I really hope Team Dear Leader is paying attention to these events. Of course, once the revolution is finished and the regime has been disposed of, watch for Dear Leader to claim that he helped and supported the revolution by not meddling...but, maybe on the other hand, given his less than stellar track record of end results of meddling, maybe that was a good idea after all. Somehow though, I doubt the next leader of Iran will view his silence on the rape, torture and murder of possibly thousands of Iranian protestors as "a good thing". Stay tuned though, there is still much more to come from these brave Iranian people.
-----------------------------------------
From Pajamas Media
September 21st, 2009 9:59 am
The Death Spiral of the Islamic Republic III
Michael Leeden
Marx would have delighted in the events of the 18th, all over Iran. Groucho, that is, for on the 18th the supreme leader and all his co-conspirators were transformed from figures of awe to objects of ridicule. As Machiavelli likes to remind us, the most dangerous thing for any leader is to earn the contempt of his followers, and the Iranian people made it luminously clear that they would no longer be intimidated. The regime had launched a vicious repression following the challenges to the “election results” of June 12th. For a hundred days they had killed, raped, tortured and threatened. In the runup to the 18th, the stern face of the leader of the Revolutionary Guards had appeared on television and his confident voice had been heard on the radio, warning that anyone who dared wear green, or carry protest signs, or chant criticism of the Islamic Republic, would be treated “very harshly.” His words were like so much spittle in a storm; among the many chants in the streets that day, you could hear “rape, murder and torture will not silence us.”
When a tyrannical regime dies, you can see the symptoms in the little things. Late Friday afternoon, after millions (yes, millions–this according to Le Monde, France 2, and L’Express, with the BBC saying that the demonstrations were bigger than those at the time of the Revolution) of Greens mobbed the streets and squares of more than thirty towns and cities to call for the end of the regime, there was a soccer game in Azadi Stadium in Tehran. It holds about a hundred thousand fans, and it was full of men wearing green and carrying green balloons. When state-run tv saw what was happening, the color was drained from the broadcast, and viewers saw the game in black and white. And when the fans began to chant “Death to the Dictator,” “Death to Russia,” and “Death to Putin, Chavez and Nasrallah, enemies of Iran,” the sound was shut off. So the game turned into a silent movie.
But the censors forgot about the radio, and the microphones stayed open, so that millions of listeners could hear the sounds of the revolution. And in Azadi Stadium, as in most parts of the country, the security officers either walked away or joined the party.
You will not have heard such stories, nor read about them in our “media,” which have raised denial of the day’s major events to an art form of late. Rather like the Iranian regime, which used to have an enormous influence on the way citizens thought, the major broadcasters and dead-tree scribblers have also become objects of ridicule. On Sunday morning, Supreme Leader Khamenei proclaimed that the demonstrations had been an enormous success for the regime, but anyone looking at the pictures could see that he was short on sleep. So would you if you had heard the thunderous shouts of “Death to the Dictator” during the night. Khamenei’s claim was greeted with ridicule.
Sunday also brought open contempt from some of the most revered leaders of the Shi’ite world. Khamene’i had declared Sunday the end of Ramadan, a day of feasts and prayers, one of the most joyous of the Muslim year. Such a proclamation is supposed to be canonical, for Khamene’i speaks in the name of all Muslims. But fifteen Grand Ayatollahs like Sistani (from Najaf, Iraq), Montazeri, Taheri and Sanei rejected Khamenei’s reading of the moon, and said that the feast could not begin until Monday. No one could get away with such an open challenge to the supreme leader’s theological authority unless there were a considerable consensus that his rule was illegitimate. And it’s even worse for him: across the country, many mosques were closed on Sunday. The faithful were told to go home and fast, and come back the next day for prayer.
No wonder Khamenei looks tired. And in keeping with the avalanche of errors, today the Revolutionary Guards’ favorite newspaper kept the whole thing going, insisting that the supreme leader was right after all. Stupid and irrelevant, a classic example of people in a hole who keep digging deeper.
These little stories illustrate a great event, indeed a world-changing event: the death of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Khamenei and Ahmadinejad, and the rest of the evil empire in Tehran, are all dead men walking. We don’t know the schedule for the funeral yet, but Iranians know it’s on the agenda. One will get you ten at my betting window that, aside from a very thin veneer of top officials (for whom there is no hope, for they will fulfill the demand of the nightly rooftop chants), anyone who is anyone in Iran today is trying to make a deal with Mousavi and Karroubi. They are all whispering that their hearts are green, and always were green.
Khamenei & Co. certainly know this, as they know they are being betrayed by some very high-ranking people. And the exodus is under way; by the end of the week we will see some important representatives of the Islamic Republic resign their posts, for they do not wish to be associated with it any longer.
Look at what didn’t happen in the streets last Friday. Not a shot was fired at the millions of demonstrators in Tehran. There are YouTubes of police fraternizing with the Greens. There are stories of Revolutionary Guardsmen helping the demonstrators, and even the Basij didn’t dare to attack or arrest, with a handful of exceptions (one of which is notable: in Tabriz, if I remember correctly, they started to round up some people, and the crowd turned on them, freed the would-be victims, and beat the Basijis to death).
And look at what else didn’t happen: nobody tried to arrest Mousavi or Karroubi. Somebody tried to stab Khatami in the street, but it was thwarted, and Karroubi has been told to show up at a Revolutionary Tribunal to respond to charges of spreading false claims of rape and murder in the prisons. But this subpoena, which previously terrified the recipient, is no longer threatening. Karroubi has proclaimed it is good news, for it will give him the opportunity to present the evidence, which is iron-clad, and can no longer be destroyed (copies of documents, audios and videos are now in the hands of Green supporters in Europe and the United States).
So we have a regime of zombies in Tehran, but they can still do a lot of damage, to Iranians and to us. Early last week Khamenei summoned Afghan terrorist chieftain Gulbadin Hekhmatiar to Tehran, and told him to step up attacks against American and other Allied forces. Other Iranian-supported terrorist groups have received similar instructions.
Under the circumstances, you’d think that your government would be talking to the Greens. But you’d be wrong. Perhaps Hillary Clinton thought she was telling the truth when she claimed, a few days after the insurrection of June 12th, that “behind the scenes” we were helping the Iranian opposition. If so, she shouldn’t have said anything about it, but I don’t think she was well informed. There are no contacts between the American Government and the leaders of the opposition. One should not expect the new government to look kindly upon a President Obama who publicly sweet-talked the Tehran butchers, and all but begged Khamenei for a few minutes of his precious time. The same applies to the Europeans, all of whom scrambled for oil and other commercial contracts, and none of whom talked to the Green leaders.
As so often, Martin Luther King Jr. summed it up perfectly: “In the end we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/09/21/the-death-spiral-of-the-islamic-republic-iii/
Showing posts with label thugocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thugocracy. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Is the Obama Administration Shielding The Black Panthers?
I am inclined to think it is and here is why. During the elections, men were filmed standing in front of the doors of a polling location; wearing jackboots and uniforms and both men held batons...and from time to time were seen slapping them menancingly into the palms of their hands. The police were called and arrests were made. The case made its way through the courts and here is what has happened since.
From the WSJ:
1. The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)
One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"
2. In the first week of January, the Justice Department(still under Bush's watch)filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice's request to support its lawsuit.
3. When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default.
4...the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that's already illegal under existing law.
5. one of the defendants who walked was Jerry Jackson, a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and a credentialed poll watcher for the Democratic Party last Election Day.
6. on July 30 six career lawyers at Justice who had recommended continuing to pursue the case were overruled by Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli—a top administration political appointee
7. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights voted on Aug.7 to send a letter to Justice expanding its own investigation and demanding more complete answers. "We believe the Department's defense of its actions thus far undermines respect for rule of law," its letter stated. It noted "the peculiar logic" of one Justice argument, that defendants' failure to show up in court was a reason for dismissing the case: "Such an argument sends a perverse message to wrongdoers—that attempts at voter suppression will be tolerated so long as the persons who engage in them are careful not to appear in court to answer the government's complaint."
8. Black Panther Party Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, said on Fox News just after the election that his activities at the polling station were part of a nationwide effort. Mr. Shabazz added that the Black Panther activities in Philadelphia were justified due to "an emergency situation."
You can read the rest of the article at WSJ, but those are the main points.
Why is Eric(Americans are cowards) Holder protecting the Black Panthers? Why were these thugs allowed to intimidate American citizens at polling places? Finally, a question that has been gnawing at me for some time---are we, the average American citizen on our own now when not even the Department of Justice will prosecute blatant thuggery?
From the WSJ:
1. The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)
One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"
2. In the first week of January, the Justice Department(still under Bush's watch)filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice's request to support its lawsuit.
3. When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default.
4...the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that's already illegal under existing law.
5. one of the defendants who walked was Jerry Jackson, a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and a credentialed poll watcher for the Democratic Party last Election Day.
6. on July 30 six career lawyers at Justice who had recommended continuing to pursue the case were overruled by Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli—a top administration political appointee
7. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights voted on Aug.7 to send a letter to Justice expanding its own investigation and demanding more complete answers. "We believe the Department's defense of its actions thus far undermines respect for rule of law," its letter stated. It noted "the peculiar logic" of one Justice argument, that defendants' failure to show up in court was a reason for dismissing the case: "Such an argument sends a perverse message to wrongdoers—that attempts at voter suppression will be tolerated so long as the persons who engage in them are careful not to appear in court to answer the government's complaint."
8. Black Panther Party Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, said on Fox News just after the election that his activities at the polling station were part of a nationwide effort. Mr. Shabazz added that the Black Panther activities in Philadelphia were justified due to "an emergency situation."
You can read the rest of the article at WSJ, but those are the main points.
Why is Eric(Americans are cowards) Holder protecting the Black Panthers? Why were these thugs allowed to intimidate American citizens at polling places? Finally, a question that has been gnawing at me for some time---are we, the average American citizen on our own now when not even the Department of Justice will prosecute blatant thuggery?
Friday, May 8, 2009
Call me Paranoid
I don't believe I am alone when I say every day I can feel the noose of tyrany drawing tighter and tighter around the personal freedoms that I have enjoyed these 40+ years. I am not sure I even believe that a socialist state is the end game for the current thugocracy in power. I'm starting to believe it is totalitarianism--I sure hope not, since socialism is faster to type.
Back in the winter I posted a few blogs voicing my concern about the doctrine that isn't the Fairness Doctrine and was promtly blasted for contributing to the uneducated redneck stereotype because I didn't fully "comprehend" my blogging subject for the day. Well, I disagree.
In the past months I have watched a local columnist link local "right wing" bloggers to Tim McVeigh, Missouri issue an alert for people who oppose the current administration,support pro-life,Israel,the Constitution, Ron Paul, the One wants to raise an army of Obamites, the FBI inflitrate and photograph the TEA parties, the Dept of Homeland Security classify returning veterans, religious, pro-lifers,Constitutionalist, etc...as potential terrorists, then the article posted by Butch Cassidy yesterday about the protections for sexual deviants over the rights of ordinary citizens, and then this gem today, HR 1966. This act is designed to protect people from cyberbullying (how that makes any sense I have no clue since no one forces another person to log onto a website) with this type of language in the bill
[Sec. 881. Cyberbullying
`(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.]
What?? Does that mean if I am engaged in an internet debate with a fellow living in England and I hurt his feelings --that he can then file charges against me under this new bill? Who decides my "intent"? Or more locally, what if I'm engaged in defending myself from being called raaaacist for the umpteenth time and I hurt someone's feelings--am I then guilty of intent to cause substantial emotional distress by using electronic means in a repeated and hostile manner?
Now, I know the first intent of this bill was to protect youngsters on the internet in the wake of the tragic death of Megan Meir---but, Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Los Angeles isn't happy with just protecting young people. In the terminally stupid mode of those liberals among us who just do not understand that we will fight to the death any attempts to try to remove our right of free speech,she has extended that protection one giant step further---to everyone.
So, riddle me this--if the doctrine that isn't the fairness doctrine says we all have to play nice and get along or go to jail--will it be applied equally and fairly to both sides? Doubtful. Fairness only seems to be something the current administration applies when it benefits one side--their side. The preferred method of operation for a thugocracy it seems.
Back in the winter I posted a few blogs voicing my concern about the doctrine that isn't the Fairness Doctrine and was promtly blasted for contributing to the uneducated redneck stereotype because I didn't fully "comprehend" my blogging subject for the day. Well, I disagree.
In the past months I have watched a local columnist link local "right wing" bloggers to Tim McVeigh, Missouri issue an alert for people who oppose the current administration,support pro-life,Israel,the Constitution, Ron Paul, the One wants to raise an army of Obamites, the FBI inflitrate and photograph the TEA parties, the Dept of Homeland Security classify returning veterans, religious, pro-lifers,Constitutionalist, etc...as potential terrorists, then the article posted by Butch Cassidy yesterday about the protections for sexual deviants over the rights of ordinary citizens, and then this gem today, HR 1966. This act is designed to protect people from cyberbullying (how that makes any sense I have no clue since no one forces another person to log onto a website) with this type of language in the bill
[Sec. 881. Cyberbullying
`(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.]
What?? Does that mean if I am engaged in an internet debate with a fellow living in England and I hurt his feelings --that he can then file charges against me under this new bill? Who decides my "intent"? Or more locally, what if I'm engaged in defending myself from being called raaaacist for the umpteenth time and I hurt someone's feelings--am I then guilty of intent to cause substantial emotional distress by using electronic means in a repeated and hostile manner?
Now, I know the first intent of this bill was to protect youngsters on the internet in the wake of the tragic death of Megan Meir---but, Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Los Angeles isn't happy with just protecting young people. In the terminally stupid mode of those liberals among us who just do not understand that we will fight to the death any attempts to try to remove our right of free speech,she has extended that protection one giant step further---to everyone.
So, riddle me this--if the doctrine that isn't the fairness doctrine says we all have to play nice and get along or go to jail--will it be applied equally and fairly to both sides? Doubtful. Fairness only seems to be something the current administration applies when it benefits one side--their side. The preferred method of operation for a thugocracy it seems.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The breeze is picking up
Have you ever been outside in just a lightweight jacket and an unexpectedly chill breeze blows over you, you know that brrrrr moment when you sort of duck your head down and hunch your shoulders up to try to protect the back of your neck from the cold wind?
This is one of those moments for me...another one brought to you courtesy of the obamabots in their relentless pursuit of an obamanation. A student was supsended for publishing his conservative website...I kid you not.
and then there is this...
and this...
Monday, October 27, 2008
We're sorry this video is no longer available.
Imagine that. I posted this video a few weeks ago. This video that showed the the messiah campaiging in Kenya for his cousin Odinga was pulled. The short version: the messiah went to Kenya and campaigned for Odinga(a big no-no) Odinga lost, but not before he signed a pact with the Islamic extremist in his country to begin sharia if he won. Don't know what sharia is? Google it. It's worse than you can imagine. After Odinga lost, he incited his followers to "demonstrate" I think the word demonstrate must lose alot in translation when it is spoken in Kenya because thousands of his political opponents were hacked to death by machetes or burned alive in their homes and churches. Interestingly, not one single mosque was damaged. not one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)