Grand Ayatollah:System based on force illegitimate

[yoldash2]

Many of the demonstrators are now anti islam but thats the only way they can express their dissidence. as an atheist

i would chant the same slogans if i were

inside iran!

[sohrab2012]

ای کاش با ما میماندی تا با هم جشن آزادی را بگیریم. بدرود ای پدر سبز ملت ایران

[TheWhiteWire]

Isn't it Ayat Allah or verse of Allah I think it means an evidence that God exists

[asperin]

Any State of today is based on force. Without force, tons of people would secede and separate because their ideologies don't match.

That is what naturally would happen and what would make people happy, in Iran, US, ect.

[peymaania]

I love Ron Paul, I thought he was especially good in the latest Sasha Cohen Flick!

[blackiron60]

The status quo in Iran has written its own obituary.

[RevoltAgainstLies]

Again, just because the current Iranian unrest is primarily an internally generated affair, doesn't mean that the US, UK and Israel aren't salivating at the opportunities for exploiting them for advantage. This reality alone multiplies the brutality of the authorities in quashing said protests.

[mikezephyr]

very true.

similar to the russian revolution and the civil war with all imperial powers hacking at the possibility of liberation.

and to be blunt, the current situation in iran is revolutionary.

[RevoltAgainstLies]

To be even more blunt, the current situation in Iran is truly "revolutionary" (meaning eventual regime change) only to the extent that foreign powers have viable intelligence on the ground that can bring it about. The past 3 regime changes in Iran (1941, 1953, 1979) were ALL courtesy of foreign interventions (yes, including the Shah's).

[ass711]

1979 wasn't foreign-backed or influenced (unless you are talking about anti-americanism and hostage crisis) that was a revolution by the people for islam, just like the protests by the iranians today in 2009 is by the people for democracy and reform.

[RevoltAgainstLies]

That's not the case. The West had tired of the Shah and opted to replace him with Khomeini, but hadn't done enough due diligence with the cleric, and it blew up in their faces. Read "Hostage to Khomeini" by Robert Dreyfuss, "A Century of War" by F. William Engdahl, and the Shah's own memoirs, "Answer to History" and you'll see the evidence.

[ass711]

i did read those books, but their evidences were a little too weak. america knew the power of islam was very strong and could move the 900 million people (back in 79) they knew it because they had experienced it from the power of hte caliphate in pre-1923. any revolution by religious leaders could have been catatrosphic for them. thats why they supported secularist groups like mossadegh's old tudeh party (with leader shapour baktihar) and generals of the monarchist army, financing them etc.

[TheWhiteWire]

insha Allah

[WeAreWakingUp]

It means 'If God wills it' right? So Calling God by his Arabic name constitutes thumbing a comment down? Don't be ignorant people

[bfq3000]

it's kind of understandable that's there's no real push towards irreligion in a country that has capital punishment for apostasy from islam

[flyhead2]

Hashemi minces his words. He managed to slip in '30 years of religious oppression', which is not the mainstream Iranian view of the revolution. It was, and largely still is, seen as a pivotal moment of liberation.

[happosai21]

yes. the iranians freed themself from american sponsored opression of the shar regime in 1979

[bbburton]

Like Ron Paul said, friends with all nations, entangling alliances with none.

[7jerryv7]

For Iranians without access to the internet can they get access to independent newspapers? If so they could get the whole text, news about it and opinion. This would spread the message very quickly.