Posted by: Perm Dude
- [154552311] Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 14:44
Probably deserving of its own thread. I've been watching a ton of news on this--hard to get a handle on but I'll try to post links as I come across them.
Andrew Sullivan and TPM are on top of this as well.
1
Mith Dude
ID: 01629107 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 15:10
The past few days on this topic are easily Sullivan's best work since the election.
Pancho Villa
ID: 485511514 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 15:52
Good work from Sullivan.
Now, it's time for this country, especially the right, to recognize that Iran can't be stereotyped as a terrorist nation whose only goal is to nuke Israel.
...even if Obama isn’t as concerned about Israel as he is about Japan and South Korea, if Iran nukes Israel, it’s not just five million Jews who’d be incinerated. It would also wipe out two million Arabs residing there, with the nuclear fallout killing God only knows how many people in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan. Is there anyone, aside from possibly Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who really thinks that would make the Iranians hesitate for even a nano-second from carrying out the annihilation of the Jewish nation?
4
Boldwin
ID: 133532810 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 20:38
The leader of Iran himself said that the Isreali problem would disappear as soon as Islam had the bomb.
Exactly why it is somehow crazy to think he might use it is beyond me. When did a suicide bomber ever worry about the significant number of muslim palestinians he was about to blow up along with isrealis? Well actually they do spend time dithering with their consciences about it but they blow themselves up anyway.
Anyone using that as if it were a reliable insurance policy against Iran nuking Isreal is surpassingly naive.
5
WiddleAvi Sustainer
ID: 361032112 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 21:06
Is it possible for one thread not to go completely off ? Can this stick just to the Iranian election ?
6
Tree
ID: 41371322 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 23:22
when it comes to his disdain for those with dark skin, Baldwin knows no bounds.
this a monumental election. it is an exciting moment, and it's happening with a technological bend as well.
Twitter is being used quite a bit to spread the word - so much so that there are reports that the Iranian government has already blocked #iranelection , so people have begun to switch to #iran9.
this is fascinating stuff.
7
Pancho Villa
ID: 485511514 Mon, Jun 15, 2009, 23:50
Can this stick just to the Iranian election ?
I figured Baldwin was waiting for WorldNetDaily's take so he could offer their geopolitical insight.
So, in the spirit of pre-emption, here's today's WND headlines:
>Are you freer today than you were before Obama?
>Independence Day tea party tally explodes
>Gibbs gets 2nd shot at eligibility question
>Start your own eligibility billboard campaign
>Where's the birth certificate?
etc., etc.....
And I wonder if Burt Prelutsky is referring to these Iranians as those who woildn't hesitate for even a nano-second from carrying out the annihilation of the Jewish nation?
8
boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 09:32
Re: 6, have you noticed the expectational quality of the news reporting done through cell phones? I guess the Iranian government is really behind the times when it comes to technology. Oh the other hand It is not surprising that the people are, i know a few Iranians and they are all extremely tech savoy.
9
Mith
ID: 2894309 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 09:41
I don't think the Iranian Government is as 'behind the times' as you suggest. Cell phone communications have been turned off and back on at their will.
A critical network upgrade must be performed to ensure continued operation of Twitter. In coordination with Twitter, our network host had planned this upgrade for tonight. However, our network partners at NTT America recognize the role Twitter is currently playing as an important communication tool in Iran. Tonight's planned maintenance has been rescheduled to tomorrow between 2-3p PST (1:30a in Iran).
Our partners are taking a huge risk not just for Twitter but also the other services they support worldwide—we commend them for being flexible in what is essentially an inflexible situation. We chose NTT America Enterprise Hosting Services early last year specifically because of their impeccable history of reliability and global perspective. Today's decision and actions continue to prove why NTT America is such a powerful partner for Twitter.
I don't think the Iranian Government is as 'behind the times' as you suggest.
then maybe they should actually confiscate the cell phones along with video cameras, if they don't want journalist video taping what they are seeing.
13
Mith
ID: 2894309 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 13:22
...huh?
14
boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 13:30
I was talking about how reporters were reporting from Tehran using cell phone cameras because the Iranian government was confiscating video cameras. I thought that was pretty good use of technology.
15
Perm Dude
ID: 154552311 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 13:35
They are confiscating what they can. But rather than try to confiscate millions of cell phones, it is a lot easier to just disable or damage the network through which the signals must go. And that is what they are doing.
16
boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 13:42
turning of cell phone coverage does not stop them from being used as video cameras and it is not that hard to confiscated the cell phones of foreign journalists, there are not millions of them.
17
Perm Dude
ID: 154552311 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 13:48
You're thinking too small, boikin--as if only concentrating on "foreign journalists" is the way to stop the news from getting out.
Anyone with a cell phone can and is a journalist. And there are millions of cell phones in Iran.
18
Mith
ID: 2894309 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 14:01
Boikin
As authoritarian a regime as Iran is, I don't think they quite possess the resources to confiscate every last cell phone that might be used to upload video and photos to the internet, if you intended that literally.
From my perspective the regime does seem to be reacting with a good deal of uncertainty with regard to what lengths they will go to stifle dissent. Law enforcement in Tehran does seem to have somewhat eased their anti-protest tactics since the weekend, at least for now. And as I pointed out above, it does seem likely that Iran fully possesses the ability to cease all internet activity within their borders, a measure which would likely stop most of those images from getting out - and one which they have not taken, to my knowledge.
Links I provided earlier suggest that PR is a apparently much greater concern for them than might seem likely.
"uhh... this guy does not get along with that guy"
21
nerveclinic Leader
ID: 05047110 Tue, Jun 16, 2009, 14:43
The leader of Iran himself said that the Isreali problem would disappear as soon as Islam had the bomb.
Quote please.
Even if you have the quote out of context he may simply be saying that the Israeli's have the bomb and that's "a problem" so once Islam has a bomb the problem will be neutralized.
Not that I don't hate the F#&k mind you.
Lot's of coverage here in the papers by the way about the rioting, and not reported in a negative way. Also there were protests outside the Iranian consulate here and not only were they allowed they were featured prominently in the State news.
I have an Iranian client, Hates Amajinschmuck, and he is currently in Iran. I got a message from a mutual UAE contact today...
Hi Monty,
I understand from (name censored) that you contacted him regarding designs. Please note that he is unavailable right now due to the current political situation in Iran and will be in touch when things settle down.
Washington Post Foreign Service Friday, October 28, 2005; Page A16
LONDON, Oct. 27 -- Leaders around the world on Thursday condemned a call by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that Israel be "wiped off the map," and a top Iranian official said that mass demonstrations in his country on Friday would rebuff the rising criticism from abroad.
"I have never come across a situation of the president of a country saying they want to . . . wipe out another country," British Prime Minister Tony Blair said at a summit outside London of the 25 leaders of the European Union's member states.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, right, and French President Jacques Chirac, left, were among the 25 European Union leaders who excoriated Iran. (Pool Photo/by Patrick Kovarik Via Associated Press) Blair said Ahmadinejad's comment was "completely and totally unacceptable."
...to show support for the country's president. Manouchehr Mottaki was quoted on state-run television saying that the "Zionist regime is illegitimate" and that "the world will see the anger of the Islamic world against this regime."
Ahmadinejad made his remarks in a speech Wednesday to 4,000 students attending a conference called "The World Without Zionism."
"Israel Should Be Wiped Off the Map" was the slogan draped on a Shahab-3 ballistic missile during a military parade in Tehran a month ago. Six of the missiles, which, with a 1,250 mile range, could reach Israel, were the high point of the parade. "We Will Trample America Under Our Feet," read another banner.
What he actually said was:
"Emam goft een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzegar mahv shavad."
A word for word translation gives us the following....
"Imam said this occupying regime in Jerusalem must vanish from the page of times."You might find it interesting what Iran has already done with nuclear materials and Isreal.
Or consider the words of Ahmadenijad's hero Khomeini:
Khomeini, put it in a speech in Qom in 1980: 'We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. I say, let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant.' [For these worshipers at the cult of death, even the sacrifice of the homeland is acceptable if the outcome is the demise of Israel].
Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former President of Iran...
Rafsanjani added that with the formation of Israel, colonialists created insecurity in the region, exposing states to threats so as to bring them under the dominion of colonialism. The survival of Israel depends on the interests of global arrogance and colonialism, and as long as this base is beneficial to them, they will preserve it.
Nuclear Weapons Can Solve the Israel Problem Rafsanjani said that Muslims must surround colonialism and force them [the colonialists] to see whether Israel is beneficial to them or not. If one day, he said, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession [meaning nuclear weapons] - on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This, he said, is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam. - “Al-Quds Day”, December 14, 2001 sermon of former Iranian President Ali Akhbar Hashemi Rafsanjani
24
nerveclinic
ID: 265321713 Wed, Jun 17, 2009, 14:32
OK well Baldwin once again misleading.
Of course we all know about the Ahmadinejad quote about Israel being wiped off the face of the earth. It was well publicized.
I was specifically asking you about...
The leader of Iran himself said that the Isreali problem would disappear as soon as Islam had the bomb
So I asked for a quote.
It turns out it wasn't the "leader of Iran himself" who said this, that would be Ahmadinejad. It was, according to your quote, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former President of Iran.
You really should be more careful how you post.
25
boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Jun 17, 2009, 14:49
re 19...and there names are so long....i think i might have to start watching fox and friends it is like IQ ego boost.
26
Mith
ID: 2894309 Wed, Jun 17, 2009, 15:00
Not to nitpick, but the leader of Iran Ayatolah Khameni.
This factoid became suddenly convenient for the political right for about 2 days last week during the buildup to the election, when John Bolton and other neocons pointed to the Ayatolah to head off and counter any praise they feared Obama's foreign policy outreach might have received for possibly influencing the Iranian vote.
27
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Wed, Jun 17, 2009, 15:27
Nerve
That was something I had stored away in my brain for a decade and it accurately reflected what Iranian presidents feel about nuking Isreal. But if you prefer amnesia continue aligning with liberals.
They will reliably forget every inconvenient truth.
28
Tree
ID: 41371322 Wed, Jun 17, 2009, 15:44
But if you prefer amnesia continue aligning with liberals.
is it even possible for you to make a post without disparaging "liberals"? is it even possible for you to think on your own, without making a generalization? i'm fairly convinced you can't, and at this point, you're not much more than a sound bite from conservative talk radio.
William Blake put it best when he said "To generalize is to be an idiot."
29
nerveclinic Leader
ID: 05047110 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 09:18
How am I aligning with liberals by questioning the validity of your quote?
Funny to, Ahmadinejad is a conservative. It's the liberals in Iran who want him gone. So Baldwin, if you concur you now find yourself aligning with liberals.
There's a first for everything.
30
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 09:32
In no sense other than sematical guerilla warfare could anyone say Ahmadinejad is a conservative.
Liberals immediately after the end of the cold war started calling Stalin a conservative too, but that was deliberately misleading also.
Western liberals put people like Ahmadinejad in power in Iran, not because shiite radicals are liberals, but because western liberals hated anyone pro-American like the Shah and they always mysteriously end up aiding despots.
31
Pancho Villa
ID: 7515189 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 10:15
Western liberals put people like Ahmadinejad in power in Iran, not because shiite radicals are liberals, but because western liberals hated anyone pro-American like the Shah and they always mysteriously end up aiding despots.
Taking complicated geopolitical situations and condensing them into black and white soundbites to support your hatred for liberals, in this case Western liberals, displays a refusal to approach history in an honest and objective manner.
One might even call it semantical guerilla warfare.
32
Pancho Villa
ID: 7515189 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 10:51
Not that anyone should be suprised at the rhetoric in #30.
Here's the opening paragraph to today's column by Baldwin's hero Ann Coulter:
Whether it is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Weather Underground, Central Park rapists, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Jim Jones and the People's Temple, welfare recipients, Palestinian terrorists, murderers, abortionists, strippers or common criminals -- liberals always take the side of the enemies of civilization against civilization.
Compare that to the column yesterday by Michele Malkin, who refrained from using the word "liberal" or "the left" even once in her expose on the firing of AmeriCorps IG Gerald Walpin.
Liberals took the side of Jim Jones and the People's Temple? More sematical guerilla warfare. Good phrase.
33
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 11:36
Liberals did take the side of Jim Jones. He was the darling of San Francisco liberals. Read up on yer history.
And Ann Coulter is exactly exactly right. They are against common sense every last time.
34
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 11:39
Harvey Milk and Jim Jones were as thick as thieves.
35
Tree
ID: 41371322 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 12:02
Baldwin. welcome to 2009. we're midway through it. are you going to keep fighting wars that are 30 years old, featuring men dead nearly as long.
no doubt, there were ties between Jones and the SF political elite - not just Milk, but also Moscone, Brown, and several others. no shock you single out the homosexual in the crowd though.
what in god's name do they have to do with the current discussion, with the current revolution happening in Iran?
it's another forest for the trees scenario, where instead of hailing this potential historic moment, you'd rather disparage the left.
36
Pancho Villa
ID: 7515189 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 12:20
Liberals did take the side of Jim Jones. He was the darling of San Francisco liberals. Read up on yer history.
And Ann Coulter is exactly exactly right. They are against common sense every last time.
My history is just fine. When Jim Jones was feeding, clothing and housing the homeless and the downtrodden, he was the darling of San Francisco liberals and conservatives.
Coulter's implication is that liberals took Jones' side regarding Georgetown, which is preposterous. You know it, I know it and every person with an IQ above 50 knows it. She's exactly wrong.
And where does she use the term common sense which you inserted? She claims liberals always take the side of the enemies of civilization against civilization.
And what does any of that 1st paragraph have to do with the subject matter except to pander to so-called conservatives like yourself?
37
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 12:32
And what does any of that 1st paragraph have to do with the subject matter except to pander to so-called conservatives like yourself?
1) Go to a mirror.
2) Ask the person who posted it.
38
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 12:40
PV
Coulter's implication is that liberals took Jones' side regarding Georgetown, which is preposterous.
No, Coulter's piece does not hang on whether liberals like Milk maintained support for Jones after the 1000 bodies including Jones' were found.
39
Seattle Zen
ID: 565581811 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 16:04
1000 bodies? Are you sure it wasn't 100 million? You know, the same amount as Stalin?
I GUARANTEE that Baldwin was a Jim Jones supporter before he up and left for Guyana. You always take the side of the small cult that is suffering from religious persecution.
Raise your hand if you knew that strippers were enemies of civilization. I guess you learn something new every day...
40
Tree
ID: 41371322 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 16:20
No, Coulter's piece does not hang on whether liberals like Milk maintained support for Jones after the 1000 bodies including Jones' were found.
i'm sure the family of Leo Ryan agrees with you that liberals blindly supported Jones prior to 909 bodies being found.
41
Perm Dude
ID: 154552311 Thu, Jun 18, 2009, 16:25
liberals always take the side of the enemies of civilization against civilization
Yes, FDR, in fighting Hitler, was definitely anti-civilization.
Rebutting Coulter is like debating the raving homeless guy in the alley.
You should really steer clear of the insurance industry.
45
nerveclinic
ID: 535142014 Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 15:14
A friend of mine posted this on her facebook page. She claims it's a reliable source. I thought it was worth pasting.
this is the report from the street –
"On Yadegar Freeway to Azadi Junction around 4 PM – there were people moving in small groups, and there were Basiji and riot police in full body armor walking through the people.
In every street leading to Azadi Square there were many police waiting for the protestors, and keeping them from emerging onto Azadi Street.
The strategy of the police was to prevent the protestors from coalescing into a large group.
The people were being forced into the alleys by riot police, who then fired teargas canisters into them.
When large groups of people were forced into an alley and encountered lone members of the Basiji or riot police, the crowd protected them, making a shield around them, and allowed them to escape back to the main street.
Some of the Basiji forces looked quite young, even 14 or 16 years old. Many of them were clearly brought to Tehran from the villages.
Old women spoke to them, saying "You are like my child." or "You are Iranian – these people are your brothers and sisters."
Some of the riot police had tears in their eyes.
Many of the Basiji said things to us, such as "We are here to protect you from the foreign enemies who are making these disturbances. The people who have made these disturbances are not pro-Mousavi, they are against the Islamic government."
At times, when the police or Basiji became too violent with the protestors, the protestors fought back with sticks and stones.
Many of the riot police and Basiji seemed more afraid of the crowd of protestors fighting back than the protestors were of them. They had fear in their eyes.
Anyone seen taking pictures, even with a mobile phone, was immediately arrested.
The crowd chanted slogans – the most popular was "God is Great!"
There were also cries of "Death to Dictatoriship!"
At one point, when the Basiji had shot and killed one of the protestors, the chant changed to "Death to Khamenei!" This was in Sattar Khan neighborhood.
Reports were coming from other places that more protestors had been killed by police.
In some places the police became outnumbered and stood together in groups on the street corners.
The crowds of protestors gathered around them and chanted "Don't kill your brothers!"
Alley after alley it was a similar story.
In some streets the people had control. In others, the riot police and Basiji dominated.
Walking through some areas you would encounter a cloud of nearly invisible tear gas. Suddenly your eyes and throat are burning. Constant crying, eyes reddened.
In places even middle aged women could be seen breaking paving stones to hurl at police.
"Student Alley" where the dormitories of Tehran University are located, was blocked by a line of riot police.
There were fires burning on the street behind them, and people running along the street in both directions.
You could see the clashes and people running along the alleys and side streets – moving higher into Tehran as night fell.
The people were saying to each other as they passed by: "This is only the beginning. We will not stop."
Tonight on the streets of Tehran, people are on their balconies, windows and rooftops, chanting "God is Great! God is Great!"
It is not clear what will happen tomorrow."
46
Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Sat, Jun 20, 2009, 20:19
Nice post nerve...I have a couple of 2nd generation Iranian friends here and all they keep saying is how much they wish they were there right now.
47
Razor
ID: 385371019 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 14:26
By the way, just to backtrack a bit, this entire post is false:
In no sense other than sematical guerilla warfare could anyone say Ahmadinejad is a conservative.
Liberals immediately after the end of the cold war started calling Stalin a conservative too, but that was deliberately misleading also.
Western liberals put people like Ahmadinejad in power in Iran, not because shiite radicals are liberals, but because western liberals hated anyone pro-American like the Shah and they always mysteriously end up aiding despots.
Ahmadinejad is most certainly a conservative. I am sorry if that term offends you because you consider yourself an American conservative, but by every definition of the word, he is. And no, liberals do not want to see people like Ahmadinejad in power.
despite that, the fact is that these photos give hope that as large number of Iranians are good people, who want freedoms like everyone else, and that characterizing the entire nation as some sort of evil america hating machine, is simply false.
49
Myboyjack Dude
ID: 014826271 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 15:39
I don't think anyone of note has ever characterized the Iranian people as anything other than good; y'all should stop flogging that canard.
References to the "axis of evil" and America hating were clearly aimed at the Iranian government; evidently the Iranian populace agrees.
I had an old thread on Iran from a few years back; evidently it's been flushed.
50
Tree
ID: 41371322 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 15:51
MBJ - for the record, that was not a shot at anyone in particular of any political affiliation in particular, just a general statement...
51
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 16:39
Razor
I don't recognize any definition of conservative that includes totalitarians.
52
Perm Dude
ID: 154552311 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 16:45
*snort*
I don't recognize any definition of the "left" that includes them doing anything bad.
53
Razor
ID: 385371019 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 16:48
It doesn't matter if you do or not. Ahmadinejad is a conservative. There are liberal dictators too, for the record.
MBJ - After having Bush call Iran a member of the Axis of Evil and having Ahmadinejad be the public face of Iran, I doubt the average American has any other perception of Iran other than a place where dangerous, America-hating, Muslim wackos live. Educated people may know better, but the perception of Iran as having a significant pro-democracy, relatively liberal contingent is not widespread, or at least has not been until now.
54
nerveclinic Leader
ID: 05047110 Sun, Jun 21, 2009, 20:35
Here's a new one, same source
Iran June 20, 2009 - a friend's account We went today, all the routes were closed but we made it to about a km away from revolution square but at every intersection they had riot police dispersing us, wouldn’t let us get through.
We managed to get some further , my guess is on the northern pavement of enghelab street to enghelab square something like 50,000 people were trying to get through, they were using watercanons at the gate of the Tehran university.
They kept breaking us up. The regular riot policemen were generally ok but then the riot police with army fatigue came and started eating people, they were hitting people on the head, one young womn’s head was broken in front of us, we all jumped in the gutter and some of the men protected us from the batons, the girl was in bad way, we dragged her out and then they just kept shouting. One of them had really red eyes and was screaming from the bottom of his lungs, then the tear gas came and we kept running, but then re-grouping, at some point the younger men started chasing them saying death to basiji.
But then more tear gas and batons.
Along the road running nrth don’t know the name but near the university there were basijis mingling with the army types in yellow lacoste etyle tshirts and they all had caskets. We lost some of our friedsn on the way.
We managed to get to laleh park and there was lots of riot olice there. At the cross section of fatemi and kargar the robocops were waiting the ones in black with the rubberised gear.
We gave up and tried to get back home the streets were jammed, in one of the alleys running parallel to amirabad which is the main road running to the uni dormitories there was a commtion ,we could see the smoke of tear gas.
They were out in force, even had communication officers with their boxes on their backs. Now they say someone was shot there, in amirabad.
We heard on the way, when mobiles came back to life that they have exploded two bombs in the shrine of Khomeini.
Don’t know what will happen next, only news from CNN and aljazeera. BBC Persian is out, most people can’t even get on the net.
There were lost of people lingering around the park and the streets for miles off asking whats’ going on and how they shd proceed.
One of us went further east and tried to get into azadi street from the west , west of Navab highway, but the same dipreesing of crowds.
One of our friends was hit on the knee, another was run over by car. She says the hospital was full of people coming in with broken heads and limbs.
We are home safe but apparently it’s going on in vanak square we know that amirabad ws in turmoil.
There were all kinds of people there not just rich westernised people, they have always been there in all the marches, the difference today we were not marching in peace, they were out to get rid of us. I still think some of the forces there were not realy into hurting us, it was the basij and the military fatigued riot police. Still some people say that these guys don’t speak Persian, I don’t know, I didn’t hear any Arabic spoken, some people belive most of these people are brought in from client states.
We were scared, but we went. We don’t what will happen next but if they organise it we have to go again, there’s no other way. We can’t let the extreme elemnets turn this into another Lebanon or Palestine. There is no way but to go out.
The bombing ofkhomeini’s tomb though is bad. They will blame it on the protestors. But we all feel this is their own work. The protestors don’t even have batons, just their fists and they are not yet using them. The bombing will give them a chance to declare martial law. They are trying to create something bad here; civil war, military takeover…. I can’t believe they were so stupid as to do all this without knowing.
Let people know what is happening here.
I wonder if the young girl we dragged out will live, there was so much blood.
55
Tree
ID: 41371322 Mon, Jun 22, 2009, 00:28
for anyone who didn't see, this is the footage of the teenage girl shot and killed by a sniper's bullet, who was apparently only watching the protests and nothing more.
you do not see her shot, but i think what is shown is much more graphic and heart-wrenching.
THIS FOOTAGE IS GRAPHIC. I CAN'T SAY THAT ENOUGH. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE IT, DON'T CLICK ON IT.
Are you really comparing the Iranian regime with the Obama Administration?
You really think that reactively accusing Iranian protesters of terrorism is the same as a single nonsensical question in a training manual that the DOD thought better of and omitted?
An Oregon antiterrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in what critics consider a thinly veiled effort to discourage antiwar demonstrations.
The bill has met strong opposition, but lawmakers expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state Senate judiciary committee, whose chairman, Republican John Minnis, wrote the proposal.
Senate Bill 742 identifies a terrorist as a person who ''plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt'' business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.
The bill's few public supporters say police need stronger laws to break up protests that have created havoc in cities like Portland, where thousands of people have marched and demonstrated against war in Iraq since last fall.
''We need some additional tools to control protests that shut down the city,'' said Lars Larson, a conservative radio talk-show host who has stumped for the bill.
Larson said protesters should be protected by free speech laws, but not be able to hold up ambulances or frighten people out of their daily routines, adding that police and the court system could be trusted to see the difference.
''Right now, a group of people can get together and go downtown and block a freeway,'' Larson said. ''You need a tool to deal with that.''
There's your American fascism for you. Not an ambiguous line in some training manual that was omitted the moment someone looked at it crosseyed - but a real bill designed to stifle speech and and oppress dissent, proposed by serious and elected Republican legislators and supported by rightist media. The measure was defeated by all of three votes in the 30 member state senate. I can't find a roll call on line, but how do you think the yeas and nays broke down?
58
Boldwin
ID: 26451820 Tue, Jun 23, 2009, 12:06
MITH
I am not, strictly speaking, singling out Obama on this. This stuff has been popping up regularly ever since the DHS was created and I don't remotely think it is inadvertant mistakes, accidental or trivial.
The only thing these officials regret is that this has been made public. They just keep right on plugging under the mindset that average americans are terrorists.
59
biliruben
ID: 461142511 Tue, Jun 23, 2009, 13:06
Is Boxman above or below average?
I actually share your concern, Boldwin.
(BTW, when did your name change back? Conspiracy theorists should probably demure from multiple personalities, even in jest).
Protesting had come very close to moving from a right to a privilege, under the prior administration. Any person in power can find it much easier to subtly stifle dissent, and it is one of those things really is a slippery slope.
That said, whacko operation rescue types punching pregnant nurses and offing abortion docs just makes the job easier for those with a beef with protest.
60
Mith
ID: 2894309 Tue, Jun 23, 2009, 13:39
This stuff has been popping up regularly ever since the DHS was created
HEADLINE: 3 SENATORS FORESEE A THREAT IN ANTITERRORISM BILL
BYLINE: By STUART TAYLOR Jr.
DATELINE: WASHINGTON, June 5
BODY: Two conservative Republican Senators and a liberal Democrat agreed at a hearing today that an antiterrorism bill proposed by President Reagan was so broadly worded that it might threaten civil liberties.
They agreed on little else, however.
Senators Jeremiah Denton of Alabama and Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, the conservative Republicans, said that antiterrorism legislation was needed and that the problems with the bill could be corrected by modest amendments.
Senator Howard M. Metzenbaum, Democrat of Ohio, on the other hand, said the proposed legislation was a dangerous and unnecessary ''throwback to the McCarthy era'' and that many provisions were ''clearly unconstitutional'' invasions of freedom of speech.
The Reagan bill would make it a crime to provide training or ''logistical, mechanical, maintenance or similar support services'' or ''to act in concert with'' any foreign government or group designated by the Secretary of State as terrorist.
Deciding Who Are Terrorists
The Secretary of State could apparently designate as terrorist, for example, either the Sandinista Government in Nicaragua or the Nicaraguan exiles who are mounting paramilitary attacks on it, or both, or neither, according to his preference.
The Reagan bill specifies that defendants prosecuted for aiding any such group would be barred from challenging the Secretary of State's designation of the group as terrorist. No proof of intent to assist specific terrorist activities would be required. Violators could receive prison terms of up to 10 years.
Senators Denton, Hatch and Metzenbaum each told Justice Department lawyers who testified for the bill today that this broad grant of unreviewable power to the Secretary of State was unacceptable in its present form.
They were the only senators to attend the first of four scheduled hearings by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism, of which Mr. Denton is chairman.
Mr. Hatch said the bill was deficient because it provided no indication of how the Secretary of State would decide which governments and groups were terrorist. ''There should be standards'' for such decisions, he said. Mr. Denton said Congress should be consulted before such designations are made.
Support for the Bill
At the same time, Mr. Hatch stressed that ''there are few issues confronting this nation that pose as serious a dilemma as that of dealing effectively with such subversive activities.''
Mark Richard and Victoria Toensing, both Deputy Assistant Attorneys General, said existing laws were inadequate to cover such activities as the training of terrorists in Libya by Edwin P. Wilson, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency. Mr. Wilson is in prison on related charges. But Senator Metzenbaum said today that the bill was written much more broadly than necessary to reach such activities as aiding and abetting violent terrorist acts. Representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union, who are scheduled to testify Wednesday, agreed,
They said the legislation could be used to prosecute Americans for speaking out on foreign policy issues, including such activities as urging support for the cause of insurgent factions in foreign countries, sending money to such groups and arguing as an attorney on their behalf.
Mr. Richard denied this. He said ''the legislation does not intend to prohibit moral support to any group,'' such as speeches, marches and cash contributions. Rather, he said, it is aimed at ''affirmative acts of providing services to these groups and hostile nations.''
The hearings were called to consider four antiterrorism bills proposed in April by Mr. Reagan.
While none of the bills have much chance of becoming law in this election year, they may make more progress next year.
61
Mith
ID: 2894309 Tue, Jun 23, 2009, 13:41
By the way, I don't mean to imply that Ronald Reagan was any kind of forefather of American fascism. Post 60 is just to show that the issues you raise are not a phenomenon that began with teh creation of DHS.
62
Texas Flood
ID: 205282316 Tue, Jun 23, 2009, 17:28
55, How sad. That young girl and her compatriots are just that true Patriots---real Freedom Fighters.
Seattle Zen
ID: 495532611 Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 12:53
Great blog post, MITH
67
boikin
ID: 532592112 Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 13:30
re 65: I was just watching an interview last week on PBS saying that the unrest in Iran could lead to military coup. I don't remember all the details but i guess the general idea was that there have been many in military and more specifically those of Ahmadinejad generation have been waiting for the opportunity to weaken the power of the supreme council. It is interesting that they are saying that the election itself was the coup...good find.
68
Boldwin
ID: 25282121 Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 18:55
Good find, Tree.
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com