The tweet revolution

[tugmoose]

in Iran.

[Good Old Neon]

I’ve been following developments all weekend – inspiring stuff. Sullivan’s website appears to be suffering sporadic blackouts, he seems to believe it is due to some sort of digital attack.

 

From his blog:

 

This blog has long been interested in Iran, especially in its younger generation so open to the West. Part of it is that I've long believed that Iran was much more likely to become a democracy than its neighboring Arab states - and that this might be the key to unwinding the clash of civilizations that was hurtling us toward apocalyptic scenarios. Part of it is that being immersed in online media, I'm perhaps more aware of the vibrant debate, evolving culture and amazing passion of Iran's Millennials. So this day is a moment of great hope and joy for those of us who have been waiting for it and knowing that one day, it would come. But many Americans have, sadly, been left unaware of this phenomenon - and a glance at the cable news of the weekend helps explain why. Maybe these images will change that. A reader writes:

I am 31 years old. I cannot remember ever having a discussion about "Iran" at work. I cannot remember ever having a discussion about "Iran" with my wife or members of my family. Unless it was about their nuclear weapons program, or their involvement in Iraq, I cannot remember ever having a conversation about "Iran" with any of my friends.

 

Today, people at work are sharing photos, many of them are those found on the links you have provided. People are speaking about "Iran", not as an enemy - but as a people who has had their freedom taken from them. I don't know how this will resolve, but those protesters need to know they are not alone.

 

They aren't. If you can read this out there, know that we are with you, every day and every moment of your fight for your freedoms.

 

And know this too:

 

Yes You Can.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

I’ve been following developments all weekend – inspiring stuff. Sullivan’s website appears to be suffering sporadic blackouts, he seems to believe it is due to some sort of digital attack.

 

From his blog:

 

This blog has long been interested in Iran, especially in its younger generation so open to the West. Part of it is that I've long believed that Iran was much more likely to become a democracy than its neighboring Arab states - and that this might be the key to unwinding the clash of civilizations that was hurtling us toward apocalyptic scenarios. Part of it is that being immersed in online media, I'm perhaps more aware of the vibrant debate, evolving culture and amazing passion of Iran's Millennials. So this day is a moment of great hope and joy for those of us who have been waiting for it and knowing that one day, it would come. But many Americans have, sadly, been left unaware of this phenomenon - and a glance at the cable news of the weekend helps explain why. Maybe these images will change that. A reader writes:

I am 31 years old. I cannot remember ever having a discussion about "Iran" at work. I cannot remember ever having a discussion about "Iran" with my wife or members of my family. Unless it was about their nuclear weapons program, or their involvement in Iraq, I cannot remember ever having a conversation about "Iran" with any of my friends.

 

Today, people at work are sharing photos, many of them are those found on the links you have provided. People are speaking about "Iran", not as an enemy - but as a people who has had their freedom taken from them. I don't know how this will resolve, but those protesters need to know they are not alone.

 

They aren't. If you can read this out there, know that we are with you, every day and every moment of your fight for your freedoms.

 

And know this too:

 

Yes You Can.

 

 

I distinctly remember the Iranian students I knew in college and the effect the Revolution had on these normally congenial, friendly people. The revolution blew these students apart with heavy conflict between them.

 

Thirty years into the Revolution, things are ripe for a change. The islamic fundamentalist regime will either have to adapt or suffer the fate of the shah.

 

With some familial ties to the area, I avow strongly that a FREE, STABLE Iran is the most important ingredient for peace in the middle east.

[Serak_the_Preparer]

Not the Conan Obrien "Twitter Tracker" discussion I thought it would be.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Goddamn...things just seem to always go wrong with a US president's response to a fast breaking world crisis.

 

After 8 years of a president who flew off the handle we now have a president who responds to extraordinary events with 'measured responses'. Hope the Iranian people taking it to the streets find solace in tweets from the American people, because our offical response leaves a bit to be desired.

We don't want blood running in the streets; nobody does. But a harsh response and reaction is coming.

 

Iran in 2009 could be Berlin in 1989 or Hungary in 1956. And it looks like the tanks will roll.

[explodo]

Goddamn...things just seem to always go wrong with a US president's response to a fast breaking world crisis.

 

After 8 years of a president who flew off the handle we now have a president who responds to extraordinary events with 'measured responses'. Hope the Iranian people taking it to the streets find solace in tweets from the American people, because our offical response leaves a bit to be desired.

We don't want blood running in the streets; nobody does. But a harsh response and reaction is coming.

 

Iran in 2009 could be Berlin in 1989 or Hungary in 1956. And it looks like the tanks will roll.

Actually, I don't think Obama's response could have been much better. We simply don't know what happened, so it doesn't make sense to pick sides. And like he said, from an American perspective, whatever the outcome, the repercussions will be similar. Iran is still Iran, racing towards nuclear weapons and harboring a general distrust of all things American. If he sides with Moussavi, everybody loses. Ahmadinejad and the gang are going to be in control (though I hope I am wrong). We don't need to do something meaningless and stupid to piss them off further. And if this turns into a revolution, we have plenty of time to reassess our National position. Protests today had about 3000 attendees, down from hundreds of thousands. It's also worth mentioning that Tehran is one city in an entire country. It's like saying, "New Yorkers are protesting! America will fall by this time next week!"

[bjorn_skurj]

Military intervention in Iran is not going to happen and I am not sure economic sanctions would help in this case. Like the people of Eastern Europe in 1989, the Iranians are going to have to do this one on their own, and if enough Iranians want it, it will happen.

[bjorn_skurj]

I less-than-three Fareed Zakaria!

 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/19/zakaria.iran.elections/index.html

 

CNN: What should the United States do?

 

Zakaria: I would say continue what we have been doing. By reaching out to Iran, publicly and repeatedly, President Obama has made it extremely difficult for the Iranian regime to claim that they are battling an aggressive America bent on attacking Iran. In his inaugural address, his New Year greetings, and his Cairo speech, there is a consistent effort to convey respect and friendship for Iranians. That is why Khamenei reacted so angrily to the New Year greeting. It undermined the image of the Great Satan that he routinely paints in his sermons. In his Friday sermon, Khamenei said that the United States, Israel, and especially the United Kingdom were behind the street protests, an accusation that will surely sound ridiculous to most Iranians. The fact that Obama has been cautious in his reaction makes it all the harder for Khamenei and Ahmadinejad to wrap themselves in a nationalist flag.

 

CNN: But shouldn't we be more vocal in our support for the Iranian protesters?

 

Zakaria: I think a good historic analogy is President George H.W. Bush's cautious response to the cracks in the Soviet empire in 1989. Then, many neo-conservatives were livid with Bush for not loudly supporting those trying to topple the communist regimes in Eastern Europe. But Bush's concern was that the situation was fragile. Those regimes could easily crack down on the protestors and the Soviet Union could send in tanks. Handing the communists reasons to react forcefully would help no one, least of all the protesters. Bush's basic approach was correct and has been vindicated by history.

 

CNN: Finally, do you think the regime will survive?

 

Zakaria: As I said before, repressive regimes can last a long time, and this regime can definitely endure if they are willing to use force, impose a strict crackdown on protests, and arrest the leaders of the opposition. Only time will tell, so we will have see what develops.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Defiant Tehran protesters battle police

 

TEHRAN, Iran – Thousands of protesters defied Iran's highest authority Saturday and marched on waiting security forces that fought back with baton charges, tear gas and water cannons as the crisis over disputed elections lurched into volatile new ground.

 

In a separate incident, a state-run television channel reported that a suicide bombing at the shrine of the Islamic Revolution leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini killed at least two people and wounded eight. The report could be not independently evaluated due to government restrictions on journalists.

 

If proven true, the reports could enrage conservatives and bring strains among backers of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi. Another state channel broadcast images of broken glass but no other damage or casualties, and showed a witness saying three people had been wounded.

 

The extent of injuries in the street battles also was unclear. Some witnesses said dozens were hurt and gunfire was heard.

 

Some bloggers and Twitter users claimed that there had been numerous fatalities in Saturday's unrest, reports that could not be immediately verified.

 

The clashes along one of Tehran's main avenues — as described by witnesses — had far fewer demonstrators than recent mass rallies for Mousavi. But they marked another blow to authorities who sought to intimidate protesters with harsh warnings and lines of black-clad police three deep in places.

 

The rallies also left questions about Mousavi's ability to hold together his protest movement, which claims that widespread fraud in June 12 elections robbed Mousavi of victory and kept hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in office.

 

Mousavi bewildered many followers by not directly replying to the ultimatum issued Friday by Iran's most powerful figure, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. His stern order to Mousavi and others: Call off demonstrations or risk being held responsible for "bloodshed, violence and rioting."

 

A police commander sharpened the message Saturday. Gen. Esmaeil Ahmadi Moghadam said more than a week of unrest and marches had become "exhausting, bothersome and intolerable." He threatened a more "serious confrontation" if protesters return.

 

Mousavi's silence was broken after the melee with another call to annul the election results. But there was no mention of the clashes — suggesting he wants to distance himself from the violence and possibly opening the door for more militant factions to break away.

 

Amateur video showed clashes erupting in the southern city of Shiraz and witnesses reported street violence in Isfahan, south of Tehran.

 

"I think the regime has taken an enormous risk in confronting this situation in the manner that they have," said Mehrdad Khonsari, a consultant to the London-based Center for Arab and Iranian Studies.

 

"Now they'll have to hold their ground and hope that people don't keep coming back," he added. "But history has taught us that people in these situations lose their initial sense of fear and become emboldened by brutality."

 

In Washington, President Barack Obama urged Iranian authorities to halt "all violent and unjust actions against its own people." He said the United States "stands by all who seek to exercise" the universal rights to assembly and free speech.

 

Obama has offered to open talks with Iran to ease a nearly 30-year diplomatic freeze, but the upheaval could complicate any attempts at outreach.

 

Full details of the street battles could not be obtained because of Iranian media restrictions. But witnesses described scenes that could sharply escalate the most serious internal conflict since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

An estimated 3,000 marchers — some chanting "Death to dictatorship!" — marched directly onto a blockade of security forces keeping them from approaching Azadi Square, where Mousavi gathered hundreds of thousands of people on Monday.

 

Police first fired tear gas and water cannons at the protesters, witnesses said. Then came a second wave. It included volunteer militiamen on motorcycles chasing down demonstrators.

 

Witnesses claimed some marchers were beaten with batons by security forces or metal pipes wielded by the militiamen known as Basijis, who are directed by the powerful Revolutionary Guard.

 

An old woman cloaked in a head-to-toe black chador shouted, "Death to the dictator," drawing the attention of Basij members who ran from the other side of the street and clubbed her, according to one witness contacted by the AP.

 

Protesters lit trash bins on fire — sending pillars of black smoke over the city — and hurled rocks. Some managed to wrestle away a few motorcycles and set them ablaze.

 

One witness told The Associated Press that people came from apartments to aid the wounded demonstrators or allowed them to take shelter. Helicopters hovered over central Tehran until dusk.

 

The witnesses told AP that between 50 and 60 protesters were seriously beaten by police and pro-government militia and taken to Imam Khomeini hospital in central Tehran. People could be seen dragging away comrades bloodied by baton strikes.

 

Nearby, Tehran University was cordoned off by police and militia.

 

On the streets, witnesses said some protesters also shouted "Death to Khamenei!" — another sign of once unthinkable challenges to the authority of the successor of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution.

 

All witnesses spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared government reprisals. Iranian authorities have placed strict limits on the ability of foreign media to cover events, banning reporting from the street and allowing only phone interviews and information from officials sources such as state TV.

 

Mousavi, who served was prime minister during the 1980s, is not believed to seek the collapse of the Islamic system. But he claims that state powers were abused to skew the election results and re-elect Ahmadinejad in a landslide.

 

That stand has increasingly brought him and his supporters into direct confrontation with Iran's highest authorities.

 

A statement on Mousavi's Web site said he and his supporters were not seeking to confront their "brothers" among Iran's security forces or the "sacred system" that preserves the country's freedom and independence.

 

"We are confronting deviations and lies. We seek to bring reform that returns us to the pure principals of the Islamic Republic," it said.

 

Khamenei sided firmly with Ahmadinejad on Friday, saying the vote reflected popular will and ordering opposition leaders to end street protests.

 

A report on Press TV listed the fallout from the unrest, including 700 buildings and 300 banks damaged and 400 police hurt. It gave no similar list for the protesters. At least seven people have died, according to the official Iranian count, but the total could be more.

 

Mousavi's extremely slim hope of having the election results annulled rest with Iran's Guardian Council, an unelected body of 12 clerics and Islamic law experts. But Mousavi and another moderate candidate in the race, Mahdi Karroubi, did not appear at a meeting called to discuss their allegations of fraud, a council official told state TV.

 

The council has said it was prepared to conduct a limited recount of ballots at sites where candidates claim irregularities.

 

In a letter to the council, posted on one of Mousavi's Web site, he listed alleged violations that include his representatives being expelled from polling stations and fake ballots at some mobile polling stations.

 

The government has blocked Web sites such as BBC Farsi, Facebook, Twitter and several pro-Mousavi sites used by Iranians to tell the world about protests and violence. Text messaging has not been working in Iran since last week, and cell phone service in Tehran is frequently down.

 

But that won't stifle the opposition networks, said Sami Al Faraj, president of the Kuwait Center for Strategic Studies.

 

"They can resort to whispering ... they can do it the old-fashioned way," he said.

[uncool2pillow]

Obama talks tougher on Iran violence

 

Obama said his message has been consistent, and he shot back at Republican critics who are calling him timid: "Only I'm the president of the United States."

 

When asked if his strong language on Tuesday was influenced by pressure from such Republicans as Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, Obama scoffed: "What do you think?"

 

Sounds a little bit like "I'm the decider" to me. Unfortunately, I think the climate in Washington is so poisoned by partisanship that Obama may have already forgotten about making overtures to Republicans. While it's the DC culture to blame more than him personally, choosing Emmanuel for his chief of staff certainly didn't help.

 

Edit: BTW, I fully understand Obama's cautious stand. The more our government supports the protesters, the more they're tied to us. I was just surprised. I think his quote sounds so much like Bush.