One sided is one side, no matter what side you are on
US President Barack Obama is taking fire from all sides on his position, or some would say lack of it, on Iran. Some say he hasn't done enough and others say he has done too much: the US is meddling.
Only the most uninformed would argue that has said nothing to support or inspire the Iranian riots. Indeed, Obama has given the Iran rioters his nod of approval by making clear that their "robust" action "inspires" him, if not the world. He clearly supports the Iranian riots with approval. To Obama throwing, bricks, wielding clubs, breaking windows and burning cars and buildings is just an exuberate youth expressing themselves.
Obama calls stoning the police, breaking windows, burning cars and buildings, using clubs and attaching police stations in his words, "peaceful." Yet, this same conduct in WTO protests in Seattle, at the 1968 democratic convention in Chicago, or at Kent State and Jackson where we shots students, or the Watts riots, or L.A. after Rodney King got off in Van Nuys, were intolerable to many and the rule of law..
Well, finally he sees that something isn't quite right. This peaceful expression of democracy is now "outrageous." A reporter asked, "What took you so long?" To realize what? Not that brick throwing, club wielding or burning down Tehran was "Outrageous," but, Obama sees the riots in Iran as "outrageous," because the mullahs want the riots stopped. Because they use threats and force to try to stop the riots they are oppressive. Hum. Over 400 cities were recently burned in Europe. Is that what to mullahs are supposed to allow? Obama apparently thinks so.
If this is the lens through which Obama sees the world, we are in big trouble. He has no sense of reality nor of right or wrong. Sure, the mullahs are an easy target, but, fairness requires you see the whole picture. You can't just see what you want. Pick and choose the parts in order to perpetuate a predetermined course of war with the bad guy.
Look at the whole picture. One sided is one side, no matter what side you are on.
For me it is about the truth, at least as I see it. Democrat or Republican, right or left, don't really matter. Being a liar or one who can't see his hand in front of his face or one who believes that "we" believe he can't see his hand, is what matters.
If the truth isn't good enough, then it is just not good enough. We identify a bad guy and distort everything to prove he is worse than he is. The bad guy becomes the monster threatening the world and a sense of urgency to destroy the monster permeates the West and Isreal.
I am not defending Iran, but, let's get real. What are they supposed to do? Nothing. Just play the fiddle while the country burns.
It may be argued that they have been fairly restrained in view of the size of the rioting crowds and the level of violence they direct at the authorities.
Wouldn't you, as a country, be a little concerned when riots break out so quickly and ferociously just after an election which by many accounts was at worst close. The spark for the fire was the scream: "fixed." No real evidence other than what appears to be fabricated (the letter from the Interior Department), exists or has yet to be produced.
This spontaneous combustion makes no sense. It is just anger directed in any direction it can find vents. The elections, the mullahs, the system, woman's rights, etc. etc. It changes every day. Similar to US excuses for invading Iraq.
Anyway, these riots occur after the US put Iran on the terrorist list, named them as one of the three members of the "axis of evil," has debated for years whether the US or Israel would hit them first and whether nuclear weapons would be used.
Add to that the 1953 overthrow of their democratically elected president and 8 years of US backed war with Saddam and the use of chemical weapons.
And maybe they know our budget contains $750,000,000 for regime change, special ops have gone into Iran, and we back a pro-democracy movement in Iran.
There are two sides to every story. We should be fair and not just swallow the bull.
















This is a very one sided and distorted picture of what has been happening in Iran. You call us to be fair and not just swallow the bull and then post the most bullshit blog I've seen here on this situation. It appears to me you haven't been following this story or you have an agenda to push. An agenda the requires you to distort the truth to push.
For several days the demonstrations were almost totally free of violence from the demonstrators. There are videos of police in riot gear attacking peaceful demonstrators doing nothing more than chanting slogans. No stones being thrown nor any in evidence in anyone's hand. People being brutally beaten by police for nothing more than gathering peacefully.
I'm truly in awe of the Iranians. Rarely has any protest been so peaceful in America. There are videos of hundreds of thousands peacefully marching in near silence at times. Others where demonstrators sit down when confronted by the police.
The Iranian government faced a choice but not about how to deal with rioters. The choice was how to deal with peaceful demonstrations calling for change. This was the same choice the government officials had to make in Montgomery, AL during the peaceful marches for civil rights. The Iranian government made the same choice that was made in Montgomery, brutal repression. In Montgomery fortunately there was a higher power, the Federal government that moved in to protect the rights of the demonstrators against the actions of the local and state government. In Iran it is the federal government that has assaulted and murdered its own citizens.
Yes, now one can claim there are riots, people have fought back, picked up stones and started fires. But those rioters are government created. Violence tends to beget violence and peaceful demonstrations can become violent confrontations in the face of government brutality.
June 28, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but in this country they have pretty much made all peaceful protest illegal. Look at the travesties political conventions have become. Remember Boston when the DEMOCRATS gave protestors wire pens in which they could gather. They've been effective in requiring permits to protest and they make the restrictions so rigid that you'd be a fool to show up.
Sheesh, I wouldn't have ventured into St. Paul when the Republicans were here for fear of having my mere presence sufficient to get me logged into some "enemy combatant" database. They had turned the local police into the enforcement arm of the far right after spreading propaganda that "anarchists" were going to take over the town. I suppose there were a handful of anarchists somewhere but it was mainly well orchestrated propaganda to clamp down any peep of opposition. It was so effective that it scared away everyone and the local bars and restaurants lost a pile of money because they had no customers. The police state had scared them off the street. It reminded me of visiting East Berlin in the 70's.
So I certainly do not defend or excuse the Iranian government. But if you think our government is treating peaceful opposition much differently I wonder. Ours has just become even more effective at preemptively clamping down on opposition by making it virtually impossible for people to assemble.
When was the last time a "centrist" or mainstream Democratic politician would show up at a peaceful protest?
June 28, 2009 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
The right to free assembly has certainly been narrowed over the years in America. Its a big problem imo. But I do think its still very different here than in Iran. Dozens, at least, have been murdered in the streets by government forces in Iran. No one was killed or assaulted by government forces during the Womens March on Washington in 2004. Even during the 8 days of battle for the Chicago Streets in 1968 no one was killed by police.
June 28, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll add that the problem with the governments abridgment of our right to free assembly via time, place and manner restrictions is not government oppression similar to Iran. Americans have simply lost the will to practice civil disobedience and risk direct confrontation with police. Had there been sufficient numbers people could have peacefully marched from those wire cages and "free speech zones" to the convention hall while filing briefs claiming that the placement of the zones were an undue restriction of the First Amendment. That likely would have been enough to modify the restrictions. Frankly until we reclaim our long tradition of civil disobedience I see little hope for real change in this country.
June 28, 2009 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you are participating in the Iranian Riots or know someone who is and wish to remain safe? Let me help by showing you how to distinguish between those who are angry and those who are lethal. http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm
June 29, 2009 5:45 AM | Reply | Permalink