Iran's "supreme leader" is losing it

[Chris]

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, triggered a diplomatic row today when he publicly singled out "evil" Britain as the foremost enemy of the Islamic republic.

Gordon Brown responded swiftly by condemning Iran's "repression and *brutality" in the strongest language used by the UK yet about last week's disputed presidential poll. Previous public *comments have been *deliberately restrained to avoid fuelling Iranian accusations of interference in its internal affairs.

Iran's ambassador to London was summoned to the Foreign Office after Khamenei's remarks during midday *Friday prayers at Tehran University, where the cleric referred to Britain as "the most evil" of foreign powers.

Iran's supreme leader Khamenei issues verbal attack on 'evil Britain' | World news | The Guardian

 

[strollingbones]

obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea

 

[Xenophon]

Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.

 

[Annie]

obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea

Well according to Chris, this is all Obama's doing...

You're right bones, he's been a coward. The House however, has moved:

TheHill.com - House approves Iran bill 405-1

House approves Iran bill 405-1
By Ian Swanson
Posted: 06/19/09 11:51 AM [ET]
The House overwhelmingly approved a resolution Friday in support of Iranian dissidents as that country’s top cleric warned protesters to end demonstrations.

The resolution was approved in a 405-1 vote, with two members voting present. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was the only lawmaker opposed to the resolution. Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and David Loebsack (D-Iowa) voted present.

“This resolution is not about American interests,” said Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee. “It is about American values that I believe are universal.”
Berman sponsored the resolution with Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.).

Iran has been consumed by demonstrations protesting the election of Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since last weekend. Opposition candidates have insisted the election was rigged for Ahmadinejad.

But Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, on Friday offered his strongest defense yet of the election, and warned of repercussions if demonstrations continued. He said opposition leaders will be “responsible for bloodshed and chaos” if they do not stop further rallies, according to a report in The New York Times.

The comments suggested Iran’s authorities are prepared to end the demonstrations with force if they persist.

“We are extremely disturbed at statements made by Ayatollah Khamenei which seem to give the green light to security forces to violently handle protesters exercising their right to demonstrate and express their views," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa program.

In Washington, the debate has centered on whether President Obama should be more forceful in criticizing Iranian authorities, and in showing support for the demonstrators.

The issue has put Obama in a tough spot, with conservatives blasting him for not showing more support for demonstrators, and Iran criticizing the U.S. and Obama for meddling in its affairs.

Obama has sought to find a middle ground to prevent Iran from blaming the demonstrations on the U.S.

Some lawmakers during the debate on the resolution said Congress must be careful not to hurt the demonstrators...

 

[DiveCon]

WOW the UK replaces the USA as the greatest Satan eh?

 

[strollingbones]

point taken. all we can do is wait and see.

 

[MaggieMae]

obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea

Well according to Chris, this is all Obama's doing...

You're right bones, he's been a coward. The House however, has moved:

TheHill.com - House approves Iran bill 405-1

House approves Iran bill 405-1
By Ian Swanson
Posted: 06/19/09 11:51 AM [ET]
The House overwhelmingly approved a resolution Friday in support of Iranian dissidents as that country’s top cleric warned protesters to end demonstrations.

The resolution was approved in a 405-1 vote, with two members voting present. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was the only lawmaker opposed to the resolution. Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and David Loebsack (D-Iowa) voted present.

“This resolution is not about American interests,” said Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee. “It is about American values that I believe are universal.”
Berman sponsored the resolution with Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.).

Iran has been consumed by demonstrations protesting the election of Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since last weekend. Opposition candidates have insisted the election was rigged for Ahmadinejad.

But Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, on Friday offered his strongest defense yet of the election, and warned of repercussions if demonstrations continued. He said opposition leaders will be “responsible for bloodshed and chaos” if they do not stop further rallies, according to a report in The New York Times.

The comments suggested Iran’s authorities are prepared to end the demonstrations with force if they persist.

“We are extremely disturbed at statements made by Ayatollah Khamenei which seem to give the green light to security forces to violently handle protesters exercising their right to demonstrate and express their views," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa program.

In Washington, the debate has centered on whether President Obama should be more forceful in criticizing Iranian authorities, and in showing support for the demonstrators.

The issue has put Obama in a tough spot, with conservatives blasting him for not showing more support for demonstrators, and Iran criticizing the U.S. and Obama for meddling in its affairs.

Obama has sought to find a middle ground to prevent Iran from blaming the demonstrations on the U.S.

Some lawmakers during the debate on the resolution said Congress must be careful not to hurt the demonstrators...

That's nice, and it's also politically correct. By doing a simple resolution, which is not a statement of foreign policy, the message gets sent loud and clear that the American people support the Iranian people but without declaring any intent to muddle in their election process.

 

[Annie]

obama needs to step up and say something strong to them and fucking stronger to n korea

Well according to Chris, this is all Obama's doing...

You're right bones, he's been a coward. The House however, has moved:

TheHill.com - House approves Iran bill 405-1

House approves Iran bill 405-1
By Ian Swanson
Posted: 06/19/09 11:51 AM [ET]
The House overwhelmingly approved a resolution Friday in support of Iranian dissidents as that country’s top cleric warned protesters to end demonstrations.

The resolution was approved in a 405-1 vote, with two members voting present. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) was the only lawmaker opposed to the resolution. Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and David Loebsack (D-Iowa) voted present.

“This resolution is not about American interests,” said Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee. “It is about American values that I believe are universal.”
Berman sponsored the resolution with Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.).

Iran has been consumed by demonstrations protesting the election of Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since last weekend. Opposition candidates have insisted the election was rigged for Ahmadinejad.

But Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, on Friday offered his strongest defense yet of the election, and warned of repercussions if demonstrations continued. He said opposition leaders will be “responsible for bloodshed and chaos” if they do not stop further rallies, according to a report in The New York Times.

The comments suggested Iran’s authorities are prepared to end the demonstrations with force if they persist.

“We are extremely disturbed at statements made by Ayatollah Khamenei which seem to give the green light to security forces to violently handle protesters exercising their right to demonstrate and express their views," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa program.

In Washington, the debate has centered on whether President Obama should be more forceful in criticizing Iranian authorities, and in showing support for the demonstrators.

The issue has put Obama in a tough spot, with conservatives blasting him for not showing more support for demonstrators, and Iran criticizing the U.S. and Obama for meddling in its affairs.

Obama has sought to find a middle ground to prevent Iran from blaming the demonstrations on the U.S.

Some lawmakers during the debate on the resolution said Congress must be careful not to hurt the demonstrators...

That's nice, and it's also politically correct. By doing a simple resolution, which is not a statement of foreign policy, the message gets sent loud and clear that the American people support the Iranian people but without declaring any intent to muddle in their election process.

It's what they could do, as the power for foreign affairs lies within the executive branch which has done zilch.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama's approach in this situation has been good. The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.

 

[strollingbones]

but we do need to encourage the revolution and will we stand by and watch them slaughtered people in the streets....

 

[Sunni Man]

Obama's approach in this situation has been good. The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.

You are absolutly correct

It's their country, culture, and society.

They should be left alone, with No interferance from America or anyone else.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

but we do need to encourage the revolution and will we stand by and watch them slaughtered people in the streets....

Why do we need to encourage them? They're doing just fine without our "moral" support. As to watching them being slaughtered in the streets, it hasn't happened yet. There have been crackdowns, but no mass slaughter.

 

[Annie]

There shouldn't really be a question of whose side the US is on:

Whose Side Are We On? You Have to Ask? - WSJ.com

Whose Side Are We On? You Have to Ask?
With Twitter's help, the youth of Iran take on the ayatollahs.
By PEGGY NOONAN

America so often gets Iran wrong. We didn't know when the shah was going to fall, didn't foresee the massive wave that would topple him, didn't know the 1979 revolution would move violently against American citizens, didn't know how to handle the hostage-taking. Last week we didn't know a mass rebellion was coming, and this week we don't know who will emerge the full or partial victor. So modesty and humility seem appropriate stances from which to observe and comment.

That having been said, it's pretty wonderful to see what we're seeing. It is moving, stirring—they are risking their lives over there in a spontaneous, self-generated movement for greater liberty and justice. Good for them. In a selfish and solipsistic way—more on that in a moment—the uprising, as it moves us, reminds us of who we are: lovers of political freedom who are always and irresistibly on the side of the student standing in front of the tank or the demonstrator chanting "Where is my vote?" in the face of the billy club. Good for us. (If you don't understand who the American people are for, put down this newspaper or get up from your computer, walk into the street and grab the first non-insane-looking person you meet. Say, "Did you see the demonstrations in Iran? It's the ayatollahs versus the reformers. Who do you want to win?" You won't just get "the reformers," you'll get the perplexed-puppy look, a tilt of the head and a wondering stare: You have to ask?)....

I don't much care for Noonan for several years, but in this case she says it well.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Maybe not bones, Chris could be correct that BO not saying something has really undercut the Iranain Mullahs, they can't just knee-jerk blame america and it's having some effect on the riots and protests there.

Interesting problem, to say the least.


In Iran, like in Cuba, America hatred is the engine that drives the regime.

I do think that 0bama does need to make it clear that America has learned from its mistakes and values Democracy as the highest goal, and that, as a democratic regime, we find last weekend's farce a bad deal for democracy. Both of these clowns are bad for America.

Lets not loose sight of the two important facts. Tweedledum was probably just as bad or worse than tweedeldee. We have no interesest in which loon is at the button in Iran. However, we do have an interest in democratic institutions, and we condemn the farce of a dishonest election.

 

[concept]

Obama's approach in this situation has been good. The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.

We alienate them by simply breathing.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama's approach in this situation has been good. The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.

We alienate them by simply breathing.

Or maybe it's our aggressive policies toward them.

 

[DiveCon]

Obama's approach in this situation has been good. The Iranians don't need American approval and we don't need to further alienate the Iranian government.

We alienate them by simply breathing.

Or maybe it's our aggressive policies toward them.

nope, its the fact we arent muslim and have sharia law
and unless we convert, that wont change

 

[Soaring]

A couple of things......the VP said in a speech a few days ago that he thought the election was a sham. In other words, he insinuated that it was rigged. Now, is Obama going to sit back and let the VP do his talking? Personally, I don't think we should say a damn thing. Their people obviously are pissed and are letting the world know their feelings. If I was the Khomeni (or however you spell it) I would be worried about a real revolution. A lot of their men were college educated in the United States during the time the Shah was in charge, so they know all about a democratic society. My college roommate was a Persian. I can't see this oppressive government lasting very much longer.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

We alienate them by simply breathing.

Or maybe it's our aggressive policies toward them.

nope, its the fact we arent muslim and have sharia law
and unless we convert, that wont change

I'm guessing that they object more to our meddling in their affairs than what religion we adhere to.

 

[MaggieMae]

Well according to Chris, this is all Obama's doing...

You're right bones, he's been a coward. The House however, has moved:

TheHill.com - House approves Iran bill 405-1

That's nice, and it's also politically correct. By doing a simple resolution, which is not a statement of foreign policy, the message gets sent loud and clear that the American people support the Iranian people but without declaring any intent to muddle in their election process.

It's what they could do, as the power for foreign affairs lies within the executive branch which has done zilch.

What are they supposed to "do"?? Get real. It's none of our fucking business how they conduct their elections, nor how they turn out.