FILE - In this Friday, June 12, 2009 file photo, Iranian men line up as they wait to vote for presidential election, while they stand in front of a picture of the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at a polling station, in downtown in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
FILE - In this Friday, June 12, 2009 file photo, Iranian men line up as they wait to vote for presidential election, while they stand in front of a picture of the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at a polling station, in downtown in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
FILE - In this Friday, July 27, 2012 file photo, Iranian worshippers listen to the Friday prayer's sermon, at the Tehran University campus, in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
In this Friday, June 12, 2009 photo, an Iranian police officer stands guard as people line up outside a polling station in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
In this Monday, June 15, 2009 photo, hundreds of thousands of supporters of leading opposition presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, who claims there was voting fraud in Friday's election, turn out to protest the result of the election at a mass rally in Azadi (Freedom) St. in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
In this Friday, June 12, 2009 photo, an Iranian police officer stands guard as people line up outside a polling station in Tehran, Iran. Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership. The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) ? Elections to pick Iran's next president are still five months away, but that's not too early for some warning shots by the country's leadership.
The message to anyone questioning the openness of the June vote: Keep quiet.
A high-level campaign ? including blunt remarks by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ? seeks to muzzle any open dissent over the process to select the successor for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and likely usher in a new president with a far tamer political persona.
Public denunciations are nothing new against anyone straying from Iran's official script. But the unusually early pre-emptive salvos appears to reflect worries that the election campaign could offer room for rising criticism and complaints over Iran's myriad challenges, including an economy sputtering under Western-led sanctions, double-digit inflation and a national currency whose value has nosedived.
"Elections, by their nature, are an opportunity to make your voice heard," said Mustafa Alani, an analyst at the Gulf Research Center based in Geneva. "Iran's leaders understand this very well and are not likely to take any chances."
And Iranian authorities hold nearly all the cards. Their main goal this time is to avoid any repeat of 2009, when reform-leaning candidates were allowed on the ballot and led an unprecedented street revolt after Ahmadinejad's re-election to his second, and final, term amid claims of vote rigging.
The protest leaders are now under house arrest and their opposition Green Movement has been systematically dismantled through crackdowns and intimidation. The next group of presidential hopefuls ? who must be cleared by Iran's ruling clerics ? is almost certain to have no wildcards.
Instead, the emphasis is likely to be on easing the domestic political friction as Iran attempts the strategic version of a win-win: Finding ways to ride out sanctions, while negotiating a deal with the U.S. and allies that would allow Tehran to keep some levels of uranium enrichment, the centerpiece of its nuclear program.
The West and others fear Iran's ability to make nuclear fuel could eventually lead to warhead-grade material. Iran claims it only seeks reactors for energy production and medical applications. Iran is scheduled to hold talks with envoys from the U.N. nuclear agency later this week.
For more than a year, internal political spats have been an unwelcome distraction for Iran's ruling system.
Ahmadinejad shattered protocol by openly defying the all-powerful Supreme Leader Khamenei over a Cabinet choice. What followed was a feud that left Ahmadinejad politically weakened and many of his allies sidelined or jailed. It also raised major doubts about whether his chief protege, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, will be allowed on the June 14 ballot.
A more likely scenario ? at the moment, at least ? is more predictable loyalists to both the ruling system and its guardians, the powerful Revolutionary Guard. Perceived front-runners include former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, prominent lawmaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel, Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and ex-Revolutionary Guard commander Mohsen Rezaei.
But it will be months before any kind of race begins. In the meantime, Iranian authorities appear ready to pounce hard on any perceived opposition.
What has touched a nerve has been debates among reformists and moderates, including former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, about whether Iran will hold "free elections" ? a coded phrase pointing to the expected rejection of any potential opposition candidates.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters in Iran, responded sharply. He equated the phrase with aiding the Islamic Republic's "enemies" ? meaning the U.S., Israel and others ? that have raised questions about the fairness of Iran's elections. Iranian leaders also are concerned about a possible low turnout if former Green Movement backers stage a boycott.
"Even those who may make general recommendations about the election out of good will for the nation must be cautious not to help the enemy's purpose," Khamenei told a crowd in Tehran last week. "Be careful that your words don't discourage people from the elections."
Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born political analyst based in Israel, said the Arab Spring uprisings ? including the rebellion against Iran's key ally Bashar Assad in Syria ? are likely to keep Iranian authorities on high alert for any signs of unrest as the election draws closer.
"When the supreme leader looks at these developments, it would be understandable for him to be concerned," Javedanfar said.
In a rare common message, Friday prayer leaders around Iran described the phrase "free elections" as a new buzzword to create "sedition" in the upcoming vote. Hardliners call opposition leaders "seditionists."
"Those promoting the term of 'free elections' are politically defeated ones. Others who raise this term are monarchists, the U.S. and Israel ... shame on you. Why do you repeat the words of the enemy?" said Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, addressing Friday prayers at Tehran University. Jannati heads the Guardian Council, which vets election candidates.
In the seminary city of Qom, prayer leader Mohammadi Saeedi called the term "free elections" an effort "to create riots in the upcoming elections."
"We steadfastly declare that people, having put the 2009 sedition behind, won't allow the enemy and seditionists to create riots in the elections," he said.
Mohammad Shahcheraghi, leading prayers in Semnan, about 150 kilometers (90 miles) east of Tehran, urged authorities to stamp out the "second sedition."
"From today, anyone ... who promotes the term free elections should be considered an opponent of the position of the supreme leader and has served the ominous aims of the enemy," he said.
Tehran-based political analyst Davoud Hermidas Bavand interpreted the attacks as an attempt to keep Rafsanjani and others from trying to build a new pro-reform movement around the vote.
"The slogan of 'free elections' casts doubt on the authenticity of previous elections," he said. "That makes the establishment unhappy and authorities take it as an indication that reformists are seeking to provoke tensions ahead of the vote."
___
Murphy reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Associated PressSource: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2013-01-13-Iran-Election%20Warnings/id-bb537bf3f9394043ac4ba0f5caaff360
annalynne mccord natalie wood van halen numerology the game george lucas billy the kid
Yesterday I wrote about the ongoing CNET editorial independence issue. I said that the editors and journalists at CNET were part of the problem, and suggested that they either publish their (assumed) dissent, or resign, or both. A conversation began in the comments of that post, with some people saying that it isn’t reasonable to expect people to resign. From Danny Sullivan: I think a lot of CNET staffers probably aren’t resigning, Mike, because they have families to support, as well as themselves. It’s not exactly a great economy out there. I think what Greg did was very brave, but not everyone is that brave nor even able to make that type of move. Rof Hof: I don’t blame people in today’s publishing business for wanting to line up work first. Not everybody can be sure of being able to support their families, and when they’ve been screwed by their employer, they shouldn’t be expected to *immediately* screw themselves too. But don’t be surprised to see more leaving. There were similar comments on Twitter. These comments were often combined with statements my position wasn’t valid because I have made some money selling my business. As just one example, David Carnoy, Executive Editor at CNET, says: @arrington In your post about @CNET you neglected to disclose $$$ you made from selling out to AOL. Easy to walk when you had your BIG EXIT. And finally, some people have said that it’s only reasonable for people to resign if they have another job lined up. Hunter Walk, in a comment to the original post, says: Let’s see other journalists stand with their brethren and start a “free the CNET staffers” fund that can be tapped by any CNET journalist who wants to walk away but needs the money to do so. Mike, I’ll match up to the first $500 of your contribution I think some of these are valid points and worth exploring. First, sure it’s easy for me to say they should just quit their jobs when I’m not the one doing it and I may have more financial security than most or all of them. If I worked at CNET, had a family to take care of and had little financial breathing room I cannot say for certain that I’d resign. My family would certainly come first (and second, and third). It’s a fair point. Second, I agree that it
(17)
One of my first orders of business in any new year is to figure out which conferences I will attend as part of my personal development plan. With that in mind, I asked my social media connections ?what are the best marketing conferences??
Aaron Swartz, the intelligent programmer and Internet activist who co-founded the company that eventually grew into Reddit, committed suicide on Friday in his New York City apartment. He was 26. The sad news of his death was confirmed early Saturday morning, with those closest to him revealing his long-time battle with depression. Swartz’s attorney, Elliot ...
For some, this could be real property, an investment portfolio and more. For others, it could be as straightforward as the $10 bill in their wallet and the clothes on their back. Either way, what you leave behind when you die is considered to be your ?estate.?
