Wednesday
Dec162009
UPDATED "Where is My Vote?" (Part 2): TIME Snubs Green Movement as "Person of the Year"
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 at 6:44 
UPDATE 0925 GMT: US National Public Radio is conducting a parallel poll, so far without throwing out "Iran Protesters".President Obama is the Leader of the Others, with 2% of the vote. Yep, 2%. He's got a way to go to catch those pesky Protesters, who are on 93%.
United4Iran offers comments on the Time affair.
UPDATE 0800 GMT: Iran News Now has a spirited investigation of Time's poll and the dropping of "Iran's Protesters" from the final list for Person of the Year.
It may not rank with the alleged theft of June's Presidential election, but Time magazine just put itself in the role of vote-stealing villain for many supporters of Iran's Green Wave.
Yesterday Time put out the press release:
The seven finalists [for Time's Person of the Year] include Apple [Computers] CEO Steve Jobs, US Federal Reserve Charman [sic] Ben Bernanke, US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Jamaican Sprinter and Olympic Gold Medalist Usain Bolt, Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal and US President Barack Obama.
Also making the lists is "the Chinese worker," a group of people whom TIME says "are an increasingly influential group in one of the world's most powerful economies".
The Latest from Iran (15 November): The Path to Moharram
All credible candidates for the honour of the figure or group who has made a significant impact on the world in 2009 - except maybe the one whose claim is that he runs really, really fast. But the news is who didn't make the final cut from 10 nominees. Apparently "the Iranian People" didn't match up to an American Congresswoman, the man leading the US Long War in Central Asia, or the iPhone guy, let alone an assembly-line machinist in Beijing.
Still, even that rejection might have fluttered into cyber-space had it not been for Time's perverse tribute to democracy.
To boost attention to the award, the magazine held an on-line poll: the top US money-man Bernanke, for example, finished 6th with more than 63,000 votes; computer-whiz Jobs was 3rd with almost 87,000. (Bizarrely, given yesterday's outcome, Pelosi and "the Chinese worker" were not even among the nominees.) The runner-up in the vote was US President Barack Obama, who must be pleased with just under 112,000 endorsements.
But the winner in the poll? With 573,561 votes --- more than a 5:1 margin over Obama --- "Iran Protesters".
So how did Time achieve what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cannot, making the Green Movement disappear after a supposedly full and fair election? Well, the magazine did put up the caveat, "TIME's editors reserve the right to disagree." And here is the likely explanation:
[While] their courage and determination in the face of a brutal government crackdown demonstrated the depth of their willingness to fight for what they believed in....any hopes that the protests would usher in a flowering of Iranian democracy were shattered by the violent reprisals. And as time went on, it became clear that opposition movement leaders like Mir-Hossein Mousavi were not seeking a clean break with the Islamic Republic, as many Western observers had hoped.
Sorry, folks, you were kinda cute, as well as kinda valiant, in the summer. You might even have spurred an outpouring of popular support as you persisted. But, for Time, your demonstrations no longer exist because you couldn't deliver a "regime change" winding the clock in Iran back to 1978.
Long live democracy. Go away, democracy.
Reader Comments (73)
Hey Sombody,
"It would be amusing to see the defense submit this issue into evidence: http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19800107,00.html (that is, if the defendants are permitted legal counsel..)."
That would be a defense only if the trial was not in a kangaroo court like Iran Revolutionary court or a court system that does not have monkeys as jurists.
I do not know who you are and I sure do not understand your itch in responding to my comments even when you have absolutely nothing worth to say or anything of value to add. But I find it certainly entertaining how small some people are and how hard they work to show it.
Megan,
Sadly i think your right. However lets hope the pursuit of profit wins the day! I would have to imagine the editors of time realize the bigger story is Iran rather than obama or god forbid the Chinese Workerss! Maybe this time greed will work in our favor!! Lets all pray it does!!!
Thx
Bill
Megan,
We are working on correcting the bugs in the edit function so we can restore it. In meantime, I have corrected the typo in your comment.
S.
Rezvan
you seem to be singing to deaf ears ...
Rezvan,
Again it is all about Gaza and Palestine. Gee what about the 2 million who died in Darfur since the early 90's with over 300,000 in the past few years. I guess since the Jews are not involved no big deal for the Islamic world. It was only Muslims killing and raping Muslims, Animists, and Christians. While we are at why don't we talk about the 100,000 plus dead in the 90's due to Islamic fanatics in Algeria, Somalia, The Philipines, and Thailand because they want to implement their form of Sharia. Again no big deal to the Islamic world because no jews involved and the majority of the deaths are caused by Muslims. Wake up most us in the free world are tired of hearing about the Palestinian issue when much bigger humanitarian disasters have occured.
The Palestinians consume over 2% of the entire UN budget each year while only 3% is used for the other hundereds of millions in need. In addition the Palestinians have the highest consumption of aid per capita in the world. Where is the brotherly love amongst the Arab nations who to this day deny citizenship or even the right for palestinians to settle in their land. These same arab states year after year stand by and watch while the "evil" West pays over 90% of the bills in Palestine. It is these same "evil" states that have granted more palestinians citizenship than their Arab brothers. Why? It is all politics and well most Arab states wan't Israel gone so it serves their purpose to keep the Palestinians in limbo as a proxy to wage their war against Israel.
The politics say Jews shouldn't be in Israel because the Muslims conqured them at one time, The Prophet said all non Muslims must be cleasned from the Arabian penisula, and the Muslims built the Fartheset Away Mosque(incidentally built in 690 ad decades after if was actually mentioned in the Quran) on the Jews holiest site. Oh the audacity of those Jews to claim what was theirs from thousands of years ago. It is political because fanatic Islamists believe we can conquer and convert the infidel but a big no if it is the other way around.
I protested against the Gaza war but it sickens me when this selective outrage crops up in light of much bigger humanitarian issues. Israel is so wrong on many issues and they as a people should know oppression never works. However, what are they to do when most Arab states and many Muslims want them entirely wiped out? The Islamic world claims genocide but if you read the Charters of the PLO and Hamas they themselves want to inflict a genocide on the Jews. Gee sort of hard to work out a comprimise knowing the other side trully wants you dead. Sorry my friend but I am sick and tired of the Isareli Arab conflict in light of much bigger humanitarian issues are afoot. The reality is the hyper focus on the issue has had only one true result that being it acting as an enabler for both sides to continue the conflict. So yes along with many others we do think Iranian people is the bigger issue vs. Palestine. For some it may even be because we believe the foucs on Iran might actually bring results unlike Palestine where it seems to drag on and on despite all best efforts.
Thx
Bill
Rezvan,
Today I would also like say while being and American I am an Iranian at heart now. Maybe in the future when the Arab world trully wants peace I will be a Palestinian. For now I am an Iranian and my solidarity, prayers, and heart fellt concern is for the oppressed people of Iran!
Thx
Bill
Time Person of the Year is Ben Bernanke. WTF? Chinese worker was a runner up but when you look through the list Iran Protestors are not on the list: http://www.time.com/time/specials/poylist/0,32517,1946375,00.html WTF agian? The your results poll is updated and the Iranian protestors got over 2.4 million votes almost the same amount of votes all others got combined. Something is fishy that the Iran Protestors were so obviously left off the list? I a may be dreaming but lets hope Time has a surprise for us and this was not a Obama administration to have them removed. Here is the link to the final poll results for Your Results: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1939691_1943685_1943686,00.html
Scott,
Thanks as always.
“you seem to be singing to deaf ears”
We are not deaf. We ignore Ahmadinajad kind of nonsense re-packaged with different labels, Rezvan, etc.
I thought you were “dis-attracted” to EA, a weblog that in your words was highly dubious. Is traffic that slow at your own blog, the Neo-cope? What a bummer!
Bill,
At least Neda made the list for people who mattered.
What do you mean by Time has a surprise?
Megan,
What I meant by surprise was a hope I had that this was all something to mimic what happened in Iran--ie the rigged election. After looking through the articles from Time today the Iran Protestors are no where to be found despite them having 2.4 million votes compared to 2.5 for all the rest. And further puzzling is the fact the Chinese worker made the runner up list despite not even being included at first. I am hoping when the magazine goes to print they will say we rigged our election!!!! Under this scenario they may publish a magazine declaring the winner then follow up the next with a HA HA we rigged the election. I know I am dreaming but I can't help think something is fishy. On the other hand your suggestion that the Obama administration told them to back off is also possible scenario. In any event all I can say to today is WTF!!!
Thx
Bill
"Maybe in the future when the Arab world trully wants peace I will be a Palestinian."
So, Bill, until the Arab world (their governments, their people) change their attitude you couldn't empathize with the Palestinians? Do you realize how bogus that is? Shouldn't it be enough that the Palestinians want peace? That the Palestinians have rights under the UDHR? Shouldn't it be enough that Israel is the occupying power denying them those rights? Don't you believe in a people's right to self-determination?
Do you really think that Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories will change the probability of them getting "swept into the sea" (currently at a probability of zero)? How then is this absurd rhetoric be considered a rational excuse for an illegal occupation?
You bring up the atrocities in Darfur and elsewhere. You sound like people who answer to discussion of crimes in Iran by bringing up American crimes. If your principles were universal, you would "be" an Iranian and a Palestinian and a Sudanese and a Somali. How can you justify choosing which people you have empathy for?
"I do not know who you are and I sure do not understand your itch in responding to my comments even when you have absolutely nothing worth to say or anything of value to add."
Megan, you seem to have an over-inflated impression of yourself. I'm only trying to add to the debate; there's no cause for hostility.
Somebody,
Yes I believe the Palestinians deserve their rights and I am against much of what Israel does. However, I singled out the Israeli Arab conflict because it is so grossly over emphasized respective to all the other humanitarian disasters that are much bigger! I trully believe if Israel and Palestine wanted peace it could happen. The reality is BOTH sides don't seem to want it. On one hand the West blindly supports Israel giving them confidence to maintain the status quo and on the other the Arab world continually bleats on and on about how Israel has not right to any of the land. Israel then build settlements saying they want peace and the Palestinians claim they want peace yet like the Arabs say the want all of Israel. It is an unending cycle of violence that all are to blame for. Added to all this is the world's fixation on the issue that seem to only enable the conflict to go on. It seem the people have all been lost in this crisis and now driving it are only the politics.
I will support causes when I believe people want their God given rights but not when they want them at the cost of others. That my friend is the difference with the Arab Israeli conflict respective to Iran, Darfur, and all the others oppressed. I hope you see I am not unilaterally condeming Palestine but also Israel and politics that perpetuate this cycle of violence. In your defense I should have also mentioned I am not an Israeli either!
Thx
Bill
Bill, thanks for your clear-headed response. I realized after hitting the submit button that I was being a bit overly confrontational in my post.
I suppose our differences lie in the fact that I don't see what's happening as a conflict between Israelis and Arabs. I simply see a population that has been under an illegal occupation for sixty years. I feel that people often forget that occupied people don't have any responsibilities under international law. It is the occupiers that have responsibilities and in this case it is the Israeli military that is doing the occupying with the balance of power squarely on its side.
All Palestinians want the occupation to end and it is their right that it should end. If the Israelis weren't being lied to constantly about the dire need to continue the occupation to ensure their security (which is the exact opposite of the truth) then I'm sure the vast majority of Israelis would favour withdrawal as well. And other than the zealots on either side (Israelis who cling to the notion that "Judea and Samaria are ours!" by Biblical right or otherwise and Palestinians who refuse to recognize Israel) a two state solution is universally recognized as an acceptable solution.
Somebody,
“There’s no cause for hostility”
Hostility is a natural response when one senses hostility.
“I’m only trying to add to the debate”
Your perception of your action is irrelevant, it is the perception of others, in this case people you are addressing, that matters. In my view you are not debating points one makes, you are confronting the person who has expressed her/his views and often with a sanctimonious tone. You lecture and confront, you do not debate.
Example: you write to Bill at 13:32
"So, Bill, until the Arab world (their governments, their people) change their attitude you couldn’t empathize with the Palestinians? Do you realize how bogus that is?”
The above is not debating points. That is personal attack on a person whose views and feeling you don’t share. Bill was magnanimous in his reply to you. I am not as generous as Bill. I hit back in kind and as hard as I can. But I am honest enough not to sugar-coat my response as “I’m only trying to add to the debate”.
“Megan, you seem to have an over-inflated impression of yourself.”
Somebody, I rest my case.
"'I’m only trying to add to the debate' ... Your perception of your action is irrelevant, it is the perception of others, in this case people you are addressing, that matters. In my view you are not debating points one makes,"
My intention to take part in the debate is relevant and just because you ignore the points being made doesn't mean they're not there.
"Hostility is a natural response when one senses hostility. ... Example: you write to Bill at 13:32 "
Is that all? I called someone's argument bogus and then (the part you don't cite) I explain why it's bogus? Well, if we're playing the citations game, I'd like to make a few references myself.
Me: http://enduringamerica.com/2009/12/11/iran-the-military-will-stand-with-the-iranian-people/comment-page-2/#comment-16773
Your response to me: http://enduringamerica.com/2009/12/11/iran-the-military-will-stand-with-the-iranian-people/comment-page-2/#comment-16797
There's an exchange in which you respond to my plainly stated viewpoint with:
"So hold your higher standard but stop lecturing me. What is with you anyway? What is all this self-righteousness when you address me? ... I certainly have not qualified you to teach me ethics. Ethical???????????? I wonder how Taraneh Mousavi’s mother or a father whose son was raped and murdered in Kahrizak would say to you in response. Sometimes I wonder who is more annoying, Samuel(s) of this world or Sanctimonious Somebody(s) of this world. I would say latter. I really detest your tone toward my comments. You did that in the very first comment I posted on this blog and you are still at it. Drop it."
I don't remember the very first post on this blog, but your bringing it up in that comment gives me the impression that your hostile tone is not so much a "natural response [to] hostility" but rather originates in your frustration over being disagreed with. I'm afraid I can't do anything to remedy that, you sometimes say things that demand a response and this is after all a public comment board (for example your bigoted attitude toward Muslim clergy: http://enduringamerica.com/2009/12/13/the-latest-from-iran-13-december-bubbling-over/comment-page-1/#comment-17077 ).
As for my comment about your impression of yourself, what else am I supposed to make of your apparent sense of entitlement to speak on a public forum without facing criticism and your subsequent hostility when you find that you have no such entitlement?
Calm down people! We are not here to become hostile to each other. We are here to express our sympathy and support to freedom movement in Iran. We are here to express our views and thoughts of whats going on and what happens next in Iran. We are here to express our dissatisfaction, frustration and anger towards the regime of Iran. We should not waste our energy by throwing accusations towards each other. If we dont like each others opinion, we can give constructive criticism but not in a way to impose our own opinion. Lets give each other some respect. We have the same goal in mind anyway. The fall of this hated regime. We should not be like religious people who fights each other because they want to impose their own ways of worshipping God yet believe in the same God.
Somebody,
Wow! You missed my points again.
You seem to have too much time on your hands. I do not. My life is full. The time I spent here is taken from my sleep time. Spending time on Iran is labor of love for me. You seem to be enjoying the cat fight. I find that utterly embarrassing especially in this forum.
You can continue getting in the middle of every conversation I have with other readers and oppose my views. It is okay, I understand you cannot help it. I will ignore your remarks in the future because doing otherwise is total waste of time and trivial in the scheme of what we face.
Cecil,
You have a good point. I apologize to you for having you read matters totally unrelated to the struggle in Iran.
Somebody,
Thank you for your response. I did not think your post was confrontational. If anything I just took it as a challenge that is it. The reality is the issue is "confrontational" by nature. It also doesn't help that we are communicating only through email. Typed words only convey half the message and the fact remains a reader may take a different meaning away from the post than the writer intended. I think my whole issue is I am just "over" the whole issue with Palestine. The 60 year refugees is a case in point. Regardless of who is right or wrong a 60 year refugee is unheard of. In every other conflict the refugee is dealt with. It is why I believe many in the Arab world don't want this issue resolved unless Israel goes by by. Otherwise they would have helped these 60 year old refugees! Arafat was even caught several times stating the refugee status works in the favor of the PLO so he didn't mind that the arab states did nothing to resettle them. Israel is no better on so many levels.
Instead I have chosen to move on and not fixate on an issue no one seems to want to fix. The world has much bigger problems than the Arab Israeli conflict.
@ Megan
Please dont apologize. I love your views and opinions. Everytime I see you posting in this site, I'll make sure I read every word of it. I love everyone who contributes in this forum but you are my number one...
Cecil,
Thanks a million for kind words. I read you comments as well. I hope this nightmare will be over soon. My heart aches for those who are trapped in Iran especially those who have lost loved ones in the past thirty years. I let my anger run loose for those in Iran who cannot and I do that with the hope that those in Iran who might read our words realize they are not voiceless.