Reports of Brutal Assaults on Protesters by Iran Security

There are reports of brutal assaults on protesters in Tehran. There are eyewitness reports of people being thrown off bridges.

At least two trusted sources described wild and violent conditions at a part of Tehran where protesters had planned to demonstrate. “They were waiting for us,” the source said. “They all have guns and riot uniforms. It was like a mouse trap.”

“I see many people with broken arms, legs, heads — blood everywhere — pepper gas like war,” the source said. Around “500 thugs” with clubs came out of a mosque and attacked people in the square, another source said. The security forces were “”beating women madly” and “killing people like hell,” the source said.

Best way to follow the updates live is on Twitter. Try #Tehran, #IranElection. HuffPo is live-blogging information. and CNN is on it as well.

< U.N. High Commissioner Criticizes U.S. Over Guantanamo | AG Holder Asks For Cocaine Sentencing Reform >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I am glad (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:41:04 AM EST
    that Obama is the President during this unraveling.

    I wouldnt say I am glad Obama is (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:01:13 PM EST
    in charge.   but I certainly am glad Bush is not.

    That's vague (none / 0) (#9)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:19:22 PM EST
    Please share. I've heard he gave a statement saying his was appalled and outraged, but I haven't heard that we've said we are going to get involved. I am just curious why you feel the way you do.

    I, too, am glad McCain isn't in there right now, BTW.


    In short (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:24:51 PM EST
    because President Obama isn't making this all about America.  I can elaborate if you want.  I just appreciate a President who can pursue multiple options all while being cool about it.

    If you would, that would be great (3.50 / 2) (#15)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:40:29 PM EST
    Elaborate. I'm not reading anything that explains the feelings of his supporters...just things like he is taking credit for influencing the young people of Iran to protest.

    I'm actually neutral on how he is handling the Iranian protests. I don't think it's great, nor awful. But, I believe that Iran has a right to take to the streets and alter their country's government to whatever is best for them...without anyone else getting involved, or passing judgment.


    Hi, you might be new here (2.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:02:40 PM EST
    most people generally aren't going to take links to National Review- home of Birther madness and the author of "Liberal Fascism" as credible sources when your trying to disparage Dems.  

    Naw, just did a quick google (none / 0) (#22)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:08:46 PM EST
    and grabbed the first one that came back...it was a theme I had been reading in regular news several days ago, and that wasn't the only place it showed up.

    Cool (none / 0) (#24)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:11:07 PM EST
    didn't mean to come of too harsh its just I've had people try and utilize "Liberal Fascism" as a citation in classes before and its starting to get really annoying.

    What?! (5.00 / 0) (#31)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:26:56 PM EST
    You mean Obama isn't really a latter day  Neville Chamberlin subverting our interests to appease his radical fascist/communist/islamic overlords?  

    I'll be darned.  'Cause you know that Hitler would have totally loved Five Guy's cheesburgers too.


    What a coincidence (none / 0) (#33)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:34:26 PM EST
    Really? (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 09:24:10 AM EST

    Sweeping generalizations aside, were you not here during the primaries?  'Cause I sure saw a lot of that from people around here no matter which candidate they supported.  
    In fact, it still goes on and on and on with some.  

    But you're right, it does not reflect well on them or their politician of choice--be it Clinton or Obama.

    [ Parent | Reply to This | 1 2 3 4 5  ]

    This snide attitude is under discussion on a thread just a post or two away.


    Wow. (5.00 / 0) (#41)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:52:02 PM EST
    That went right over your head like a tourist standing on the beach watching a shuttle launch.  

    Perhaps you should educate yourself on the "writings" of Jonah Goldberg before you make a fool of yourself.  

    Fix yo' sense of humor!


    5 guys (none / 0) (#34)
    by bocajeff on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:35:05 PM EST
    Not sure if Hitler would have liked them considering that he was a vegetarian. He could have gone for the peanuts though...

    I was reading about this just the other day (none / 0) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:40:57 PM EST
    this is not what I was reading (cant find it) but it is on the subject:

    Rynn Berry wants to set the record straight about Adolf Hitler. "There's absolutely no evidence he was a vegetarian. It simply isn't true." Berry, a 54-year-old raw-foodist and "vegetarian historian" who is the author of Food for the Gods: Vegetarianism and the World's Religions, is on a mission to dispel the commonly held view that the 20th century's most notorious mass murderer was also an adamant herbivore.


    well, (none / 0) (#57)
    by bocajeff on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:30:59 PM EST
    classic disassociation. Would you want to be linked in any way with Hitler? Especially something that is supposed to be so wholesome and pacifist?

    funny (none / 0) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:14:14 PM EST
    I thought the same thing.  but then I have little patients with vegans.  no offense to any who might be reading this.

    :) K (none / 0) (#27)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:14:35 PM EST
    I've actually never been to the National Review site before so have no knowledge of its history or leanings. Thanks for the info :)

    The most glaringly problem (none / 0) (#18)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:58:48 PM EST
    of Obama making the Eric Cantor's of this world happy would be fueling the Iranian representation of America as behind the protest.  This would easily make state television.  The movement moving out of the hands of the people would unravel it.  They are already making this claim, but they don't have the President spouting off to back it.  Some of the rural poor may buy this rhetoric, but most know better.  Give our history in interfering in Iranian politics, I think a measured approach is better.

    This also keeps the President from backing into a one sided approach.  If he threw his cards to Mousavi and the movement was quelled, he'd be back to President Bush's standing with the Iranian government, and that does nothing to help their people. The movement could likely be crushed, but Obama will still be able to engage Iran.  I'm not saying soft diplomacy is going to overthrow the mullahs, but a hard line stance will get us nowhere.  We don't plan to invade, but we've seen what isolating Iran has gotten us dipomatically - meddling in both Iraq and Afghanistan, a nuclear program and more fueling of Hezbollah and Hamas.

    Furthermore, we need international support in dealing with Iran.  Taking this movement away from the Iranians and making it all about us does them no favors.  In another sense we'll play to past views of the United States and shoot ourselves in the foot in the process.  They're doing great on their own, stealing their thunder makes us meddling America once more.  They'll do much better at this then we will, and they'll serve our interests much more than inserting ourselves in the middle.

    President Obama should and will stand against violence against the civilians, but he'll cooly stand of from their politics.  President Obama is a fox.


    Well, (none / 0) (#21)
    by bocajeff on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:08:41 PM EST
    If you click your heels three times you might go home. Or,

    This is a gamble either way. If the Iranian people win their struggle they might be upset with the U.S. for not offering more assistance and claim that we speak out of both sides of our mouths when it comes to democracy. Or, they won't. You can never tell what will work. But come Monday morning you can always say what went wrong and how you could have fixed it.


    You make some very good (none / 0) (#25)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:11:40 PM EST
    points, and one in particular....the Iranians will do much better at this than we will. It is, afterall, their fight. I hope the people win and enjoy decades of freedom to follow.

    Iran's Neda video vs. US torture photos... (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:29:14 PM EST
    Glenn Greenwald's most recent column discusses the images from Iran and specifically the Neda video in relation to the US torture photos that Obama is working overtime to suppress: The "Neda video," torture, and the truth-revealing power of images.

    Greenwald recounts a portion of yesterday's press conference wherein Obama described how images like the Neda video have the power to enlighten and transform public opinion. He goes on to ask the same question that Helen Thomas tried to ask Obama yesterday:

    how is it possible for Obama to pay dramatic tribute to the "heartbreaking" impact of that Neda video in bringing to light the injustices of the Iranian Government's conduct while simultaneously suppressing images that do the same with regard to our own Government's conduct?

    Greenwald cites a (current poll) which shows "half of the American citizenry is now explicitly pro-torture". He concludes that these attitudes are ascendant precisely because our government is able "to suppress evidence of what our torture actually looks like and the brutality it entails".

    Here's a thought: the Obama administration likes to tell us these torture photos are being suppressed to "protect our troops" from international outrage and increased violence on the battle field. But, isn't it likely that the Obama administration is equally concerned about protecting our own Government from the outrage of its own citizenry?


    What has to happen (none / 0) (#45)
    by Cards In 4 on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:00:26 PM EST
    before Obama withdraws the invitations to the July 4th BBQs? How many have to die on the streets before Obama decides not to sit down and negotiate with the Iranian government?

    I thought it was bad that Scowcroft and Eagelberger went to China 6 months after Tiananmen Square.  But at least they weren't making their travel plans while people were being killed.


    FWIW, Obama just disinvited the Iranian (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:59:59 PM EST
    diplomats he invited to the July 4th BBQ.

    Frankly, I hope Obama recognizes he is on VERY shaky high ground. Imo, he can't very well finger-wag the Iranian Government while he is actively suppressing photographic evidence of extreme US Government misconduct.


    Not really (none / 0) (#76)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:18:46 PM EST
    All he has to do is ignore the demands for them to be released (see Helen Thomas) and that will shut down the story.  The press corps likes their access with "Mr. Cool", so they won't dare jeopardize that by asking tough questions.

    I mean, he's the one who joked at the 65th annual Radio & Television Correspondents' Dinner:

    I have to admit, though, it wasn't easy coming up with fresh material for this dinner. A few nights ago, I was up tossing and turning, trying to figure out exactly what to say. Finally, when I couldn't get back to sleep, I rolled over and asked Brian Williams what he thought.

    No, Obama "rolled over and asked (5.00 / 0) (#81)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 07:25:47 PM EST
    Jon Favreau what he thought". Badda boom, badda bing.

    that was a joke (none / 0) (#77)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:20:06 PM EST

    That might work here... (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:36:10 PM EST
    obviously the American people don't give two sh&ts, but internationally I think people know the score with how we roll with our "detainees".  In fact I'd bet their collective imagination is on par with what the evidence would reveal, if not worse.

    Internationally he's on shaky ground as America's current pres...he inherited the shaky ground and has done nothing to firm it up. The world community might still dig the personality, but if he goes overboard with the condemnation I think we'll have many quick to remind us of how we roll.


    it seems to me whoever (none / 0) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:03:22 PM EST
    is in charge must be engaged.  we have no diplomatic relations with Iran already so its not like they are "recognizing the govt at legitimate"

    "The Lord of the Rings"? (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:03:39 PM EST
    Tehran dispatch: The regime shows us movies
    They want to keep us indoors, and quiet. But which subversive programmer picked "The Lord of the Rings"?

    By Anonymous

    Editor's note: For reasons of personal safety, the author chooses to remain anonymous.
    Jun. 24, 2009 |
    In Tehran, state television's Channel Two is putting on a "Lord of the Rings" marathon, part of a bigger push to keep us busy.
    Back to "Lord of the Rings."
    Who picked this film? I start to suspect that there is a subversive soul manning the controls at Seda va Sima, AKA the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. It is way too easy to play with the film, to draw comparisons to what is happening in real life. There are the overt Mousavi themes: the unwanted quest and the risking of life in pursuit of an unanticipated destiny. Then there is the sly nod to Ahmadinejad. Iranian films are dubbed (forget the wretched dubbing into English in the U.S.; in Iran dubbing is a craft) and there are plenty of references to "kootoole," little person, the Farsi word used in the movie for hobbit and dwarf. "Kootoole," of course, was, is, the term used in many of the chants out on the street against President Ahmadinejad. He is the "little person." ("And whose side are you on?" Pippin asks the ancient, forest-dwelling giant named Treebeard. Those watching might think the answer is Mousavi, since Treebeard is decked out in green.)

    Maybe their first idea might have been... (none / 0) (#82)
    by EL seattle on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 09:37:23 PM EST
    ... to book James Brown for a concert?  Unfortunatlely, he was unavailable.

    from twitter (none / 0) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:43:08 AM EST
    in Baharestan we saw militia with axe choping ppl like meat

    this is horrible

    Horrible... (none / 0) (#5)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:55:00 AM EST
    ...barbaric, sickening--there really aren't enough adjectives to properly describe it.  

    Good god... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:48:36 AM EST
    those poor, insanely brave yearning to be free people...it makes one sick to the stomach.

    How long can they remain non-violent in the face of such brutality?  

    they have not actually been so (none / 0) (#4)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:53:42 AM EST
    non violent. I was reading that the protesters had been turning the tables on the secret police sometimes.  marking their houses and beating the crap out of them sometimes.

    I saw footage of a huge crowd chasing a bunch of riot police.  the police were clearly running for their lives.

    not so totally non violent.  not that there is anything -at all- wrong with that. afaiac.


    Thanks for the info... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:57:52 AM EST
    I don't have a problem with it either...the right to defend yourself is as basic as it gets.

    I just worry about the state/secret police/militia response escalating the violence.


    which (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 11:59:37 AM EST
    it has obviously done.  unfortunately.

    I am interested (none / 0) (#8)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:00:51 PM EST
    on where the mass of military members stand.  The IRIGC is most likely loyal to the Ayatollah, but what about the rest, and will this turn into martial law.  The Supreme Council and the Ayatollah are backing themselves into a corner as far as their options.

    Republican Guard, and their thugs (none / 0) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:28:12 PM EST
    definitely standing with Khomeini. Have read some reports that the army may be loyal to Rafsanjani. Not sure how that will help the people under attack right now.

    Very important question... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:14:20 PM EST
    the 1979 revolution suceeded in part because the military refused to follow orders and fire on the Islamic revolutionaries.

    "Basiji Hunting" (none / 0) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:19:55 PM EST
    By the way, two nights ago I went out to see a few things ... as the general crowds spread into their homes militia style Mousavi supporters were out on the streets 'Basiji hunting'.

    Their resolve is no less than these thugs -- they after hunting them down. They use their phones, their childhood friends, their intimate knowledge of their districts and neighbours to plan their attacks -- they're organised and they're supported by their community so they have little fear. They create the havoc they're after, ambush the thugs, use their Cocktail Molotovs, disperse and re-assemble elsewhere and then start again - and the door of every house is open to them as safe harbour -- they're community-connected.


    Wow.... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:38:08 PM EST
    Nice link...here's a bit more about what is sounding like the new Iranian People's Army in its embryonic stage.

    These are not the students in the dorms, they're the street young -- they know the ways better than most thugs - and these young, a surprising number of them girls, are becoming more agile in their ways as each night passes on.

    Nothing like homefield advantage in combat...it can offset being severely outgunned.  


    I read somewhere (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:42:22 PM EST
    the average age of an Iranian was 17.  a difficult age group to deal with in any culture.

    speaking of 17 year olds (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:00:15 PM EST
    The torture of a 17-year-old in Iran

    A teenager's story, with graphic photos, of abuse at the hands of Iran's religious paramilitaries, the Basij


    Our Government is probably (none / 0) (#12)
    by SOS on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:31:55 PM EST
    watching it like some televised sporting event.

    They are going to profit either way from the outcome. Be it a Pro Western Guy or the Same Lunatic that's been in charge.

    I expect the people getting hurt or killed are pretty much just considered collateral damage.

    Umm.. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:22:00 PM EST
    yeah, we are supposed to spectators.  It's called letting the Iranians self-determine their fate.  

    But you're welcome to start your own Abraham Lincoln Brigade and head over and join the fight if you wish...I'd call ya a hero.

    All the US govt. should do is maybe pulling those BBQ invites to the Iranian diplomats and boycotting all dealings with the Iranian government in light of their deplorable actions.  


    This is almost like (none / 0) (#35)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:35:28 PM EST
    the good ole days of freedom and democracy on the march when the company was training Savak to kick in skulls more efficiently and Richard Helms (American spies?! what American spies?!) was ensconced in the American Emabassy.

    Me thinks maybe we should just sit this one out and let other sovereign nations figure and work out freedom and democracy all on their own.


    Never too late to learn... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:55:50 PM EST
    minding your own damn business is a virtue...but I'm sure our Central Lack of Intelligence Agency will be involved and start fermenting blowback.

    I have been reading some of (none / 0) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:59:47 PM EST
    the allegations that the CIA is behind at least some of this.  it doesnt seem beyond the realm of possibility.  at least to me.

    Certainly fits their M.O (none / 0) (#52)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:22:45 PM EST
    like a moleskin glove.

    That "missing" (none / 0) (#54)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:26:32 PM EST
    from Iraq measly-few-billion you know got skimmed for black ops somewhere.

    We're just supposed to trust these people.


    I actually (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:30:07 PM EST
    hope they are helping them.

    That kinda help only hurts... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:43:44 PM EST
    sooner or later.

    maybe (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:49:28 PM EST
    I think it might depend on who is in charge and what the goal is.
    not a fan of the CIA.

    With the CIA (none / 0) (#80)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:58:44 PM EST
    the goal is generally to prop up some compliant thug who dosnt threaten the U.S investor class. Kinda like K Street with the gloves off.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#20)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:04:54 PM EST
    I guess I don't see what you think the government should do- intervene like in Iraq, what?

    Uh, (none / 0) (#23)
    by bocajeff on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:10:53 PM EST
    they are supposed to 'profit' from it either way as that's kind of their job. It doesn't mean they don't have preferences, it's just that they have to have contingency plans for whatever happens. It's called being prepared.

    Also, what would you like them to do?


    Well, this is interesting (none / 0) (#13)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:36:21 PM EST
    A group of Mullahs took to the streets to join the protests.

    More from the story (none / 0) (#14)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:37:57 PM EST
    Throughout all that, some clerics of the Islamic Republic have spoken up against the stifling of people's right to voice their opinion and in support of new elections.

    On his Web site, Grand Ayatollah Hussein Ali Montazeri described government efforts to crackdown on the protests as threatening the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic because it was no longer representing all the people.

    Moussavi ally and former president Mohammad Khatami also said in a statement that to "protest in a civil manner... is the definite right of the people and all must respect that."

    I read this morning (none / 0) (#28)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:16:31 PM EST
    that Moussavi and a bunch of others had been arrested.

    Hezbollah & (none / 0) (#16)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:41:55 PM EST
     Hamas waiting for Iran's nukes; Al-Qaeda circling around Pakistan and the Supreme Psycho of North Korea playing nuclear chicken.........

    Great times we live in.

    A bit of a neocon gloss (none / 0) (#39)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:41:25 PM EST
    to say Hezbollah=Hamas=Al Queda=Kim Jong Il.

    As they say, the devil's in the details.


    like I said (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:05:19 PM EST
    a tiny silver lining is that at least W is not still in charge.

    Don't forget.... (none / 0) (#78)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 05:23:08 PM EST
    the USA's two bloody occupations, constant butchery in Africa, human rights disgraces in every corner of the globe, overpopulation, pollution, potential worldwide currency collapse...plus the usual deadly sins.

    We're a real winner of a species allright...but we have our rare moments of greatness too.


    A general strike... (none / 0) (#17)
    by mike in dc on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 12:44:25 PM EST
    ...seems like the logical strategy for the reformists to pursue.  They can still get into the streets, but increasingly it looks like the protestors may have to resort to violence just to keep from being killed or beaten themselves.  

    The other half of this is whatever comes out of Rafsanjani's machinations in Qom, with the Assembly of Experts.  Khamanei has stalled the "official" outcome for another 5 days, presumably to try to quell the protests and consolidate control of the government, but the Assembly does still have the power to remove him as Supreme Leader.

    If there's a shutdown of the oil facilities, and the Assembly votes to remove Khamanei, I think the current regime will fall.  I think they know that too, so I expect there to be one last attempt to compromise.

    Not sure they can garner enough support (none / 0) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:33:20 PM EST
    to make a general strike successful. Not all Iranians support the reformists. A large segment of the population strongly support Khomeini and therefore support Ahmadienejad. I doubt anyone really knows what percentage of the population are loyalists and what percentage are reformists. Also there is the variable of how many of the reformists are willing to risk everything to achieve their objective NOW.

    IMO the current government will not compromise.


    it seems we are (none / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:38:01 PM EST
    at a tipping point.  I think the government could fall.  

    True (none / 0) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 01:52:14 PM EST
    The government could fail. Yet IMO they are betting the farm that the best way to keep from failing is to squash the protesters by any means necessary. So rather than compromise they will continue to ratchet up the violence.

    Still believe that my previous post regarding a general strike and that Khomeini still has wide spread support in Iran, is accurate.  


    In a way... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:07:10 PM EST
    the whole thing rests on the consciences of the men the state sends to kill for them....just like '79.  If they have no conscience, or ignore it...we're in for a tragic massacre, or a prolonged bloody revolution if the people can get their guerilla act in gear.  If their consciences kick into gear the regime is toast.

    All in my knuckleheaded opinion of course.


    yes but (none / 0) (#50)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:10:25 PM EST
    I would guess it also depends on how much they learned from the past and how many of the families/loved ones of the men they send to kill for them are under threat or arrest.

    WSWS on Iran (none / 0) (#51)
    by Andreas on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:19:50 PM EST
    From an article published by the WSWS today:

    Neither of the contending factions represents the interests of the working class. Both defend the present theocratic state and have a long history of bloody repression against working people. The victory of Mousavi, no less than Ahmadinejad, would inevitably pave the way for a savage assault on the democratic rights and living standards of working people.

    The working class should certainly exploit the crisis to fight for its own class interests. But it can only do so through a political offensive against all factions of the ruling elite using the methods of class struggle--strikes and factory occupations guided by committees elected by the rank-and-file. The guiding perspective of such a movement has to be the fight for workers' power and a socialist Iran.

    This program is diametrically opposed to that of the various petty-bourgeois left tendencies in Europe and the United States that have responded to the crisis in Iran by lining up behind their own governments in supporting the Mousavi camp.

    The tasks of the Iranian working class
    24 June 2009

    I don't know Andreas... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:34:03 PM EST
    the "Basiji Hunters" Capt. Howdy has brought to our attention sure sound working class to me....street kids trying to secure the rights they can defend...chief among them right now the right not to be killed.

    Maybe we can let the people of Iran address their grievances with this government first before anybody tries to tell them the next one should be socialist, capitalist, etc.


    it seems incredible to me (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:36:20 PM EST
    that the people on the ground would take the risks they are taking if they believed there was little or no difference.

    I think we may not be getting the whole story.


    Definitely not... (none / 0) (#62)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:45:35 PM EST
    getting the whole story...it would be akin to risking your life over Dem vs. Repub...simply not logical.

    Promises of more freedom (none / 0) (#66)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:59:13 PM EST
    and additional rights for women. But as BTD often says Pols are pols and as we know political promises are often broken.

    From what I understand, this is a fight between the ruling elite in Iran and Mousavi is only slightly more moderate than Ahmadinejad. Mousavi's wife may be more of a symbol for civil rights than he. The unrest in Iran has many facets and has been bubbling under the surface for some time. Economics plays a major role.  

    Small steps in easing the restrictions would probably pacify  many of the protesters.


    interesting WaPo piece (none / 0) (#74)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 04:02:39 PM EST
    Iran is so central to the fate of the Middle East that even a partial shift in regime behavior -- an added degree of nuance in its approach to Iraq, Lebanon, Israel or the United States -- could dramatically affect the region. Just as a radical Iranian leader can energize the "Arab street," an Iranian reformer can energize the emerging but curiously opaque Arab bourgeoisie. This is why the depiction of presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi as but another radical, albeit with a kinder, gentler exterior than President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, completely misses the point.

    "Capt Howdy" and the CIA (none / 0) (#69)
    by Andreas on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:23:29 PM EST
    Look at what "Capt Howdy" wrote:

    "allegations that the CIA is behind at least some of this.  it doesnt seem beyond the realm of possibility.  at least to me."

    "I actually"
    "hope they are helping them."

    In fact it is obvious that Murder, Inc. is involved. This gangster organisation does not support "democray" or "human righs" but the interests of US imperialism.

    The people of Iran can not successfully address their grievances without understanding what is going on.


    No argument... (none / 0) (#71)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:29:46 PM EST
    about the organized crime syndicate we call the CIA.

    Though I think the people of Iran understand what is going on better than anybody.


    um, gulity! (none / 0) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:30:03 PM EST
    first, I dont think "its obvious" at all.  the allegations are coming mostly from the middle east.
    its possible.  but on the other  hand why would they want chaos there with possible nuclear material in the mix.  
    second, Leon Panetta is now head of the CIA.  not exactly Dennis Kucinich but not Joe Stalin either.

    could it be possible that the covert arm(s) of the US govt could be used for good on occasion?
    I think it is.


    pretty unbelievable (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:24:31 PM EST

    Neda Soltan's family 'forced out of home' by Iranian authorities

    The Iranian authorities have ordered the family of Neda Agha Soltan out of their Tehran home after shocking images of her death were circulated around the world.

    Neighbours said that her family no longer lives in the four-floor apartment building on Meshkini Street, in eastern Tehran, having been forced to move since she was killed. The police did not hand the body back to her family, her funeral was cancelled, she was buried without letting her family know and the government banned mourning ceremonies at mosques, the neighbours said.

    "We just know that they [the family] were forced to leave their flat," a neighbour said. The Guardian was unable to contact the family directly to confirm if they had been forced to leave.

    Other good twitters (none / 0) (#55)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:28:06 PM EST
    LaraABCNews and madyar. Some of madyar's are in a language I can't read (Farsi?)but a lot are in English.

    Surreal to get these horrible accounts in the same tweet list as Stephen Colbert and Atrios.

    Can we get an open thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:43:54 PM EST
    just put (none / 0) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:47:18 PM EST
    a comment in the last open about this.

    awesome (none / 0) (#64)
    by AlkalineDave on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 02:48:08 PM EST