A real stolen election: Iran in 2009

I was in Florida in 2000 and was there for the debacle over the vote count. Ever since then, we have had to put up with the “George Bush stole the election” crap from the left. They disregarded the legal process and the fact that he won re-election in 2004.

Now the Islamic Republic of Iran has had an “election’. In reality, the thugs Mullahs who run the country select who they want to be Iran’s president. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does a victory dance, the opposition cries foul.

But for those who dreamed of a gentler Iran, Saturday was a day of smoldering anger, crushed hopes and punctured illusions, from the streets of Tehran to the policy centers of Western capitals.

Iranians who hoped for a bit more freedom, a better managed economy and a less reviled image in the world wavered between protest and despair on Saturday. —Reverberations as Door Slams on Hope of Change, NY Times.

Was there ever any doubt? Riots, street battles between the police and opposition and even cut communications. I do like the NY Times “Hope of change” headline. It just shows how out of touch the left is.

The current regime came to power after years of street battles, riots and demonstrations. They can smell when the populace is turning against them. The urban population has always looked to the west, while the poorer rural population swallowed the revolution hook line and sinker. They are the ones most eager to “martyr” themselves for the mullahs.

I see no good coming from this. The mullahs will do what ever they can to keep power. When religion and politics ride in the same cart, the driver never gives up the reigns. They don’t want another revolution, they’ll wind up like the Shah. This election was sham from the beginning:

As a result, Iranian elections are much more about style than about substance. There’s a tendency among analysts to amplify differences, but when it comes to key U.S. policy concerns: Iran’s nuclear ambitions, violent opposition to the Middle East peace process, and support for terrorism, there are none. Remember, that it was under “pragmatist” President ‘Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and “reformist” President Mohammad Khatami that the Islamic Republic not only built up its nuclear capability but also, according to the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, experimented with warhead design.

The last thing to remember is that the real power in the Islamic Republic rests with the Office of the Supreme Leader, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and, in the economic sphere, with the Revolutionary Foundations.
Eye on Iran : National Review June 11, 2009.

While the right saw through the smoke and mirrors, the left was like a deer in the headlights:

American neoconservatives have often used the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to bolster their case for aggressive action against Iran. So the assumption might be that they would be rooting for Iranians to take care of the problem themselves by electing reformer Mir Hossein Mousavi in today’s vote.–Right-Wing Neocons Rooting For Ahmadinejad Win, Rachel Weiner, The Huffington Post

This would matter if there was a difference between the two candidates. There isn’t one on the issues that count.
The foreign press gets it:

Under the headline, “Right-Wing Neocons Rooting For Ahmadinejad Win,” Rachel Weiner wrote that neocons are: “rooting for the anti-American bogeyman to stay in power.”

She stretched a point Daniel Pipes made about Ahmadinejad waking up Europe to the seriousness of the Iranian threat.

Let us review. In 2003, President Bush identified Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an “Axis of Evil,” which the left scoffed at. Iran and North Korea have no connection, they argued.

6 years later, we see the connection between their two nuke programs daily. North Korea is helping Iran acquire nuke capabilities and of course, Kim Jong-Il now has a nuke.– Dumping Ahmadinejad on the neocons, Don Surber, UK Dailymail.com (h/t: Stop The ACLU)

Mr. Surber p0wns the left on several points, chief of which is that they embrace any dictator who claims to stand against the west (read America). They even lavish praise on tyrants who murder their own people and start bloody wars. Yes I know the US has supported brutal regimes, but we question those decisions and the left protests our support for them. Question the left’s support for Iran and you get this:

Other neocons, worried a shift in power will signal a fresh start relations with Iran, are already deflating a Mousavi win. The same pundits who constantly point out Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism, and nuclear ambitions as reasons to confront Iran now argue that the president doesn’t matter.

Mrs. Weiner, does it hurt when you contort logic like that? The real power is the the mad mullahs who see war with Israel and the west as a holy crusade (no matter how many innocent civilians on all sides die). And that is why Iran’s election was stolen.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “A real stolen election: Iran in 2009”

  1. […] the original: A real stolen election: Iran in 2009 « Chockblock's blog Tags: ahmadinejad, anti, Headline, rooting-for, throngs […]

  2. wwwwwwwwoooooowwwww…. thanks for info brother…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: