« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Pence Stands With Iranian Dissidents

By: Brian Faughnan (Diary)  |  June 16th, 2009 at 05:04 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Today Congressman Mike Pence – a member of the House Republican Leadership – introduced a resolution to make clear that the US supports the brave dissidents who are risking their lives for democracy in Iran.

This ought to be a no-brainer. The United States has helped make the world’s most dangerous hot spot somewhat safer by supporting democracy in the Middle East. As Moe has pointed out, the emergence of a democracy in Iraq has encouraged other nations to demand the right to choose their own leaders. The world can only become safer if the people of Iran win their fight to choose the man who replaces Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Pence’s resolution says:

Whereas the United States supports the right of the citizens of Iran to have free and independent elections for the selection of their political leaders;

Whereas Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that ‘‘(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives; (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country; (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures’’;

Whereas, according to the State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2008, Iran’s ‘‘poor human rights record worsened, and it continued to commit numerous serious abuses. . .the government severely limited citizens’ right to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections. . .authorities held political prisoners and intensified a crackdown against women’s rights reformers, ethnic minority rights activists, student activists, and religious minorities’’;

Whereas Iran’s system of government violates numerous international norms and principles of democratic governance;

Whereas, on June 12, 2009, Iran engaged in the process of selecting that country’s new political leader;

Whereas the ensuing announcement by Iranian authorities of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s ‘‘overwhelming victory’’ has sent Iranians into the streets since June 12, 2009, and has prompted unprecedented criticism of Iran’s ruling leaders;

Whereas in the streets of Tehran and other major cities, riot police, members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, and Basij militias are cracking down on demonstrators who were protesting the results;

Whereas the government has cut Internet connections and cellphone service and jammed foreign satellite TV and radio broadcasts;

Whereas most foreign journalists in Iran to cover the June 12, 2009, selection process were reportedly expelled after the voting ended;

Whereas news websites were reportedly blocked by Iranian authorities and the Iranian Government has reportedly arrested opposition political figures and journalists;

Whereas the Iranian Government outlawed any protest following two days of unrest, with the Interior Ministry warning that ‘‘any disrupter of public security would be dealt with according to the law’’; and

Whereas the Government of Iran, pro-government militias, and affiliated entities have attacked demonstrators, causing multiple injuries and fatalities:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who struggle for freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and the protection of the rule of law;

(2) condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the Government of Iran, pro-government militias, and affiliated entities against the people of Iran, which has escalated since the June 12, 2009, process of selecting Iran’s next political leader; and

(3) affirms the universality of individual rights and the importance of democratic and fair elections.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.RedState.com/ETCartman Kenny Solomon

    Funny how it parallels Ambassador John Bolton’s view……

    A hardliner shouts from the podium and the rooftops that he wants to wipe Israel of the map and kill all Jews world-wide.

    A moderate knows to keep his mouth shut in public that he wants to wipe Israel of the map and kill all Jews world-wide.

  • texas214

    The current lead on Huffington Post is:

    Obama “Something has happened in Iran”

    Golly he’s a smartest guy in the world to figure that one out, he ought to get a few extra IQ points for that one

    • molybdanthan

      The community activist in him probably wants to side with the people taking to the streets, but the central planner in him wants the mullahs to retain power.

      • Vegas_Rick
      • Tbone

        “The community activist in him probably wants to side with the people taking to the streets”

        If you think Obama cares about “the people”, ANY people, you are a fool.

        “but the central planner in him wants the mullahs to retain power”

        No, actually, its the totalitarian ruler syndrome, read dictator, in him that favors the mullahs.

        • The_Gadfly

          He just forgot to put the quotes around “community activist” but I supply them automatically all the time, mostly because the MSM always forgets to put them in. To my mind, “community activist” is the current euphemism for ‘anti-social rioters’ and therefore I’m quite certain Obama would be as happy to be in the streets of Iran throwing rocks, molotovs, and generally ‘sticking it to the man.’

          And again for me, central planner=totalitarian statist. Or adapting The Bard, a turd by any other name smells just as bad. And yes I therefore can see Obama being ‘conflicted’ over this. Whereas any real American could never be.

          • Tbone

            selling t-shirts to the idiots.

        • molybdanthan
          • Tbone

            “If you think Obama cares about ?the people?, ANY people, you are a fool”

  • eumaios_the_swineherd

    Having previously worked in a NGO in Tehran several years ago and knowing to an extent what makes the reformist movement and progressive outlets tick, I strongly suggest that explicit support for the opposition in Iran isn’t in fact a “no-brainer.” Bush 43′s funding of pro-democracy movements in Iran was admirable in theory. But in practice, it tainted many of the beneficiaries of this funding with a sense of American intervention. This undermined their aims and conveniently gave fodder to the state apparatus to clamp down on their operations.

    You must realize that even amongst US sympathizers in Iran, there is a very deeply rooted suspicion of foreign meddling, substantiated or not. The last thing we ought to do in this case is given those handling the levers of coercion in Iran an opportunity to use those sentiments as justification for a brutal clampdown.

    President Obama often gets his fair share of grief for being a man of mere words. Let’s not fall for that shortcoming. Let’s support Iran’s awakening with material support. Let’s get them access to proxy servers to get around government censors. Let’s broadcast BBC Persian and Voice of America radio services from Afghanistan and Iraq. Let’s try to do something about satellite jamming. As with any social movement, but particularly in this instance, technology and information can make the brittle fossils of the despot crumble.

    God bless and god is great.

    • dave_in_atl

      And these days the way the “Supreme Leader” has been backtracking/covering his butt I would say the Iran people don’t need much help anyways.

      Now on the other hand I would not be the least bit upset if a shipment of CIA weapons ended up in the hands of the protesters “somehow”.

    • E Pluribus Unum

      but access to proxy servers won’t be? And satellite jamming, and broadcasting Voice of America across the border?

      • eumaios_the_swineherd

        Yes, primarily because we didn’t speak softly. What is the point of a resolution of this nature? On one level, it satisfies our need to say something. There is nothing wrong with that sentiment. We should stand for freedom. and the rule of law. We have done so in the past. Take Iran’s neighbors in which we’ve furthered the ideals of freedom in the most tangible way, military intervention.

        But right now, Iran’s awakening is blooming, and we must weigh the benefits we and Iranians accrue through this resolution with the fact that it offers ostensibly no to negative returns on the ground in Iran. What I’m suggesting is speaking softly and carrying a big, technologically savvy stick. Let Iranians rise up. They’ve done so admirably thus far. Let’s just enable them in a way that is a bit more nimble that this resolution, which appeases domestic interests more than anything. Iranians know the US would like to see the current regime topple, or at very least move even a half step away from Ahmadinejad.

        We are going to see a very heavy handed crackdown in the next few days. In the end, their triumph or their failure is just that, their’s. This resolution will not change that fact.

        • DONTREADONME

          turns out? My guess is you will never see a free Iran until either a bloody civil war, which never will happen, a foreign power invades and destroys the mullahs (which will never happen), or they are a bright and shinny glass with a few diamonds and a temperature in excess of 5000 degree Celsius. That will be the only time you will see a free Iran in our lifetime.

        • ocleverone

          Even if it is just words.

        • E Pluribus Unum

          I am leaning toward no. It sounds very much to me like the standard Democrat line here. Prove me wrong.

          “Bush did it dumb. Obama is smart, and he can do the same thing, only better and smarter, so it will work.”

          The FACT on the ground in Iran is that the dissidents right now know with a moral certainty that the United States will not back their play, because of Obama. FACT #2 on the ground is that this lack of backing hurts their chance of successfully overthrowing this evil, tyrannical mullahcracy.

          Iran has insanely youth-tilted demographic — i.e., young folks not necessarily swayed by “mullahs are good, United States is the Great Satan”. They are smart, they are educated, and they lean pro-Western. Being conspicuously backed by the US would be a great help, and scarcely a burden.

          So, no sale on the “Eumaios Plan”.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            “The FACT on the ground in Iran is that the dissidents right now know with a moral certainty that the United States will not back their play, because of Obama. FACT #2 on the ground is that this lack of backing hurts their chance of successfully overthrowing this evil, tyrannical mullahcracy.”

            You speak with no equivocation. Pray tell, how are you so in touch with the sentiment of those in the streets of Iranian cities? Though you might package your assertion of fact in all capital letters, it does not make it true. From what I have gathered, Iranians were skeptical of President Obama’s overtures in his Nowruz (New Year’s) address, but they recognized that there was a different figure to work with in the United States. This isn’t to suggest that Pres. Obama has miraculously won over the hearts of all Iranians, far from it. Khamenei, state television, a number of newspapers (which tow the state’s official line) all have and continue to suggest that it’s just SSDD (same ****, different day) in the White House.

            Respectfully sir, your ignorance betrayed in your second point might help me clarify why your first point is not just moot, but wrong. Firstly, one primary reason that this social movement is unlike the opposition’s mobilization in 2003 or 1999 is that the horizontal AND vertical scope of the opposition’s makeup is much more vast. Those mobilizing and facilitating these protests from above, the vested political and religious elites who have sided with the cause of those protesting, have not and are not calling for a fundamental change in the Islamic Republic’s governing structure. They have framed it fully within the idealistic framework of a constitutional Islamic Republic. In essence, from the open letters they have written laying out their case and the manner in which they’ve framed street rallies and slogans seek to preserve the republican element of the current constitution.

            If you find it fit to have the US explicitly advocate that we support the Iranian people’s cause of “overthrowing [the] evil, tyrannical mullahcracy” of the Islamic Republic, then you effectively would like to re-define the movement the opposition has shrewdly framed thus far. This is a very nascent movement. The most recent public protests of any note were put down after several days of mobilization. Today’s protests are far greater in scope and have backing within the political establishment. They have done an admirable job of putting Khamenei and company in a hard place by focusing on the constitutionality of their brazen electioneering and the re-affirmation of the rule of law, not regime change. The audacity of the latter this early in the game would have not only been unpalatable to many of those in the streets (Musavi appeals to a broad spectrum of Iranians) and certainly most of those within the political establishment, without whose support this would not be as seismic in Iran as it is.

            They DO know we support the cause of freedom. They need only look west to Iraq. Let us let the opposition do what is must to be viable. It is very early and everything is truly day by day, but so far it’s doing a great job.

          • E Pluribus Unum

            Alot of words. Didn’t say anything, and you especially failed to cast much of any doubt on my “fact #2″, the supposed debunking of which seems to be the basis of the rest of your lengthy bag of nothing.

            FACT #2 on the ground is that this lack of backing hurts their chance of successfully overthrowing this evil, tyrannical mullahcracy. This borders on self-evident. Good Lord. Really. Bambi sitting on his hands at this time — blatantly, in fact, refusing to display any verbal support for “freedom”, “fair elections”, or anything innocuous like that — especially after the bowing to the Saudi king and that ridiculous “suck up to the dictators” speech in Egypt, can ONLY be viewed as the United States utterly unwilling to support the movement in any way.

            And revolutions like this, the world over and throughout modern history, have been fought and won by relatively small portions of the population (10%) who acted boldly, with foreign help, and with the assurance of big-muscle-nation approval.

            The movement that you call “nascent” [perhaps you should look that word up before using next time] has been brewing for more than a decade. It’s hard to know when it actually started, since one might reasonably conclude the seeds were planted the very day the Shah was airlifted out and the crazies took over.

            You want to detail this, henpeck this, finesse this to death. Suit yourself, but while you’re enjoying calling me stupid, I’ll just say that I bet my sources for what’s going on on the ground are more reliable than yours.

          • leftylurker

            They seem to be doing a pretty good job on their own as it is. I mean, that’s some sustained action in the streets.

            i don’t have ANY sources on the ground in Iran, but the fact that some of the same people who took down the Shah are behind this makes me think that they’ve got a plan.

          • E Pluribus Unum

            I have plenty of faith in the Iranian people. They remind me of the Eastern Europeans in the 1990′s – so close to freedom they can taste it.

            They know they are on the side of good and right, and they have decided, in large quantities, that freedom is more precious than ofe itself.

            My point is that the US is in a position to do great good or great harm. Bambi has chosen great harm, to no surprise. Support from the international big dogs makes a huge difference in toppling an evil empire from within. It will happen. It could be this time, if we just let them know we support them. But thanks to charlie-sierra Obama and his Merry Band of Thieves, this could very well be an extremely bloody slam-down, a la Hungary 1956.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            To be fair,

            President Obama has come out and said of the current events:

            “But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we’ve seen on the television over the last few days. And what I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was. And they should know that the world is watching.”

            Moreover, I do think your failure to acknowledge his Nowruz address to Iranians as disingenuous. Do you think the Iran question just came into existence in the foreign affairs theater? No. These events do not occur in a vacuum. But perhaps your consciousness of Iran is rather nascent ;) (I do agree that the reformist movement has been brewing for far longer than this week. My suggestion that it was nascent was in reference to the mobilization of this movement outside of its core organizers in this instance.)

            Your read on revolutions is hit and miss. By definition, a revolution is a bold action. However, the record doesn’t indicate foreign intervention and “big-muscle-nation” assurances are indicative of success. I mentioned Iranians need look no further than Iraq to see the US’s record of support for the ideals of freedom. They also need look no further than Iraq’s recent past to see an instance where we spoke boldly and stoked the flames of freedom after Desert Storm, leading to an anti-Baathist uprising. We spoke boldly, but that was it. What happened? Those who rose up were put down brutally. It is convenient to speak boldly when are participation is limited to refreshing Twitter feeds and Youtube. Your point about small portions of the population being the motor of revolution is correct, albeit a bit off. Truly popular revolutions are misnomers. The French Revolution mobilized 2-3% of the population. Those who rose up against the Soviet Union amounted to 1-2% of the general population. Brave souls. Truly.

            I’m not enjoying calling you stupid. I haven’t done so. This is just something I care passionately about. What is in the balance is tremendous. I am not sure what your sources on the ground amount to, but as I mentioned I have worked in Tehran. I have been throughout Iran, from the Iraqi border to the Afghani border, its rural villages chemically bombed by Saddam Hussein, to those suffering from the drug trade pouring in from Afghanistan. I have been to its major cities. I’ve seen Ahmadinejad’s core supporters and the rural development projects that he has spearheaded to keep their support. I have also befriended those who have been inside Evin for their political dissent. I speak fluent Farsi.

            All in all, I think we both have the same hope. We want to see Iran open up. It would be a tremendous benefit to the world. But I do sincerely believe that to give this opening up its greatest chance of succeeding, the US has been thus far in the right.

          • DONTREADONME

            of history, please review the history (and I mean multiple sources) of Warsaw block countries. Whether you like it or not, the U.S. has been involved in the stopping of tyranny (Revisit Reagen, Clinton, Bush Sr., GWB, Truman, Eisenhower) and the undermining of leftist regimes.

            Next to be fair, reread Obama’s words again, He said nothing, if you can not see the talk around I will begin to think you somehow have an inability to understand political doublespeak.

            Finally, I do not care who you met in Iran and what you think, your shiny vision of things in the world, show the true extent of your ignorance. Keep on dreaming, Iran’s will never be free without bloodshed or sand turned to glass, the iron grip of the Mullahs and the puppets should be an example of that. Keep on thinking you are open minded on this, but your approach will solve nothing in our lifetime, and we will do nothing to that end which you seem perfectly OK with. Seriously, what rosey colored glasses do you have because I want a pair.

            PS. No need to reply, I have read your comments on this and you and I share no common ground other than an end game of a free Iran. The roadmap you have and the one I know to be correct are divergent.

          • DONTREADONME

            I will admit such and eat crow, but when someone does cartwheels to prove a point then that is usually a point not worthy of consideration.

          • Achance

            you’ll faithfully stand or are you here just to be arrogant and irritating?

          • DONTREADONME

            to your statement. Plus, he probably is already working on a thesis reply to my comment above.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            I don’t understand your gripe? Here, I’ll be brief–My shiny view of things? Of course blood will be shed, but I hope for a purposeful end. My bringing up my experience in Iran isn’t to say I’m better than you, but instead to suggest my thinking has been in part shaped by my experience there and this is something I have a deeply vested interest in. What’s wrong with that? I’m no authoritative expert, but I do have some specialized knowledge about Iran. You’ve got specialized knowledge about something that I do not. I can learn from you on those topics, why can’t I take a stand in discussing a topic I’m familiar with?

            I’ll concede I’m not the best writer. My apologies. I should work on clarity and brevity. I hope that doesn’t mean one liners and zingers these days. Hopefully with some more posting experience I’ll get better at it. My intention isn’t to irritate, it’s just to challenge myself when I disagree with others, learn something about myself, and when I’m wrong, right myself. As much as I’d like to have conversations with myself, I think my friends would find reason for concern, so here I am..

            And that’s swineherd (not swine) to you. Cheers.

          • Justin_Case

            My advice to you is to visit Youtube and locate JFK’s speech in Berlin in 1961 and Ronald Reagan’s “Mr. Gorbochev, Tear Down this Wall” speech. Also on Youtube is Obama and his “meddling” speech.

            It’s easy to see the contrast, as you might imagine. JFK and Reagan stood on Communism’s doorstep and uttered those memorable words while Obama stood half a world away from the disgrace in Iran and mumbled.

            He’s the President of the United States, fer cryin’ out loud!.

            Let’s not forget Lech Walesa and the Solidarity movement in Poland. Pope John Paul II received Walesa early on and President George H.W. Bush met with Walesa in Warsaw in 1989. There are many other examples of American leadership in trying times.

            It’s interesting now that the Left acknowledges that we have “furthered the ideals of freedom” in countries that border Iran, instead of their usual insistence that we are “occupiers”.

            This screw up by Obama is a shining example of the incompetence that many of us warned of. But those who thought our country’s blood and treasure were better spent in places like Darfur did not listen.

            I told an gloating Obama supporter a couple of days after the election, “The dog’s caught the bus”. I need to check on him and see how he’s enjoying his victory now.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            Two awesome speeches you refer to!

            “So let me ask you, as I close, to lift your eyes beyond the dangers of today to the hopes of tomorrow, beyond the freedom merely of this city of Berlin and all your country of Germany, to the advance of freedom everywhere, beyond the wall, to the day of peace with justice, beyond yourselves and ourselves to all mankind.” — JFK

            I actually have never read the entirety of Reagan’s Brandenburg speech. I just did. History is

            “Yet, it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world.

            Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German separated from his fellow men.

            Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar.” — Reagan

            ***

            I don’t think Obama’s “meddling” comments amounted to a speech. The analogue you’re looking for so far is his Cairo speech (in which Iran played a very small part). I know it isn’t a popular speech on his part here, but I think that history will ultimately find it admirable (in much the same way I think what the past administration started in Iraq will be looked upon in much brighter light with time). JFK’s Berlin speech and Reagan’s Brandenburg address didn’t change things over night. But they contributed boldly to the space of ideas. The Soviet Union’s guns, propaganda, and heartlessness could not put those flames out.

            I can’t really respond coherently right now, my mind is all over the place. I would just like to say something personal. Last night I was at a bar with some friends. The only thing on my mind were the people I know in Iran. They are much like the friends I was with last night. Young, hopeful, ambitious. But instead of worrying about what to do with a Saturday, the friends I know in Iran were contemplating the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of freedom, for the sake of standing up to despotism., for the sake of a dream they may never live to see.

            I became a naturalized citizen of the USA three years ago and I feel tremendous guilt at the fact that for those three years, I feel like I have taken for granted the freedom of this nation, whether it is the profound feeling of casting a vote that will be counted to the simple pleasure of beers with friends. God bless the US, the flame of freedom, and those in Iran are trying to light their own freer future today.

          • 6eorge Jetson

            I sincerely mean that.

            As to your faith in Obama to do anything other than what is easy, good luck with that. Your Iranian friends should realize that they’re on their own in this one, at least until they gain a convincing upper hand.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            thank you.

          • Justin_Case

            I hope you stick around here.

            In affirmation of President Obama’s recent speeches, our country has made mistakes, but we have spent many years attempting to rectify these. We need a President who spends less time apologizing for these, and more time extolling the sacrifices made by generations of Americans who served and gave their lives to spread freedom and liberty to those who yearned for it.

            Whether or not “meddling” was part of a speech does not matter. The words he chose to use did not go far enough in providing inspiration to those in Iran, among whom are your personal friends. I honestly do not believe that President Obama has America’s interests at heart as much as he has his own political future. He is vastly different from George W. Bush, whose vision in the middle east is once again bearing fruit in Iran. Democracy is contagious.

            Your last sentence, in my opinion, is what needs to be stated more often by Obama and those who support him. We need more and more people like yourself, who admit taking freedom for granted, but who come to realize just how precious it is when events like what is happening in Iran take place.

            Thanks for your response.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            I hope that we live to see the day where the WHO announces the democracy virus has gone pandemic.

            Thank you for your response. Let’s see where things go. History is being written in dramatic fashion right now. At the very least, what is happening on the ground in Iran has reaffirmed my faith in democracy, in man’s primordial desire for freedom, and the truly bold, audacious even, experiment that is the United States and its republic. Let it shine brightly for time immemorial.

          • Justin_Case

            your reply.

            All I can say to your message is, “AMEN”.

          • Mike gamecock DeVine
          • E Pluribus Unum

            then that is an impressive set of credentials. Yet you still miss the boat. E, this is really an easy one. You seem to be listening to the ‘lets not do anything bold’ crowd, using the same philosophy Jimmy Carter did, that the MSRP people do, that Democrats do when it comes to dealing with the deeply dark-hearted regimes.

            My sources are not especially secret, on the ground operatives, etc, etc. I certainly do not speak Farsi, and I’ve never set foot in Iran. My sources are primarily (a) ex-pats here in the US, and lots of them, (b) conservative ME experts that I respect, and (c) a large number of US and Iraqi soldiers who currently and recently worked that Iranian frontier and deal with what we might call the ugly underbelly of the current oligarchy. [I am locked in to certain American units by association.] They also work closely with the dissidents who have now gone public (one can see how Iraqi soldiers trying to stem the flow of Iranian meddling might find a friend in the people trying to topple the regime from the inside).

            If I am to believe what I am told, the people from the inside are telling our soldiers and Iraqi soldiers (agents is probably a better term) that they want the US to speak out openly in support. That is current, this-week information. They are saying that while the election’s result was entirely expected, they are surprised that the protesting has gotten this much traction (they thought one more round might do it). They said the public has become so jaded with the press arm of the regime that nothing is taken at face value.

            It is a given that the current regime will loudly cry that the insurrection is a bought-and-paid-for US operation, whether there’s any truth to that or not. Indeed, in spite of Bambi’s best efforts to provide no help to the movement, he’s getting blamed regardless.

            You seem to think that a couple of tepid statements by Bambi more than offset his obvious overtures to the mullahs (and his de facto condemnation of Israel). Nope, that conclusion is one that an academian or a wuss Republican or an Obama supporter might make. But the message to the movement runs strongly toward “the US can’t be counted on anymore”. And it is viewed as not positive.

            That’s what my peeps tell me. Emphatically.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            Firstly, I haven’t mentioned this, but you’ve got an excellent moniker. I like it a lot.

            Secondly, you’re definitely in the loop. That’s great. We need people like you to be in tune. It’s how we can most effectively advance the interests of the United States and the interests of freedom.

            I think this is what it comes down to for me. Beyond the anecdotal, the often tenuous analogies between social movements of the past and what is happening in Iran, etc., I am very skeptical of the marginal effect of the Obama administration jumping even more than they are. I do not doubt that they would like to see the opposition successfully push the Iranian state toward greater freedom and a clear rule of law, and their statements, however carefully measured, do suggest as much. To be clear, I do not think they should just sit silent. But, I don’t think something akin to a “today we are all Georgians” type statement is necessary or even needed. At the end of the day, whoever is in power, we have to deal with Iran.

            When I have a chance tonight I’m going to look through some journals to see if there hasn’t been a study of some sorts on this very subject. I’m sure I’ll find some interesting stuff and I will try to write a diary entry on it.

            Thanks for the thoughtful discussion. Let’s do it again.

            Best, e.

        • eburke

          You may have missed the TOTUS proclaim yesterday that the US should not ‘meddle’ in Iranian affiars, but I’m pretty sure the Iranian dissidents heard it loud and clear.

        • ocleverone

          why are the large majority of the protestors signs written in English? Isn’t Persian the official language of Iran? Could it be that the protesters are sending a message to the free, English speaking countries of the world?

          Just a thought.

          • eumaios_the_swineherd

            The opposition is definitely trying to frame their messages in a way that they will be heard. They know that state television is not going to broadcast their protests within Iran. But they do know that if the images and film make it out, which has been the case (although one has to wonder how much HASN’T made it out of Iran), it will be an international community watching. I have seen signs in French, Spanish, and Russian (which I found odd).

            On another note, it might also be an issue of selection bias. Editors of websites, newspapers, news broadcasts, etc. will probably choose a photo or clip of protesters holding up posters in English than in Farsi.

            But you are definitely right.

          • ocleverone

            Aren’t most members of the international community considered “Western”?

      • eumaios_the_swineherd

        A young Iranian poet wrote a poem I really enjoyed. This is off the top of my head and loosely translated, but maybe the point will be conveyed:

        Two things enchant me in the sky:
        blue without borders,
        and god.

        One is seen,
        yet I know it is not,
        and the other invisible,
        yet I know it is.

    • Gyorc Nacain

      …IIRC Congress passes resolutions all the time. It’s not exactly an earth-shattering event. To illustrate my point, a transcript of the show The West Wing:

      JORDAN
      None. No force and effect. The following is a sampling of non-binding joint
      resolutions
      from the 106th Congress.

      LEO
      I have a meeting.

      JORDAN
      A resolution in support of Ohio’s state motto. A resolution fostering
      friendship and
      cooperation with the people of Mongolia.

      LEO
      I have a meeting.

      JORDAN
      A resolution recognizing the contributions of Bristol, Tennese, to the
      development of
      country music.

      LEO
      I’m sorry, I have a budget meeting.

      JORDAN
      A resolution in support of Little League baseball.

      (link)

      I don’t know if this is the same type of resolution, but it doesn’t appear to really take action, and having sat in on House proceedings once, all they do is stupid trivial stuff with no effect.

      That being said, I agree with you in general, though I can’t claim to have much knowledge of the area.

  • texas214

    If the President of the USA cannot say anything more than “something has happened in Iran” then we have failed as a country. If he cannot even give the a generic message that ” the USA stands with open, fair and honest elections that allow for democraticly elected leaders, and that we will stand behind that principal” our moral standing within the world is diminished.

  • mom2oneson

    and Khameini has already said they will do a recount. The government allowed them to protest. He needs to be more precise with this stuff. M isn’t someone new to the scene has been involved with the government there for a long time.

    It looks like this resolution is a copy and paste from yahoo news. The people are protesting for their vote they aren’t trying to take down the whole government.

    • mom2oneson

      There are many people there if not the majority that do not want the extreme fundamentalism that the revolution brought and the government breathing down their necks all the time. Many things that we say as human rights violations there are no issue to them. I am sure most of the population over 25 have no issue with women being required to see a midwife and get a certificate that she has an intact hymen before marriage or that a man can be jailed until he marries a woman he slept with. (In some rural areas they just may stone both of them) or a married woman committing adultry can be killed or some of their other punishments we would see as cruel for crimes and think it’s bizarre they are even crimes. I am sure most or all do not want the government like it is but that doesn’t mean they want freedom like we think of it here. I think we should be more precise on exactly what they are fighting for.

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahHoPhvuOpY

  • Pingback: Homepage