Iran on the brink of civil war...

[Grunthos]

... over the fraudulent re-election of Ahmadinejiad.

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2009/06/iran-on-fire.php

Let's hope so; it's time and well past time for the mullahs to go.

[Tonus]

A great opportunity for the US and the world, too bad we're stuck with the current administration. Expect Obama to legitimize the illegal Iranian regime instead of seizing the opportunity to really put the screws to them.

[Grunthos]

Obambi has got his head stuck in the same bucket no-win situation that Carter shoved his foot into, back in the 70's.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/137/20090616/760/twl-analysis-no-win-situation-for-obama.html

The Obama administration faces a dilemma over how to respond to Iran's disputed election. Strong criticism could backfire but a muted response leaves an impression of weakness.

So far senior U.S. officials have given a guarded response to the disputed vote, which sparked violent protests after hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's was declared the easy victor over ex-prime minister Mirhossein Mousavi.

Several analysts said on Monday the White House was in a no-win situation but the best option was to stand back rather than inject U.S. views into the Iranian political debate.



That's where you end up when you try to work the political angles, rather than taking a stand on principles like freedom and democracy.

What a putz this academician be.

[Tonus]

That's where you end up when you try to work the political angles, rather than taking a stand on principles like freedom and democracy.

What a putz this academician be.

Yeah, it's very telling that he feels that the most honest and straightforward approach "could backfire." Hey, I understand that in politics you cannot always play it straight, but in this case a clear and unambiguous condemnation could also lead to a change in Iran that isn't adequately covered by the term "positive." That's worth the risk of it "backfiring." Especially since having it backfire would really leave us in the same place we would be anyway, with Iran flipping us the bird while they continue to work towards a viable nuclear weapon.

[Shady]

Especially since having it backfire would really leave us in the same place we would be anyway, with Iran flipping us the bird while they continue to work towards a viable nuclear weapon.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

[Tonus]

And, as expected, (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124523854750623001.html) Iran blames the USA for the political unrest. In other words, the same reaction that we would have seen had Obama condemned them in clear and unmistakable language.

One notable quote:

"They just want Mousavi because he told them he will give them freedom," said one Ahmadinejad supporter.

What a crazy idea, voting for a guy who promises more freedom.

[Shady]

"They just want Mousavi because he told them he will give them freedom," said one Ahmadinejad supporter.

Ahahahahlskhfkljsdfjksdks. Those Amadinejad supporters are so smart. I'll bet he figured that out all by himself.

:blink:

[Grunthos]

Fact is, it IS our fault... for having a democracy that so far hasn't completely failed.

The young folks in Iran want a shot at the chance we've had.

[Shady]

The Iran Resolution passed the House 405-1. Ron Paul was the only person idiot opposed.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-approves-iran-bill-405-1-2009-06-19.html

[Dr. L]

Being a Libertarian, and Ron Paul being one of the few Libertarian bigwigs, I am curious about what that bill is supposed to do, and why he opposed it.

[Shady]

I'm also curious about the reason behind his opposition.

And, afaik, the bill merely shows approval for the protesting dissidents in Iran, and disapproval for any actions the government might take against them. To me, that basically means America has the OK to frown on any retaliation the state may take against the protesters.

While that's not a really big deal, as silent as the leader of the free world has been about this situation, I'd say it's a win for the free world in some form or another.

[Dr. L]

I see. I've also heard it floating around that Paul is something of an isolationist. Which may mean he's sticking to his guns about wanting the federal government to keep out of most foreign affairs. Though I may be wrong, but that's just a guess at his intentions.

[Shady]

I've heard Ron Paul is a lunatic. That's my guess about his intentions.

[Dr. L]

Well, giving Paul credit for one thing, he seems to be one of the few people on the upper ladder that is familiar with that old piece of obscure literature called "The United States Constitution" is. Agree with him or not, I find that appealing.

Though not many know the constitution that well. I didn't know anything beyond the first two of the Bill of Rights until I went to a Private Vocational school. That stuff should be drilled in our heads every year starting with fourth grade.

[Grunthos]

I have my copy right here on my desk... even though I know it pretty well.

[Tonus]

Ron Paul can be accurately described by either term. He is an isolationist, and he is nuttier than a squirrel. His opposition to this bill is due in larger part to the former.

[Shady]

Ron Paul can be accurately described by either term. He is an isolationist, and he is nuttier than a squirrel. His opposition to this bill is due in larger part to the former.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Some could say they are mutually inclusive. His isolationist ideas were/are a big part of what turned me off of him. It's just not practical. It's a great ideal, but not such a great idea.

[Grunthos]

The only 2 ways any country has ever successfully pursued an isolationist policy are to be completely independent in all resources, AND either 1) be damned near impossible to reach with an army, or 2) have nothing at all in the way of natural resources, or open space, or decent climate, or arable land, or a land route to somewhere else, or anything else that anyone else on the planet might possibly want.

Note that all of these conditions can change with time - - Japan was able to be isolationist until sailing technology made it easy to reach; Arabia was completely free of international entanglements (even of government in any real sense) until oil was discovered... cases in point go on and on.

And your own good intentions have no influence on your ability to stay isolated - - that's dictated by the good intentions, or lack thereof, of EVERY other country or group, individually and together.

And as we all know, the actual answer to the question, "Can't we all just get along?" has been proven time and again to be "apparently not."

[S Carver Orne]

NSFW Explicit!

4uWqlK87y8w

[Ythogtha]

Her name was Neda Soltani. She was 16. Apparently she was shot by a sniper. Brave guys. There is news about it on the interner. Have no time to post article.

[Shady]

I can't embed this video, but it's worth a watch.

In Iran, riot police are throwing tear gas grenades at a crowd of protesters to hold then back. Some people start throwing them back, and then lots of people do. Then the crowd rushes the police, and the police run away in fear.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9ndxl_battle-w-police-tehran-iran-june-20_news

I never thought I would live to see the day that the desire for democracy would grip the middle east in such a way.

[Tonus]

The timing is so bad for those poor people, though. There's a President in the White House who seems more interested in seeing the whole thing blow over so that he can get back to not having a dialogue with the Iranian "leadership." It's embarrassing.

Edit to add: And the sickest part of this will be that if there really is a revolution in Iran and the mullahcracy is overthrown, Obama will use it as a feather in his cap as soon as he is able to.

[S Carver Orne]

There's a President in the White House who's too chicken shit to actually do anything for fear it might hurt his socialist image.

Fixed that for you. :happy:

[Dr. L]

How many votes of ours where cast by dead people, and others who were somehow away from the booth and voting at the same time here?

Thousands upon thousands of illegitimate votes... and all we get is a tea party, covered solely by Fox news, and lampooned by everyone else.

Is it sad that the Iranians are fighting so hard for a scrap of freedom, yet an openly major crime was committed here and there aren't enough people caring to actually question the prospect of who the people really wanted for president?

There are many disgruntled people here, likely in the majority, but they're stricken with fear of our own damned media. The only thing that has happened so far is that Obama has been voted the national Gun salesman of the year. So, we're at a stalemate, watching this idiot masturbate as he writes fluffy letters of "stern warning" to North Korea. Why is this country so afraid of action, in one of the few countries that permits it?

But, I know what people are waiting for. They're waiting for an inarguable, blatant threat to our rights. But that will be hard to come by, because while we're looking at the sky for the clouds to start falling, little snakes keep slithering past our feet.


Kudos to Iranian citizens for their bravery in this. I really admire them now...

[S Carver Orne]

Her name was Neda Soltani.

His name was Robert Paulson.

[Tonus]

There's a President in the White House who seems more interested in seeing the whole thing blow over so that he can get back to not having a dialogue with the Iranian "leadership." It's embarrassing.

As if on cue... (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hMtZsaQT4cTxcgA51WrpiUS6cWGg)

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States said Monday its invitations were still standing for Iranian diplomats to attend July 4 celebrations at US embassies despite the crackdown on opposition supporters.

President Barack Obama's administration said earlier this month it would invite Iran to US embassy barbecues for the national holiday for the first time since the two nations severed relations following the 1979 Islamic revolution.

"There's no thought to rescinding the invitations to Iranian diplomats," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters.

"We have made a strategic decision to engage on a number of fronts with Iran," Kelly said. "We tried many years of isolation, and we're pursuing a different path now."

Or as Ed Morrissey at HotAir put it: (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/22/ajami-the-education-of-mr-obama/)
They want to have the Iranian regime celebrate Independence Day after brutally repressing a freedom movement in Iran? Sickening.

[Shady]

They want to have the Iranian regime celebrate Independence Day after brutally repressing a freedom movement in Iran? Sickening.

Good grief.



I wonder what Obama's press conference will be about today?

I guess it doesn't really matter. It will outshine any other news for the day/week even if he just stands there talking about his dog.

Master of subversion. And the MSM laps it up like the table scraps it's intended to be. /sigh

[Shady]

How many votes of ours where cast by dead people, and others who were somehow away from the booth and voting at the same time here?

Thousands upon thousands of illegitimate votes... and all we get is a tea party, covered solely by Fox news, and lampooned by everyone else.

Is it sad that the Iranians are fighting so hard for a scrap of freedom, yet an openly major crime was committed here and there aren't enough people caring to actually question the prospect of who the people really wanted for president?

Iran is protesting exactly as we are. The difference being they are not allowed the freedom to do so and are met with strong, often violent, resistance from the government. Half a million protesters in the US does not fit the narrative of the current administration or the liberal MSM, so they don't report it.

As for ACORN, of course there should be a federal investigation into that. But with all the IGs being fired from other investigations, I think we know that's not going to happen. The hope, for now, is that in 2010 the idiots who voted these morons into power will vote them out so that some things can start being challenged. The other hope is that the Republican party can come up with someone better than McCain by 2012 to run against one of the most inept presidents this country has experienced in several decades.

[Grunthos]

Those who can't remember Carter, are doomed to repeat him.

[Little Bug]

You don't need to remember him. You just need an American history class that's worth the money that gets put into it. I wasn't around then, but I know how horrible Carter was. My American history teachers in high school actually taught history to students that wanted to learn though...

[Demented]

His name was Robert Paulson.

OK I got to just say great "Fight Club" reference

[Grunthos]

I just got to say that demented Frank J nailed this one to the door:

Obama the Sociopath
Posted by Frank J. at 12:12 pm
Okay, I can see an argument for not more forcefully condemning Iran and for not breaking off negotiations with them — I mean, I hugely disagree and think we have a sissy for a president, but those arguments at least exist in my universe. What I don’t get is this not rescinding a party invite. For the first time since 1979, Iran is being invited to our Independence Day barbecue. And I guess we’ll hand out moist towelettes on the way in so people can wipe off the blood of the oppressed.

This is so horrible, I expected it to be debunked on Snopes. I don’t mindlessly believe anything bad about Obama; if someone came up to me and said, “Do you know Obama has a secret rape room in the White House where he sodomizes puppies?” I’d say, “Did you know you’re a moron?” And this inviting a oppressive regime in the middle of brutalizing its people to a barbecue sounds made up. It’s like if Kim Jong Il nuked someone and Obama wouldn’t rescind his standing invitation to him to come over and play Rock Band. And to put this in perspective: It was Carter who first stopped inviting Iran.

Obama has finally done it. He’s become more of a capitulating sissy than Carter.

I haven’t even heard how liberals are planning to defend this one, but so far their answer to all of Obama sissiness is that he’s just being smart and not letting emotions let him do anything rash. At what point, though, does turning a blind eye to the suffering of others makes him a sociopath? Isn’t it always the bad guy in the movies who let’s horrible things happen for the greater good?

I hope he’ll at least reconsider inviting Iran over to celebrate America’s Independence. Maybe he can do something less anathema to the spirit of the day, like urinating on George Washington’s grave.

[Dr. L]

Iran is protesting exactly as we are. The difference being they are not allowed the freedom to do so and are met with strong, often violent, resistance from the government. Half a million protesters in the US does not fit the narrative of the current administration or the liberal MSM, so they don't report it.

As for ACORN, of course there should be a federal investigation into that. But with all the IGs being fired from other investigations, I think we know that's not going to happen. The hope, for now, is that in 2010 the idiots who voted these morons into power will vote them out so that some things can start being challenged. The other hope is that the Republican party can come up with someone better than McCain by 2012 to run against one of the most inept presidents this country has experienced in several decades.

You make good points. Our tea parties are similar, except less forceful, and less often. I can only hope that more people attend the next one, in light of recent events. And ACORN... bleh. Just bleh.


And I've been wondering where the line is with this guy. He seriously is inviting the Iranian officials to our own White House's Independence Day Barbecue? I think that really does show precisely how much the Commander-in-Thief values our own freedoms.

[Shady]

You make good points. Our tea parties are similar, except less forceful, and less often. I can only hope that more people attend the next one, in light of recent events. And ACORN... bleh. Just bleh.

Less forceful, yes. Less often? Only slightly. They've been happening with great regularity since April 15th all over the country (which has so far been the only national protest). Most of the ones since then have been at the local level targeting local government, state reps and congressmen. From what I understand, there will be a great many people protesting outside of their local ABC affiliates tonight during the airing of Obama's "Healthcare" interview, or whatever it is. Tea Party protests are still going very strong, and in some very unlikely places, like California. I don't think a week passes by without Glenn Reynolds (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/) giving an update about some tea party protest somewhere.

I have a feeling the national tea party of July 4th will have a far bigger turnout than that of April 15th, as well.

[Grunthos]

And I've been wondering where the line is with this guy.

Fog has no lines.

He seriously is inviting the Iranian officials to our own White House's Independence Day Barbecue? I think that really does show precisely how much the Commander-in-Thief values our own freedoms.

The Administration, through the State Department, is now trying to defuse this particular (most recent of many) Carteresque blunder by pointing out that the Iranian diplomats have, to a man, refused the invitations.

No, I didn't make that up:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=TX-PAR-LKS64&show_article=1

[Dr. L]

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m128/Dr_Larkin/000Giovanni-facepalm.jpg

[Grunthos]

I'm betting they consider it a "one up" victory in diplomacy, too..."well, we invited them... see, we're being the bigger person!"

Thog, you damn sig is making me want chicken wings...

[Little Bug]

I'm betting they consider it a "one up" victory in diplomacy, too..."well, we invited them... see, we're being the bigger person!"

Thog, you damn sig is making me want chicken wings...

You mean Luberduber. Thog doesn't have a sig.

[Grunthos]

You mean Luberduber. Thog doesn't have a sig.

You're right... I can't think while wing-lust burns in mah brain.

[Grunthos]

Update: The White House finally decided to retract the invitations - - after the Iranian government today slaughtered its own citizens in the streets. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/24/iran.election/index.html


U.S. Takes Back July 4 Invitations to Iranians

No RSVPs from Iranian diplomats offered a chance to party down on July 4th with U.S. officials at embassies around the world means no more invitations.

FOXNews.com

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

The White House announced Wednesday that it has rescinded the invitations made to Iranian diplomats who may want to barbecue and watch fireworks to celebrate Independence Day.

"As you all know many weeks ago the administration extended an invitation to celebrate the freedom that this country enjoys. not surprisingly based on what we see in Tehran, no one has RSVP'd," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

"Understand that July 4th allows us to celebrate the freedom and liberty that we enjoy. I don't think it's surprising that no one has signed up to come given the events of the last few days. Those invitations will be no longer extended."

The Iranian government's crackdown on protesters has raised questions about the propriety of opening U.S. doors to Iranians government officials.

President Obama on Tuesday linked the attendance of Iranian diplomats to the potential for warming between the two nations.

The United States and Iran don't have formal diplomatic relations but Obama said that it's up to the Iranian diplomats to decide whether to use an invitation to attend embassy festivities as an opening.

"I think that we have said that if Iran chooses a path that abides by international norms and principles, then we are interested in healing some of the wounds of 30 years in terms of U.S.-Iranian relations. But that is a choice that the Iranians are going to have to make," Obama said during a press conference in the White House briefing room.

Late last month, the State Department first encouraged officials at all U.S. embassies and consulates to ask their Iranian counterparts to attend the July 4 parties, which generally feature speeches about American values, fireworks, hot dogs and hamburgers.

The notice said that the posts "may invite representatives from the government of Iran" to the events.

As of Monday, State Department spokesman Ian Kelley said the invite would stand. Kelly said that no one is going to take back offers for Iranian officials to join the festivities, even as the Islamic Republic's leaders threaten violence against protesters at home demonstrating against allegedly fraudulent presidential election results.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/iranians-responding-july-th-embassy-invite/

This country is being run by a bunch of baffoons, people.

[Dr. L]

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m128/Dr_Larkin/000Giovanni-facepalm.jpg

[S Carver Orne]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v368/profmgmiller/Obamadoh.jpg

[Tonus]

They talk as if they actually, finally made the decision to rescind the invites. But all that happened is that the Iranians told us to screw off, and rejected all of the invitations. So they are "not extending" the invitations that the Iranians already told them they could jam up their asses.

I'm sure the press will report that the President "got tough" with Iran. Just like that guy who curses out another person... after the person is no longer within earshot.

[Dr. L]

Oh... he scoffed!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090626/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama


As offended as I am about him standing in the presence of Angela Merkel representing us, he finally did something to really condemn Iran's government. He scoffed!

[Edmaster]

My post from a now-locked thread on UGOP, made shortly after Obama's press conference a few days ago:

Watch the first few minutes, in particular:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/pol...conf.06.23.cnn

Because we haven't been talking SERIUS DISCUSAN for awhile now.

Well, jee, Mr. President, do you REALLY condemn these actions? Are you sure about that? Do you need ANOTHER week to decide? Or two weeks so you can change your mind yet again?

Honestly, does anyone even believe anything The Anointed One (or worse, Gibbs) has to say anymore?

I mean, Christ. "We condemn these actions" but we "respect their sovereignty" and "do not meddle" in Iran's affairs. Meanwhile hundreds of protesters are killed, and thousands more are beaten or imprisoned every day. He "condemns" these actions but does nothing to even encourage the Iranian people to stand up for their own freedom from a tyrannical theocratic regime.

In non-political words, Obama continues to both do and say NOTHING while attempting to appease both sides. It almost seems as if he's just waiting for all the protesters to be executed so he can continue on with his pipe dream of "sitting down" with Iran, as if his eloquent speech is enough to dissuade them from continuing to seek nuclear armament. Is he really that egotistical?

[Dr. L]

"So when a beautiful Iranian woman, Neda Agha Soltan, was shot dead in the streets of Iran during a protest on Saturday and a video of her death ricocheted around the World Wide Web, Obama valiantly responded by ... going out for an ice cream cone. (Masterful!)" - Ann Coulter

I'm starting to like these Fox News nuts more and more every day.

[Tonus]

The Iranian government's Guardian Council will re-count a random sampling of 10% of the vote totals. So far, they find that Amhadinejad has gained votes.

To say the least, this has become a resounding embarrassment to the mullahs, who made sure to have their thugs in place before they announce the results of the recount. They are now a police state, not a theocracy, since they completely destroyed any trust in the religious leadership when Khameini basically told the country that Allah himself had certified the results.