It has become an extraordinary day, at the end of what has been an extraordinary election campaign.
As soon as polls opened in Iran, it became clear that the enthusiasm of the last few days has been translated into what is likely to be a huge turnout.
There were queues snaking round the block from many polling stations.
The crowds gathered outside, in segregated lines of men and women. Even as they waited to vote, they continued the spontaneous debate that has been sweeping Iran in the last week.
At one polling station I visited, some voters came up to me, nervous that the government might be trying to rig the election.
They were worried that a bus being used as a mobile polling station was not as well monitored as the main polling centre.
Other voters say the system under which a reference number has to be written by the candidates' name on the ballot paper is confusing.
Good humour
Much of the mobile phone text message system seems not to be working, a system the opposition had been hoping to use to send back reports from their monitors at polling stations and election counts.
The opposition has complained to the government.
Rumours are sweeping Tehran that some satellite TV stations may have been blocked.
But for the most part election day has continued the good humour of recent days.
One supporter of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a woman in the long black religious chador, made a point of shaking hands with another woman wearing the green colours of the opposition contender, Mir-Hossein Mousavi.
Many of the polling stations are in mosques or other religious buildings.
At the Hosseiniyat Ershad in north Tehran, the number of women, particularly young women, queuing to vote is most striking.
The young voters who have been turning out in force for Mr Mousavi say they want more personal freedom, more opportunities and better relations with the West.
Extended voting
Supporters of Mr Ahmadinejad have praised him for pushing forward the nuclear programme, and say he has earned more respect for Iran internationally.
By mid-morning, the interior ministry announced that already five million people had voted. Voting was extended by two hours, and may be extended longer.
Such a high turnout will make Iranians more confident of the outcome.
They will remember the election in 1997, in which President Khatami defeated a candidate heavily favoured by the establishment.
His victory was so overwhelming it soon became clear that it could not be overturned, even if there had been those trying to do so.
Results are expected to begin coming in during the night. Almost every Iranian you meet is eager for any idea about what is going to happen.
And as for the onewho fears standing in front of His Lord and restrainsthe soul from impure evil desires and lusts, verily, Paradise will be his abode [79:40-41]
Ahmadinejad had a seemingly unassailable lead with 80 per cent of the votes counted [AFP]
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, has taken a seemingly unassailable lead in his bid for re-election, Iran's interior ministry has said.
With 80 per cent of the ballots counted on Saturday, the election commission put Ahmadinejad ahead with 63.8 per cent of the vote against 32.7 per cent for Mir Hossein Mousavi, his main rival.
"Doctor Ahmadinejad, by getting a majority of the votes, has become the definite winner of the 10th presidential election," the official IRNA news agency reported.
But Mousavi, who had himself declared victory just moments after the polls closed on Friday, described the decision to declare Ahmadinejad as the winner as "treason to the votes of the people".
"I personally strongly protest the many obvious violations and I'm warning I will not surrender to this dangerous charade," he said in a statement.
"The result of such performance by some officials will jeopardise the pillars of the Islamic Republic and will establish tyranny."
Mousavi complained that many people had been prevented from voting, in part due to a shortage of ballot papers, and said that the authorities had blocked text messaging, which his campaign has used to reach young voters.
'Question marks'
Trita Parsi, the president of National American Iranian Council, told Al Jazeera that the emphatic nature of the victory raised "a lot of question marks".
"There are so many inconsistencies, they are even reporting that Ahmadinejad won the city of Tabriz, which is Mousavi's home town, with 57 per cent. That seems extremely unlikely.
"How come the votes were counted so quickly, even though the polls were open six hours extra?" he asked.
Scuffles broke out between police and chanting Mousavi supporters in a Tehran square early on Saturday, witnesses said. Anti-riot police were deployed outside government offices.
Al Jazeera's Teymoor Nabili, reporting from Tehran, said that the results declared by the interior ministry would still need to be signed off by the state audit body and the audit commission of the supreme leader.
"These two bodies are headed by men who might not be so close to the present administration," he said.
"Mousavi has the option of going to these two bodies and saying 'look I want definitive proof from you that these are clean numbers' ... but Mousavi is going to have to make some very tough choices about how much trouble he wants to make over these results."
Ahmadinejad's supporters took to the street in the early hours of Saturday, waving Iranian flags and honking car horns, after IRNA had declared the election for the incumbent president.
"Where are the greens? In a mousehole," some of them said, referring to the campaign colours of Mousavi, whose supporters held mass rallies in recent weeks.
The two other candidates up for election - Mohsen Rezai, a former commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, and Mehdi Karroubi, an ex-parliament speaker - were set to finish a distant third and fourth.
Source
And as for the onewho fears standing in front of His Lord and restrainsthe soul from impure evil desires and lusts, verily, Paradise will be his abode [79:40-41]
I definitely don't think these elections were free and fair, the whole election seems quite fishy. But as a general point how many elections are free and fair nowadays.
I definitely don't think these elections were free and fair, the whole election seems quite fishy. But as a general point how many elections are free and fair nowadays.
Many rather more so than this one, I suspect, but the numbers certainly seem to suggest Ahmadinejad would have won anyway... indeed I rather suspect he will be regretting any manipulation that may have gone on; 51% would probably have turned out rather better for him in the long run. I understand he is particularly popular among rural voters, though, and with some reason, and he may have just been particularly effective in mobilizing their vote.
What were the sunni community hoping for, a victory for Ahmadinejad or Mousavi?
Is there anything in the Qu’ran explaining about the sunni shia split?
I know the questions are slightly off topic but I don’t think its worth staring a new thread for what I presume is a simple answer.
What were the sunni community hoping for, a victory for Ahmadinejad or Mousavi?
Is there anything in the Qu’ran explaining about the sunni shia split?
I know the questions are slightly off topic but I don’t think its worth staring a new thread for what I presume is a simple answer.
The Quran tells you not to innovate in religion or create factions.
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.
I have to disagree, when the west is so instigating all the time..
yesterday I was watching one of my favorite travel shows 'Rick Steve' whose shows I enjoy immensely, he makes an effort with diplomacy and generally informative, well recently he took on Iran..
and I disliked all his sneaky comments here and there.. subtle, yet annoying nonetheless.. I dislike many things about Iran, but believing that only route worth taking is a western one, isn't only insulting.. It is wrong and unfounded.. given the mess the west finds itself in on social issues alone...
people should live and let live.. you can't think it is ok for you to have weapons and to instigate wars because 'you are good' others are evil.. says who? if the U.S drags itself into war with Iran, it will be its own doing.. already it has whittled itself away on useless wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, made an enemy with just about every country in the region, and drove its economy to the dumps..
I see nothing good with a continued war for the benefit of the little colonial cockroach of Israel... no it won't hasten the descent of a republican Jesus on a silver cloud, nor will the promised Moschiach come to aid those who have gone astray simply because they have made all necessary preparations including illegal excavation beneath al Aqsa for their imaginary third temple....
God bequeathed this earth to the righteous not the tyrants it says so in your Psalms but certainly not reflected in the actions of this fundi-Zionist govt.!
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
This man will not start a war. He may be involved though. The USA is who will start world war 3. They have been starting wars constantly since their inception. Iran hasn't started a war in recent memory.
I'm curious, on what asumptions do you believe Iran will start ''World War 3.''
Just sounds like U.S proganda. They never do give the full picture.
Personally, I am glad that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won. He is a strong political figure.
I think it will be either Iran under Ahmadinejad or it will be North Korea. Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and denies the Holocaust. Clearly to me this is a man who I would not consider to be mentally stable. I say the same about Kim Jong Il. I am not a Zionist by any means, I openly and publically condemn what Israel did in Gaza. Just because they are Jews does not give them liscence to do what they do. But Israel will not stand by and do nothing if he keeps calling for their destruction. If Israel does attack, than the US of course will be obligated to come to Israels aid. Hence we will be dragged into WW3. For this man to deny the Holocaust is extremly disturing and personally offensive to me. My maternal grandfather served in WW2, he helped liberate some of those camps. He saw the carnage that the Nazis inflicted and he being a product of his time was no friend of Jewish people. It was not just Jews who parished, but many Christians and other politcal prisoners as well. To deny history is to deny what happened to all who perished regardless of their religion. I do not want to see us go to war with either Iran or North Korea. We have done enough killing in the past decade in Iraq. Iran may not fire the first shot, but the tongue sometimes is more dangeruous than any weapon.
people should live and let live.. you can't think it is ok for you to have weapons and to instigate wars because 'you are good' others are evil.. says who? if the U.S drags itself into war with Iran, it will be its own doing.. already it has whittled itself away on useless wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, made an enemy with just about every country in the region, and drove its economy to the dumps..
...
God bequeathed this earth to the righteous not the tyrants it says so in your Psalms but certainly not reflected in the actions of this fundi-Zionist govt.!
The US had no business going into Iraq. Saddam was no threat to us and had no connections to Al queda. Was he a merciless tyrant, you bet. Should he have been overthrown, you bet, but by his own people. Should we have helped trained the Iraqi army so that it could fuction on its own, yes, but that is all we should have done. As far as Afganistan, that is where priorty should have been placed in going after bin Laden and his cohorts. They were a direct threat to the US. I think if we had focused on Afganistan we would have gotten bin Laden either dead or alive, but he would have been brought to justice. And who are you calling a Zionist fundi goverment? Could you please clarify?
well the results are out and ahmedinjad has won. the losers dont seem to like the fruits of democracy, sore losers, they must accept the result and move on, this is democracy, the majority have spoken and thats it.
its quite funny that all these pro western groups and people who always preach about freedom, democacy, rights etc always show their hypocrisy when their on the losing side. were seeing that in Iran now with the violence, and i am sure had the opposition won in lebanon we would have seen the same thing, the pro western groups and people would be comming out saying its a sham, they wont accept it, bla bla bla. we also saw this in palestine, when Hamas won the western world shunned them and continued to take abbas as the leader, although he lost and his time in the government has come to and end, they still act like hes the leader.
why arent western governments condemning the violence and statements being made by the loser candidate musavi???? surely if ahmedinad lost and his supporters turned to violence, and he said that the results were a fraud etc etc western governments would be out in force condemning him and saying look how this guy tries to silence the people and their democratic vote, but when its the other way round they dont say a word, rather they also join the wagon and accuse ahmedinijad of rigging the votes! amazing.
perhaps its time that these secularized pro western iranians and middle-easternes realize they are not in the majority, even in Lebanon the opposition actually won the popular vote, but just like in the U.S. the popular vote alone isnt enough to win you the election. poor guys, they have been brainwashed by their own propaganda.
Once again goes to show that elections can have a highly destablizing impact in countries that are highly polarized and that lack a strong (read: long) democratic tradition. It often ends up in violence.
Once again goes to show that elections can have a highly destablizing impact in countries that are highly polarized and that lack a strong (read: long) democratic tradition. It often ends up in violence.
well, the opposition in lebanon didnt protest. neither did the conservatives in Iran back in 97 when khatami the reformist won.
fact is the ppl who are always protesting to losses are pro western groups.
I think it will be either Iran under Ahmadinejad or it will be North Korea. Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and denies the Holocaust. Clearly to me this is a man who I would not consider to be mentally stable. I say the same about Kim Jong Il. I am not a Zionist by any means, I openly and publically condemn what Israel did in Gaza. Just because they are Jews does not give them liscence to do what they do. But Israel will not stand by and do nothing if he keeps calling for their destruction. If Israel does attack, than the US of course will be obligated to come to Israels aid. Hence we will be dragged into WW3. For this man to deny the Holocaust is extremly disturing and personally offensive to me. My maternal grandfather served in WW2, he helped liberate some of those camps. He saw the carnage that the Nazis inflicted and he being a product of his time was no friend of Jewish people. It was not just Jews who parished, but many Christians and other politcal prisoners as well. To deny history is to deny what happened to all who perished regardless of their religion. I do not want to see us go to war with either Iran or North Korea. We have done enough killing in the past decade in Iraq. Iran may not fire the first shot, but the tongue sometimes is more dangeruous than any weapon.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not deny the holocaust. Firstly, he says why are there laws to prevent the Holocaust are being studied in a different perspective. To gain more knowledge and to consider other possibilities. To have laws to restrict freedom of expression on a topic, could possibily mean the government have something to hide. Now tell me, what is wrong with researching and gaining more knowledge on a particular matter? It may support the overwhelming evidence for the holocaust that has taken place.
Secondly he states, the holocaust took place in Europe. So why is Palestine suffering? He is simply speaking for the Palestinian people. What is wrong with that? The U.S has silenced Palestinian people. He is simply voicing his opinion that Europe should have dealt with the problem since they caused it.
Israel is an illegal state. It should not exist. If it must, then it must go through the correct procedure. They took Palestine through brutal force and put them under occupation.
Iran has not started a war from my knowledge. So what makes you think this ''mentally stable'' man shall start a war? What ill intentions does he have? All he is doing speaking for the Palestinian people in essence. He is developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The U.S government have sent down officals to inpsect his nuclear energy plans and concluded that they are peaceful.
You can listen to his interviews conducted by U.S reported if you want to gain the full picture. If U.S and Israel are going to war, over because they do not like what someone has said, then they sound like the bigger threat that need to be dealt with. Are you really going to start a war where thousands of innocent lives are at risk over because you don't like what someone has said?
Israel is an illegal state. It should not exist. If it must, then it must go through the correct procedure. They took Palestine through brutal force and put them under occupation.
. Are you really going to start a war where thousands of innocent lives are at risk over because you don't like what someone has said?
The displaced Jews needed somewhere to go after WW2 and present day Israel was the original homeland of their people. They have just as much right to be there as the Palestinians. However the Israeli goverment does not have a right to displace a whole group of people who have been there for centuries. If the people of Iran have reelected the man through fair elections they are a sovereign nation and have the right to elect their own leader whomever he/she may be. He can hate America and especially Israel all he wants to do, but he cannot call for Israel to be destroyed and wiped off the face of the Earth and not expect Israel to eventually take action. "I " personally am not going to start a war of any kind. If Israel and Iran want to bomb each other let them, I dont think my nation should come to the aid of Israel,they can take care of themselves. Yet America most likely will feel obligated to come to Israels aid and I will not support that personally as I dont like war and violence as it is. If people were smart Israel and Iran would set across a conferance table and negotaite a treaty of some kind.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
neither did the conservatives in Iran back in 97 when khatami the reformist won.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks