So Ayatollah Ali Khamenei demands that protestors desist from
their demonstrations and give proper obedience to their
self-selected rulers.
Reports the New York Times:
Iran's
supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
sternly cut off any compromise over the nation's disputed
elections on Friday. In a long and hard-line sermon, he declared the elections valid and
warned of violence if demonstrators continue, as they have
pledged, to flood the streets in defiance of the government.
Opposition leaders who failed to halt the protests, he said,
"would be responsible for bloodshed and chaos." The tough words
seemed to dash hopes for a peaceful solution to what defeated
candidates and protesters call a fraudulent election last week,
plunging Iran into its gravest crisis since the Islamic
Revolution in 1979.
"Flexing muscles on the streets after the election is not
right," he said, before tens of thousands of angry supporters
at Tehran University. "It means challenging the elections and
democracy. If they don't stop, the consequences of the chaos
would be their responsibility."
But opposition leaders, who stayed home Friday, called for yet
another huge rally on Saturday afternoon, setting the stage for
a possible showdown between protesters and security forces,
perhaps a violent one.
The sermon put Ayatollah Khamenei, who prefers to govern
quietly and from behind the scenes, at the forefront of a
confrontation not only among factions of the government but
among Iranians themselves.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's dictatorial pronouncements give
him the look of the Shah some three decades ago: an
elderly thug surrounded by a rapacious elite who'd grown
increasingly out of touch with the people he desired to
rule. Popular protests helped sweep away the Shah, his
pampered military brass, and Savak, his secret police.
Let's hope the same will happen to Khamenei, the
self-interested mullocracy which he represents, and its
jack-booted enforcers like the so-called Revolutionary
Guard.
The point is, the real issue is not the election, in which no one
really represented the Iranian people and their desire for
liberty, and subsequent back-mosque maneuvering
amongst the power brokers, such as the eminently
opportunistic Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. It is the
entire system, in which a repressive and unelected elite make the
most important political decisions and use force to crush any
opposition. The Iranians are entitled to create their
political system, whatever it looks like, rather than have one
imposed upon them, like the present one.
In this we should sympathize with the Iranian people and do what
we can to help them. But that mostly means us, not the U.S.
government. Twitter adjusting its maintenance schedule to
ensure maximum availability for Iranian protestors is one
example. Abundant and continuing press coverage is
another. Sharing methods of circumventing official
censorship from Chinese dissidents is yet another.
Presumably there are additional means of directly empowering
those opposing Iran's reigning autocracy.
Unfortunately, warn Iranian activists, the worst thing the Obama
administration could do is turn what is presently the
Iranian autocracy versus the Iranian people into a contest
between the U.S. and Iranian governments. No one really
doubts where Washington stands, and its previous record, a la the
Shah, brought to power in a U.S.-supported coup against a
democratically government, is not particularly helpful. It
is critical to keep the focus on the Iranian people.
Overthrowing the system will not be easy. But the Iranian
people succeeded against the Shah, and the end came
surprisingly quickly. Hopefully the current system is
equally brittle. There are some divisions within the
elite; perhaps unity will similarly break within the
security services. Hopefully the Iranian equivalent of the
Iron Curtain can finally be brought down.
Is the Dear Leader doing anything more than hand-wringing, if
even that? Or is he eagerly turning away from this Persian
Tienanmen because of his crushing need for us to focus on
eugenically culling our own old people and "capping" our way back
to a pre-industrial economy?
I have to agree fully. This is not an unusual, nor an original
pattern of tryanny. Similar situations have occured in Europe
with the rise of Hitler in Germany, Stalin en Russia, and
Mussolini in Italy. Each were self-empowered, and self-elected,
and each created their own secret police systems to censor and
control any opposition within their borders. This is not new. In
the case of Mussolini and Stalin, Russia and Italy successfully
overthrew their tyrants with little help from the United States
government. It's necessary to the US gov't to back away from this
situation, support the Iranian people, and call for the American
people to support Iranian opposition. Totalitarian governments
like these have been thrown out before, and will be thrown out
again.
In case link doesn't work: http://tinyurl.com/km942y
[Via Hot Air]
Ewen Allison| 6.20.09 @ 4:37PM
Leading Republicans want the President to endorse Mousavi, to
make clearer his position against the current Iranian president
continuing in office. Funny thing is, not even Mousavi wants
that. Why should anyone stateside second guess what the man
himself thinks is a good idea?
Alice Moore| 6.20.09 @ 8:23PM
This gives me encouragement. If the Iranian people can overthrow
their totalitarian thug overlords; we can nip the fledgling
totalitarians in the bud here at home.
That the Iranians are willing to risk so much should make us all
ashamed if we meekly comply with the Obamathugs.
Alice Moore| 6.20.09 @ 8:46PM
I wish the Iranian people well. More's the pity that they they
only have Mousavi. First impressions. This Mousavi is no Lech
Walesa or Vaclav Havel. He's more of a Leonid Brezhnev.
Charles Martel| 6.20.09 @ 12:23PM
Is the Dear Leader doing anything more than hand-wringing, if even that? Or is he eagerly turning away from this Persian Tienanmen because of his crushing need for us to focus on eugenically culling our own old people and "capping" our way back to a pre-industrial economy?
Kaydee| 6.20.09 @ 1:16PM
I have to agree fully. This is not an unusual, nor an original pattern of tryanny. Similar situations have occured in Europe with the rise of Hitler in Germany, Stalin en Russia, and Mussolini in Italy. Each were self-empowered, and self-elected, and each created their own secret police systems to censor and control any opposition within their borders. This is not new. In the case of Mussolini and Stalin, Russia and Italy successfully overthrew their tyrants with little help from the United States government. It's necessary to the US gov't to back away from this situation, support the Iranian people, and call for the American people to support Iranian opposition. Totalitarian governments like these have been thrown out before, and will be thrown out again.
Mary| 6.20.09 @ 3:42PM
Everyone should see this see this.
In case link doesn't work: http://tinyurl.com/km942y
[Via Hot Air]
Ewen Allison| 6.20.09 @ 4:37PM
Leading Republicans want the President to endorse Mousavi, to make clearer his position against the current Iranian president continuing in office. Funny thing is, not even Mousavi wants that. Why should anyone stateside second guess what the man himself thinks is a good idea?
Alice Moore| 6.20.09 @ 8:23PM
This gives me encouragement. If the Iranian people can overthrow their totalitarian thug overlords; we can nip the fledgling totalitarians in the bud here at home.
That the Iranians are willing to risk so much should make us all ashamed if we meekly comply with the Obamathugs.
Alice Moore| 6.20.09 @ 8:46PM
I wish the Iranian people well. More's the pity that they they only have Mousavi. First impressions. This Mousavi is no Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel. He's more of a Leonid Brezhnev.
chi hair straightener| 6.22.09 @ 4:19AM
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.