from provincial governors. Washington and the European Union also expressed their concern. Pressure should be sustained until Ayatollah Khamenei changes his mind.

Though thwarted at every turn, the reformist lawmakers represent Iran's best near-term hope for peaceful democratic change. They have tried to use their parliamentary majority to curb torture, limit political prosecutions, expand press freedom and reduce the power of unelected authorities. The clerical conservatives, by contrast, are a politically exhausted force. They have woefully mismanaged the economy and kept the country estranged from its neighbors and trading partners.

Reformers and conservatives now more or less agree that Iran needs to begin finding ways to mend fences with the world. Hard-liners figured prominently in last year's agreement to permit expanded nuclear inspections. One interpretation of the Guardian Council's actions is that the mullahs will relax their opposition to some policy changes, provided they are able to carry them out themselves.

The mullahs may be calculating that if they offer Washington enough concessions on limiting nuclear programs and ending support for terrorists, America will lose interest in pressing for Iranian democracy. The Bush administration has a chance to prove that the mullahs' cynicism is misplaced.

* Find this article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/13/opinion/13TUE2.html

Come express yourself in our forum:
http://www.mideasttruth.com/forum/

----------------------------------
The article emphasises that these "reformist lawmakers represent Iran's best near-term hope for peaceful, democratic change." If these "reformists" are no different, than why are the "clerical conservatives" so against them?

[shady]

This NY Times article is Shady though because it in a way supports the reformists..

[TeachESL]

Shady wrote:

------------------------------
This NY Times article is Shady though because it in a way supports the reformists
----------------------------
But my question as to why the clerics are afraid of these 'reformers' wasn't answered. Is it that the 'reformers' want to make Islam more liberal? Give the people more freedoms? Have more freedom of the press? I need an answer if I am going to understand what's going on there.

[stefania]

DEAR, ALL THIS IS A JOKE!!! THEY ARE TRYING TO CONVINCE THE PEOPLE THAT THE POOR "REFORMISTS" ARE VICTIMS OF THE HARD-LINERS!!


THEY USED MANY WAYS TO DECIEVE THE WORLD..BUT THIS PLAN WILL BE A FAILURE--
_________________
Referendum AFTER Regime Change

"I'm ready to die for you to be able to say your own opinions, even if i strongly disagree with you" (Voltaire)

[TeachESL]

Well, they are certainly playing the 'part' very well. Why go through such a charade? But I still need to know what these 'reformists' want to do that is different from the 'hardliners.'

By the way, there is a link on www.nicejewishboy.net/ to this site. I asked him to put it there.