
by: Bill Dupray posted: 2009-06-20 17:59:00
Viewed 2328 times. 12 Comments.
Obama won't back the protesters because if the thugocracy crushes them, Barry will need to negotiate with the mullahs. It's getting harder and harder to justify that position when you see stuff like this. This woman was reportedly just standing with her father watching the protests when the Iranian State Police gunned her down. If you would prefer to go for ice cream, like the president did this afternoon, instead of witnessing the tyranny that Obama is appeasing, I don't blame you. But then again, you are not the President of the United States.
WARNING: The woman dies before your eyes.
Video is on a Facebook account here.
H/T to Ace, who has lots more.
UPDATE:
Our good friend American Genie gave us a good link for more graphic footage of the carnage in Iran. While seeing stuff like this may be distasteful, it is the real world, it is America's real enemy, and Obama is really going to have to deal with these people. So when the appeasement continues (and that is exactly what this is), let's not hear about how the United States had no idea how bad these guys were. These are the bad guys. Good guys like us defeat guys like them.
See remaining Iran coverage here.
Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/iranian-woman-shot-to-death-on-video-obama-goes-for-ice-cream/trackback
Thanks for the info Genie. I updated the post with your links.
The Pro Iranian Militia that's fighting the protestors, is something that Mr. Obama had proposes for the US. Remember, the "Civilian Force" with authority and funding equal to the Military. Scary Stuff!
Robert L., your post is my sentiments exactly. We need to be very wary of this "Civilian Force". It could turn out to be the modern day "Brown Shirts".
So if he didn't get ice cream the woman would have lived? Should Bush have not gone to vacation with his dad in Maine when troops were dying in Iraq?
My point was apparently lost on both Harrison and Kelly. The "going for ice cream," while literally true, was meant metaphorically as a criticism of Obama's policy on this crisis. He is simply not in the game. He is screwing around trying to nationalize health care, which most assuredly does not need nationalizing, while people are gunned down in the streets of one of America's most belligerent and dangerous enemies.
Does Obama lose some sort of high ground by saying America stands, as it always has, for free people to speak freely, govern themselves, and live without tyranny and oppression from their own government and that he condemns the government of Iran for its actions? If you want to be cynical about it, if Obama is concerned that he won't be able to talk Iran out of it's nukes (heh - he wouldn't be the only one who thought that) once he does that, then he can give the mullahs a wink and tell them that politically that is what he had to say.
Once again, this is appeasement: let murderous thugs get away with murderous deeds against innocent people, rationalize the thugs' actions, and make no sudden moves to anger them further lest they take things one step further. The Austrians and Czechoslovakians in the late 1930's would recognize this policy in a New York minute.
I love putting you on the defensive, Bill. You have your fun dangling me on a hook now and then. This time I got you. Smile.
But I completely agree with you. I remember vividly the wise-ass libs talking about W reading to children and all the smackdowns throughout his presidency. I remember the same things with Reagan. Then their petard was hoist as they defended Clinton getting a blowjob in the oval office from an intern as a "personal issue" and "just sex" - positions clearly not afforded republicans.
And now they miff about defending Obama. It is more transparent than even his claims of transparency.
One thing wholly lacking in libs is a single standard. They judge based upon party affiliation, and that is just disappointing.
Harrison, you are an idiot. He went to get ice cream instead of dealing with the Iranian Crisis. Perhaps if he tried a little harder to, ya know, be president. Less people would have died. But of course a moron democrat like you would just take a shot at Bush instead of facing the facts. Moron.
Little harsh, Joe, but I get your point.
To me, it was not ice cream or b'ball when other presidents go to church, it is the cumulative effect of O's "present" votes on all the tough shots, how consistently he backs down on positions (Turkey when Egypt and Jordan said no, NK when China balked, Russia, etc.).
It's as if all O knows what to do is take a position as if it were a political trial balloon, and then he pulls the the tether when the winds are too strong.
That, to me, is why people can criticize ice cream - his entire presidency is doing personal stuff. No strong leadership. No strongly held positions. Nothing.
If he stood for something steadfastly, maybe it would give a basis for discussion. But even healthcare - he says he wants it and DOESN'T SUBMIT A DRAFT. "Let the legislative branch figure it out." OMG.
Just disappointing.
btw, Harrison's a nice guy.
Joe,
I understand your point also, but Harrison is not an idiot, nor a moron & when one attacks someone else with name calling like you did here it does not help the conservative cause.
While I do not agree with Harrison about everything I have noted that he is always calm & insightful with his comments. No need to attack him that way.
I have on occasion been frustrated & angry enough to resort to name calling, but always regret it when I do because it adds nothing to the discussion & makes me look like a horse's ass. Look in the mirror next time you want to call someone an idiot or a moron. Try it on for size.
Politicians are the exception to the rule. however. :-)
God bless America!
and what would you prefer he do? would you like him to bunker down in his lair, like Cheney? or would you rather he go chop wood, like Bush?
Kelly, I didn't write this post nor do I approve of the blithe criticism of Obama going for ice cream. However, Vice President Cheney was being protected from an unknown quantum of attack when he was in his "lair" as you put it. W chopping wood? Not sure of the reference.
But Obama's issue is that he is on the sidelines. Iran is cracking down worse than Tienanmen. The UK is active in its support of the people's rights to demonstrate. Even Slovenia is stepping up with embassy support for wounded. Obama is caught in his own web - if the "revolution" (if that is not too strong a word, fails, he thinks he won't be able to do his talking thing on the nuclear front. So he is frozen in position. He's already said that a new administration there probably wouldn't change - see the Iran Revolution v2.0 post. It is Newsweek criticizing him - not just me.
Being frozen in place, afraid to lead - is not being on the right side of history on this issue.
Views: 93 Comments: 0
Views: 179 Comments: 0
Views: 97 Comments: 1
Views: 155 Comments: 0
Ranking Republican Paul Ryan responds to an NRO query about the news this morning: ?The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that there is currently no official cost estimate. Yet House Democrats are touting to the press ? and spinning for partisan gain ? numbers that have not been released and are impossible to confirm.Boy, a final official number that came in over a trillion bucks would really bite them in the a**.
Views: 125 Comments: 0
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Arizona GOP Primary voters shows McCain ahead 48% to 41%. Three percent (3%) favor another candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. Following the announcement that Sarah Palin would campaign for his reelection, McCain opened up a 53% to 31% lead over Hayworth in January. The two men were in a near tie in November.By my math, McCain's lead shrunk from 21 to 7 in two months. Hmmm.
Views: 71 Comments: 0
Views: 85 Comments: 0
[House] leaders are mulling a rule that would allow the chamber to "deem" the Senate's version of health legislation as passed, without actually having to vote on it. Imagine how useful this trick would be in daily life. You could make unpopular decisions without actually appearing to make them. That excruciating Thanksgiving dinner at your brother-in-law's? You "deemed" that you attended. . . . It's understandable that some House Democrats wouldn't want to cast a direct vote on the Senate bill . . . before moving to change it. But a procedure this transparently gimmicky just adds to the cynicism surrounding the bill and opens it up to unnecessary court challenges.
Views: 88 Comments: 2
Views: 99 Comments: 1
In hypothetical match ups with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) in the general election, Campbell leads Boxer, 44% to 43%, while Boxer leads Fiorina, 45% to 44%, and tops DeVore, 45% to 41%. Both findings are within the survey's margin of error.
Views: 90 Comments: 0
Thanks for this post, Bill. I'll take your word as far as the video goes. People need to know what is going on in Iran.
I posted some links at my blog to a site run by a fellow named Alan Peters that had some pretty graphic still photos from inside Iran. It's horrible what is happening.
I urge everyone who prays to pray for the innocents in Iran.
God bless America!