| View Blog
|
|
|
|
| Iran rioters oppose democracy |
Like you, I have been watching the "nonviolent" protest images on my boob tube, but I also have been viewing unfiltered images from outside of the U.S. and trust me, there are many violent protesters, throwing rocks at police, looters, thugs burning cars, suicide bombers, burning buildings etc.. although our own censored media doesn't show it. These are not common men from all walks of life, they are mainly unemployed young college aged kids supported by leftist professor types who want a world where McDonalds, filthy rap music, nose rings, anonymous sex and alcohol are commonplace. The Iranian government is well within their rights to put down these violent protests aimed at overthrowing the newly elected Ahmadinejad and nullifying the vote of the people of Iran. Yet our President pretends as if the protests are non-violent and that the election was rigged, with NO EVIDENCE AT ALL. President Obama supports the overthrow of an elected leader because the militant minority didn't like the election results. I support Iran's developing democracy, as imperfect as it is, because as soon as the religious fanatics no longer hold power there will be a democracy in place. But guess what? The protests are not targeting the religious fanatics, they target a man considered to be a moderate reformer and friend of the working class. Why don't those who support the rioters support democracy as they claim? The answer is that they don't support democracies who don't yield results they like.
A point of caution:
WHEN ARMED MEN TELL YOU TO GO HOME AND THERE IS A CURFEW, YOU RISK YOUR OWN LIFE IN DEFYING THAT ORDER, ESPECIALLY IN AN ISLAMIC REPUBLIC.
Apparantly, Mousavi, who now feels he may be able to win that election by "other means," is now inciting the rioters and making statements saying he is prepared to be a "matyr." Please do look up his Wikipedia entry. He was one of the men who supported the Islamic Revolution. It is clear that he is not a reformer. The allegations of fraud are commonplace in all elections in all countries. Ahmadenejad won by close to the same margin last time, according to alJazeera Magazine - Ahmadinejad won; get over it, a pro-government source. As for the winner of this election: I can't judge Ahmadinejad's character because I am not an Iranian. I do not automatically dismiss someone as crazy or dangerous based solely upon western media propaganda. That propaganda is what shapes our opinions on everything else, hence Americans believe there was massive vote fraud when there is not a shred of evidence. Lets look at the three allegations which are used to discredit him:
1) His alleged statement about "wiping Israel off the map" was a purposefully oft-repeated mistranslation that was taken from context. What he said was essentially that any country who treated its neighbors the way Israel treated the Palestinians, God would wipe off the map.
2) He is a holocaust denier: Never clarified, just alleged. Does he say the Jews were never persecuted in Germany? That gas chambers weren't used? That the 6 million figure is lower? Does he deny the holocaust or does he disagree with the details? To me, denying the holocaust is saying Jews were never persecuted in Nazi Germany, and that is false. I can't comment on other questions because I lack the knowledge and I do not wish to enter the world of holocaust revisionism. Often cited as evidence Ahmadinejad is a holocaust denier is the fact that he didn't outlaw a holocaust revisionist conference held a few years ago, where historians present their theories which challenge the generally accepted facts regarding the holocaust. It is also claimed he said the holocaust didn't happen. I have not seen a legitimate source for that claim.
3) Iran is plotting to develop nukes and incinerate the U.S. and Israel: The evidence is that they are cultivating nuclear power, and the allegation is that they are making nukes. There is no evidence for the latter. Israel and Iran are major enemies, and Israel has made some serious public claims, prompting our own intelligence services to frequently issue press releases stating that there is no supporting evidence for the Israeli claims. Their intent was to get us to do their fighting for them. Israel fears 1) Iran will nuke them and 2) they will lose their nuclear leverage over the region. If Iran makes nukes, it will be to counteract the Israel nukes in my humble opinion. Frankly, and in an ideal world, neither would have nukes because both are run by nutty theocracies.
With that said, the real power brokers are the Ayatolla, Imams and Mullahs. Ahmadinejad is just an administrative mouthpiece. And he is a moderate, not a "hard-line" leader. The real power mongers are not the targets of the rioters. If their power were threatened, no elections would have been held. If the CIA is involved in this (good chance) uprising, any meaningful change in Iran will be nullified if those facts come out, just as the Shah's rise to power was nullified after western involvement was exposed. Change over there must be gradual and come from the Persian people, not foreign meddlers who target Iran's rich culture for disintegration as well as their theocratic leadership.
Listen Americans, to your new President's words of utter hypocrisy, telling Iran what it "must" and "mustn't" do. What gives him the right to tell Iran how to deal with rioters? How would he respond if the losers of the last Presidential election turned themselves into a mob of rioters who got increasingly violent by the day? Would we install McCain based on the threat of rioting or would we harken back to the 60's, to our methods of putting down civil rights protests?
America doesn't take kindly on political dissidents, NO WESTERN COUNTRY DOES. So why expect Iran to? Have we forgotten what we have done to our own dissidents? Waco? Ruby Ridge? How about last year's raid on that polygamy sect and the highly illegal kidnapping of all those children? And Americans stood there, nodded their heads in agreement and allowed it because the victims held religious and political views outside of the mainstream. Their right to sit in that warm chair with a beer and porno wasn't in jeopardy, so why care about the freedom of others? Americans have shown time and time again they do not value freedom of speech and assembly for those they disagree with. They are unworthy of the nation our great founders entrusted them with.
In closing, Please do take the time to go toAntiwar.com for an incredibly intelligent and diverse libertarian perspective and Al Jazeera for an objective Arab perspective. The magazine I linked to in the second paragraph is a censored Iranian pro-government source, though it still contains information you won't hear in our media. For the establishment view, just keep watching all those emotional men and very young blond women on the three mainstream stations. For the Marxist perspective, go to Democracy Now.
GO WITH GOD.
Mullah of da propasphere!
|
|
Posted by propasphere on 2009-06-21 14:44:35 | Rating: | Views: 43
|
|
| |
|
|
Email This to a Friend 