Some Comments On The Iranian Protests

Yesterday Fred Fleitz posted an article at The Center For Security Policy website about the ongoing protests in Iran.

The article reports:

There also is significant and growing opposition to the country’s theocratic system, especially by young people. Incredibly, protesters reportedly have been chanting “We don’t want an Islamic Republic” and “Death to Rouhani.”

It is no accident that the Iranian government announced today that it will no longer arrest women who go outside without wearing head scarves. So far these protests seem much smaller and not as serious as the massive Green Revolution protests that broke out in Iran after the fraudulent 2009 presidential election, which returned Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power. However, Amir Taheri, a well-known Iran expert, said in the below tweet that Iranian security reportedly is reluctant to fire on protesters:

When viewing the unrest in Iran, it is wise to consider the population demographics of the country. Because of the extended war with Iraq, a large group of the population is missing. Wikipedia posted a chart of the population demographic:

As you can see from the chart (although it is a few years old, the numbers are basically accurate), the largest percentage of the Iranian population is between the ages of ten and thirty-five. This group of people has no relationship with the Islamic revolution that took place in Iran in 1979–most of them were not even born then. The younger Iranians look with envy at the western world–they do not appreciate the rules of the mullahs. It is only a matter of time before the mullahs die out and the young people take over. I am not sure that democracy is possible in Iran after all they have been through, but there will come a time when a revolt leads to a more free society and hopefully one without nuclear ambitions.

It is telling that Iranian security is reluctant to fire on the protesters. That might be the result of the mullahs not wanting to create martyrs or it might be a reaction to the fact that the mullahs no longer have a friend in the White House. There are some positive aspects of the fact that many countries consider President Trump a loose cannon.

The World Turned Upside Down

Sometimes you just have to shake your head in amazement. I have lost track of how many millions of dollars America has poured into Iran to help them fund terrorism, but it seems even our generosity has limits.

Fox Business posted a story yesterday that simply amazes me. The article reports:

Pastor Saeed Abedini, one of four American hostages released from Iran in January, shared his disbelief of Rouhani’s annual speech during an interview with FOX Business Network’s Trish Regan.

“I was just telling people that imagine leader of ISIS come to the United States after 30 years of all the executions that they did and leaders of the world shaking his hand. It’s unbelievable,” Abedini said.

Abedini said he and other hostages were left to fend for themselves after flying from Iran to Germany when they were released after the Obama Administration’s $400 million payment to Iran.

After spending a few days in a hospital in Germany, Adedini was surprised to hear that he needed to buy his own plane ticket home. 

“We were actually all shocked because I came out; I just had prison clothes and [they] just told us you need to buy your own ticket.”

Abedini said he was physically and psychologically tortured in the Iranian prison to the point where his stomach was bleeding for months from all the beatings.

We can send millions to Iran, but we can’t even buy plane tickets to bring former hostages home? That is a disgrace.

Meanwhile, Iranian president Hassan Rouhani got a warm reception at the United Nations yesterday. Iran is one of the worst human rights violators on the planet, and the United Nations says nothing–they are too busy condemning Israel for imaginary violations. It’s time to remove the United Nations from New York, collect on all the unpaid parking tickets of the delegates, and send them elsewhere. America is the main support of this organization that no longer stands for democracy and freedom. The United Nations has become enamored of the idea of one world government with the UN in charge. We need to make them go away.

Changing History As It Occurs

Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article about the recent editing of a State Department press briefing on December 2, 2013. A question asked by Fox News reporter James Rosen was edited out of the archived video of the briefing.

The article reports:

The deleted segment of the briefing featured Fox News reporter James Rosen asking then-State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki whether the Obama administration had lied about having secret talks with Iran in 2011. Psaki essentially admitted that it had.

Rosen inquired, “Is it the policy of the State Department, where the preservation or the secrecy of secret negotiations is concerned, to lie in order to achieve that goal?” Psaki responded, “James, I think there are times where diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress. This is a good example of that.”

The start date of the Iran nuclear negotiations is back in the spotlight because of a New York Times Magazine piece in which Ben Rhodes admitted that the Obama administration “largely manufactured” a narrative for the Iran deal in order to garner support for it. A key element of the manufactured narrative was that negotiations began in 2013 with the election of a “moderate” Iranian president.

It looks like the State Department tried, by editing the video, to cover up the administration’s lie about when Iran negotiations commenced (together with the admission that it is willing to lie), and then lied again by claiming that the cover up was the product of a glitch.

Remember, this video is supposed to be an accurate archived record of American history. The State Department chose to edit it to rewrite a portion of history. I thought only Communist countries did that.

The article explains the consequences for the editing of the video:

Who requested the scrubbing? The State Department claims not to know. It says that officials “tried” to determine who ordered the edit, “but it was three years ago and the individual who took the call [to edit the tape] just simply doesn’t have a better memory of it.”

Jen Psaki, who made the admission that needed to be deleted, is an obvious suspect. She denies responsibility.

Will the State Department launch an investigation? No it will not. Current spokesperson John Kirby says:

There were no rules governing this sort of action in the past, so I find no reason to press forward with a more formal or deeper investigation. What matters to me — and I take it seriously — is our commitment to transparency and disclosure.

The Obama State Department just can’t stop lying.

I have been known to complain about the mainstream media slanting the news or lying to Americans. Now we have evidence that the government is lying to us. It’s time for a new government.

After The Speech, The Truth Comes Out

Today’s Washington Free Beacon posted an article entitled, “The Big Chide,” the writer’s term for President Obama’s foreign policy.

In his State of the Union speech, President Obama stated:

American diplomacy, backed by the threat of force, is why Syria’s chemical weapons are being eliminated. (Applause.) And we will continue to work with the international community to usher in the future the Syrian people deserve — a future free of dictatorship, terror and fear.

Well, not so fast. The Washington Free Beacon reported today:

…Well, who could have predicted it, but this week we learned that Assad has retained 95 percent of his WMD stockpile while continuing to miss the deadlines to hand over his weapons. More than 125,000 Syrians are dead, millions more are displaced, and al Qaeda affiliates claim jurisdiction over much of the country.

The conflict has drawn thousands of foreign fighters from 50 countries into Syria, foreign fighters who have every intention of bringing the jihad back home when they return to Africa, Asia, Europe, and the United States. The Syrian chaos has spilled over into Lebanon and into Iraq, where ethno-sectarian conflict has resumed and al Qaeda has reappeared.

But do not worry. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is on the case. “The United States is concerned that the Syrian government is behind in delivering these chemical weapons and precursor materials on time, and with the schedule that was agreed to,” he said in a statement from Poland. And if that is not enough to get Assad back on schedule, the State Department made the hilarious claim that the military option remains “on the table.”

The Syrians have not complied, the agreement we signed assured that Bashar Assad will stay in power, and put Russia in the position of being the power negotiator in the region. That is not a positive diplomatic achievement.

The article goes on the cite some of the other results of President Obama’s concept of ‘leading from behind.’ The President has projected weakness in foreign affairs, and the perception of America as weak has made the world a more dangerous place.

The article further reports:

Russia, for instance, has been caught violating a decades-old nuclear missile treaty. A high-ranking administration official has admitted as much to our NATO allies. But the Obama State Department does not want to acknowledge the violation formally because, the New York Times reports, “With President Obama pledging to seek deeper cuts in nuclear arms, the State Department has been trying to find a way to resolve the compliance issue, preserve the treaty, and keep the door open to future arms control accords.” This is logic at which Yossarian would not be surprised: We cannot say the Russians broke the treaty because that would jeopardize our chances of signing more treaties with the Russians.

The President also stated in the State of the Union:

And it is American diplomacy, backed by pressure, that has halted the progress of Iran’s nuclear program — and rolled back parts of that program — for the very first time in a decade. As we gather here tonight, Iran has begun to eliminate its stockpile of higher levels of enriched uranium.

It’s not installing advanced centrifuges. Unprecedented inspections help the world verify every day that Iran is not building a bomb. And with our allies and partners, we’re engaged in negotiations to see if we can peacefully achieve a goal we all share: preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The article reports:

Then there is the Iranian president, who says the interim nuclear deal “means the surrender of the big powers before the great Iranian nation.” There is his foreign minister, who visited the grave of a Hezbollah terrorist. There is his chief nuclear negotiator, who said the interim deal could be undone in a day. And there is the White House response: All of this is simply Iranian propaganda, meant for internal consumption. The real Rouhani, the real Zarif, the real Araqchi want exactly the things John Kerry wants.

The question the writer at the Washington Free Beacon asks is, “What will the world look like in 2017?” I just hope America can survive the reality check that is coming.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Handshake That Was Never Going To Happen

On Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal posted an editorial entitled, “He’ s Just Not That Into You.” The editorial dealt with the fact that Hassan Rouhani, Iran‘s current president, was not interested in a photo-op handshake with President Obama. The editorial points out that President Clinton was met with a similar refusal in 2000.

The editorial reports:

Back then, the explanation for Mr. Khatami’s refusal was that internal Iranian politics would not have allowed it. On Tuesday, a senior Obama Administration official peddled a similar line after the Rouhani snub, telling reporters that Iranians “have an internal dynamic that they have to manage.”

That’s one way of putting it. Another way is that Iran’s ruling clerics and Revolutionary Guard Corps remain ideologically incapable of reconciling themselves to the Great Satan. This shouldn’t surprise anyone who reviews the 34-year-history of Iranian rebuffs to American diplomatic overtures, which makes the U.S. embarrassment on Tuesday all the more acute.

The thing to keep in mind here is that the president of Iran has no power–the clerics rule the country. The president is chosen by the clerics and controlled by the clerics. Just for the record, they are not a moderate group.

The editorial concludes:

Politics in the normal sense doesn’t exist in Tehran, where the rules are set and the players chosen by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, who is accountable to nobody. What Iran’s leaders do understand is how to humiliate adversaries they consider to be weak. We hope Mr. Obama appreciates how he has been schooled.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Visit That Occurred After The F-16’s Were Delivered

The Blaze is reporting today Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has visited Egypt and met with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi today. This is the first visit to Egypt by an Iranian leader since the 1979 Iranian revolution. The visit also occurred two days after Egypt received its shipment of F-16’s from America.

The article reports:

Though Egypt’s shifting alliances are unavoidably apparent, the United States is continuing to arm the country.  On Sunday U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson held a ceremony in Cairo to mark the arrival of four F-16 fighter jets from the United States.  Twenty in total are due to be delivered throughout 2013.

“Today’s ceremony demonstrates the firm belief of the United States that a strong Egypt is in the interest of the U.S., the region, and the world,” she declared.

According to the United States Embassy website, the U.S. has delivered 224 F-16 aircraft to Egypt.

It is interesting to me that the visit occurred after the planes were shipped. I really do question the wisdom of arming the present Egyptian government. This may easily be something we will regret later.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Iranian Government Supports Obama

John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line today highlighting how the Iranian press is covering the American presidential election.

The article quotes an Israeli National News story posted today:

Iran’s government mouthpiece Press TV is panicking over the prospect of a defeat for President Barack Obama and warns that Mitt Romney will steal the election through “black-box” voting machines that “manufacture election outcomes.”

It also charged that the polls – virtually all of which now show Romney in the lead or at least in a dead heat – are fraudulent. Press TV has picked up on some American website tweets that predict black Americans will riot if Obama loses.

Obama is far from being a friend of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but the prospect of a hawkish Republican candidate apparently is even less attractive for Tehran.

If Iran supports President Obama, then I support Governor Romney!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Clarity At The United Nations

The contrast was obvious. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the United Nations this week. Part of his speech was to encourage the growth of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) which recently met in Tehran.

Here is part of President Ahmadinejad’s speech at the UN:

Unilateralism, application of double standards, and imposition of wars, instability and occupations to ensure economic interests, and expand dominance over sensitive centers of the world have turned to be the order of the day.

Arms race and intimidation by nuclear weapons and weapons of mass-destruction by the hegemonic powers have become prevalent: Testing new generations of ultra-modern weaponry and the pledge to disclose these armaments on due time is now being used as a new language of threat against nations to coerce them into accepting a new era of hegemony. Continued threat by the uncivilized Zionists to resort to military action against our great nation is a clear example of this bitter reality.

-A state of mistrust has cast its shadow on the international relations, whilst there is no trusted or just authority to help resolve world conflicts.

Just for the record, those ‘uncivilized Zionists’ have attempted to live in peace with their neighbors for more than fifty years. It’s the neighbors that have been uncivilized. They have also won more Nobel prizes per capita than any other nation in the world.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also spoke at the UN last week. His remarks had a very different perspective.

Breitbart.com posted the entire speech, but they also posted sections of the speech that contain truth the world needs to hear:

Israel wants to see a Middle East of progress and peace. We want to see the three great religions that sprang forth from our region, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, coexist in peace and in mutual respect. Yet the medieval forces of radical Islam whom you just saw storming the American embassies throughout the Middle East, well, they oppose this. They seek supremacy over all Muslims. They’re bent on world conquest. They want to destroy Israel, Europe, America. They want to extinguish freedom. They want to end the modern world.

Now, militant Islam has many branches, from the rulers of Iran with their Revolutionary Guards to al-Qaida terrorists to the radical cells lurking in every part of the globe.

But despite their differences, they are all rooted in the same bitter soil of intolerance. That intolerance is directed first to their fellow Muslims and then to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, secular people, anyone who doesn’t submit to their unforgiving creed. They want to drag humanity back to an age of unquestioning dogma, unrelenting conflict.

I’m sure of one thing. Ultimately, they will fail. Ultimately, light will penetrate the darkness.

Prime Minister Netanyahu used a very simple drawing to show the danger the world now faces regarding the Iranian nuclear program. We can choose to listen now or we can regret later that we closed our ears.

Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke the truth–the question is whether or not anyone heard.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Perspective On Bringing Peace To The Middle East

One definition of appeasement is letting the alligator eat everyone else first. It really doesn’t solve the problem–it just delays the inevitable conflict. At some point, if you choose to live, you will have to fight the alligator. Do you want to do it after he has eaten all of your potential allies and is strong or do you want to do it while he is weak and hungry? That is where we are in the discussions of a Palestinian state.

Yesterday Haaretz reported on a statement made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad explaining how he would bring peace to the Middle East.

The article reports:

Speaking at the sidelines of the the International Conference on Palestine in Tehran, the Iranian president was quoted by AFP as saying that if “the backers of the Zionist regime want to solve the issue… the solution is simple … everyone should go home.” 

“Some poor people were brought to Palestine on the promise of security and jobs while they made Palestinian people into refugees… So now Palestinians should go home and those brought here should go to theirs,” Ahmadinejad was quoted by AFP as saying. 

He doesn’t want to drive the Jewish people into the sea, he just wants to kick them out of Israel and take their land. How peaceful. Does anyone really believe that he will stop at Israel? Does anyone doubt that Iran is smuggling weapons into Gaza and bringing weapons into Lebanon to prepare for an attack on Israel? Iran has territorial ambitions. A video smuggled out of the country details the international goals of Iran (see rightwinggranny March 28). We need to listen to what Ahmadinejad is saying. He is telling us what to expect.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta