Baharestan Square Massacre?

My God. If this is accurate. (warning gruesome photo of ax wound at link) And there are multiple reports. The phone call below is simply horrific. The WH rescinded the Jul 4th invite. Big freaking whoop. This is the evil Obama couldn't wait to sit down with without pre-conditions? These are the results of his Cairo speech in his view? The Ayatolla he reached out to before the election?

The man is a f&*king disgrace. Stupid wide-eyed liberals. They never learn. If he had any dignity or respect for people he'd cancel his ABC sideshow and allow the news to focus on this. I doubt he will. It's all about what he wants in the end. Pathetic.

This is the Iranian regime, wading into its own unarmed people and axing them to death, bludgeoning women (seen as the greatest threat to the regime) and throwing them to their deaths from pedestrian bridges. The same Iranian regime whose embassy officials are invited to American embassies around the world to celebrate on July 4th, of all things, a successful revolution.

This frantic phone call from a Tehran woman will break your heart as you consider our standard response has been "that there are sets of international norms and principles about violence" and that "the international community is watching." Part of yesterday's response by President Obama in a press conference included "that there is a peaceful path that will lead to stability and legitimacy (of the Iranian regime) and prosperity for the Iranian people. We hope they take it." The Iranian theocratic regime clearly is not interested.

Comments

[mark l.]

it's like watching a rat, run thru a maze, hitting every dead end.
the media, and even the public, have the advantage of seeing that this guy is heading the wrong way, but we have to sit through reports of how wonderfully decisive and quick he is...

they can't even send a credible dem out there to speak for him, lest the public believe that he is incapable of handling the crisis, himself. It's 12 days since the revolution got going, and every day has been an erosion of the motives of his previous days statements.

the reason no one can go out there and speak about it?
no one, and I do mean, no one, gets obama's foreign policy. how could anyone be asked to defend it or promote it?
it's gibberish filtered through a leaderless quorum.

we might as well outsource our foreign policy to a focus group.

[SacTownMan]

I am speechless!

The picture from the link is disturbing!

These monsters need to be wiped off of the face of the earth!

But hey those evil Jews are the real animals right Barry. Those pesky settlements are the problem in the middle east!

If Xerxes continues to ignore this abuse of human rights and keeps going with the Pravda/ABC sham broadcast he is a bigger asshole than I thought.

But hey the BBQ is off, way to show those butchers tough guy!

If the world lets this ride we are no better than the butchers that waged this carnage!

I pray for the souls of these poor people that actually thought they could expect the POTUS to stand up for them!

This country needs to pounded back into the stone age and the Jews should be fueling up the jets as we speak!

[IslamoLlama]

I'm not sure how, exactly, the Ayatollah's actions are Obama's fault. Would big bad John McCain have performed some political jujitsu we are unaware of? Exactly what is Obama supposed to do about a looming Iranian civil war?

Quit your crocodile tears. You guys spent four years begging to roll tanks across the border and launch bombing runs on power plants and cities. Suddenly you're crying about Iranian casualties? Bull-shit.

"-- If he had any dignity or respect for people he'd cancel his ABC sideshow and allow the news to focus on this. --"

Oh, I see now. I get it. Tragedy half a world away means the President can't pass universal health care at home. I wonder how this logic would have flown in 2005 when Mugabe was crushing dissent in Zimbabwe while Bush trotted around the US trying to privatize social security.

It's a beautiful mish-mash of right wing nonsense. Obama should stop supporting a policy conservatives hate, so that he can "let" the media (which cannot report on Iran without Obama's permission) focus on Tehran.

Of course, Dan and his fellow wingnut troopers won't be watching any of the Iran coverage on ABC or CBS, because of ongoing boycotts. But these news agencies shouldn't be distracted by something the wingnut brigades don't want to talk about, even if they don't plan on tuning in.

Makes sense to me.

[kol2009]

Typical conservatives, taking any event and using it as a platform to attack and berate others, all the while doing nothing constructive themselves; in fact, their actions are nothing but counterproductive in the end. It'll be a wonderful day when people like you realize just how pathetic your bias is and finally opens your eyes to the world to the point you can actually achieve something meaningful beyond pointless attacks loaded with propaganda and half truths.

I suppose we could go back to Bush's foreign policy? Bomb the world and hope they don't get made about it later. Yeah, we all saw how eight years of conservative foreign policy was working. You don't get the policy? That's no surprise, your obvious bias and closed-minded nature would make understanding anything outside of your self imposed bubble of stupidity and ignorance a complete impossibility. Give up the meaningless ranting and attacks, it just makes the conservatives look more idiotic. Liberals are far from perfect themselves, as is the complete concept of the 2 party system being anything close to "democratic", but at least they're not resembling 5 year old kids in a playground argument everytime they open their mouths.

For gods sake. Grow up and learn to think for yourself, instead of how your party and your bias tells you to think. It gets old, and it's amazingly pathetic that anyone would criticize peoples policy and actions when their own actions are so obviously governed by extreme prejudice. It's also pathetic that you would use a horrible event like what is occurring in Iran as another platform to spit out attacks and propaganda.

[Anon]

I'm no Obama fan, but WHAT exactly do you think he should be doing that he is not doing?

Any kind of military action would unite Iran against the U.S. and we'd be back where we started. Sometimes you have to watch from the sidelines and hope whatever covert assets you have in place can do some good.

Rhetoric is just that, if he threatens some kind of military action, same result: Iranians will start chanting death to American again. We already have every kind of economic sanction that exists levied against Iran.

[Dan Riehl]

I'm not suggesting we should be attacking anyone. But the two liberal dirtbags up above are just that, dirt.

This is a regime to rush to negotiate with? This is a regime to waste your time talking to so they can go on working toward a nuclear weapon? Seriously?

Do you think pressuring Isreal to not build some few settlements will change anything about this regime? I posted when this started he gave them a green light for this when he said he wanted to talk anyway, despite any election issues. That doesn't mean he could stop it. I don't think he can accomplish anything in the ME or elsewhere given his need to apologize for America at every turn. But these are the very types of regimes he is, in effect, apologizing to. Iran inparticular.

The man is disgraceful as the purported leader of a free world. France and England have shown more strength and principle than this fool.

And the two apolgists up above are as disgusting and pathetic as he is.

[mark l.]

"It'll be a wonderful day when people like you realize just how pathetic your bias is and finally opens your eyes to the world to the point you can actually achieve something meaningful beyond pointless attacks loaded with propaganda and half truths."

yea, like all of obama's acheivements with the Iranian regime.

the crux of his foreign policy beliefs were built around negotiating with the current regime.

nuclear deals, mainstreaming of hamas as a political force in the ME, so that ahmadineajd would back off the terrorist side of things...if you ignore that they were the last govt in the ME openly sponsoring terrorists, there is a lot to reccomend about the current regime.

obama's secret plan for peace in the ME is now short one ingredient.

"WHAT exactly do you think he should be doing that he is not doing?"

his job is to be responsible for the citizens of the united states. his job is to communicate his decisions and his impressions of a very important world event. as it stands now, he can't even articulate a policy for the US, for fear that his words will have ramifications in another country. thus far, the argument of not wanting to interfere-which is a policy within itself-will not be discussed for fear of it becoming propoganda. Ignoring the fact that the regime has been using us interference as propoganda already...

he can't come out and say that the regime is authoritarian and supports terrorism?

if the words of the president are limited by the sentiments of another country, does that not suggest that the country in question controls the words of the president?

thus far, obama's strategy(?) is to act like he doesn't know much. as of late, I'm getting the idea that it isn't even a strategy.

bottom line?
the us cares more about the iranian revolution than they do healthcare, but he is going to spend his time on primetime to discuss a relatively irrelevant topic, instead of one that history has put in his lap.

friday, primetime address, where he spells out what is at stake, and what is transpiring in Iran.
he'll never do it.

[mark l.]

let me pop a little bubble while on the topic of propoganda...

keep seeing these uber libs, and wh insiders touting the cairo speech as the source of the revolution...

pretending this is true, then doesn't the messiah have an obligation to see it thru? isn't the implication that his speech led to people dying in the streets, and where he could once give a speech to support, he now must be silent as the die has been cast?

[SacTownMan]

These trolls are are the perfect example of genetics gone wrong!

Lame-O and this other nutjob are so full of hate they simply can't fathom the moral outrage that this crushing of dissent in Iran demands. Instead they cling to their Bush Derangement Syndrome like a couple of crack heads!

The issue is the inhumanity that these nutjobs exhibit and the lack of moral outrage that the great Xerxes shows by sucking up to these murdering thugs!

The "burning" issue of nationalized healthcare pales in significance to the brutality being inflected on these innocent, freedom loving people.

There was time when the president of this country was the LEADER of the free world and not a crackhead bent on the destruction of our own individual liberties and freedoms.

No preconditions and a burger and a beer, sounds like great leadership skills to me!

Your blind hatred of Bush has NOTHING to do with the fact that "the One" has no moral compass. He is simply a Soro's owned pawn in the "need" to push a progessive agenda.

It is moments like these when REAL men of conviction show their true selves. Unfortunately the resident "bastard in chief" has not shown himself to be anything other than a media crafted, phony POS!

[syn]

"WHAT exactly do you think he should be doing that he is not doing?"

How about getting to work at in the White House spending hour upon hour, day after day on the phone, having serious dialogue with the leaders of the International Community, whom he so praises and admires, figuring out ways to pressure the brutal regime into ending the butchery.

How about heading to the United Nations, make a speech to the world about what America stands for; he's su0ppose to be the Great Orator who can make the ocean's rise, cure all dis-ease and bring great peace to the world with just a few well chosen words!

Instead he's front and center on Kingdom Hollywood's TV Land selling his fraudulent stupid soap to the children which promises to bring shiny happy to unwashed masses plus lots of peace, love and understanding.

And then when the grand show is over and the lights are out, he'll take ABC out for f**king ICE CREAM!!!

[mark l.]

stm-

shhhh...

the iranian regime will use your words as propoganda, and the dead iranians will become your fault.

[Anon]

Why would the US care more about the Iranian revolution than healthcare? Whatever happens in Iran it is going to have a nominal effect on this country or its ME policy.

Iran is not going to turn into an American loving country overnight, it may be less oppressive and less a player in other ME politics, less of a theocracy, but it will still be anti-Israel, pro-Hezbollah and anti-American.

I don't think we're pressuring Israel to stop expanding its illegal settlements as a way to get something for Iran, we're doing it because its the only way for the 2-state solution to move forward.

And yes, I think it is REALLY STUPID to stamp your foot and refuse to talk to your enemies at all, ever. It leaves you nothing to negotiate with.

[Ad rem]

Media Matters thus opens their doors and lets two of their finest out for a days reconoscence. Do you think they get paid per posting.....or is it done by the hour?

[Nishner]

It's a bit hard to take seriously advice from people whose #1 priority for Iran up to a few days ago was to bomb it.

[Ad rem]

Iranians have nothing to fear from liberals, unless they're building "aspirin factories"......

[Boob]

where's iran?

[syn]

"where's iran?"

It's where Obama's International Community is hacking people to death with axes.

[Dan Riehl]

I altered "Bob's" comment given it's repugnant nature. Some people forget who owns this place.

[mark l.]

thus far the protestors have gone out of their way not to injure the regime forces.
the massacre changes their tactics.

[katablog.com]

So if a massacre happens half a world away, it's not real? The bleeding people hit with axes and clubs hurt less, don't really die, aren't real people? Why did the liberals care so much about the Iraqi people "half a world away" who were casualties of war but now they think a government take over of health care is more important?

Here is an open opportunity to have real dialogue with the people of Iran by having some very strong dialogue with their leaders who are murdering their citizens. Here's the opportunity to show the difference between the people of Iran and a few hundred thugs put in leadership positions and given the guns and the army. Maybe it's only Iranian leaders that want the death of Israel? How could we possibly know what the people want when they are being murdered for speaking up?

Finally, is that really how you live your life - what's in it for me? A death of a human being doesn't matter if it doesn't effect me? And you can sleep at night with those type of thoughts?

[Ad rem]

Hey Katablog.....hope you and the kitties (Mr. Cowkitty, Bart, and Gizmo) are well. Tried to comment at your site, but kept getting a "site is having problems" message.

[Bob]

Dan, you can dish it out, but you can't take it, eh? The fact that you wouldn't allow my comment to stand as-is shows that you're closer to a thug than a democrat. You're a hate-monger and a moral coward.

[Rich K]

"that there is a peaceful path that will lead to stability and legitimacy (of the Iranian regime) and prosperity for the Iranian people. We hope they take it."

It's always peaceful in the cemetary, Right Mr Obama!!!!

[Bob]

Hey, I have a great idea. Rather than complaining about what Obama is doing, without ever being able to say what ELSE you think he should be doing, why not take the burden of responsibility on yourselves and quit the whining? All of you brave partisans should get on a plane, go to Iran and have a TEA PARTY right there in the middle of Tehran. Between your chants of "Death to Al Franken" and "Death to Obama," the authorities may be so confused about whose side you're on that they may not shoot you.

[SacTownMan]

Obi-Wan the hate is strong in this one!

[Bob]

Here's what an Iranian-American, Hooman Majd, has to say about conservative criticism of Obama over the current crisis:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/25/hooman_majd/index.html

"The neocons know nothing about Iran, nothing about the culture of Iran. They have no interest in understanding Iran, in speaking to any Iranian other than Iranian exiles who support the idea of invasions -- I'll call them Iranian Chalabis. It's offensive, even to an Iranian American like me. These are people who would have actually preferred to have Ahmadinejad as president so they could continue to demonize him and were worried, as some wrote in Op-Eds, that Mousavi would be a distraction and would make it easier for Iranians to build a nuclear weapon and now all of a sudden they want to be on his side? Go away.

I'm not saying Obama is the most knowledgeable person on Iran, but he's obviously getting good advice right now. He understands way more about the culture of the Middle East than any of the neocons. For them to be lecturing President Obama is a joke. I have criticized Obama; for instance, I criticized him for having a patronizing tone in his Persian New Year message. But right now I think he's doing a good job. The John McCains of the world, they're Ahmadinejad's useful idiots. They're doing a great job for him."

[mark l.]

Rather than complaining about what (Bush) is doing, without ever being able to say what ELSE you think he should be doing, why not take the burden of responsibility on yourselves and quit the whining?

bob, the dems have been telling us they could do it better for eight years...

here's your chance big boy.

I sincerely hope that this minor ripple in Iran gets soothed over quickly, so that it doesn't embarass the messiah too much. He's been itching for a 'deal' with them, I hope Obama doesn't have to wait too long, while the regime is killing its citizens.

The problem remains, that along with sponsoring terrorism and funding segments of the insurgency in Iraq with weapons, money, and advisors that led to the death of american soldiers. We can now add to "slaughtering his own population" to the list.

When the poster comes out of ahmadinejad shaking the messiah's hand, I'm buying one.
Nothing could make me laugh more, with the exception of the nk missile boat launching a nuke at hawaii.

[mark l.]

bob-

you inflate the neocon strategy.

bush set about to change the ME. one of the under-reported sides of iraq is the fact that their supreme leader, sistani, advocates religion functioning outside of govt.

I noticed that there are clergy in Iran who share the sentiment. If sistani is still under house arrest, and is never given a chance to advocate seperating relgion from govt, and provided a opportunity to demonstrate what he preaches, the Iranian revolution is far weaker.

I think bush changed the me.

[Bob]

Again, mark, lots of self-righteous, outraged-sounding words, but nowhere in any of your posts is a single piece of actionable advice for what you think Obama should be doing. And it's not at all true that Democrats had no alternative proposals under Bush. It was things like, DON'T invade Iraq, DON'T spy on Americans without warrants, DON'T cut taxes on the wealthy. You can argue that you don't agree with what they recommended, but they had lots of suggestions, and time has only proven that most of them were right.

Since you bring up the Bush era (aren't you the one who's always saying that Bush is history and everybody should move on?), it's worth noting that Republicans under Bush had no magic solution to either Iran or North Korea. Since your side did not have, and still doesn't have, any practical answer to the Iran problem (other than perhaps some kind of military intervention that even the neocons don't have the balls to recommend now), you'd think you'd do the decent thing and at least not undermine your president during an international crisis for no other reason than to try to score cheap political points. The Sistani example is rather far-fetched, with no proof to back it up. You might just as well give Bush credit for Moqtada al Sadr. Take your pick. In any case, Iraq is still, much more than anything else, an albatross around our necks that has cost us far more than it will have ever been worth to our national security. Again, too bad he didn't listen to the liberals' advice.

[North Dallas Thirty]

you'd think you'd do the decent thing and at least not undermine your president during an international crisis for no other reason than to try to score cheap political points.

Actually, Bob, you and your Obama Party said that the decent thing WAS to undermine your president during an international crisis to score cheap political points. I believe you called it "speaking truth to power" and insisted that such dissent was "patriotic".

But I understand why you need to shift the meme now. Before, you were screaming and hollering that the reason Obama wasn't doing anything was because he didn't want to given the mullahs reason to blame the United States. Now that the mullahs have blamed the US anyway, demonstrating that Obama is an ignorant fool who has no concept of the Iranian regime, you have to start whining and crying that criticism of the Obama Party is "unpatriotic".

[Bob]

It seems like even the more experienced Republicans, like former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, have the maturity to be honest about the situation in Iran vis-a-vis Obama's options:

Q: Obama aides told reporters there is little to nothing the U.S. can do. Is it demonstrating a weakness?

SCOWCROFT: No I don’t think so. I don’t think so. How can we be more influential? We don’t control Iran. We don’t control the government obviously. There is little we can do to change the situation domestically in Iran right now and I think an attempt to change it is more likely to be turned against us and against the people who are demonstrating for more freedom and therefore I think we need to look at what we can do best, which is to try to influence Iranian behavior in the region, and with nuclear weapons.

Is Scowcroft "dirt" too, Dan, in your self-righteous judgment? By the way, Dan, what did YOU do to overthrow Ahmedinejad today?

[Nishner]

Seems like it's working out a lot better than what NDT's guy wanted, that would be bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

[North Dallas Thirty]

Yup, Scowcroft is dirt.

But then again, that surprises no one; he was one of the first to push appeasement of Iran and say that Obama should ignore the human rights abuses there. Do you expect him to admit that he was wrong?

And what did Riehl do? He publicized and condemned the abuses. He made it clear what the brutal Iranian regime is doing.

Problem is, from Bob's perspective, he also pointed out that Barack Obama wasn't doing squat.

[Rob Crawford]

"you'd think you'd do the decent thing and at least not undermine your president during an international crisis for no other reason than to try to score cheap political points"

Wow.

Just... wow.

[Bob]

"And what did Riehl do? He publicized and condemned the abuses. He made it clear what the brutal Iranian regime is doing."

And the mullahs are no doubt quaking in their boots because of Dan's resolute posturing. LOL. Of course, your statement implies that Obama was somehow NOT condemning what was going on in Iran. Here's Obama's statement on the situation:

"First, I'd like to say a few words about the situation in Iran. The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings, and imprisonments of the last few days. I strongly CONDEMN these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost."

So it looks like Obama specifically CONDEMNED what was going on too. So what's your beef, poseur? If Obama is not "doing squat" then neither is Dan, it seems. But honestly, as Scowcroft (a much more knowledgeable commentator than you or anyone else around here) said, there's really only so much that we can do from over here. Unless you propose some kind of military strike. Is that what you're proposing? Again: LOL. What a bunch of poseurs.

[Rob Crawford]

Yeah, there's nothing between mealy-mouthed statements (while stroking the mullahs off under the table) and ordering the troops in. Absolutely no options in the middle.

None.

At all.

Nope.

[Bob]

"Yeah, there's nothing between mealy-mouthed statements (while stroking the mullahs off under the table) and ordering the troops in. Absolutely no options in the middle."

And yet you fail to provide any concrete suggestions yet again. "Wow, just wow." LOL.

[North Dallas Thirty]

So it looks like Obama specifically CONDEMNED what was going on too.

Funny; if Obama condemns Iran, why does he still insist on negotiating with them without preconditions?

It's just another Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers example; Obama "condemns" anti-Semitism while clapping and cheering for twenty years as his "spiritual mentor" blames all the world's problems on "Jews", and he "condemns" terrorism and extremism while cultivating and supporting the finest American examples of it.

The mullahs know that they can crack heads and do whatever they want; Obama's just going to go out for ice cream. He doesn't care.

[Bob]

"The mullahs know that they can crack heads and do whatever they want"

So tell us what YOU'D do to keep the mullahs from cracking heads.

[Bob]

Wow, this is great, North Dallas. I finally found a magic phrase that can make you shut the hell up. From now on, I'll just ask you what concrete suggestions you have for what Obama should be doing about the Iranian crisis. It seems to stop you dead in your tracks.

[North Dallas Thirty]

LOL....more like I do have things other than this to do. I know you wouldn't understand that, given that you're paid to troll blogs by Axelrod.

What would I do? Condemn the violence. Impose immediate sanctions. Force the UN to issue a resolution. And tell Iran that there will be no negotiations until they stop brutalizing their own people.

Instead, what did Obama do? Eat ice cream, while insisting that only "wingnuts" would condemn the violence and that doing so would mean the Iranians would blame the US. A week later, when the Iranians were blaming us anyway, then he flip-flopped, as expected, and whined about how bad the violence was while still saying how much he looked forward to "negotiating".

[Bob]

Damn . . . I knew it was too good to be true. Sigh.