Still Marching in Iran
Iran has some kind of regular anti-Israel parade day (because, obviously, that sort of thing does a huge amount to alleviate Palestinian suffering…) but this year it went a bit awry:
Conservatives had warned against using the annual pro-Palestinian march, known as Quds Day, as an excuse for renewed protests against Mr. Ahmadinejad, whose disputed re-election in June plunged Iran into its worst internal crisis in three decades.
But the protesters turned out anyway, wearing green, the color of opposition, and often walking alongside larger groups of state-sanctioned marchers bearing huge banners denouncing Israel. The protesters even flouted Iran’s support for pro-Palestinian militants, chanting “No to Gaza and Lebanon, my life is for Iran.” And when officials shouted “death to Israel” through loudspeakers, protesters derisively chanted “death to Russia” in response. [...]
The opposition leaders Mir Hussein Moussavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohammad Khatami joined the crowds, drawing appreciative cheers and chants of support. Later, Basij militia members tried to attack Mr. Khatami and Mr. Karroubi, but defenders fought them back, opposition Web sites reported.
Meanwhile, Ahmadenijad took the occasion to opine that the Holocaust “is a lie” designed to bolster support for Israel. Earlier this week a prominent anti-regime ayatollah in Iran stepped up his rhetoric accusing the government of being a “military regime” and urging clerics to preach resistance.
35 Responses to “Still Marching in Iran”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 18th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
If you get your news from liberal sources, the Holocaust killed 6 million Jews. If you get it from Ahmadinejad, it never even happened.
September 18th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Yes. Iran. What barbaric people they are. How dare they have a day of public remembrance for Palestinian people that plays up the Palestinian role of victim.
America would never do such a thing, such as politicizing 9/11 and having public, government sponsored, ceremonies that tell Americans they are the victims and whipping up jingoistic and religious fears to support a political party or it’s desire to wage war on others. Yes, the the American government would never stoop to such a level and use 9/11 as a political weapon to get political support.
Evil bastards. We should nuke them back to the stone age.
September 18th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
America would never do such a thing, such as politicizing 9/11 and having public, government sponsored, ceremonies
We do it, Iran does it, everyone does it. What’s your point?
September 18th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Death to Russia? Why death to Russia? Am I missing somthing?
September 18th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Poptarts, I think that was sarcasm.
September 18th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Damn, Bob beat me to it…
September 18th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Exactly my point Poptarts. Iran is like ACORN. It’s a fake controversy. Even Democrats exaggerate the threat from Iran to make them look “tough”. It’s mindless scaremongering. Iran is yet another bogeyman. And there is an agenda behind it; war.
The bombing them to the stone ages is a paraphrase of H. Clinton’s threat to the people of that country (as well as Dick Cheney’s attempt–with Pentagon assistance–to use small nukes in Iran to prevent them from getting nukes–kind of like hitting your child to teach him hitting is wrong). We, America, can evidently threaten to end the lives of millions in Iran, and we are the good guys, when the Iranian leadership makes statement about Israel that are half as bad, and par for the course in the Arab/Muslim world, and they are evil incarnate.
This is yet more piling on an easy target without putting it in the proper context or dealing with Iran in a fair and proportionate manner.
It’s because Neocons call people like Matt pussies so he retaliates by demonizing an easy target.
It’s childish and wrong to demonize Iran. And progressives are falling for the bait. How long before Obama realizes he can get his poll numbers up by attacking Iran (or letting Israel attack Iran)? Matt Y. and his fellow abused housewives are dishonestly laying the groundwork for war in Iran.
September 18th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Ahmadenijad gets rightfully slammed for denying the Holocaust ever happened. Meanwhile in this nation criticism is slight for thousands of Republicans denying George W. Bush ever happened.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
“Ahmadinejad” is really just Farsi for “Huey Long.” He’s not really stupid enough to believe the Holocaust didn’t happen, but he surely knows denial plays well to his base.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
It might be worthwhile to point out that “death to X” is a figure of speech in Persian that does not necessarily imply actual death threats any more than, say, “My dad is gonna kill me” means you should call Child Protective Services immediately or “Man, this band is on fire tonight” means you should find the nearest fire extinguisher.
It is still an expression of disapproval, and I don’t know what the protesters had against Russia, but don’t take it too literally.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
George W. Bush is a Zionist myth.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
SFHawkguy:
It’s childish and wrong to demonize Iran. And progressives are falling for the bait. How long before Obama realizes he can get his poll numbers up by attacking Iran (or letting Israel attack Iran)? Matt Y. and his fellow abused housewives are dishonestly laying the groundwork for war in Iran.
Matt’s laying the groundwork for war? In what way? Can we never say bad things about foreign countries? Never ever? Are you fucking insane?
September 18th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Ahmadinejad has really proved himself to be a disgusting figure. No, that doesn’t mean we need to bomb Iran. But it’s almost as if this guy is purposefully trying to turn himself into a western caricature of a swarthy, menacing Muslim. What a tool.
Any effort to “crack down” on Iran and Ahmadinejad is doomed to backfire. So what to do? I am out of ideas.
My guess is that the crowd chanting “death to Russia” is being sarcastic–making a point that, for Iran, Israel is really no more of a threat than Russia is. But that’s a guess, and I’m not even sure if that kind of sarcasm works in Farsi.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
poptarts,
He’s laying the groundwork for war in the way that the groundwork was laid in Iraq–it’s an electroshock treatment to the American people’s brains to train them into thinking there are hordes of brown people ‘over there’ that want to kill us. That Persians are subhuman beasts. I am sure that Matt is not advocating war with Iran but he is doing the equivalent of picking on the weak kid in school.
I am no defender of the Iranian regime. I, personally, would prefer a more secular government. But, who is America to demand who leads Iran? Do you not know that America has spent $100s of Millions to bring down the regime? Do you think some of these covert funds, as well as the decades long demonization of Iran and Persian people in general, effects the information we get here in America?
Just look at the recent AP article that incorrectly reported the international community agrees with America that Iran is on the verge of getting the bomb: http://www.boomantribune.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2009/9/17/16487/5839
Do you think these inaccurate stories just write themselves? Do you not see the piling on? The agenda? Do you know Cheney, the neocons, and Israel are champing at the bit to attack the people of Iran and will come up with any old excuse to do so?
Are you fucking insane? Or just deliberating obfuscating what everyone else in the World can see; many America have a boner for killing them some Persians.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
It’s not “laying the groundwork for war against Iran” to report how a silly riualistic official anti-Israel demonstration is being co-opted by the opposition.
Yes, for domestic consumption and rhetorical purposes Obama also has to engage in a silly ritual of “talking tough” and making saber-rattling gestures. But I trust that Obama will not let himself get dragged into an unwinnable war in the Middle-East the way that poor dumb schmuck Dubya did.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
SFHawkguy
I am no defender of the Iranian regime. I, personally, would prefer a more secular government.
You just totally laid down the grounds for war you Neocon you.
Do you know Cheney, the neocons, and Israel are champing at the bit to attack the people of Iran and will come up with any old excuse to do so?
Cheney and the Neocons are no longer in power if you haven’t noticed. I’m worried Israel may bomb Iran which would be a disaster. They asked Bush to and he said no.
But Iran has insisted on starting a nuclear arms race, or at least race with Israel. Next you’ll get Egypt and the Saudis going nuclear. (But I know you couldn’t care less about the consequences of that. You really don’t give a shit. All you know is that Americans are bloodthirsty warmongers.)
September 18th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
SFHawkguy, there’s no question that the military-industrial complex is itching to turn Iran into a parking lot for fun and profit, and that an army of ignorant mouth-breathing knuckle-draggers are willing to cheer them on. But I think there is still a semblance of civilian restraint in the United States government, and that Obama is intelligent enough to see the stakes and not go down that path.
Of course, there could be a trumped-up Tonkin Gulf-style incident that could tip the scales towards war, but even then I don’t see Obama losing his head in a crisis (phony or not).
September 18th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Iran has not started a nuclear arms race. They are enriching uranium for nuclear power. They have a right to do that, whether we like it or not. Rather than engage in a lot of paranoid rhetoric, we should re-dedicate ourselves to the NPT and work with other world powers to account for and secure fissile materials. The actual work of nuclear safety is boring and wonkish, but effective.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Well, I don’t blindly trust Obama to do this.
In fact, after less than one year in office Obama has already done this in Afghanistan!
It seems reasonable to many progressives to pile on Iran because Supreme Leader Obama (which, ironically, is another mistranslation of Farsi which we use to demonize Iran) will do the right thing. That’s foolish. Obama can’t even handle criticism from Beck that his green czar is a communist and threw him under the bus. Do you really think Obama is going to spend any political capital doing the right thing and standing up to stop an attack against Iran after America has been whipped into a frenzy to attack? No, Iran is expendable for Obama and his fellow Democratic Abused Wives (they kick anyone weaker than them when Beck attacks them).
The fearmongering might be an American tradition but the last 8 years show us these actions have consequences. How many Americans still think Saddam Hussein attacked us on 9/11?
Look at the discussion of the rhetoric above re “Death to the U.S.” and “driving Israel to the Sea” and the U.S. threats to attack Iran. We mistranslate the Farsi to make Iranians seem like madmen. Then we collectively ignore the fact that America has actually threatened nuclear war on Iran, not to mention that we overthrew their elected leaders in the past and are currently running covert operations to do the same now. We supported Saddam Hussein as he gassed and killed the Iranians. Not to mention that America is far more likely and capable of following through on its threats. And Iran has every legal right to enrich uranium.
We’ve twisted these facts into an American fantasy–a fantasy that liberals are all too eager to engage in if it makes them look “tough”.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
The rhetoric against Iran has been insane. Our former president said that “all options are on the table if Iran has the knowledge to build nuclear weapons”. That is one of the most dangerously idiotic statements ever made. Any country with an undergraduate physics department has the knowledge to build a nuclear weapon.
Why is it that the potential to build nuclear weapons is being peddled as a huge, game-changing threat, when we have an arsenal on hair-trigger alert that could destroy Iran, and have threatened to use it. Why is it that our threats, and Israel’s threats don’t count?
September 18th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I find it hilarious that you can all clutch your pearls over Iran and it’s election while completely ignoring the fact that an American client state rigged an election far more ineptly.
Also, what idiot in charge of the protests thought this was a good idea? Iran may be cynically using this cause to manipulate it’s citizens, but you must realize that they do that because this cause is popular. This is basically the equivalant of 2000 election protests showing up at a Ground Zero and pissing all over it. Good luck having that work out for you.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
“Also, what idiot in charge of the protests thought this was a good idea?”
Apparently, it was Rafsanjani. But I wouldn’t call him an idiot. He may be really corrupt, and a self-serving bastard, but he’s not an idiot. I’m guessing only Rafsanjani knows how this works, but it works for him, I’m sure of that.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
(because, obviously, that sort of thing does a huge amount to alleviate Palestinian suffering…)
Thats a feature! The entire point of Iranian foreign polic strategy is to be big with the mouth and actually do nothing in the end that could cost anything, like actually helping Palestinans. They are just tactical tools for Iran.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Why is it that the potential to build nuclear weapons is being peddled as a huge, game-changing threat, when we have an arsenal on hair-trigger alert that could destroy Iran, and have threatened to use it. Why is it that our threats, and Israel’s threats don’t count?
You’re going to find out when Iran gets nuclear weapons. You’ll have your questions answered. The Iranian regime isn’t as psycho as Saddam was, but Egypt and the Saudis will go nuclear in response. The potential for something bad happening will be huge and it probably will.
I’m guessing Israel will attack even after Obama tells them not to. It will be a disaster. Huge disaster. Nothing but good times ahead.
Guys like SFHawkguy are full of shit. We should have single standards for every country, not cut Iran all kinds of slack b/c the rest of the world says mean things about them.
23 August 2009
“President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad nominated Gen Ahmad Vahidi – even though he is wanted by Interpol for the 1994 attack on a Jewish centre that left 85 dead.
Iran’s foreign policy committee chairman, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, said the allegations may increase his support.
Iran accused Argentina of “meddling” after it condemned the nomination.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8217372.stm
Argentina are bunch of imperialist meddlers!!!
September 18th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
At the moment, Russia is putting pressure on Iran to stop build nuclear technology. So the hate against Russia is most likely genuine.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
“Iran has not started a nuclear arms race. They are enriching uranium for nuclear power. They have a right to do that, whether we like it or not.”
How many times must this be said? I guess an infinite number. Nuclear energy makes sense in very few countries. But Iran is in the top of that list. Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan are above them, but nobody else is. With already discovered reserves, Iran can supply 30% of its electricity for over two hundred years. The rest of the world can supply a much smaller fraction for maybe 150 years with known reserves. More reserves will be found, both in Iran and the rest of the world. And technology will make nuclear technology much more efficient. But that only makes it more desirable for Iran to pursue this technology. But they have to control the full cycle before they’ll ever get to breeder reactor technology. We need their oil and gas, so it’s actually in our interest that they find a way to get electricity without burning the things we need. They already have maxed out on hydroelectric, they need nuclear power so we can get their oil and gas. Yes, there is this minor issue of them being an enemy right now, but that never stopped us before. During the Cold War, we got most of our titanium from the Soviet Union. Nothing stops commerce.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
At the moment, Russia is putting pressure on Iran to stop build nuclear technology. So the hate against Russia is most likely genuine.
September 16, 2009
“President Medvedev gave the first hint yesterday that Russia was prepared to perform a significant policy U-turn and support US moves for sanctions against Iran.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6835632.ece
Maybe the quo for the quid of scrapping the missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Rep.?
September 18th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Poptarts,
Boy you changed course fast. First, I’m “fucking insane” for saying Matt is unwittingly laying the groundwork for war with Iran and not an hour later you say that your guess is Israel will attack Iran? With disastrous consequences? Of course after Obama tries to cover his ass by saying he doesn’t approve.
Yeah. We’re all just helpless bystanders as our country approves of yet another war. And you and the liberal hawks are totally without any responsibility? There piling on Iran is a genuine concern from a rational and proportional assessment of the likely danger? Is it going to be like Lebanon? Is Obama going to give Israel a month to tear shit up and then play peacemaker and tell them they spilled enough Persian blood? Oh Goody. And you don’t think Obama knows his poll numbers will go up?
I just don’t know if I can take four years of centrist Democrat shit; the obfuscation, the pretending, the lying about their true intentions. You can’t just rail against Iran and then claim you didn’t agree that the U.S. is supporting a war against them.
And I’m not arguing for a more lenient standard for Iran. I’m arguing for exactly the opposite; a uniform standard for all countries. It is you and the right that are disproportionately building up the fear of an Iranian bomb.
September 18th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
To soullite: you’ve obviously never met an Iranian before, because if you did, you would know that pro-Palestinianism is not “popular” with Iranians (although Iranians do generally have sympathy for the Palestinians as an oppressed group, but you have to keep in mind, there’s a huge anti-Arab streak in the Persian psyche). I’ve never heard an Iranian spontaneously say they support the Palestinians or Hizbollah or hate the Israelis – conversely, I’ve heard plenty of Iranians say that their gov wastes it’s money on Arab terrorists.
September 18th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
And thank you tarts for that link. Just as I had speculated . . .. this appears to be the product of Obama’s secret letter to Medvedev from the spring. Supposedly the missile defense in exchange for support on the U.S. position against Iran. They claim it’s not a quid pro quo . . . but.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we are getting the quid this week, that the defense shield is being abandoned, because this is good news for liberals and this is a tough week for liberals. I have to say it’s about the only good thing I’ve heard from the White House in a long time.
But methinks the quo will drop next week or soon thereafter. Which you just linked to so I suppose the cat is out of the bag already. Or is this deal common knowledge and I’m just missing it?
Anyway, it will soon be the neocon turn to be happy (war is more likely) assuming this ramps up to a heavy diplomatic effort which could end up being fruitless (see e.g. our ‘negotiations’ with Iraq in lead up to the Iraq war) which will then provide an excuse to attack Iran.
Maybe the international community will get a bit of the Obama magic, the bait and switch, the roping of the dopes. He’s going to pretend he’s interested in a peaceful negotiation only to have it end fruitlessly with a passive Obama claiming to be helpless to stop an Israeli attack on Iran. Maybe I’m getting ahead of myself though . . . maybe Obama is committed to a peaceful resolution with Iran and he knows he’s being disengenious about the proportion of the threat coming from Iran but has purer, yet ulterior, motives for playing this game. Maybe.
But thanks for the link.
And of course we see the link to the action in the U.N. which he characterizes as “cute”. Cute indeed. No rational discussion of the Arab argument just a one word dismissal of the position.
September 18th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
“No rational discussion of the Arab argument just a one word dismissal of the position.”
Why would anyone need more than that? The idea of Israel admitting that it has nuclear weapons is ludicrous. They will admit to their weapons twenty minutes after they launch them. Period. And if we want inspections, than they’ll just nuke Iran and call that an inspection. The Arab argument is perfectly rational and reasonable, but the Israeli government is neither. And what would those inspections determine? That Israel has an illegal nuclear weapons program? No shit. Everybody and his dog knows that already. What’s the point?
But one thing is cool. With Bush out of office, we no longer have to say ‘nucular.’
September 18th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
“They claim it’s not a quid pro quo . . . but.”
Once some starts saying it’s not a quid pro quo, you can be assured it is. If there wasn’t a quid pro quo to hide, they wouldn’t be trying to hide it.
September 18th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
On the contrary, the anti-Ahmadinejad protesters joined in the anti-Israeli protests, and used the public exposure to also criticize their own government.
I don’t know what the “death to Russia” was about. Maybe it’s their equivalent to “Blame Canada”.
September 19th, 2009 at 12:02 am
Israel does not have the technological capability to affect Iran’s ability to build nuclear weapons in a significant manner. When they get their F-35s, that might no longer be true.
September 19th, 2009 at 1:35 am
Right after the election, Ahmadinejad took a quick trip to Russia and was congratulated and recognized as the winner and all that. When the protests really started ramping up, Ahmadinejad busted out the usual lines about how the dissent was the being caused by the Western powers (he sort of divided the blame between the UK and the USA). The ‘Death to Russia line is basically a big FU to that, and draws attention to the fact that Ahmadinejad isn’t without his own foreign support. It doesn’t hurt that Russia (USSR) hasn’t exactly been a benevolent player in the region.