Let's talk Iran...

I watched the video of that very young woman, Neda, dying in the street with a bullet through her heart. Tragic in the extreme, and quite upsetting. The protest she was watching (watching, mind you... not participating in) was loud and boisterous, but in no way violent... and the chant being raised by the crowd wasn't "Death to the government" but "Let our voice be heard".

Needless to say, it spurred me on to read more and more about the protests and their participants.

None of the crowds had been spectacularly huge. Even in Tehran, the crowds had been averaging in the thousands... but by no means the majority of Iranians were taking to the streets. Most demonstrations were peaceful and without violence (although the last 48 hours has seen a marked increase in retaliatory reaction by the Basiji, culminating in the death of Neda), until the three opposition, "reform" candidates got together in Tehran and held a rally to protest the government's published results of the election. This rally ended up being the largest in Iran since the 1979 institution of the Revolutionary Islamic Republic.

Now, these three candidates are called "reformers" and "moderates" by many in the press... but I wouldn't trust a one of them as far as I could throw them. All were hand-picked by the "ruling" clerical council to have their names on the ballot out of the more than 240 TOTAL registered candidates for Iranian President, and no consideration was given to the popular support any of the candidates might have had going into the process. That tells me they were picked either because the council thought they couldn't win... or because the council thought they were "in line" enough to sustain council policy should they actually win.

Mousavi, who allegedly only won 34% of the popular vote, is the most prominent figure of the three. He is the one that people in the West seemed to have pinned their hopes on as a real reformer. Is he?

He has openly admitted that the Holocaust did occur and that the indiscriminate slaughter of the Jews in WWII was a bad thing. He routinely accuses Ahckmadinnerjacket of corruption and political abuse, and criticizes his regime for making Iran's international name a "taboo" term again. All well and good... I guess... unless you take into account the following:

He was an ARDENT (his words, not mine) follower and supporter of Ayotollah Khomeini's revolutionary regime, and still seems to have a special place in his heart for the architect and protector of the American Hostage Crisis perpetrators. He is extremely critical of Ahckmashitterpits' coddling to Obama and the new US Administration, fearing that new ties to the new US President will cause an increase in pro-American opinion in the country. He has also (but not very recently) asserted his belief that Israel has NO RIGHT to exist as a nation, and that all efforts by terrorists in Palestine and the entire Levant are rightious and blessed by God (Allah).

Moreover... many facets of the press are comparing what is happening in Tehran to what happened in China at Tiananmen Square 20 years ago. However, this isn't a call for CHANGE, this is a call for the implementaion of established laws and policies concerning elections in Iran. This is a call for the recognition that the democratic process WORKS and that it be allowed to WORK in Iran... possibly because it is still seen to be working in IRAQ.

THAT is a facet of this drama that I find fascinating. Some liberals are already standing up and stating that the situation in Iran is a shining example of why Obama's policies and promises towards Iran are working... because it is bringing a sense of freedom and liberty to Iran that wasn't there before. I would contend that the sense of freedom and liberty that might be present in Iran is just as attributable to US intervention and success in Iraq as to anything Obama said or did. But you won't see that opinion voiced by the mainstream media, will you?

Iranians are a proud and independent people with a long and storied history of national pride and identity. They don't want to be told what to do, say or think. They showed this to the world in 1979, but seemed to have forgotten it between 1980 and 2009. Now, with both Sunis and Shi'as in Iraq fairly represented in free and independent elections, they see what Ahckmacrazypants doesn't want them to see... that freedom is more than simply having Iranians running Iran. It is an individual person's ability to "twitter" to their hearts content. It is the ability to cast a vote and KNOW it counted towards a verifiable result. It is the ability to take one's earnings and savings and purchase goods THEY choose to purchase, be it foreign products or foreign newspapers and Internet websites.

Just watch... over the course of the next few weeks, we will see more and more spin on the "results" of Obama's policies towards Iran and its internal crisis. Objective observation, however, will show that very little of what Obama has done is that radically different than what Bush had been doing with Iran prior to the election in Nov of 2008.