A new Iranian spring, a new President who won’t turn his back on it

Loading


 
The signs of a new Iranian spring are there. Fed up with the corruption of the current Iranian regime- one firmly supported by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama- the Iranian people are protesting in large numbers.

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — A wave of spontaneous protests over Iran’s weak economy swept into Tehran on Saturday, with college students and others chanting against the government just hours after hard-liners held their own rally in support of the Islamic Republic’s clerical establishment.

The demonstrations appear to be the largest to strike the Islamic Republic since the protests that followed the country’s disputed 2009 presidential election.

Thousands already have taken to the streets of cities across Iran, beginning at first on Thursday in Mashhad, the country’s second-largest city and a holy site for Shiite pilgrims.

The spark for the protests seems to be high food prices.



Donald Trump quickly signaled his support:

Iranians are wondering where the billions obama gave to Iran are:

Placards were calling “Death to Rouhani” and groups shouted in chorus: “No to Syria! No to Lebanon! No to Gaza!” and “Corruption is everywhere!” In Mashhad, demonstrators gathered outside the residence of supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s favorite for president, Ebrahim Raisi, who heads the Astan Quds Razavi, Khamenei’s personal financial organ.
The anti-corruption protests first erupted in the capital, Tehran, outside Khamenei’s residence, with the slogan on placards asking, “Where is the money?” It was a reference to the vast sums released to Iran by the Obama administration for signing the 2015 nuclear accord.

Iran is using that money to fund terrorism and build up its military. Thank you, Barack Obama. But then, Obama has always acted as a pawn of the Iranian regime. He largely ignored the protesters in 2009:

Why did President Obama refuse to support the demonstrators in Iran in 2009, but supported the “Arab Spring” in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere more recently?

In 2009, demonstrators filled the streets of Iran, denouncing the regime and crying out for freedom.  It was a glorious opportunity for the leader of the free world to demonstrate his support for free people everywhere and strike a decisive blow against the bloody regime that had considered itself at war with the United States for three decades.

But Barack Obama didn’t help them.  Quite the contrary.  The leader of the free world was too busy extending his hand to those same mullahs.

It was monstrous when Obama stood by and did nothing during the abortive Iranian revolution; instead, he bought ice cream and posed for photo ops on the golf course while the only revolution against Islamic rule in a Muslim country was taking flight in Iran.

Hillary Clinton offered up a pile of crap as an excuse not to support them:

“At the time,” Hillary said, “the most insistent voices within the Green Movement and the supporters from outside of Iran were that we, the United States, had to be very careful not to look like what was happening inside Iran was directed by… the United States. So we were torn. … [W]e kept being cautioned that we would put people’s lives in danger, we would discredit the movement, we would undermine their aspirations.”

That sure didn’t stop her from orchestrating the overthrow Gaddafi. Nor did it stop her from meddling in Russia’s election in 2011.

This may be the beginning of a regime change in Iran:

The media is already promoting a regime change narrative

As we noted during our initial coverage of Thursday’s protests, Israeli as well as Iranian opposition media commentators (and of course pundits in the US mainstream) have generally appeared giddy with excitement at the prospect that protests could spread inside Iran, potentially culminating in society-wide resistance and possible change in government. It goes without saying that Iran has been enemy #1 for the United States and Israel since the Islamic Revolution and embassy hostage crisis beginning in 1979.

Trump is right to signal his support for the protests:

In reality, despotic regimes will always make the claim that America is behind protests. Furthermore, pro-freedom protesters always privately want the support of the free world – and the American president. Such support cheers dissidents and raises the cost to the dictatorial regime of brutally suppressing protests.

For example, Lech Walesa, the leader of the Solidarity movement that challenged and eventually brought down communism in Poland in the 1980s, credited President Ronald Reagan’s unabashed support for the movement’s success.

Elsewhere in the Soviet bloc, a dissident named Natan Sharansky was rotting in a Russian prison when he and his fellow prisoners heard that President Reagan had referred to the Soviet Union as an evil empire destined for the ash heap of history.

Sharansky later remarked: “For us, that was the moment that really marked the end for them, and the beginning for us. The lie had been exposed and could never, ever be untold now.”

Clearly, the moral support of the American president can make a big difference in influencing political outcomes abroad.

Trump’s support should hearten the protesters and those who remember Neda Agha-Soltan, who was murdered by the Iranian military in 2009 and became the face of the Iranian Arab Spring.

 

Barack Obama was willing to do anything for an Iran trophy- an agreement he lied about and one which Iran cannot violate no matter what actions they take, including routine trashing the human rights of its citizens.

Donald Trump will not make the same mistake. He does not carry the fealty to the mullahs Obama clearly did.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Obama was gutless and anti-American throughout his rein. We can see that every move and action he took was bad for America, and much of it was bad for the rest of the world as well.

Role Change Towel Head

All Sharia (Islamic) states are failed states.
Oil-rich Islamic ones cover up that fact better and for longer than the rest.
The problem is the lack of available capital for poor people to use to get ahead, or even to stay in place.
Islamic law denies people loans with interest.
So, Muslims who get in dire straights, or who have a great idea, must go to some “patron.”
The patron is a rich Muslim, usually also powerful in gov’t.
People try to meet with such men all day, every day.
Of necessity, many are habitually refused aid.
(They are on “the outs.”)
Favored people, the “in crowd, get help whenever they ask.
But they must ask.

Iran is divided into two groups: those on the outs and the in crowd.
If Iran were to see a toppling of these leaders, the new ones would be up to this same thing only favoring other people.
The system sucks.

The ins and the outs are all Muslims, so the patriarchal system will remain with new favorites.
None of them want to see Western Banking.

Looks like their finding out who the real Great Satan is he has been running their nation in the ground since 1979 and their tired of Sharia Law and want no more of living in the Stone Age while in the 21st Century

@Nanny G: #3
Oh, an interest-free loan is easy to get.
If an Iranian wants to borrow $100,000 to buy a home, the bank
will gladly loan it to him with no interest.
But payments on the added $200,000 in associated fees will be included.
Or the bank will buy the house for $100,000, then resell it to him for $300,000. With an interest-free loan, of course.

@Petercat: In the West, yes. At Sharia-compliant banks.
3% of the loan must go to finance jihad, too.
And we have bankers lining up for that “privilege!”

I just wish they would show a efegee of Obama with horns and a dunce cap or a pussy hat