The Infidel Task Force

Saturday, June 20, 2009


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."

Shall we salute and spiritually support the youth movement in Iran, for standing up against a bloodthirsty, corrupt, dictatorship in Iran?

Should Obama let it be known that the US is supporting this said movement?

Would Iran be better off with Musavi, instead of Amadinajhad?

Simple questions, right?

Not necessarily.....the answers are:




Yes, we should give our support and prayers for the students that are marching and fighting in the streets of Tehran. Reports coming in tell of up to 40 people may have been killed. Undocumented reports also state that helicopters may be pouring chemically enhanced agents from the air. Causing a burning sensation if it comes in contact with the flesh. Thank goodness the women are covered from head to toe.

Those youths that have hit the streets have been met with extreme violence form the police and the civilian militias. Baton wheeling thugs storming into buildings and hospitals seem to relish the though of cracking skulls and popping veins.

So, my answer to this question is...Yes. WE should be behind the protestors. Americans stand for liberty and we should support those that truly wish for it.

Second question? My answer is NO!! Obama has been, and should continue to maintain a moderatly neutral stance. His relationship with the current government depends on it. This "uprising" may fizzle out, as many have done before, and Obama will be weaker then he already is. Not to forget the Arab Islamists are a very un-grateful people. Just look at Iraq.

Not to mention that if Obama speaks out in support of the protestors, it will be just another case of Americans "meddling" in foreign affairs.

Better to keep your mouth shut and see what happens, then to play your cards now and end up the loser.

Last question...another resounding NO!!

NO! Iran would not be better if Musavi won over Amadinajhad. Why? Because they are ALL corrupt!!

Don't forget, Musavi was the last Prime Minister in Iran before the constitutional changes which removed the post of prime minister. And it was under Musavi that Iran started its nuclear programs. Like Ahmadinejad, Musavi said Iran will not halt its nuclear work, but suggested he would do more to assure the West it is not for bomb-making. Big freakin deal!!

Besides, its not the Iranian president that holds power, its the Islamic mullahs. And all they care about is the repression of women, and the elimination of Israel and the jewish race.

Iran would not be better off...well OK, maybe a little. But lets not be naive, the chances of the protestors getting what they wish is very slim. Changing regimes is even slimmer. Iran becoming a semi-democracy is non-existent.

So, we can support them, we can pray for them, we can wish them all the luck in the world. But as far as I'm concerned...they're on their own.

BlackbootJack 6/20/09

1 comment:

  1. you are right bbj Musavi would be no better then Amadinajhad the lesser of to evils if they want real change they need to over throw the islamic leaders that rule over the nut Amadinajhad now that is real change i can believe in but they will have to do it by their self because obama is not going to help them but we will get blame for it and when its all over don't be surprised if you don't see problems start up in iraq and afghanistan for a little pay back from iran..................