The Iranian regime is now creating martyrs on film for everyone to watch (warning graphic).
Update [2009-6-20 14:57:13 by BooMan]: YouTube yanked the video. You can see another angle here.
This is the same mistake that the Shah made. The surest way to make sure that the protests continue is to kill people. The opposition will come out in the streets to mourn the dead. And the cycle of violence will continue and escalate.
The regime will attempt to blame acts of terrorism and sabotage on the opposition, while blaming Western powers (mainly the U.S. and U.K.) for giving aid and succor to the opposition. The reports of the suicide bombing at the Imam Khomeini shrine and the mistranslation on state-run television of Obama’s remarks, indicate that the government will make up facts if they are not forthcoming on their own.
It’s very troubling to see young women bleeding to death on the streets of Tehran. But, unfortunately, this is the type of sacrifice that will lead to the fall of the Islamic aspect of the Islamic Republic. And, since I think that would be a positive development for both the Iranian people and the peace process, I believe these lives may be one day be honored very highly.
Maybe the government doesn’t know what else to do, but creating martyrs ought to be something they well understand not to do.
very sad and shocking! and a big mistake on their part, as evidently they don’t understand how cell phone cameras, twitter, etc will magnify the martyr effect
It is so sad watching that. I can only hope that the young woman won’t have died in vain.
It’s makes me feel more angry than sad. But it is very, very sad.
it’s infuriating.
i will be posting and linking later today. I think th Iranian government is makign a HUGE mistake. And I hope the protestors topple those motherfuckers.
Boo:
They haven’t hanked every single copy of this. I posted this over at OpenLeft(in the comments) and it’s still there.
Sick and enraged.
I have the same reaction to the waterboarding videos.
I have been more moved by the women protesting than anything else, if I’m honest.
Out of curiosity, why is that?
.
Caporious – VIDEO: Riot police and demonstrators
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."“A Basij member hiding on the rooftop aimed straight for her heart.”
Good lord, what sort of cowardly animal could do that?
The same kind of cowardly American animal who, in Baghdad in 2003 took careful aim at a seven year old girl standing on her balcony and shot her dead. Or the same kind of cowardly American animal who took careful aim at a confused old man hobbling along with his cane and shot him dead. Or the sam kind of cowardly American animal who forced an Iraqi he had taken prisoner to jump into the river.
Or the same kind of cowardly Israeli animals who uses Palestinian children for target practice.
This kind of cowardly animal exists in every human society.
You might want to put an explicit warning above that video. It’s very graphic.
My condolences to her family.
good idea, I added a warning.
Thanks. I can’t stand to see videos of animals dying, and I am certainly not up to watching the death of a human being.
OMG
A terrible thing to see. It looks like the regime has chosen the path to its own demise. Today will be seen as the turning point.
Its been taken off YouTube. People need to see what is happening. That was a beautiful young woman gunned down by Basij thugs on Khameni’s orders. Khameni is a pig. Obama can’t say it but we can.
probably have to put it on the porn youtube to avoid terms of usage violation.
Snuff video.
Is the video still available somewhere?
shorter version [http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1149602027692].
Why is it not being reported that the United States has spent $400 million to undermine the Iranian regime.
Every Western commentator says it’s the regime’s “propaganda” but it appears to be fact. Our own government admits to undermining the regime. What better way to do so than stuff the ballots on behalf of the regime.
I’m no fan of the Iranian regime but the suicide bombing, stuffed ballot boxes, fake letters from the regime “admitting” to stealing the election, and other facts certainly make it plausible that the U.S. has a role to play here. Once again, I’m no fan, but U.S. meddling isn’t paranoid propaganda–it’s likely.
And it’s frustrating because I do want a more democratic and secular Iran. But we are on a collision course of confrontation and more death. The regime is committing violence now but how long before we replace the regime’s bullets with American or Israeli bombs?
if you haven’t noticed, citizens all over the world are banding together to undermine the regime. Washington doesn’t need to do a thing.
Can’t blame America for everything, the blood on their own people is on the hands of the Islamic Leaders of Iran.
Americanforliberty,
Am I blaming America for “everything”? Evidently your emotion has short-circuited your brain. I have a specific allegation: which the United States has admitted. Namely, clandestine and not-so-clandestine efforts to undermine the regime. That’s indisputable.
Even the Democrats were hesitant to allow it (but they reluctantly agreed).
Once again, I am not a fan of the regime.
Yeah, but aside from economic sanctions and a bit of sponsored sabotage, all the Bush and Cheney were doing was trying to rouse ethnic minorities (Arabs, Azeris, Kurds, Balochis) to cause trouble. None of that has a thing to do with this uprising.
Well, since the activities are clandestine we don’t know how that money was spent. And remember it was mostly the neocons in charge of spending the money. It seems the Democrats were concerned with assassinations and have tried to limit the number of assassinations and terrorist bombing that the money was used for (though that apparently is going on as well).
It’s entirely plausible that some of that money went to stuff the ballots for the regime. If I were in charge of that money and charged with undermining the regime that’s exactly what I would do.
I would also cut off all communication (even if the regime weren’t doing it) and otherwise make them look more oppressive than they really are (which is not to say it isn’t oppressive). In other words, undermine the democracy Iran really does (did) enjoy.
I just know that we in America have been subjected to such propaganda on this subject over the years I don’t know what to believe and I wouldn’t be surprised at anything.
You’re right though that there is indeed a homegrown Iranian-led opposition to the regime. That is heart-felt and legitimate and I support that.
I’m just worried about the inevitable next steps.
Well there’s been no evidence none, about ballot stuffing from anyone. The argument as I understand it is that the government didn’t even bother to count the votes at all so ballot stuffing or not is irrelevant.
.
Needed everybody’s ballot in this lobsided victory through divine intervention.
There are other versions of this stuff out there – Fivethirtyeight.com has visualised these figures as a map, while Iran Tracker has another set.
Polling Data Before Iranian Election
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."OBama’s speech in Cairo seemed to coincide with Mousavi’s surge. Any thoughts that maybe that was a tipping point? The west seems to be regaining its senses so maybe we should get rid of our Bush clone Ahmadinejad. We want change. I think Obama as Ghandi is a an effective voice for peace. A journey begins with a first step the Cairo speech and Obama’s willingness to ask Israel to live up to her commitments is having an immediate impact. Thank God Bush the big mouth war pig is not the president now.
What about trying to blame them for weapons, violence, etc. in Iraq? And weren’t we testing bunker busters to be used on them? Maybe these don’t qualify as undermining the regime in the context of this discussion, but we’ve certainly got a long and unbroken history of meddling or worse. I have to believe it hasn’t stopped.
I must love the regime, right? Nice strawman.
I understand I am in the minority of people that are looking at this rationally and asking this inconvenient question.
But since you seem to be beating your chest let me repeat once again for you: I am no fan of the regime. I am close to a number of Iranian-Americans and I don’t need any hectoring from you about the regime. I probably know more about this than you do and I don’t need a Johnny-come-lately morality lesson from you. You’re trying to shut down an inconvenient fact. Why?
The regime is bad. Like many regimes in the World.
You have to look at the broader geopolitical issues going on here.
Do you support spending $400 million to undermine the Saudi and Egyptian governments? If not, why not?
I’m not lecturing you.
The regime has perhaps fatally undermined itself. Some covert activities might have contributed to this slightly (mainly through negative impacts on the Iranian economy) but the real damage was done by gaming the election and then gunning their own people down in the streets.
If you show me anything similar happening in Egypt or Saudi Arabia, I will support democrats there. But they don’t even have the pretense of democracy. They are currently not creating problems for the peace process, but are trying to facilitate it, and there is no uprising to support or oppose.
The people of Iran are in a death-struggle for their rights. It’s not complicated. There is no moral ambiguity here.
We don’t know all the facts. For instance, why would the regime be so inept at stuffing the ballots? It’s conceivable they were stuffed by their enemies. And we should only intervene in countries where the oppressive regime’s give the “pretense” of Democracy? So, where there is no pretense we should just stay out?
The bullets are real though. And I have no doubt an oppressive regime is resorting to violence to maintain its grip on power. And my heart goes out to the Iranian people.
Because I see the next step. The United States will use this as a pretense for more military action in the region. It’s no secret what the neocons and even many Democrats want; war on Iran.
The regime’s bullets will be replaced by Western bullets. Count on it.
I don’t know what the truth is other than average Iranians will continue to suffer. And one thing has remained true: the United States has intervened in Iran for over 50 years and continues to do so.
It’s true we don’t have all the facts, but it’s not just the CIA that’s holding back the facts. The regime’s implausible election result is the proximate reason for what’s happening. Shooting people down in the streets is not a good idea for protesting a rigged election is not a good thing.
Two things can be equally true. The CIA has been fomenting dissent in Iran. And Iran’s regime is repressive and misplayed this very badly.
Right. Why was it so implausible?
Couldn’t the CIA have had a hand it that?
while I have no trouble believing the CIA might have had a small contributory role in the rising, I would appreciate it if you could provide linky backing to your allegations.
Otherwise, all your words here sound more than a little of paranoid conspiracy theories, and I would hope that’s not your aim.
Ah, yes. The paranoid rantings of conspiracy nut.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh
Let me repeat. The United States government spent up to $400 million dollars on clandestine activities in Iran. That seems to be a fact. I don’t know why this fact isn’t more widely acknowledged. I don’t know why you heap scorn on people for bringing this fact up. But I guess you’re not to blame. You’re ignorant because our government and our media want you ignorant.
I don’t know how that $400 million was spent. I don’t claim to know. But that’s a lot of money. And America has been openly calling for regime change. Now for you to act like this is crazy talk is too much. Give me a break.
If you’re so hot about what the US government did in Iran, clandestine or open, attacking bloggers and fellow citizens who might otherwise agree with you is no way to get out your ideas.
you’re better off comfortably ensconced in your haight-ashbury basement. Some of us have lives and day jobs that keep certain info sources lower on the priority news list, but we get to read or view it eventually.
If you think you’re the example of what it means to be well-informed, I’m happy to claim the title of chief ignoramus at this site.
Your mind was shut before you even engaged me and then when you did you threw out a silly stereotype.
You were the first one to bring the invective. Paranoid. Conspiracy. Now I don’t have a job and live in a basement in Haight-Ashbury (what, I don’t live with my mother?).
Whatever. I’m the crazy dirty hippie (and btw, I’m not–you don’t know me–I am a totally different person than you envision–at least based on the ignorant stereotype you threw out there).
It’s not a lack of time that is preventing you from being better informed (as I’m sure you do really important stuff); it’s that you cling to stereotypes and can’t handle having your assumptions challenged.
And since I’m such a well-adjusted and healthy adult I think I will venture out into the beautiful sunshine today and enjoy life.
And btw, when one of us loony-lefties here in San Francisco ventures from his lair, he doesn’t leave his basement because there aren’t basements here (I know–I was kind of surprised when I got here as well–just like I was when I found out it doesn’t rain for about 6 months–weird).
A conspiracy nut in San Francisco lives in a SRO, or is one of the street kids that lives in the park with his dog on a home-made leash, or, if he’s a little better off, would share a flat in a Victorian. And Haight-Ashbury isn’t really were the political left is alive and well. Sure, there’s a part of the community left over from the 60s and 70s (but think guys out in tie-dies washing their Prius in the driveway on weekends, tolerant of the kids on the street but kind of resenting them, etc.). In fact, neighboring Cole Valley is probably more vibrant as an organic community but that is more filled with youngish professionals and not so much in the way of liberals and hippies.
Haight-Ashbury is more for the tourists now and these street kids that come from all over the country to live in poverty in the park and on the streets and probably are more concentrated on their drug and alcohol addictions and other problems than they are on politics and foreign affairs. And if you really want to disparage someone call them a Trustafarian Haight-Asbury street kid (the little dog leash comment is my little flourish–I just find that kind of funny–esp. the one guy I saw that had an electrical cord as a dog leash).
Enjoy the day . . .
There is no question that the U.S. has been working hard to undermine the Iranian regime, but that in no way supports your overly imaginative suggestion that they systematically brought on what is going on now by stuffing ballot boxes, or whatever.
Expect agent provocateurs and false flag operations to be happening n what is going on in Iran. See if you can tell what really happened. Be discerning and looks at the facts.
This comment is not to anyone in particular.
Simply to note that not every attack or act of violence was done by the organization that is blamed.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=992
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4264614.stm
http://www.topplerummy.org/berg/
I for one do not know what happened in this case. Was it an agent provocateurs or a false flag attack? Who benefits from this?
Who benefits from this might be one question to ask, but it is hardly the only question, and very unlikely to be the best question. The operative saying here is “the best laid plans of mice and men gang aft aglae”.
The two most likely scenarios are the following, not necessarily in this order:
We will likely never know for certain which scenario is the true one.
Isn’t it up to you to show how they could have had a hand in ballot stuffing? You’ve posted nothing that would suggest that it’s plausible that the CIA had anything to do with rigging the election. I have no idea whether you’re in a dingy basement or a luxury penthouse and I don’t care. You’re comments on this subject are enough for readers to know that you’re a conspiracy theorist without any interest in providing proof for your assertions. Your unsubstantiated and ludicrous conspiracy theories ignore some basic facts; the US has very little presence in Iran, no embassy or corporate interests to provide cover for intelligence operations. Yet you’re suggesting that they rigged the election. That’s just stupid. And nobody who wants to gain political power is going to think that cooperating with CIA agents is a way to get ahead.
There are some events in the world that have little to do with the US and this is one of them.
Correct that nothing has been presented to support the CIA ballot-stuffing scenario. Your suggestion that the U.S. cannot conduct intelligence operations without the cover of an official presence such as an embassy or corporate interests. The fact is that the U.S. has been conducting all kinds of intelligence and military operations in Iran for years. Whether those operations are effective or successful or whether they have any connection to the election outcome or the resulting uprising is quite another question.
I find the suggestion that the CIA was engaged in ballot-stuffing, or that millions of Iranians from all different levels of society throughout the country have chosen to protest actively to be far fetched.
I also find that your habit of making ad hominem attacks detract from your arguments and do not encourage me, at least, to want to read what you have to say.
Yes but not the kind of activities that would allow the CIA to rig an election. And sorry but that’s a stupid suggestion on his part and I don’t care if you don’t like me saying so.
The U.S. does not need to have an embassy or corporate interests in the country in order to try to rig an election. The election-rigging scenario is not a likely one for other reasons.
My objection is not to your statement that the suggestion is stupid, it is to your consistent use of ad hominem attacks – aka flaming – in place of substantive arguments.
They would indeed need to have a strong physical presence there to rig an election or cause a revolution. Diplomatic and business cover are how they’ve traditionally operated so that’s what I used as examples but they don’t have anything else of significance going on that would allow them to have brought all this about so it remains a ludicrous conspiracy theory. If you don’t like me saying so that’s too bad and if it means you won’t read what I write and I won’t get your brand of condescending reply to my comments then I will just have to live with that.
You just can’t help making it personal in some way, can you?
What makes you think I do not like you pointing out that the CIA ballot-box-stuffing theory is not credible? Have you missed the numerous times I have stated that I agree with you on the main point that it is not an explanation that makes sense? The only thing I objected to was your consistent flaming of people whose views you disagree with. My main objection to that is that it detracts from your argument and tends to cause the discussion to stray from the substance and devolve into a flame war at which point it stops being even a little bit interesting.
I understand that diplomatic and business cover are among the traditional means by which certain types of covert operations are conducted. All I was saying was that I do not believe they are a necessary factor for the CIA or whomever to attempt an operation such as rigging an election or fomenting unrest. I know, and I am sure you do to, that the U.S. uses non-U.S. agents within and from the target countries to do their dirty work for them, and not just crude things like assassinations and such. Many of their local agents are, in fact, business persons, intellectuals, military officers, and even officials of the targeted government who may work in very subtle and sophisticated ways.
So, I have a slightly different point of view than yours, and I expressed it. Why is that such a problem for you? Maybe you are right, maybe I am wrong, maybe vice versa. Or we are both wrong, or more likely each of us is partially right and partially wrong. I don’t know about you, but one of the main ways I expand my knowledge, broaden my understanding, and rethink and refine my views is by talking to people who see things differently than I do. I don’t always like it at the time, but it is very valuable.
When the U.S. spends $400 million to undermine another government and has a history of provoking street protests to topple the government, and otherwise has a history of meddling in the country by assassination and supporting opponents of the regime, I think it is incumbent on the United States to show how it spent that money.
And I clearly wasn’t stating that ballot shenanigans as fact but was raising it as a possibility. I said flat out I didn’t know what the truth was but we do know one thing: the United States is spending money to meddle in the country. I was pointing out that it’s possible and that if I were an agent I would do something like this because it is a perfect crime (does the regime complain because the shenanigans put it’s candidate over the top? Hardly, the probably would suprres the involvement of the CIA helping them if they knew because they don’t want to be accused of helping the CIA as some in the regime did in the 80s. And it is indeed likely that the opposition in Iran would be moved to protest if the “theft” of the election were as egregious as people seem to think it was). I agree it would be difficult though. But, I was pointing out a FACT that is being suprresed in the rest of American media: our government has spent $400 million to undermine the regime and that money is likely still being put to use.
Once again, you’re SHOCKED at the implications the United States would be involved which makes you the stupid one. You’re looking at the fact that the United States spent $400 million dollars to undermine the regime and you give lectures about people being paranoid about American involvement. You’re stupid to deny that America is involved in Iranian affairs.
I agree the logistics of meddling in the election might be too difficult to pull off. I need more facts to know for sure and actually think it’s more likely the CIA meddled in other ways. Indeed, there are other red flags of American involvement–like the letter “admitting” the regime stole the election and then the guy just died in a “car accident”. And as Booman pointed out the other day, the U.S. has a history of meddling in Iranian affairs. Surely you’re not ignorant of that?
And the United States has evidently recently (as in the last few years) kidnapped and assassinated members of the regime (the Seymour Hersh article quotes Democrats who thought Bush and the neocons went too far doing that–but the neocons are responsible for spending that $400 million dollars and we don’t know how that money was spent and hence we and the rest of the world are left to guess).
You have it backwards my friend: America should bear the burden of describing how that money was spent. If messing with an election is so crazy and only conspiracy theorists would think of that you tell me how $400 million is spent to undermine a regime?
And Robert Fisk describes the misinformation currently going on in the country. http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-secret-letter-proves-mousavi-won-
poll-1707896.html You’re the “stupid” one for uncritically swallowing the John McCain version of events in the country.
Here’s what you said then:
Why is it not being reported that the United States has spent $400 million to undermine the Iranian regime.
Every Western commentator says it’s the regime’s “propaganda” but it appears to be fact. Our own government admits to undermining the regime. What better way to do so than stuff the ballots on behalf of the regime.
I’m no fan of the Iranian regime but the suicide bombing, stuffed ballot boxes, fake letters from the regime “admitting” to stealing the election, and other facts certainly make it plausible that the U.S. has a role to play here. Once again, I’m no fan, but U.S. meddling isn’t paranoid propaganda–it’s likely.
Now you’re saying it’s just a possibility which is better but it’s still nothing but conspiracy mongering to suggest without any evidence that the US had anything to do with the stuffing of ballot boxes or anything material to do with the uprising there. The Iranians would have to be a nation of morons and the CIA the most competent evildoers that ever lived to make any of that happen under the circumstances and neither is the case. This is not the 1950s when the CIA and American businessman had the ability to operate freely there. Funding separatist/terrorist groups and causing evil like kidnappings and assassinations are a far cry from rigging an election or fomenting a popular uprising. If, as you say, you were an agent, you wouldn’t be able to accomplish anything of the sort with $4B, let alone $400M. This is an Iranian uprising against Iranian vote rigging.
It is really far fetched that somehow the U.S. has managed to stuff the ballot boxes in Iran. And in any case, the U.S. has repeatedly proven that it is not astute enough to remotely accurately predict how any Middle Eastern population will respond to anything. On the contrary, they are nearly always off the mark, often by 180 degrees. To believe that the U.S. stuffed the ballot boxes because they knew that if AhmadiNejad won there would be a huge popular uprising in Iran to which the regime would respond in what appears to be a very unwise manner requires that one believe both that the U.S. government employs psychics and that psychics really can predict the future.
“If you show me anything similar happening in Egypt or Saudi Arabia, I will support democrats there. But they don’t even have the pretense of democracy. They are currently not creating problems for the peace process, but are trying to facilitate it, and there is no uprising to support or oppose.“
They don’t have the pretence of democracy because they have the whole-hearted support of the United States, so they don’t have to. The awful, awful regimes in Sa`udia and Egypt are serving the interests of America, so screw the democrats there and screw the people. And you have to wait for a bloody uprising before supporting democracy in those countries? Well, that DOES sound like American international politics as usual, but it seems in violation of your personal principles.
It’s kind of ridiculous to imagine that the US has not been favoring Iran with its clumsy, childish spy games. Of course it did/is. But I doubt those efforts have any part in what’s going on there now. In fact I’d bet pretty much everything that Bush’s hate campaign against Iran did the regime more good than any “American intelligence” dirty tricks did it damage.
Still, I do greatly fear that the US will manage to pervert and destabilize any new and more liberal regime that might emerge. Our dirty hands need to stay in our own pockets.
Puleeeeeeeze! The United States has gone so far in its efforts to undermine the regime as to give its support for years to the wacked-out cult known as Mujahiddin-e-Khalq. And that is only one small part of its operations in Iran, which also include supporting Iranian Kurdish opposition groups in numerous ways, including arming them. Of course, they will sell out the Iranian Kurds just as they have seduced and sold out the Iraqi Kurds time and again, and their support of the Mujahiddin-e-Khalq will come back to bite America in the derriere just as their support of the mujahiddin in Afghanistan did.
And who knows what the longer-term blowback will be? Remember what the US overthrow of Mossadegh eventually led to.
I didn’t know the Kurds were leading the revolution. I didn’t know that the MEK was in charge.
Care to point out where I suggested either that the Kurds were “leading the revolution” or that the MEK was in charge? I believe I was merely responding to what I read as a denial that the U.S. has for some time been engaged in operations to undermine the regime.
And by what criteria have you determined that a revolution is now taking place in Iran?
Okay, let me make a better argument for you than your ballot stuffing charge:
First, let’s assume that Ahmadenijad stole the election with Khomeni’s permission. He expected some protests that he could paint as being orchestrated by the CIA, Khomeni would speak up for him and his opposition would be tarnished by any violence perpetrated by protesters. So it would assist his plan to plant some operatives among the protesters who would blow shit up, beat up policemen, etc.
As BooMan has repeatedly said, answering the protesters with undue violence would be the wrong move for him to make and killing any of them would be really stupid.
Yet some protesters have been killed. Perhaps, in the heat of the moment, it couldn’t be avoided. But, now, we — and more importantly, the Iranians — are presented with this little clip of incendiary video. An attractive young woman, an innocent bystander, is killed by a rooftop sniper. This has the look of a covert action all over it!
“They” say the sniper was a Basij, a member of the volunteer militia strongly aligned to Ahmadenijad. Why would a Basij member shoot a girl who is doing nothing more than watching? Surely, the militia has been given permission to beat the shit out of people who are actively protesting but also warned to avoid killing any of them. “Martyrs to the Cause” are the last thing Ahmadenijad needs and certainly not a young, pretty one.
So, maybe, the sniper wasn’t a member of the Basij… Could he have been an operative for the opposition? Or…?
I agree with you about where this all could lead. “They say” the “freedom-loving protesters” in Iran are “wailing in their grief and anger” for “our help”… Bombs away… with puppet dictator to follow.
/end cynical speculation
well, how else are they supposed to dissuade people from gathering and marching if they don’t heed warnings and don’t back down from beatings and tear-gas?
Redo the elections?
“Why would a Basij member shoot a girl who is doing nothing more than watching?“
Why would an American soldier shoot a seven year old Iraqi girl who was doing nothing more than standing on her balcony watching?
yes, yes, create moral equivalence wherever possible. Even when it hasn’t the slightest relevance. Unless your point is that it is okay to kill innocent women for no obvious reason.
I didn’t create moral equivalence there, it simply exists. You don’t think there is moral equivalence between a Basij taking careful aim at and shooting to death a bystander, and a U.S. soldier taking careful aim at and shooting to death a seven year old child standing on her balcony? I do. And I do not find it irrelevant to point that out.
“Unless your point is that it is okay to kill innocent women for no obvious reason.“
You don’t tell me what my point is, BooMan, I tell you what my point is. My point is that it is completely unacceptable in all cases, in all places, and under all circumstances to take careful aim at and kill innocent human beings of any gender for no obvious reasons.
The double standard I see from self-proclaimed progressive Americans is always very disappointing. You rightly condemn unconditionally the murder of that woman while constantly making excuses and justifications and even assigning victimhood to your guys who commit equally horrific murders. Forgive me for pointing this out.
right, because I never took a stand against the invasion and occupation of Iraq or our activities there.
Sorry, BooMan, I can see why you might take it that way, but that is not what I am saying at all. Of course you took a stand. What I am addressing is something more specific. You and others here have unconditionally condemned the shooting of that young woman, and the character of the person who did the shooting as well as, by implication, those for whom he works while consistently making excuses for and even assigning victimhood to American troops who commit similar, equally and even more unspeakable acts in Iraq and afghanistan. This is a clear double standard based on what? Nationalist/own-group exceptionalism? It’s a natural human reaction, and in my view it is one we must strive to overcome.
And I also need to point out that not long ago you attacked me in a very ugly way with indirect but very clear accusations of anti-Semitism, and even equated me with Nazis when I decried the actions of Israelis in Gaza by asking what kind of inhuman beasts would commit some of the acts they were committing. Interesting that you have not had the same reaction – or any reaction at all – to a very similar question on this very page about the person who murdered the young Iranian woman. So, again, why the double standard? Shy is it OK with you to have that kind of thing written about Iranians, but not OK to ask it about Israelis?
I seem to remember condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza (and Lebanon) in somewhat intemperate terms. I have no recollection of making apologies for American atrocities in Iraq.
If I have slammed you in the past over comments you have made about Israelis, it is only because I see you coming pretty close to dehumanizing them at times and treating them all as if they are part of a collective hive mind.
In the world of American political commentary, I am more willing to criticize Israel in harsh terms than most. But I am also thoroughly bored with assigning blame for the past and am only interested in efforts at peace. Realistic efforts at peace.
I repeat that you obviously find it quite acceptable to use “animal” as a rhetorical device in a discussion of individual Iranians who murder innocents, but not in a discussion of individual or groups of Israelis who commit similar acts. The former is allowed to stand as a valid reaction. The latter earns the user of the device a cruel and completely undeserved knee-jerk reaction that consists of the clearly and repeatedly implied designation of anti-Semite and even hints of Nazi tendencies.
Right. The “self-proclaimed progressive Americans” never had any problem with Vietnam, Iraq, Central America, Guantanamo, or anything else the “our guys” have committed. Your one-note self-appointed role as the moral equivalency monitor spoils the credibility of your sometimes insightful comments through sheer predictable tedium. I assume you don’t really intend it, but the effect of comments like this parse out to a defense of this murderer. It’s a childish argument that in the end only negates equivalency by saying “everybody does it”, so this guy isn’t so bad. Why would you want to suggest that? It really brings your agenda into question.
By your own standard, you are obligated to never talk about US/Western atrocities without pointing out what the Islamist assholes have wrought in the name of their wackjob beliefs. Which, applied to all, would pretty much end discussion of everything, wouldn’t it?
Dave, what I was attempting to point out, as I have already said, is that there is a clear and consistent double standard among liberal progressive Americans when it comes to actions of their guys as opposed to actions of those who are designated as “bad guys”. I am not talking about whether progressives have problems with their government’s military actions, I am talking about something different.
I am talking about a clear and consistent double standard. I am talking about the fact that the immediate reaction to an American soldier who takes careful aim at and shoots to death a seven year old Iraqi girl standing on her balcony, or a confused, crippled old Iraqi man desperately trying to hobble out of harms way is that after all we really must take pity on the poor American soldiers and imagine what they are going through and after all they are just undereducated young guys from poor families who have, after all, been brainwashed. Support our troops no matter what murderous horrors they commit. On the other hand the immediate reaction to the murder of an innocent bystander by an Iranian militia member is unconditional condemnation of both the act and the actor. No excuses, no thoughts about what the shooter might be “going through”, no consideration of the possibility that he is just an uneducated guy from a poor family who has been brainwashed.
The American soldier is defended as an innocent victim of his government’s policies and of stress whereas the Iranian murderer is accorded no such consideration, ever. It is my position that if you condemn one as a murderer with no excuses made, then you must condemn both as murderers with no excuses made. Otherwise, holding a self-serving “us versus them” double standard that recognizes the humanity of “your” murderers while denying the humanity of the the “others’ ” murderers.
I am also talking about the fact that apparently it is quite acceptable to use the designation “animal” here as a rhetorical device in connection with Iranian murderers is absolutely acceptable while using in in connection with Israeli murderers results in very ugly verbal violence against the one using the device. Obvious “us versus them” double standard.
And I am talking about the fact that the murder by a member of an Iranian militia of an innocent young woman engenders a strong emotional reaction on behalf of the victim, and an interest in knowing her name and who she was while the murder by an American (or Israeli) soldier of an innocent Iraqi (or Palestinian) brings little if any emotion or interest in the victim. Another consistent double standard that humanizes “our” murderer while dehumanizing the “others’ ” victim.
And I have never suggested that there can be no mention of bad acts by the “other” without mention of bad acts by the U.S. That was not my point. My point is that there is a general double standard in which “our” crimes, “our” criminals and the victims of those crimes and criminals are viewed and treated very differently from “their” crimes, criminals and victims. And what I am asking is that progressives who hold that double standard should take a close look at its existence, consider where it comes from, and understand that it is one of the very malignant human tendencies that true progressives need to be aware of and struggle against in themselves.
I don’t know who you are talking about but it doesn’t seem to be me.
I may show a certain level of empathy for our troops in Iraq but I never showed sympathy for them when they broke the law and the laws of war.
As for your other complaint, I don’t even know where the comment is that refers to Iranians as animals. If it’s in this thread somewhere, it is an understandable emotional reaction to the video, but referring to any group or nationality of people as animals in obviously unfair. The government of Iran, however, is actually with extreme disregard for human life. They are treating their own people like animals.
I don’t recall you specifically making excuses for U.S. troops or suggesting they were victims when they committed murders and other crimes. I was speaking in a more general way than about one individual.
For the record, I can much more easily understand having empathy for American troops in Viet Nam and seeing as victims because as conscripts they had much less choice. In the case of Iraq and Afghanistan they have volunteered to join the military, and the vast majority of them who have gone have chosen to join knowing they would likely be sent to be part of an invasion/occupation and what they would be sent to do there.
Yes, the reference to animals is on this page. I personally have no objection to it. What I have objection to is being singled out for a vicious attack on my personal character for using the same rhetorical device in reference to specific people who committed specific acts when those people just happen to be Israelis. I have never in my life referred to any human group or nationality as animals, and cannot imagine the circumstance in which I would do so.
You have made the same knee-jerk attack on my personal character (minus the Nazi reference – thanks for that, I guess) two other times, including when I criticized Al Franken, a supposed progressive, for attending a rally in support of Israel’s actions in Ghazza. You reflexively assumed I was criticizing him because he is a Jew despite a complete lack of anything in my statement that indicated that. I have never been intimidated into silence by such attacks, but I do lose respect for the person who makes them.
And by the way, Israel has been treating the entire population of Ghazza like animals for decades with the overwhelming support of the Israeli population. In fact, they have even succeeded in convincing the people of Ghazza that they are animals if my conversations with my dear friend Majdi are any indication.
Al Franken did not attend a rally. He visited a synagogue. It is something you might expect a Jewish candidate for the Senate to do. Considering that the Congress passed a resolution in support of the Gaza operation, it’s hard to single out a single candidate for office as somehow uniquely supportive of that outrage.
I’d like you to show me one example of where I have failed to take Israel to task for their treatment of the Palestinians, or their Lebanon and Gaza operations, or their disingenuous peace efforts, or their settler policy, or their spying on America, or their efforts to get us to bomb Iran, or of our own Congress’ spineless enablement of all of the above.
For that matter, show me one example of where I have failed to argue that our relationships with Egypt and Saudi Arabia were more direct causes of al-Qaeda’s terrorism than even our relationship with Israel.
And, have I not argued, consistently, that American needs to become more energy independent so that we can be less directly involved in the Middle East?
I want peace in Israel as much for the freedom it would grant us vis-a-vis our client states as for the benefit to the people in Israel and Palestine. I don’t want to be allied with the House of Saud or Mubarak. And, while I really am fond of the Jordanian Royal Family, I don’t wish to be allied with them either, except for the potential it provides for a peaceful settlement in Israel/Palestine.
Give me a f**ing break, BooMan! Al Franken might have visited hundreds of synagogues in his life. So f**ing what? I myself have lost count of the number of synagogues I have visited in the U.S., Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt. I have attended services, bars mitzvah, weddings, met with rabbis and Jewish groups who support Palestinian rights, and checked out historical synagogues in the Arab world. The last synagogue I visited was last month in Damascus
Al Franken attended an “Israel solidarity” rally in St. Louis Park that was organized and held during Israel’s criminal assault on Gaza for the purpose of supporting Israel’s operation in Gaza. It was held on January 11 long after the true nature of Israel’s operations in Gaza had become public knowledge and had badly shaken many of Israel’s American supporters, including many Jews. He spoke at that rally and pledged his support for Israel “as a U.S. Senator”.
That is what I criticized him for, not for visiting a synagogue for god’s sake. And I am hardly the only one who criticized him for that, nor was my criticism by any means harsh, especially compared to that of many others.
Please show me where I have accused you of any of the things you are asking me to substantiate.
Sorry, it was a Jewish Community Center, not strictly a synagogue.
It was also not “strictly” a visit, was it now? It was, “strictly” a rally in support of Israel’s actions in Gaza.
Shame on him as a progressive for supporting crimes against humanity.
PS I have also been in various Jewish community centers more times than I can count, and for various different reasons. Describing a Jewish community center as not “strictly” a synagogue is deceptive. Not one of the Jewish community centers I have been in was in any way, shape, or form a synagogue, nor did any of them have any association with any synagogue. They were, just as the name suggests, community centers, not in any way places of worship.
Most Jewish community centers, in my experience, are attached geographically to a synagogue. They are on the same property. I do not know if that was the case in Minnesota.
I could play tit for tat and accuse you of lying, but I won’t descend to that level.
PS Not one of the Jews I know, including a few who are knee-jerk supporters of Israel, attended any kind of support event for Israel’s actions in Gaza. Most of the knee jerk Zionists I know became uncharacteristically quiet during that period. Many of the Jews I know, including some who support Israel in general, organized and attended events protesting Israel’s Gaza crimes. Some spent most of their free time in front of the Israeli consulate holding signs condemning Israel’s actions. A few of the Jews I know committed acts of civil disobedience and were arrested. Some of those Jews were rabbis.
the event at the Jewish community center drew almost every significant office holder in Minnesota.
Big f***ing deal! He is supposed to be a progressive, and as such he is supposed to live up to certain standards.
Look, some of our most progressive leaders are Jewish and failed miserably on Gaza and Lebanon.
Let me point out some of the Jewish progressives that fail your test:
Barbara Boxer
Bernie Sanders
Russ Feingold
Robert Wexler
Ben Cardin
Howard Berman
Brad Sherman
Henry Waxman
If you want to pick on Al Franken, go ahead. But don’t try to write him out of the progessive movement just because he demonstrates support for Israel even when they are least deserving of it. He has plenty of company among both Jews and Gentiles.
Oh, for F***’S sake, BooMan.
I “picked on” Al Franken because he was a subject in that discussion. From now on whenever I mention Al Franken or any other Jewish public figure in a negative way I will be sure to include everyone else, especially non-Jews, who have committed the same offenses as I am criticizing the Jew for. Will that satisfy you?
Put it this way. Al Franken, whenever he does eventually take his seat in the Senate, will probably be one of the most progressive senators we have. I will be shocked if he isn’t in the top 10% of the Senate in his voting record. And at least half of the other top 10% will be Jewish. Even on the issue of Palestinian rights, he will be in the top quarter. So, blast him if you want. But blast Boxer and Sanders and Feingold, too. Blast all the Republicans who would deny any Jewish blood even if they had it. Blast all the Congresspeople because they are almost all in the bag.
Please clarify one thing for me. I understand that if I criticize Al Franken, because he is a Jew, in order to avoid character assassination I must now criticize everyone else who holds the positions for which I criticize him even though my criticism takes place in a discussion about Al Franken and none of the others. What is unclear is whether this rule applies only to Al Franken, to all Jews who are considered progressive, or to all Jews regardless of their politics.
Correction: “because he is a Jew” should be “because I now cannot lie and pretend I do not know he is a Jew”.
But you ARE nicely avoiding the real point, aren’t you? The real point is your completely unjustified assassination of my character on exactly zero grounds.
Or am I expected to check out whether or not someone is Jewish before I am allowed to criticize them?
I don’t want to get personal, but I said it then and I will repeat it now that I don’t for a moment believe you when you say that you didn’t know that Al Franken was Jewish.
Oh yes, I forgot I am not only an anti-Semite with Nazi-like thinking, I am also a liar. Thanks for reminding me.
And here’s something else you can accuse me of lying about. I also didn’t know that the building the rally was held in was a Jewish community center. I assumed it was a public building owned and run by the city.
I know this will be very difficult for you to believe, but whether or not someone is a Jew is way down near the bottom of my list of concerns. I don’t think about that at all about unless it is relevant in some way to the way I relate to them as it is sometimes for my work on Palestinian issues. Most of the time I don’t ever find out unless they tell me one way or the other, or I see them wearing a cross or a Star of David, or they invite me to their church or synagogue, or for Christmas dinner or a Seder.
I had never given a thought to whether Al Franken was a Jew or not because it was not relevant to the way I related to him. I have related mainly to him as a performer on Saturday Night Live where, as best I recall, he was never presented as a “Jewish comedian”. When I think of him I think first of Stewart Smalley in a blue cardigan (or is it a pullover, the visual is getting vague), second as someone who would help the Democrats a lot in the Senate if that ridiculous Norm Coleman ever stops acting like a two year old who refuses to let go of his playmate’s toy (is he a Jew, too? If so, I take that back) . Now, actually, I think of Al Franken primarily as someone who gave you an excuse to make a nasty attack on my character.
Now, of course, thanks to you, I am ultra-aware that he is a Jew, but it still doesn’t have any effect on how I view or judge him as a politician or a comedian.
Of course, since I am such a liar, you will not believe a word of the above, but you can believe one thing for sure. I don’t give a damn whether you believe me or not.
I don’t. Not for a moment. And I never did. I see that upsets you.
How would it affect you to be called an anti-Semite with Nazi-like thoughts and a liar by someone for whom you held a measure of respect?
How would it affect you in particular if you had worked hard against anti-Semitism as an activist in areas, mainly the struggle for Palestinian rights, that tend to attract anti-Semites, that you had sometimes been the only one who spoke up or acted on it, and done so, at times, at some risk to yourself?
How would it affect you if you had spent years working without material compensation with groups of Jews and Arabs toward seeing the common humanity, and finding ways to work together for the common benefit?
And how would it affect you if one of the things of which you were most proud was that you, all by yourself, had managed to convince a few young Palestinians in the Occupied Territories to view Jews in a different way despite the fact that they had lived their entire lives under Israeli occupation, and had only known humiliation and brutality from Jews? How would it affect you if you had cried tears of joy when, after a year of patient effort on your part, the first of those young men said to you, without prompting, that a certain Israeli Jew he had recently encountered was “one of the good ones”?
Oh, but I forgot that I am a liar so none of the above is true, is it?
You know, on reflection I realize that I have been approaching this in entirely the wrong way. For one thing, it is not conciliatory at all.
So, BooMan, please explain to me specifically convinces you that I am lying when I say I had never considered whether or not Al Franken was Jewish? What specifically convinces you that I knew he was Jewish, and why does that even matter, given that I did not single him out, but made my comment in the context of a conversation of which he was the subject? And what specifically convinces you that I am an anti-Semite?
This is more than mere curiosity, I really want to know what I have done to convey this feeling to you.
“I don’t want to get personal“
WTF?!!!
What do you MEAN you don’t want to get personal?! The only reason we are having this conversation at all today is that in the first place YOU made it extremely personal in the most ugly way imaginable, and in a way I cannot forget or forgive as long as you persist.
get used to it.
It’s not like I am suddenly going to believe you on this issue. We discussed this five months ago. I haven’t harped on it, you have.
Yes, I have harped on it because it is character assassination of vicious sort, you have said it repeatedly, and it is completely unjustified, has no basis whatsoever, and is not something I am going to let go of anytime soon.
In my entire life the only other people who have attacked me in this way have been Zionists for whom it was the only argument they have had left. I never took it seriously from them because it was a clear sign they were out of gas. From you it has a very different and much, much more personal significance. I don’t care whether you like me or dislike me, but I do care that you have made repeated very personal attacks on my character, and I care even more that you have made these attacks in regard to something that has huge importance to me.
PS I will not share with you the deeply personal core reason that this issue is so important to me – you would only accuse me of lying again if I did – but it has something to do with a best friend of my childhood and youth.
You’re not comparing the same things. The actions of soldiers in battle are not regarded as the same thing as murder either in law or in the thinking of any nation or any time in history. Soldiers under fire, rightly or wrongly, get something of a break. That may be unpalatable but it’s reality. And every country gives “our” countrymen a bit more trust in their good intentions than “their” actors. These are basic realities that everyone is aware of and don’t need constant pointing out. Should there be a double standard between what’s done in war and elsewhere? Probably not, but there is, universally. Is it easier to go easier on killing when under fire? Yes.
But the killing in question was not combat, and there is no claim that the sniper’s life was threatened. Unless you know something nobody else does, this was a cold-blooded murder from afar by a person working on behalf of the regime. If you want to make comparisons, a better one would be the killers at Kent State, or Lt. Calley in Vietnam, or the killer-torturers in Iraq or Guantanamo. None of whom were excused by these “progressives” you keep talking about.
The impression I get is that you accuse others of doing what you seem yourself inclined to do: defend the crimes of the anti-Israel/US because you feel you understand their circumstances and viewpoint more clearly. It’s a universal and inevitable mindset. But it isn’t exclusively reserved for some kinds of people.
Soldiers do not get any break from me when they careful aim at little girls and confused, crippled old men and shoot and kill them. You might find that “regretable”, but an acceptable consequence of invading and occupying countries against the will of their populations. I do not. Murder is murder, period.
“And every country gives “our” countrymen a bit more trust in their good intentions than “their” actors.“
That is exactly my point. Own-group exceptionalism is one of the most malignant and dangerous aspects of human nature, and true progressives, if they really care to work toward peace and universal human rights, should be aware of and struggle against this tendency in themselves individually and collectively. They should also strive to spread awareness in the hope of minimizing the effects of this tendency.
“These are basic realities that everyone is aware of and don’t need constant pointing out.“
Bullshit. Most people are either unaware of them or find them perfectly acceptable. They are dangerous human tendencies and they do need pointing out all the time, internally and externally. Just because something exists does not mean we have to accept it either in ourselves or in others.
“Should there be a double standard between what’s done in war and elsewhere? Probably not, but there is, universally. “
No, not universally. There are many, many people who do not accept such a double standard, and the number is increasing. And in any case, the fact that some evil exists “universally” means we should all just accept it and move on.
“But the killing in question was not combat, and there is no claim that the sniper’s life was threatened. Unless you know something nobody else does, this was a cold-blooded murder from afar by a person working on behalf of the regime.“
“The impression I get is that you accuse others of doing what you seem yourself inclined to do: defend the crimes of the anti-Israel/US…“
Please show me one instance of me defending the harming, let alone murder of any innocent person (or even animal) by anyone anywhere under any circumstances. If you can do so, I will accept your allegation as correct.
not that it will change the arguments here, but do you have links to these two murders you are referring to?
Sorry, but no. Something is probably available on the web, but I don’t know where and do not have the time for a lengthy search.
Both took place in 2003. I saw each of them numerous times on Arabic TV, probably Al Jazeera, and later read brief reports in as part of one or more English-language sources, but I do not remember where. It sounds like the kind of discreet, little-noted incident that Robert Fisk, who was there then, was reporting on at the time, but I do not know for sure that it came from him. I probably have something about it in my files, but there are literally thousands of items there, and I don’t have the time to search through a lot of stories.
There was a lot of disgust over these particular incidents, and they helped change the minds of a number of Iraqis I know of who had naively trusted the good intentions of the Americans.
well, I don’t dispute that those things happened but it is hard to debate this issue on your terms without at least the ability to look at the circumstances and the response from liberal progressive people at the time.
I understand that. And in all honesty I don’t recall any reaction to those specific incidents from any Americans of any kind. I doubt many Americans even heard about them. The mainstream media at that time were acting almost exclusively as a PR organ of the U.S. military, and you saw almost nothing there about the Iraqis’ reality. For that you had to focus on Arabic and European sources, which were, of course, being roundly condemned for showing the horror, the destruction, the carnage and the suffering that was the Iraqi side of the experience. I personally know of at least one non-Arab American who subscribed to an Arabic satellite package in order to get Al Jazeera. He said that although he did not understand a word, he saw an entirely different, and far more balanced, view of the invasion there than on the mainstream media.
As for my reaction to atrocities from our troops:
link
“I do want a more democratic and secular Iran.“
A gentle reminder that it is not your business what kind of government Iran has. And do be careful what you wish for. A democratic Iran might not be America’s dream come true, after all. Remember that people in the Middle East tend to elect the governments that serve their perceived interests, not America’s.
True, and it’s not our business what kind of governments Egypt and Saudi Arabia have either right?
No, it it is not your business what kinds of government Egypt and Sa`udi Arabia have. Therefore, you should stop propping up those governments and assisting them to stay in power, and let nature take its course in those countries.
I don’t disagree with that but I don’t think US support for democratic movements in those countries would be any more effective than it would be in Iran.
I have not suggested that the U.S. should support democratic movements in those countries. What I have suggested is that they should stop actively propping up ugly, incompetent, dictatorial regimes with horrible human rights records that serve U.S. interests and stop trying to manipulate other countries’ internal political business in a self-serving way.
And the U.S. will never support democratic movements in those countries when they have useful client regimes in place. The only time they “support” “democratic” movements is when the current regime is not to their liking.
That’s incredibly cowardly of Youtube to take it down.
And their suggestion that I watch a Kanye West or ‘puppy flushed down the toilet’ video instead is insulting.
.
PLEASE YOU HAVE TO SHOW THIS… THIS HAPPENED TODAY. DESCRIPTION IS WRITTEN BELOW. I CANNOT UPLOAD VIDEO, BUT LINK TO YOUTUBE VIDEO IS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osXLPz5BhaM
Youtube has already removed the video. Here’s the Liveleak version
Basij shoots to death a young woman in Tehran’s Saturday June 20th protests
At 19:05 June 20th
Place: Karekar Ave., at the corner crossing Khosravi St. and Salehi st.
A young woman who was standing aside with her father watching the protests was shot by a basij member hiding on the rooftop of a civilian house. He had clear shot at the girl and could not miss her. However, he aimed straight her heart. I am a doctor, so I rushed to try to save her. But the impact of the gunshot was so fierce that the bullet had blasted inside the victim’s chest, and she died in less than 2 minutes.
The protests were going on about 1 kilometers away in the main street and some of the protesting crowd were running from teargas used among them, towards Salehi St.
The film is shot by my friend who was standing beside me.
Please let the world know.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."an innocent bystander…not a protester…killed for no other reason than being there.
hollow point sniper loads, originally banned by the 1899 hague conventions, but increasingly popular, especially by law enforcement and military agencies.
l suspect the violence is going to escalate. revolutions are seldom bloodless, and this one is being “televised”.
Watching that I can’t help think about all the pretty young girls killed in our name. I think about the sweet little Iraqi girl about 3 yrs. old in her pretty white dress speckled in red from her parents blood. Because we killed them at a checkpoint. They didn’t stop and US soldiers killed them in front of their three small children. Spattering them in their blood. Maybe just a mistake they didn’t understand when a soldier of the empire holds up a closed fist it means stop. Expecting a more universal sign of an open palm.
The people of Iran and Iraq could really use a break maybe this is it for the Iranians. Maybe a more representative government come out of this, I hope so.
Interesting how focused everyone is on the fact that the victim was female, pretty, and young. I understand how that hits the human heart in a special way, but it is sad to realize that there would likely not be anything close to the outcry if the victim had been an ugly fifty year old man – or even an ugly fifty year old woman, who would after all, be equally innocent and equally valuable as human beings.
i just shared the facebook video with everyone that comes to my page.
that is so messed up and wrong.
Power hungry fascists are the same the world over,
Whether the order the dropping of bombs from on innocent civilians in South East or South West Asia., or the roof top murder of an innocent bystander …… they are willing to spill lots of innocent blood to keep their greedy hands on power.
Hopefully the Iranians are successful if toppling the people who give such orders, we were not able to do so for eight long years.
.
It’s important to note that Iranian democracy was derailed by the Bush Administration’s reckless labeling Iran as a member of the “Axis of Evil”. This pushed the Iranians, reluctantly, into the hard-liners camp. So this nascent democratic movement was set back at least 6 years …
Iran under president Khatami
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Ugh. Sickening. The youtube is working now. Hopefully it will continue to do so.
Her name was Neda.
.
QUOTE: “I have one vote. I gave it to Mousavi. I have one life. I will give it for freedom.”
May her death not be in vain…
“Her name was Neda….
I find it rather fitting that ‘Neda’ (the girls name) means ‘voice’ or ‘call’ in Farsi. UNQUOTE
It’s a bit too slick and too professional with the same statements spreading across the Internet. Be careful this is not a Kuwait incubator moment!
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."“this is the type of sacrifice that will lead to the fall of the Islamic aspect of the Islamic Republic.“
Booman, this is a very unfortunate statement on several levels. First, it was completely unnecessary to say something like this, and it is extremely offensive, even to those of us who vastly prefer secular governments, including those of us who live secular lives.
Second, it makes no sense logically. You can’t remove the Islamic aspect of an Islamic republic unless you remove the Islamic Republic and replace it with some other kind of state.
Third, you are very mistaken if you believe that what is going on today is about taking Islam out of the Republic, and you are even more mistaken if you think that a revolution that might result would necessarily take Islam out of the Republic. That is certainly not what Mousavi and his supporters was ever looking for – far from it.
I hope you will be a bit more careful about making statements like this in the future. They are not helpful.
Neda Soltani RIP
http://carlosechevarria.blogspot.com/2009/06/neda-soltani-rip.html