YouTube Poem From Iran

Andrew has this powerful video up on his site. He has been doing a bang up job putting the tweets together.
.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g1NpV1inCc&hl=en&fs=1&]
.
Also has up this translated statement from Moussavi.
.
In the name of God, the compassionate and merciful, We are all from God, and one day we will return to Him [A Koranic quote, that signify readiness for death]
.
The heart-wrenching news of martyrdom of a group of protestors, against widespread cheating in recent elections, has cast a pall of silence and sadness over our society. Opening fire on people, militarizing the city, spreading fear, provoking [the public] and power displays are all illegitimate children of the unlawfulness which we face and it is bewildering that the perpetrators of these acts accuse others of this.
.
To those who call people lawless, for expressing their opinions, I say that the biggest act of lawlessness is indifference [to the public] and contravention of the explicit [text] of article 27 of the constitution [allowing public demonstrations] by the government in not issuing permits for peaceful gatherings. Do revolutionary people who, with gatherings like these, brought you and us out of the dark history of Shah's tyranny must be beaten and wounded and be threatened with force?
.
I, as a mourner, invite the people to self-restraint. The country belongs to you. The revolution and the government are your inheritances. Objecting to lies and cheating is your right.
.
Be hopeful in exercising your rights and do not allow those, who try to instill fear in you to dissuade you, to make you angry. Continue to avoid violence in your protests and treat the disproportionate actions of the security forces as broken hearted parents would their children.
.
Having said that, I expect that security forces will not allow memories of these days to cause irreparable harm in their relationship with the people. That they [security forces] are not informing the families of the martyred, the wounded, and the arrested, and are keeping them hidden and in limbo will not aid in restoration of peace and will antagonize [people's] emotions. Arbitrary arrests lead to loss of respect and authority of security forces in the mind of the people and the society. I ask the Almighty to be compassionate towards these martyrs and to give them the highest of honors, and for their stricken families I wish patience and fulfillment of their dreams.
.
Mir Hossein Moussavi
.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/

Michael I have watched this several times on Andrew's site, it is beautiful and sad. Thank you for posting it here, I should have known the poet in you would appreciate it.

Gysgt213 thank you for the video I had not seen this one.

Thanks for posting these MS & Gunny. Have you seen the "Hurrah" vid:
~
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2009/06/090621_ag_street_clashes.shtml
~
Here's hoping it foreshadows a much greater victory, though it might take a while. After all, Tiananmen was 20 years ago.
~
Funny that so many neocons (see their propaganda sheet, Wa Po) have sympathy for the poor Iranian street protesters yet when Americans marched against the neocons' own wars, or going all the way back to Vietnam, what did the perpetual warmongers think of them?
~
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0407-06.htm

jcapan-thanks for the reminder of our history of allowing people to protest.

Had Ahmedinajad been our man, MS would not have seen any beauty in this poem from the violent Mousavi missile-throwing criminals - who seem to hate all that is Iran, from the language and alphabet to religion, institutions and garb.

In fact, when did MS post any poem from the Palestinians? Could it be that the struggle of the Palestinian people against occupation and violence has no gripping human element to it?

MS, if you searched as hard would you find a poem from those MSM-neglected, brutalized nad slaughtered reformist Kenyans whose victory our man snatched from them in their 2007 presidential elections?

.

Who are those people demonstrating in Tehran?
Are they Iranians or inciters and other rabble rousers shipped in from elsewhere? Why would an Iranian who is out to create mayhem and claims to be ready for martyrdom - take refuge in a foreign embassy when things get rough?

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20090619/capt.31c514e4d23047ce983181465ead40b6.aptopix_mideast_iran_election_vah118.jpg

vs.

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20090620/capt.photo_1245532205634-1-0.jpg

.

Suppose that the demonstrators for Al Gore after USA's presidential elections 2000 poured into the streets carrying placards written in Chinese and courting Chinese media?
Our media would be against them - for being un-American - and against Al Gore for being a foreign stooge.
What response would such a spectacle elicit from the FOX network's talking (blank) heads and the "Daughters of the American Revolution" movement?

.

"Meanwhile the Bush administration appears to have launched a coordinated effort to discredit the anti-war movement. On Tuesday, President Bush, White House spokesman Trent Duffy and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld all took jabs at critics of the war. Duffy described the critics as people who don't believe the U.S. must win the war on terror. And Rumsfeld compared anti-war activists to American supporters of Joseph Stalin. He said 'Throughout history there have always been those who predict America's failure just around every corner… Many Western intellectuals praised Stalin… For a time, Communism was very much en vogue… thankfully the American people are better centered. They ultimately come to the right decisions on big issues. And the future of Iraq is a very big issue.'"
~
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/8/24/headlines
~
Khamenei says their people are being riled up by western meddlers. Rummy & co. felt anyone who disagreed with their warmaking were akin to Stalinist sympathizers.

So, what C-Fuk? B/C of American (political & media-driven) hypocrisy, inconsistency or selective storymaking (when certain narratives are closer to our interests), does that mean the media is wrong every time, that their sympathies are always to be doubted? So, MS shouldn't post this, or only if he gives equal time to all the other oppressed groups his magazine has ignored for decades? If the media were completely ignoring this would you be pleased or would you be ridiculing them?
~
And just to be certain, b/c it's never particularly clear, but are you doubting the legitimacy of this movement? Is there some ironic subtext to phrases like: "from the violent Mousavi missile-throwing criminals" or "Are they Iranians or inciters and other rabble rousers shipped in from elsewhere? Why would an Iranian who is out to create mayhem and claims to be ready for martyrdom - take refuge in a foreign embassy when things get rough?" Help us duped rubes out here? When man faced tank in '89 Tiananmen, were you siding with the leadership, were you doubting the dirty Chinese activists? I mean there's no one more cynical about our media or gov't, but isn't it possible that their sympathies are occasionally well-placed?

gysgt213 Says: " .. thanks for the reminder of our history of allowing people to protest. ."
We have an enviable history of "allowing" protests - even as the world watches.

Yesterday, looked at clips from the WTO Protests in Seattle, 1999.

Do those feverish Twitter bugs in Iran appreciate the history/track record of 'genial' protest-tolerance of their esteemed countries in the west?

Ah, the naivete of youth.

"We have an enviable history of "allowing" protests - even as the world watches."
.
You must have misunderstood my comment. If you think the above is true, then you are either lying about being from here or you are completely ignorant of American history.

gysgt213: " .. You must have misunderstood my comment.

A look at the clips referred to (which are available at YouTube) may place the words "enviable" and "allowing" - which are implied by our shrill, pious pronouncements on the protests in Iran - in a certain context (of a history of duplicity).

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/06/19/there-will-be-blood/?apage=3#comment-73681

" .. you are either lying about being from here or you are completely ignorant of American history."

Please yourself.

OK, C-Fuk, I've tried but I'm done. I think it was Cliff who called your prose style "sideways-speak." But you're obviously incapable of coherent thought or discussion. Seriously, go take these ravings to your former 9th grade English instructor and see what she/he has to say about coherence or discernible strain of thought. It's a textual Rorschach of Gertrude-Stein proportions:.
~
"It happens very often that a man has it in him, that a man does something, that he does it very often that he does many things, when he is a young man when he is an old man, when he is an older man. One of such of these kind of them had a little boy and this one, the little son wanted to make a collection of butterflies and beetles and it was all exciting to him and it was all arranged then and then the father said to the son you are certain this is not a cruel thing that you are wanting to be doing, killing things to make collections of them, and the son was very disturbed then and they talked about it together the two of them and more and more they talked about it then and then at last the boy was convinced it was a cruel thing and he said he would not do it and his father said the little boy was a noble boy to give up pleasure when it was a cruel one. The boy went to bed then and then the father when he got up in the early morning saw a wonderfully beautiful moth in the room and he caught him and he killed him and he pinned him and he woke up his son then and showed it to him and he said to him see what a good father I am to have caught and killed this one, the boy was all mixed up inside him and then he said he would go on with his collecting and that was all there was then of discussing and this is a little description of something that happened once and it is very interesting."
~
And please accept my apologies if you're dyslexic or otherwise impaired. I mean, sh!t, at least I know what Spob and co. are saying.

jcapan, June 21, 2009 at 8:09 pm: " .. but isn't it possible that their sympathies are occasionally well-placed? .."

"occasionally"! Does that constitute a commendable standard of journalism?

In the case of the trio of Chris Krauthammer, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Kristol, their symphathies seem to be NOT just "occasionally" 'well-placed' but TOTALLY 'well-placed' in alignment with the foreign policies of the foreign country of Israel.
That is not the case when it comes to USA's leadership and its foreign policy.

With regard to 'self-censorship' in USA's media, it is said that a dog does not bite - not even occassionally - the hand that feeds it.
Who feeds that trio?

Seriously man, are you Yoda's half brother? If Yoda was tripping on acid, mind ya.

jcapan, June 21, 2009: " .. OK, C-Fuk, I've tried but I'm done. .."

Unless otherwise noted, my postings do not target you specifically. So you are not obliged to respond.

Junior, there is plenty out there which we choose not to read.
And we don't bother to moralize about it to the world.

Had Ahmedinajad been our man, MS would not have seen any beauty in this poem from the violent Mousavi missile-throwing criminals - who seem to hate all that is Iran, from the language and alphabet to religion, institutions and garb.
-
Seriously C-Fuk, are you an Iranian agent or something? Are you so willing to accept blindly the results of an election at face value, especially when the citizenry is unwilling to accept that result? The Iranian people have every right to question this election, and when they got doors slammed in their faces, they revolted. How's about we let the Iranian decide who's being criminal here before we issue blanket judgments over them?

And please accept my apologies if you're dyslexic or otherwise impaired.
-
I can read just fine JC-san, but MAN that is a glaring example of a run-on if I've EVER seen one!

yutsano: June 21, 2009 at 9:27 pm: " .. Are you so willing to accept blindly the results of an election at face value, especially when the citizenry is unwilling to accept that result? .."

All "citizenry"?
OK. A majority of the "citizenry"? If so, how do you determine that?
A few criminals can wreak havoc that seems disproportionate to their numbers. Consider few creeps of the 9/11 havoc that changed the world we live in and led to the dislocation and/or deaths of over a million..

And the pictures? Do you remember the pictures from Iraq that seemed to tell us that the whole of Bagdad turned up to witness the toppling of Saddam's stature?
No. There were only a handful of shell-shocked, jittery people shipped into the square. And we were NOT being welcome as heroes.

And the pictures? Do you remember the pictures from Iraq that seemed to tell us that the whole of Bagdad turned up to witness the toppling of Saddam's stature?
No. There were only a handful of shell-shocked, jittery people shipped into the square. And we were NOT being welcome as heroes.
-
Fie on thee and thine false equivalence. If you refuse to see that there are enough people in Iran clamoring for change I have one name for you: Neda. Her death has doomed the mullahs. And yes I'm staking my reputation on that.

I must say, C-Fuk has a valid point here. Not sure if any of you have been taking in the whole picture, but the nature of these protests has been violent to the extreme. While police charging into protesters plays well for the citizen-sympathizers, what really elicits these responses? Torched cars? Vandalized storefronts? Mob beatings of Ahmadinejad supporters? Stone hurling at police officers? Worse?
*
Obama says: We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people.
*
I'm curious, does the same go for the Mousavi crowd? Is anyone calling on them to "stop all violent and unjust actions against its society"?

neorationist86, "I'm curious, does the same go for the Mousavi crowd? Is anyone calling on them to 'stop all violent and unjust actions against its society'?"

.
Actually, Moussavi himself has urged the protesters several times to not engage in any acts of violence:
.
"By trust in God, and hope for the future, and leaning on the strength of social movements, claim your rights in the frameworks of the existing constitution, based on principle of non-violence.

In this, we are not confronting the Basij. Basiji is our brother. In this we are not confronting the revolutionary guard. The guard is the keeper of our revolution. We are not confronting the army, the army is the keeper of our borders. These organs are the keepers of our independence, freedom and our Islamic republic. We are confronting deception and lies, we want to reform them, a reform by return to the pure principles of revolution..."

The Iranian Constitution, Article 27, gives the people the right to peaceably assemble and protest. If the government would allow people their constitutional rights to peaceably assemble, there wouldn't be any need for violent conflict. But if the government is going to withhold the rights of the people, and try to stop the protesters when they are being peaceful, well then, what do you expect but for the people to fight back to assert their constitutional rights?

Is the Moussavi crowd murdering people in the streets, beating women and children in streets and anyone who questions why they are beating people in the first place, raiding people's houses and storming dormitories, arresting people who show up at the hospital for treatment of injuries, going into neighborhoods at night and smashing car windows? Does the Mossavi crowd have weapons other than rocks, are they using the threat of further violence? Do they have the guns? With all due respect to the fact that there are always to sides to every story, I'm not sure what scenes coming out of Iran you two are watching.

The Constitutional right to peacefully assemble should certainly not be infringed upon. However, immediately following the announcement of an Ahmadinejad victory Moussavi supports took to the streets in a violent, confrontational manner. Torching cars, smashing store windows, assaulting Ahmadinejad supporters. These were the initial events. Now Basij and the Revolutionary Guard have taken a much more oppressive posture and, according to some, have taken things too far. This may be so, it may not. If their perception of these protests is one of a violent, destabilizing, rabble-rousing attempt to insight revolutionary sentiments than the police/military/government are obligated to respond with full force to quell unrest, detain those who are responsible for organizing/leading violent protests, and protect the citizens and society itself from a negligent and debilitating social movement.

I love armchair points of view from people who think they know the truth but have never stepped into the country of Iran, nor probably even spoken to an Iranian currently living in Iran.

For 30 years the population of Iran has lived in fear of the government knocking on the door and beating the crap out of them for being the wrong religion, or wearing makeup, or whatever. Families can't talk to their families in other countries about what is going on because the government is often listening in on the conversations.

Now they have a movement and you guys are on here saying that the hundreds of thousands who are on the streets ( and I know there are hundreds of thousands because I know some of them on those streets) are violent in the extreme? The mob beatings are of the Basij - who are a brutal group - not just regular supporters. There are very few sotrefront windows being broken. In fact, those owners are often handing rocks to these guys to throw. Tourched cars??? Those are actually the motorcycles/mopeds of the Basij.

So, until you have lived in a repressed society, don't sit behind the luxury of your laptop talking about how violent these people are. They have the courage that very few of us will ever have.

I do not defend or condone the rioting and vandalism that occurred in the immediate aftermath of the election. I do believe, though, that the tenor of the protests quickly changed as the movement became organized. Most are committed to peace and non-violence, and they are attempting to self-regulate the actions of each other to avoid confrontation. Obviously, not perfectly. And yes, of course any incident of violence or vandalism by a protester can be used by the government as "evidence" that these are thugs and hooligans, to stir up public condemnation against the protesters and encourage crack-down by the military. But the spin game only works when most are insulated from the events taking place. When several hundred thousand protesters are involved (as at some of the larger rallies last week), it makes it much more difficult to characterize everyone as an enemy of the state.