"I think that the democratic process — free speech, the ability of
people to peacefully dissent — all those are universal values and need
to be respected. And whenever I see violence perpetrated on people who
are peacefully dissenting, and whenever the American people see that, I
think they're rightfully troubled.." –Barack Obama, on Tehran demonstrations.
I would point out that several Palestinians have been killed in nonviolent protests of the confiscatory/illegal Israeli wall, and California's Tristan Anderson grievously injured; and that Rachel Corrie and Tom Hurndall were murdered during nonviolent protests of Israeli house demolitions in occupied Gaza in 2003. Not a peep. Though Corrie's death seems to have played an important part in Washington Congressman Brian Baird's two visits to Gaza.
I wonder when Obam is going to extend his "teaching" to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?
The question concerning Iran still remains who actually started the violence…? From Sunday''s Times: "…“'Death to the coup d’état!' chanted a surging crowd of several thousand protesters, many of whom wore Mr. Moussavi’s [sic] signature bright green campaign colors, as they marched in central Tehran on Saturday afternoon. 'Death to the dictator!' Farther down the street, clusters of young men hurled rocks at a phalanx of riot police officers, and the police used their batons to beat back protesters. There were reports of demonstrations in other major Iranian cities as well. … As night settled in, the streets in northern Tehran that recently had been the scene of pre-election euphoria were lit by the flames of trash fires and blocked by tipped trash bins and at least one charred bus. Young men ran through the streets throwing paving stones at shop windows, and the police pursued them.” (Note: Northern Tehran is the more affluent part of the city. There were no reports of protest in the much poorer southern part of the capital.)…" http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/14063...
Although what is behind the Iranian demonstrations remains questionable, I wonder why the people of the U.S. did not get out and demonstrate in large numbers to show their decent when they believed that Bush stole the election, is it because they fear their government or no longer believe in the Democratic process of free speech and the ability of people to peacefully dissent?
Because the American people trust their constitution too much, not all of them, but many. Americans trust their constitution but not their government. For Europeans, it's the opposite.
Yes. Obama's approach, his measured choice of words, is universal humanitarian in nature. How does this differ from, say, Clinton's? Is it merely his tone, his delivery? Is it that his POV is broader than Clinton's was? Especially considering what audience, and with what timing he makes his public speeches? Why is it that my memory of Clinton's public addresses sees them as more manipulative, more pedestrian, less full of gravitas? Is it just my failing memory, or my memory of the stained dress? Why does Obama come off in my mind as more serious, less political in a banal way, than Clinton? Why do I see, looking back so far, Clinton as a mere facile politician, while Obama, so far, seems more a real leader? I suspect the litmus test of my own perceptions is coming soon, by the end of the year, in the form of what will be done about the Israeli settlements. I sure hope it's more than what Obama has done so far about the USA banking system….
Jewish colonialism has a flavor all its own, and there’s nothing universal about it, which is in keeping with the Jewish religion. Everything the Jewish colonialists do is designed to serve Jewish-nation needs and interests, and bar non-Jews from accessing “their” schools, infrastructure, government jobs, public services. Diaspora Jewish colonialism has the same modus operandi, but operates in a less blatantly racist fashion, and hides its bigotry behind a lot of empty liberal rhetoric even as it pursues its own selfish interest at the expense of Americans who play by the one-man, one-vote democratic process rules of fair play Obama was talking about. I have no idea how he thinks he can square the Democratic Party’s Jewish Zionist caucus (which sees to it that a hugely disproportionate number of Jews are elected to national office) with his universalist rhetoric. If the Democrats truly subscribed to universalism, why do they elect so many Jewish Zionists, who are universalism’s antithesis?
Shafiq, do you believe that our constitution was followed in the case of the Bush elections? And it it was why weren't the elections over turned? How can a Constitution protect you if your government bodies are not entirely following it? What then should you be doing as a citizen believer in your constitution?
Ed, you are racist. Your hatred for Jews is pretty evident here. I can understand people's dislike towards Zionism, but I just don't get this hatred towards Jews and your belief in this vast conspiracy by Jews against all Gentiles. This thinking and your perpetuation of this stereotype has been responsible for the death of so many Jews throughout history, it both saddens me and makes me angry. As I've said before, its people like you that are responsible for the state of Israel. All the Zionists reading this take a minute to thank Ed, Joachim, and all of the other Nazis on here for their hatred and perpetuation of hate, this more than God, gave the Jewish people Israel.
I think Americans in general are just jaded, apathetic, and cowardly. Also, what happened with our elections in 2000 and 2004 was comparatively subtle next to the Iranian situation. There was no claim here that votes were simply being ignored and numbers assigned to the candidates arbitrarily. Instead, we had one or two states where Democrats and Republicans argued about the criteria for rejecting imperfect ballots. There was also the question of possible errors (whether intentional or otherwise) in the software for electronic voting machines, but that's still a lot less brazen than what the Iranian leadership did.
For example, why are around 20% of US senators in the Democratic Party Jewish Zionists, whereas only one of the 57 Democratic senators (1.7%) is African American — and Roland Burris wasn’t even elected, but appointed. For frame of reference, Jews comprise under 2% of the country, whereas African Americans comprise over 10% of the US. population and vote Democratic almost religiously. Are there really so few black Americans out there with the talent of Barack Obama, or is the Democratic Party institutionally biased against blacks and in favor of Jews? I'm the one who is "racist" simply for noticing this ugly fact? How Soviet.
So does this mean that you think the facts are all in concerning the Iranian elections Craig and that the facts regarding the 2000 and 2004 elections here in the U.S. are just subtle and meaningless?
Craig did you give me a thumbs down for speaking the truth about you?
Do I have to explain everything to you in baby talk? Subtle does not mean meaningless, it means less obvious. The theft of the Iranian election was so clumsy and blatant that it's almost as if the leaders wanted riots in the streets.
Shafiq, that's a neat sentence. How do you know we (Europeans) trust our governments? Very funny. And concerning the European disinterest in their respective constitutions, why do you think they have so much trouble with their new European constitution? I can tell you. We would probably all give up some of our basic rights.
You aren't speaking the truth about anything. I don't see any evidence that you know how to distinguish truth from falsehood. You just believe whatever you want to believe.
Again, do you think that the facts are all in regarding the Iranian elections Craig?
I thought the UN gave the Jewish people Israel. Ingrates!
Oh, and to specifically answer your question, I don't give thumbs-down to anyone just for disagreeing with me or challenging my positions. I am giving some (not all) of your comments thumbs-down today because you aren't presenting a rational argument for anything. To say, for example, that Juan Cole is "biased" is just silly. To expect anyone to be completely unbiased is dumb, and if you want to find bias I suggest you look in a mirror. The real issue is whether Cole's arguments make sense, which I think they do. He makes good statistical arguments against the believability of the election results. If you want to refute this, go right ahead, but it's harder work than just accusing him of "bias." Is Iranian Grand Ayatollah Montazeri also "biased"? He says today that the Iranian government's election results are not believable by anyone in their right mind. Is he another part of the "Western media"?
Enough facts are in to judge that the officially-announced election results are a fabrication. Again, Grand Ayatollah Montazeri says the same thing. Is he another part of the "Western media"?
Yoni, I'm not the cause of the state of Isreal, I'm a reaction to the state of Israel.
Phil–exactly. We only support the right of certain people to nonviolent protest and direct action, it seems, while giving (and selling) weapons to put down other people's nonviolent protests. In related news, the House appropriations subcommittee responsible for military aid meets tomorrow. You can sign on to an open letter to the subcommittee members opposing military aid to Israel here: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/641/t/2439/c...
Related to your post, Phil: "Another Palestinian Demonstrator killed, your tax dollars at work" http://endtheoccupationblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/...
Do not listen to Mondoweiss. I am Iranian-American and spoke to someone who lives there one day ago. Their ultimate goal is regime change and all Americans should support them in that cause. The Islamic regime tortures people under Sharia law. They stone women for adultery, execute citizens, They are shouting that from the roof-tops because they are completely against the IRI and only trust in Allah not their so called representatives on earth so torture them. They are abusing people in the name of religion. Please contact the media at: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=111. These are the The Seven-Point Manifesto of resistance movement in Iran that the person I spoke with in Iran told me :
It's not true. Gandhi did not bring down the British Raj, the Azad Hind and the Indian Naval Mutiny did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Mutiny
Does Grand Ayatollah Montazeri represent all Iranians Craig? Why is the Western Media choosing to highlight the statements of those in opposition to the results of the elections?
I don’t think anyone here condones political Islam. The question is, to what extent is the opposition backed by political Judaism and its tentacles? Anyone who really believes “secular” Judaic supremacist Statist elites in the West really have the best interests of the Iranian people at heart better think again. If political Judaism via certain Jewish supremacist operatives and power-centers in the U.S. federal government has its tentacles in the opposition, what the Iranian people are likely to end up with after any regime change is an authoritarian, Shah-like creature whose apparatus will do to pious anti-Zionist Muslims in Iran what Mubarek does to pious anti-Zionist Muslims in Egypt and what the Israelis do to anti-Zionist Palestinians in the occupied territories. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t.
It doesn't matter whether he represents all Iranians or not. If the election results are honest, why do you think he is saying they aren't? Are you in a better position to know than he is? The "Western media" that you claim is so biased has reported the statements both of the opposition and of the government. Statements from Khamenei, Ahmedinajad, and their supporters have been quoted as well. Should the press not quote Montazeri? If not, why not, other than that he is saying something you don't want to know? My issue with you is not that you disagree with me but that you have nothing even vaguely resembling a logical argument, nor do you show any evidence of even knowing what logic is. Nobody with any grasp of logic would have asked whether Montazeri represents all Iranians, because it doesn't make any difference whether he does or not. It's not as if Khamenei's statements represent the opinions of all Iranians either.
That's nice. So when do you ship off? You are going to volunteer to bring freedom to the Iranians right? And aren't relying on others to do it for you, right?
'Obama's universalist teaching'? You disgust me, Phil, you liberal imperialist hypocrite!
CIA, Iran and the Election Riots – June 14, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRwUZ-u6KFo&eu...
Why do you hate Freedom and Democracy so much, Mr. Berkeley? Forget that Phil sounds no different than Bill Kristol on this issue fora minute, and tell us why you love Ahmedinejhad so much? Maybe Phil can join FPI as a guest blogger?
nice video, there is also a link on informationclearinghouse that has all the links to the articles mentioned in the video. http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22839...
Not disinterest of constitutions, distrust. And when compared with Americans, we are quite trusting of our government, which is why we get huge shocks when politicians are caught abusing the system (e.g. MPs expenses). There's no way Americans would let the government have a near monopoly on social welfare, education and healthcare. I'm not saying it's a bad thing and I may be wrong – it's just an observation on my part
I can semi-understand Ed, but why Joachim?
Craig you are the one who used the Grand Ayatollahs' statement as if it is a fact in itself…. Are you the same Craig who has participated on Iraqi Mojo's blog?
There is a report from either AP or Reuters that one of the people shot in Tehran was shot while fire-bombing a Basij building. Perhaps someone should have explained to him the principles of non-violent protest.
Iran police arrest armed rioters "….Iranian police say they have arrested several armed rioters during overnight clashes between pro-Moussavi demonstrators and anti-riot police. "Members of an anti-revolutionary group known as 'Iranian Empire Society' carrying a significant amount of explosives and weapons have been arrested in Tehran, Deputy Police chief Ahmad Reza Radan told reporters on Tuesday. Yesterday's mostly peaceful mass rally in support of Iran's June 14 candidate Mir-Hossein Moussavi turned into an ugly scene when unidentified gunmen fired shots into the crowd. The shooting left more than seven people dead, while injuring several more in the capital Tehran. "Those arrested have confessed to having plans for creating chaos and unrest," Radan said adding that details of their reported plans will be publicized soon…." http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=98227&se... ***** Several people killed near pro-Moussavi rally "…At least seven people were killed in a mass rally staged by supporters of defeated presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Moussavi in Tehran, state radio has reported. According to the report, the protesters were killed after they tried to attack a military post near Tehran's Azadi Square on Monday…". http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=98227&se...
Why didn't you say enough facts are in to question the legitimacy of the results which would at least be more reasonable and objective? But instead you concluded that the results are fabricated, based on not enough facts…
I'm with you on this Phil. It was the first thing I thought of when Obama commented on the violence in Iran when one person had been killed. This should be brought up in a big way when the next protestor gets hurt or killed in Israel or the OPT. I do notice that Israel hasn't killed anyone since Obama said this, which I find surprising. They appear to be under quota for the week.
Just wait a few minutes. It hasn't been that long since Obama made his speech.
It would be nice if Obama took his portable, universalist teaching about violence and ported it to Iraq, Afghanisan and Pakistan. He might also consider porting some of it into the US Prison Industrial complex and ending the epidemic of police brutality, false prosecutions and mass imprisonment going on here in the US. But so far, he has nothing to offer but the same empty rhetoric he dishes up on the Mideast. In word, he is smoother and more conciliatory than Bush could ever dream of; in deed, he is every bit as vile and contemptible. You can see in articles like this why Obama is so much more dangerous than Bush: he can carry out the exact same policies as Bush and be hailed as a saint by people who ought to be smart enough to know better. He's Gandhi with a Gatling gun. Let's dispense with judging politicians by their heavily scripted rhetoric and start judging them by their deeds. When you do that, it is patently clear what Obama is and the forces he represents.
My Goodness! Obama is killing people in three different theaters of war: Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. demonstrably innocent people as has been acknowledged repeatedly. He remains calm and ignores blatant depredations in Gaza by the very people he is supposed to be 'exerting pressure on' regarding settlements. He implicitly endorses the oppression of millions of people in the same region in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.Is at the apex of a machine that imprisons thousands without any hope of justice or any trial. Prisoners and bereft of any prospect of release and subject to gratuitous torture. And his moral brand is Universal? By all means be hopeful that there might, might be some change in the air (there isn't but nothing wrong with a bit of positive thinking). But please, please, don't drop your underdaks quite so shamelessly. Oh dear, so much for Mondoweis being a voice in the wilderness.
How is Ed a racist? He believes that Christianity will solve mankind's problems, but how is that any different than believing that a politician, philosopher or intellectual of any sort can do the same? If you believe that Jews as a group aren't tight-knit, or that many Jews aren't concerned primarily with what is and isn't good for Jews in most situations, fine. Jews can be questioned and commented on individually, or as a group, and doing so doesn't make a person a racist. What would make a person a racist/ethnic supremacist is claiming group superiority, and claiming a natural right to lord that superiority over other groups. How often have I seen Jewish superiority and a "meritocracy" casually, shamelessly and self-righteously discussed on this site?