:sleepy:

^^ No, the votes were not counted with machines, the problem was that most of the votes were hand counted, and because of the large masses of people that were coming out, it would be impossible to count that many votes and get them in 3 hours after voting had ended! That's why there's something fishy

no the votes WERE counted by machine..... lol that's the whole point jesus (and they weren't counted 100% by 3hrs...)


and like the experts said it WOULD be possible to count those votes its just they find it Very Unlikely that Iran could do it.... (if it was by hand)


you can't just ignore the facts sigh....


anyway there's going to be a recount from the Guardian Council, who monitored the voting with the Expiediancy Council, both councils consisted of Mousavi supporters....



just face it dude the protesters are protesting because they're sore losers and are probably being supported by somebody in the background spurring them on; hoping to cause a disturbance to see if they can get something out of it.

either that or they've been mis-led (like not knowing the votes were counted by computers, or that Mousavi supporters are highly ranked and involved with the election but notice no fraud etc etc)

we'll see what the recount says and i only hope that they're not going to cry foul again and cause shit disturbances... which will only lead to turmoil and an Iran that isn't advancing




i guess i shouldn't have prodded for a reply and accepted the silence as defeat :P

Dear StylinRed,

Please get your facts straight. I believe this article will help http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/....elections.qa/ The votes WERE hand counted. Thanks for your time.

Choda

cnn gets its news from a variety of sources, Associated Press says its counted by computers...i posted the link for you and quoted the text....


what you linked is a FAQ... with inaccurate info like there being no monitoring there was.. dont have time to own u more thoroughly again gotta head out :P

And google is spot on ! :thumbsup:

that wasnt google news... that was google posting a report from the Associated Press....

don't tell me you don't know who the Associated Press is?

here's a direct link to the associated press' press release since u don;t like google
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

CNN is known for using outdated information and expressing it as current,
I highly doubt the Associated Press would be lying for Ahmadinejad and making such a claim that computers counted the votes... like the article says its a new system

Acclaimed professors and experts on Iran from Germany/Britian have stated that voter fraud is unlikely


Boston Herald also says there was computerized voting (they used the Associated Press' report although they threw it into the back of the story)
http://bh.heraldinteractive.com/news...dd#articleFull

USA Today also used the Associated Press' report
http://content.usatoday.net/dist/cus...30977021.story



LA TIMES In Their Own Report have also confirmed Computer Vote Counting
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,3190760.story

The govt has been encouraging people to vote this year and instituting features such as computer vote-counting and the media themselves have been encouraging ppl to get out and vote, hence the high turn out




Your Q&A CNN post.... is not a news report by CNN they are just quoting people they have spoken to about the situation the so called "experts" that they quoted say they believe Ahmadinejad had won the election, they doubt that he won in the numbers that he did..

1 person said voting was hand counted but he is neither a representative of CNN and he contradicts the views of the other people that CNN quoted from....

just to add to this

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061401757.html

US Polling of iranians (in Iran), weeks before the election, showed a more than 2:1 favour of Ahmadinejad over Mousavi

(theres a whole other argument going on where mousavi supporters are saying that polling is inaccurate; but the poll isnt much of a concern to me it just adds a little to the whole)