Do you need evidence that Iranian opposition does not want Obama to meddle in the Iranian affairs?

Here is one interesting evidence that the head of Iranian dissent against the mullahs, the top opposition candidate Mousavi does not think so...

From the Office of Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi
To the President of the USA, Mr. Barack Hussein Obama:

Dear Mr. President,

In the name of the Iranian people, we want you to know that when you recently made the statement "Achmadinejad or Mousavi? Two of a kind," we consider this as a grave and deep insult, not just to Mr. Mousavi but especially against the judgment of the Iranian people, against our moral conviction and intelligence, especially those of the young generation that comprises a population of 31 million.

It is a specially grave insult for those who are now fighting for democracy and freedom, and an unwarranted gift and even praise for Mr. Khamenei, whose security forces are now killing peaceful Iranians in the streets of every major city in the country.

Your statement misled the people of the world. It was no doubt inspired by your hope for dialogue with this regime, but you cannot possibly believe in promises from a regime that lies to its own people and then kills them when they demand the promises be kept.

By such statements, your administration and you discourage the Iranian people, who believe and trust in the values of democracy and freedom. We are pleased to see that you have condemned the regime's murderous violence, and we look forward to stronger support for the rightful struggle of the Iranian people against the actions of a regime that is your enemy as well as ours.

Would Biden be better than Obama?

Personally, I believe Biden would be a far better president than Obama. Both of them inherently want to destroy this country and its economy (or, as they see it - make it more progressive) - but Biden would be far less effective, given the fact that he is an idiot, and everyone laughs at him. It will take months and months before Obama's popularity drops to the level of the approval of his policies. Obama is quite effective in promoting the left-wing reactionary policies, even though Americans are against them. I am sure Biden would be simply laughed out of office.

Revolution in Iran - quoting Lenin

When discussing the situation in Iran, it is a worthwhile exercise to study the works of famous revolutionaries. The most talented of them all, Vladimir Lenin, the father of the communist revolution in Russia, proposed a concept of what he called "The Revolutionary Situation". According to Lenin, if and only if such a situation arises, it is possible to destroy the existing regime through the uprising.

According to Lenin, there are three objective signs of a revolutionary situation (my translation):

1. The inability of the political elite to continue its rule over the people - i.e. the elites cannot force, and the people would not agree to the status quo.
2. Dramatic increase of economic hardship for the working class.
3. Dramatic rise of people's political activity and their readiness to spontaneous revolutionary actions.

So far, it seems all three conditions are satisfied for Iran. The elites are split, the loss of oil revenues wrecked the economy, the masses cannot take it any more, and there is a massive increase in the number and intensity of demonstrations. So far, three for three. Not too bad.

What is left to find out is whether Lenin's "subjective conditions" are being satisfied. Quoting Lenin: "Are the revolutionary movement and its leadership strong enough to organize the massive uprising which will destroy the old government?"

It would appear that Mousavi is quite up to the task. Not only the dissident leader publicly said that he was ready to die for the revolution - he even smacked Obama for equating him with Ahmadinejad. It looks like Mousavi is ready to fight the mullahs and Obama at the same time. Attaboy!

I personally believe that Iranian dissidents may well win this time. God's speed, comrades! Lets finish off the Islamo-Fascist-Theocracy. Death to Tyrants!

Can Iranians win?

I am not an Iranian, but I was born, raised and educated in the USSR, so I believe my experience could help in figuring out the nuts and bolts of the current events in Iran.

Can Iranians defeat the mullahs? I most surely believe so. Here are my reasons.

1. The Iranian political elite is split.
This is a very important issue, since it gives a lot of leverage and legitimacy to the pro-democracy movement. After all, they've gotten one of the top contenders on their side, a contender with some clout within the Iranian military appratus and police.

2. The regime is caught in an obvious hypocrisy
On one side, the mullahs claim that Iran is a democratic state, but the opposition says that the mullahs falsified the results of the elections. This by itself is a very strong argument which is difficult to refute. If the people don't trust the regime's propaganda, then the mullahs have little chance of persuading the people to calm down. When the people are ready to puke at the mere sound of a "great" ayatollah's voice - there is no chance his arguments will be even heard by the people, let alone trusted. I strongly believe that many Iranian people are ready to believe the worst about the regime, and dismiss any explanations out of hand - same as it was in the USSR by the 1991. Every Soviet citizen remember the common belief - if the government is denying that an something happened - you are damn sure it did happen.

3. There are no tanks on the streets
So far, the regime did not attempt to use the Iranian armed forces to put down the rebellion - which indictates that the mullahs are not certain about their loyalty. Moreover, there are reports (unconfirmed at this moment) that the mullahs are using arab thugs (Hezballah and Hamas) as well as Venesuelian police to harrass the rebellion. This may be a major PR advantage for the dissidents - they should use the Iranian nationalism card to defeat the regime. I am sure there are plenty of Iranian soldiers who would shoot down the Hezballah thugs without a moment's hesitation (if not an outright glee). Imagine the Russian tsars using Austrian thugs to put down the people's rebellion in Russia in 1917 - at the height of WW1. Even tsar's personal guard would tear them into pieces.

All in all, if people of Iran play it right, they may well get rid of the mullah's regime. And the longer this is going on, the better (for at least a few weeks), since people are getting more and more radicalized. A few days ago, most Iranians would be fine with the mullahs declaring Mousavi a winner. Today, they are storming the headquaters of the mullah's Gestapo. Tomorrow, they may try to hang the mullahs on the lamposts.

How to make anti-Obama claims stick...

Very simple. Run ads with Obama in 2008 swearing on his mother's grave that he won't raise taxes on people who earn less than $250,000. Then, run some recordings in 2008 from Rush or Hannity questionning Obama's promise. Follow this with DNC proposals for all the new taxes, and end with a question - who are you gonna believe in 2010, Obama or Rush?

Mousavi versus Gorbachev...

It's now often said that Mousavi is no Gorbachev. Well, let me remind the people about comrade Gorbachev. For one, he came from a typical communist carrer ladder, and he was being promoted by a KGB Chief Andropov. Secondly, while Gorbachev indeed brought some reforms to the USSR, those were done due to American pressure. Thirdly, don't forget that Gorbachev was doing his best to prevent Eltsin from being elected, and was trying to get his hard-core communist buddy into power. Fourthly, lets mention that the Soviet troops invaded Vilnus, the capital of Estonia in 1990, and took over the TV station. And all this was not in vain, after the anti-communist revolution in August 1991, which was won under the slogan to defend Gorbachev from the communist putch - Gorbachev lost his power and presidency in December 1991.

What does it all mean? If the dissisdent movement in Iran wins, there is a good chance that Mousavi won't last long. It's not unusual that revolutions start with people's demonstrations against some non-ground breaking issues, and later people become extremely radicalized and break down the whole regime. So, don't be afraid by Mousavi, he is riding the tiger now. Pay attention to the tiger, the Iranian people who finally got tired of the mullah's regime.

Does it matter if Mussavi is as bad as Ahmie?

Some nay-sayers believe that America should stay away from the Iranian revolution because, among many other reasons, Mussavi is just as bad as the current imbecile in charge of Iran. Interestingly enough, Obama, the man who said that his America-is-so-wrong-please-forgive-us speech in Cairo resulted in fruitful and sincere debates between the presidential candidates in Iran - is now claiming that both candidates are in fact equally distateful. A more pragmatic view would be to remember that the Soviet president Gorbachev, a man who's reinstatement was demanded during the August revolution in 1991, was and is a devoted communist. And yet, the defeat of the communist putch resulted in drastic democratization of Russia, and Gorbachev lost his power in a matter of months after the putch was defeated. In case of Iran, it matters little if Mussavi is a progressive moslem like Ahmie or Arafat, or he actually wants Iran to become a free Western country. What matters is that succesful revolution against the mullahs will shake the whole system, and empower the people of Iran. Once they break the yoke of mullahs - they will not rest until they become free - this is the logic of the revolution.

Obama is awfully quiet on Iran...

Obama regime is afraid to mutter a single critisism about Iranian oppression of dissidents. "Who are we to meddle in Iranian internal affairs" - they say. And yet, does anyone doubt that if Israel were to build a dozen houses for the Jews in the West Bank - then Obama would be all over the news blasting the evil zionist regime?

Obama is not a stupid man, it's just that he has a different system of priorities. "Them Jews", as his spiritual leader Wright said, "them Jews".

What Iranian dissidents and American patriots should do...

Iranian dissidents must immediately call for the Persian army to intervene and protect Iranian students from the arab merceneries, who are killing the people on the streets of Tehran. Notice that the mullahs did not send the army to stop the protests, which is a clear sign that they are not sure that the generals and the soldiers will shoot at their fellow citizens. No tanks on the streets of Tehran is a very promising sign. This weakness must be immediately exploited. Appeal to Persian nationalism!

In America, Dick Cheney should imediately give a speech and push Obama to abandon his pre-election promises of appeasement, and instead confront the Iranian mullahs. The first step for Obama would be to come out 100% for the Iranian dissidents and demand an immediate halt to repressions and violence. Secondly, Obama must urgently convene all Western nations and use his skills, influence and popularity and convince them to declare an immediate embargo on all economic relations with Iran until the mullahs back down. GOP must show itself a powerful pro-freedom force. America will not forget this!

It seems like Bush's Middle East strategy is working and the domino is starting to fall. Progressives and patriots must make sure that Obama does not squander the opportunity to democratize the Middle East. Hooray to Bush!

What is happening in Iran? The view of a Russian immigrant.

The events in Iran remind me of the 1991 revolution in the USSR, except there is no Eltsin to raise the million-strong masses and there is no "White House" surrounded by armed supporters of democracy. This is a giant minus for the freedom fighters. A big plus is the reported use of imported thugs from Lebanon, Syria and Venesuela. This clearly means that the islamic regime does not trust the regular armed forces.
What must be done is obvious - the leaders of the movement must appeal to the Iranian Armed forces, beg them to protect the people of Iran from the bloodthirsty foreign thugs-for-hire. It's a risky move, but it may work.

It's extremely unfortunate that America is rendered impotent by the liberal fifth column. The uprising of the Iranian people is what progressive people of the entire world expected for years. Bush's domino of democracy is finally starting to fall - but a year too late. It's as if Bush Sr. lost the 1988 elections or the USSR broke apart in 1993.

Events in Iran complicate Obama's plans for the Middle East

As you may know, thousands of people demonstrate against the mullahs rule in Iran. As a result, hordes of progressives from Lebanon and Syria (Hezbollah) and Venesuelan security personnal are called in to suppress the people's rebellion. If the people's revolution in Iran is not defeated, Obama's plans for the Middle East will be in serious jeopardy. Today, the Glorious Leader Barack Hussein Obama is using Iran's regime as as his enforcer against the state of Israel. If the mullahs are defeated, Obama would lose his best bogey-man.

Based on this logic, I predict that Obama will not support the revolution in Iran.

This may scare some...

Jimmy Carter won in 1976.

Margaret Thatcher won in 1979.

Ronald Reagan won in 1980.


Barack Obama won in 2008.

Right-wingers overwhelmingly won in nearly all of European elections in 2009.

Who will win in 2012 in US?

Obama is choosing an interesting strategy in fighting terrorists

Seems like Obama has discovered a very efficient way to close Gitmo - he is going to kill as many terrorists as possible without going through the trouble of an actual trial. Hats off to Ba-ba, nice move. This once again underscores that conservatives don't understand him very well - he is not a naive child. An idealistic virgin would not be able to go through Chicago jungles more smoothly than a hot knife through butter.

Anyway, I've already written on this subject some time ago, see HERE for example and HERE. Obama reminds me of another pretty famous politician. I believe things will get much worse in America and in the world. I wish you all good luck.

Liberals are trying to spin Obama's words...

Liberal comrades HERE are trying to reconcile his statements that USA is not a Christian nation, and then his later statement that US is a moslem nation. Here is the exact Obama-quote: "And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.". I think it's quite obvious that before Obama, the US was a Christian nation, but once Obama tooo over, and "took the number of muslem Americans", America immediately turned into a moslem country. Obama has this power, you know. Why does Obama have this enormous power over the USA? The answer is given HERE...

cuius regio, eius religio

As the Roman saying went, "religion of the ruler would be the faith of his subjects". I believe this is the only explanation for Obama's recent claim that America is one of the largest moslem countries. This is particularily interesting given that just a few weeks ago he claimed that USA is not a christian country.

For all intents and purposes - how could big Baba make this series of claims? While christians are a great majority in the US, moslems are one of the smallest groups, probably smaller than mormons or jews. The only logical explanation is given above:

"cuius regio, eius religio", religion of the ruler would be the faith of his subjects.