Iranian and Afghan elections: Compare and contrast

Iran's tenth presidential election was held on 12 June 2009.

Afghanistan's second presidential election under its Western-imposed Post-Taliban constitution was held on 20 August 2009.

Compare and contrast:

Iran - There was little by way of build up to the elections in the Western MSM and what there was did not have that unmistakable air of Establishment orchestration to it. Before the polls closed (pace Ukraine's Yushchenko and Georgia's Saakashvili), the principle Iranian challenger, Mir-Hossain Mousavi, claimed victory. The morning after the election, Iran's official news agency announced that, with 2/3 the votes counted, the incumbent Ahmadinejad had won with 63% of the votes cast. All hell broke loose in both the Western MSM and on the Steets of Tehran.

Throughout the following 6 weeks, during what had clearly been pre-planned and orchestrated to become yet another US-friendly 'colour revolution' to follow those of Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan - The 'Twitter' tool having been polished and honed in the meantime - Western media were as one in sustained shrill condemnation of the elections. The parallels with those earlier events were uncanny, except that this time it failed. Three months later and all is quiet with not a shred of the evidence we were assured at the time was overwhelming having been produced - But never mind. The consolation prize is that 'FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS' is now firmly embedded in western public conciousness, thanks to our supine and ghastly MSM.

Afganistan - There was a big build up in the Western MSM. On the whole it's tone was grave and a little subdued, with the forebodings of Western officialdom palpable: it was to be "a laudable democratic process", "this embryonic democracy deserved our support and assistance" and similar - ad nauseam (The air of Establishment orchestration this time foetid and quite unmissable). Then the elections took place and MSM commentary very quickly subsided into embarrassed, self-concious silence. Two months later and still we have no definitive official result - though corrupt western-backed Karzai and his drug-trafficking war-lord henchmen have clearly stolen it again.

Then a couple of days ago, one Peter Galbraith, the man in charge of the UN election monitoring operation, courageously breaks ranks, declares the elections to have been grossly fraudulent and is - naturally and totally predictably - sacked for his honesty.

And all the while our mendacious 'leaders', in the fashion of squabbling parrots, STILL continue to insist that our military presence in that benighted country has a noble purpose, when anyone with half a brain can see the thoroughly sordid, self-serving nature of its true purpose staring them in the face.

We are being systematically lied to and, as with the naked emperor, the lie is so big, in your face and screamingly bloody obvious, that nobody will even admit to noticing it - let alone doing anything about it.

UN Secretary General: "I will ask the General Assembly ... to Strip Israel of its Membership"

**** Update ****

It looks like the following is a send-up - mores the pity. There is even a pdf of the "statement" in realistic UN official-looking format here . So, as of right now, my opinion of Ban Ki-Moon remains un-revised
----------------------------------
This not insignificant event occurred on Monday of this week and yet to date I have seen no mention of anywhere in the MSM. There is a view that the US has already given up on the UN and is grooming NATO to effectively supplant it. In my opinion this lends credence to that view.

Ban Ki-Moon risks becoming persona-non-grata in New York/Washington and, although I have hitherto considered him a spineless place man it looks like I may have to revise that opinion. The very best of luck to him is all I can say.

United Nations General Assembly,
New York, NY
11 May 2009

Mr. President
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

With each passing year, we come closer to our past. Every year brings with it momentous anniversaries of events that shaped our world. For example, we have recently marked the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II and of the United Nations itself. These two events, inextricably linked, form the basis of what we have come to know as the modern era, the post-war era.

For me, as Secretary–General, looking back on where the UN started and where it is now has a special importance, for I am now charged with guiding the world body through unknown and uncertain territory. “Terrorism” has long since replaced “arms control” and “détente” as the focus of international security, yet the term defies definition. One country’s terrorist is another country’s revolutionary hero. Some insist that terrorists are opposed to democracy, but we have all seen democracies behave like terrorists.

In many ways, the world today does not seem to be very removed from the barbarity of world war. The invasion of Iraq has lasted longer than World War II, and more tons of bombs have been dropped on that poor country than all the bombs dropped in that great war. The International Declaration of Human Rights, so prized and venerated by men and women of honour everywhere, stands as an impotent relic of a forgotten time because conquest, cruelty, and arrogance are still with us and growing stronger.

For all of the good the UN has accomplished since its founding, and there have been successes, the sheer magnitude of human suffering and violations of international law that have occurred and are still occurring must also be taken into account.

Few people know that Israel is the only state to be given a conditional admission. Under General Assembly Resolution 273, Israel was admitted on the condition that it grant all Palestinians the right to return to their homes and receive compensation for lost or damaged property, according to General Assembly Resolution 194 paragraph 11. Suffice to say, Israel has never lived up to these terms, and never intended to.

For 60 years Israel has violated its terms of admission, and for 60 years the UN has done nothing about it. It has watched as Israel heaped misery upon misery on Palestine, and violated international law with impunity.

After “Operation Cast Lead,” no person, no country, no democracy can look at Israel without thinking of the inhuman slaughter and destruction committed by the axis powers in World War II, though one could have said the same about numerous past massacres. What atrocities might the world have been spared if the UN had refused to admit Israel 60 years ago?

Of course, the immediate post war world was a different time. The world had just witnessed the horrors of Hitler’s racist excesses, and collective Western guilt for the Holocaust dictated attitudes toward the idea of Jewish state. Even the UN could not withstand the moral pressure.

On Nov. 29, 1947, it passed General Assembly Resolution 181, “The Partition Plan,” to carve a Jewish state out of Arab Palestine. However, it was never ratified by the Security Council, and so does not exist in law, which means the UN played no role in the creation of Israel. Nevertheless, “The Partition Plan” was utterly illegal and a violation of the UN Charter, because the UN had no right or power to take land from one people and give it to another.

If it hopes to play a meaningful role in the 21st century, the UN must do more than simply promise to enact reforms. It must search deep within its soul to redress the fundamental violations of its founding principles, which have long since ceased to have any force. That recommitment must begin now, for it was 60 years ago today, May 11, 1949, that Israel became a member of the UN. The UN cannot hope to achieve any measure of peace or justice as long as it condones war crimes, which it does every day that Israel is allowed to flout its terms of admission.

The past cannot be undone, but the future can change. As its newly elected Secretary-General, I promise that the UN will no longer be a passive enabler of genocide. Therefore, I will ask the General Assembly to meet in special session at the earliest possible time to strip Israel of its membership.

Ordinarily, a motion to expel a member nation would have to come at the recommendation of the Security Council, but this is not an ordinary motion. Because Israel is in violation of its terms of admission, it is not a member in good standing, so the UN has every right to declare General Assembly Resolution 273 null and void. Since Israel’s membership depends on adherence to that resolution, its expulsion is automatic.

Essentially, the unavoidable, lamentable truth of the last six decades is that the UN has been a moral and political failure because it has refused to enforce its own rules and defend the Charter. Nothing the UN does can have any value as long as this illegitimate member occupies a place in the General Assembly. I want the UN to have value.

I count on your support.
Thank you very much.