Day 8: The Violence Continues

June 21st, 2009 By: Michael Merritt | Tags:

Iranian protesting on June 20thApparently preferring to keep their citizens downtrodden as much as possible rather than accept they have a real problem on their hands with the election results, we enter day 8 of the protests in Iran and the tyrannical tactics the government are using to crack down on them.

It is quite something to behold how far a government will go in order to make their citizens fear retaliation enough to just shut up and go home.  The violence was reportedly worse today, with apparently some sort of acid mixture being rained down on the citizens of Tehran.  At least 19 people are dead, and maybe more, according to CNN.  One woman, Neda, is getting all the press (or Tweets), but there are so many others as well, and not just today.

I’m undecided what to think of all this, whether it’s a turning point, or whether both sides are still in a stalemate.  Though, without any further news, it still seems like a stalemate at this point.  The Guardian Council is recounting a laughable number of votes, Khamenei still thinks everything went peachy, and the protesters are not likely to give up.  The crackdown is getting tougher, but not enough yet to scare everyone away, and with the will of the people, it hopefully won’t ever until all this is cleared up.  If it can be cleared up.

I still await some action from the Assembly of Experts, headed by Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani.  He was reported to meet with members of the Assembly several days ago, supposedly to see if there were votes to kick out Khamenei from the Supreme Leader position, but haven’t heard much since, except a rumor about them having sided with the government (supposedly this one is untrue).  Right now, this seems to be the best bet of action, unless the protesters suddenly decide to become full out revolutionaries.

Otherwise, it will end up being a stalemate until one side is worn down.  Unfortunately, with most of the weapons, I fear that the government will eventually prevail.  If they do, it will most likely not be very good for Iranians.  So, the opposition clergy needs to act, lest the government decide that enough is enough once and for all.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Aniello Maglione
    June 21st, 2009 at 06:23
    Reply | Quote | #1

    It’s 3 a.m. in Tehran, and what is Obama doing? Answer: Having a Harvard debate with Supreme ruler while people are dying on the streets. This is really sad. I thought Obama would have had a little more emotion in his words. Even though his strategy may be correct, he still holds enormous emotional power as leader of the free world. His “speech” in Cairo has been drowned out by his emotional silence today. Where would we be 20 years ago if he would have been President during the collapse of Eastern European communism? Definitely not a “Berliner” there. Sad. This is a “minus” for him here. The protestors shouldn’t look Westward for support tonight.

  2. jim
    June 21st, 2009 at 13:51
    Reply | Quote | #2

    No, they shouldn’t look to the West for help tonight. They shouldn’t look anywhere. There isn’t anything that can be done that is more effective than what they are doing now, and if they look to others to “save” them they will wind up like Iraq, whose “democracy” will collapse after Americans leave (if we ever do). This way the revolution belongs to them! I,for one, am glad we have a president who doesn’t think God made him “Texas Ranger to the World”

  3. Tully
    June 21st, 2009 at 17:35
    Reply | Quote | #3

    It’s 3 a.m. in Tehran, and what is Obama doing?

    Hitting the SNOOZE button.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.