Don’t Iranians Deserve ‘Hope and Change’ Too?
The post-election options couldn't be any more clear-cut: fight for democracy and human rights — or cut a deal with a thuggish despot at any price. What will Obama choose?
That necessitates they not rock the boat — and avoid extending even rhetorical support to the Iranian demonstrators. It is a familiar trend. Obama and his supporters, after all, were the ones who called for immediate withdrawal from Iraq (before victory was apparent) despite the risk of regional genocide. Once in office Obama has been content to drop human rights (whether in China or Venezuela) from the agenda, literally embrace Hugo Chavez, and relax restrictions on Cuba with no preconditions. So perhaps we should not be surprised. These are not people dedicated to human rights, democracy, or free and fair elections — or, for that matter, placing any demand on authoritarian states regarding their treatment of their citizens.
This tactic does, of course, have two major drawbacks. First, it becomes morally repugnant at some level. Does Obama continue to coo about the “Islamic Republic of Iran”? At what time do we become facilitators of a regime which badly needs legitimacy in order to maintain its iron grip? But for those who like “realism” the central defect is that this sort of “engagement at all costs” is wildly unrealistic. After the display of the last few days who thinks these people will give up nuclear ambitions? Who thinks a regime of this type is simply waiting to join the family of nations? It should be apparent that a regime which would declare the election to be free and fair is precisely the sort to string us along in fruitless negotiations and dissemble about its current behavior and future aspirations.
Even Henry Kissinger, the quintessential architect of realpolitik, repeatedly argued that American foreign policy must combine both hard-headed realism and adherence to our deepest moral aspirations (e.g., democracy, human rights). Without the latter our ability to influence, persuade, and rally world opinion fades. And by jettisoning our moral aspirations an administration risks losing the support and affection of American voters. Indeed those Americans who expected something more from their president (who won, you may recall, by tapping into the idealism of many formerly jaded or indifferent new voters) may recoil in horror as they realize there is nothing more important to the Obama administration — not freedom, not democracy, not justice, not fidelity to allies — than “getting a deal.”
In the end, we won’t have that either, in large part, because the regime we are attempting to deal with has figured out that it can act with impunity. And if they have figured it out in Iran, what must they think in Syria, Moscow, China, and North Korea?
<- Prev Page 2 of 2
Jennifer Rubin is PJM's Washington, DC, editor. She also blogs at Commentary’s Contentions.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
53 Comments
1. Blackwater:Unfortunately the Thief in Chief administration seems to have adopted a philosophy of “Whatever Bush did was wrong! Saying we support an Iranian human rights uprising just makes things worse!” They seem to think that the lesson from the “failures” of the Bush administration is that intervening in any foreign affair just makes the situation worse and emboldens the people we’re criticizing since people hate America so much. Therefore they aren’t going to take advantage of this once in a generation oppurtunity to overthrow the barbaric islamist theocracy in Iran because they’re uncertain about being Americans and the values we’re supposed to advancing in every dark corner of the world. They’re leftist academic cowards and ideologues who have no spines who would rather bow down and advert their eyes from the Iranian mullahs rather than risk upsetting them. Afterall their new policy on Iran is to work with the Iranian despots to improve relations at all costs in order to best achieve regime change or moderation. Except all they’re doing is emboldening them.
Jun 15, 2009 - 1:02 am 2. Argo:“what must they think in Syria, Moscow, China, and North Korea?”
They are thinking the same thing that President George W. Bush was last year when Obama commandeered and totally wrecked the budget crisis meeting in the Whitehouse, “I cannot believe that the American people are stupid enough to elect this fool..”
Jun 15, 2009 - 3:39 am 3. lefroy:Roger Cohen has a minor epiphany in today’s NYT:
“I erred in underestimating the brutality and cynicism of a regime that understands the uses of ruthlessness.”
You don’t say. What a brilliant guy.
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:02 am 4. whataloadacrap08:So Iran had an election, huh? Big deal! Stop deluding yourself about these 12th Century savages. They’re playing a zero sum game of global domination while we’re splitting Clintonesque hairs over the definition of the word “is”!
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:28 am 5. David Thomson:Iran is an islamic theocracy run in tandem by fascist clerics drooling over the legalities of buggering underage family members, and a bug eyed “Twelver” intent upon triggering a global nuclear war that will usher in a new era of Mohammedan supremacy in the world.
And guess what folks, the Iranian population supports these whackos! Abdullah Six-Pack is sucking this Koranic crap up by the freakin’ barrel full. The riots in TerrorRan aren’t the birth pangs of “freedom”, they’re an Islamic fist-fight over who gets the honor of blowing your infidel carcasses to little itzy-bitzy pieces of goop.
“Hope and Change” my a$$!
“What will Obama choose?”
Barack Obama is overwhelmed by his responsibilities. He is also instinctively anti-American and blames our own country for most of the ills of the world. Such a mindset inevitably leads to a hands off approach. We presumably will only make matters worse by intervening. This is especially true if the dictators are perceived as people of color. Obama has no plans whatsoever to punish the Iranian mullahs. That would be blaming the victim.
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:38 am 6. eon:The present “progressive” slant on foreign policy is actually a very old one. It goes;
“We are irredeemably evil. Anyone who is our friend is, therefore, also evil. Conversely, anyone wise enough to hate is is, ipso facto, good. As such, we shall accommodate those who hate us, and punish those who do not; In each case, they will be getting exactly what they deserve, and we shall gain Virtue as a result.”
The One is simply practicing this philosophy to a greater degree than any of his predecessors, notably Carter.
There is also the “engagement” factor. In this mode, the “enlightened elite’” believe that to prove their higher degree of “consciousness”, they must pursue “dialogue” at all costs, even if the end result is the (brutal) status quo. It’s very much like playing an arcade-type computer game, to them; their self-imposed rules prohibit “winning” (because, since we are evil, it would be a Very Bad Thing if we “won”),so their objective is to simply Keep Playing Forever. They believe that if they can extend the “process” indefinitely, they will both look saintly, and ensure that they will never be stripped of power- because they will say, “If you give my office to someone else, the Process will collapse”.
The old saying “To travel hopefully is better than to arrive” has no place in international relations. Unfortunately, those who value appearance above substance believe that it is the only thing that matters.
clear ether
eon
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:44 am 7. Well Educated Cad:Why would Obama be upset? He got elected the same way- stuffing ballot boxes, fraud, etc…. He should be proud of his protege’!
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:47 am 8. Blackwater:#5
Sad but very true.
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:29 am 9. tanstaafl:…there is nothing more important to the Obama administration — not freedom, not democracy, not justice, not fidelity to allies — than “getting a deal.”
Probably. Just before the (sham) Iranian election, the Narcissist-in-Chief was out there personally taking some kind of credit (as a function of his speech in Cairo) for a loosening & opening up of healthy debate etc. inside Iran.
While, in fact, Friday’s election in Iran seems to have been some kind of corrupt exercise in power tightening by old Khameini (the guy who couldn’t conceal his glee after 911) and Spidery A’jad.
When you and your hangers on (Emanuel, Axelrod et al.) think in small, tight circles of control, any sort of deal is considered a feather in your cap. (Chicago on the Potomac) Said deal and being able to point to your own (narcissistic) alleged achievement is the point, not the plight of the Iranian people.
Same is true in Israel, it’s an Obama “win” if he can force Netanyahu on the settlement question.
I don’t think Israel should rely on the US as it has in the past. And the aspiring democracy movement inside Iran shouldn’t look for much in the way of US support, either.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:01 am 10. Terry Gain:Excellent article Ms Rubin, but all is not lost. The United States is now run by cool people who ceate their own reality. So here’s how it will shake out.
When it’s obvious that the people of Iran won’t accept the rigged results the mullah’s will relent and announce that the votes have been counted again -this time by non Jews- and Moussavi won, after all.
The American media will credit Obama for the outcome. Everything will continue as before with pretend moderates in charge of both Iran and the United States.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:11 am 11. Mike McNally:Obama is throwing the Iranian people under the bus. He wants to keep overseas ‘distractions’ to a minimum so he can get on with the more pressing business of imposing socialism on America.
And the ‘international community’ won’t blame Obama for the repression of the Iranian people, but it will scream blue murder if Israel acts against Iran’s nuclear program.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:12 am 12. tanstaafl:Ditto, x 2…
…they’re uncertain about being Americans and the values we’re supposed to advancing in every dark corner of the world. They’re leftist academic cowards and ideologues who have no spines who would rather bow down and advert their eyes from the Iranian mullahs rather than risk upsetting them.
…the “enlightened elite’” believe that to prove their higher degree of “consciousness”, they must pursue “dialogue” at all costs, even if the end result is the (brutal) status quo…They believe that if they can extend the “process” indefinitely, they will both look saintly, and ensure that they will never be stripped of power- because they will say, “If you give my office to someone else, the Process will collapse”.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:18 am 13. Derek:Drop the narcissism my fellow citizens. This revolution isn’t about Obama or America, it’s about Iran.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:26 am 14. sheesh:Hey, if we don’t like the results of their election, doesn’t that give us the right to invade?
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:34 am 15. Barry 0351:“C,can I just eat my waffle now?”
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:38 am 16. ajacksonian:What will Obama choose?
Why to vote ‘Present’ of course!
Far be it from him to stand up for any ideals of liberty and freedom abroad when he won’t do so at home…it would set a bad example to his followers and the American people that you really should stand up for those things. Can’t have that!
Of course he does want us to forget that the Tree of Liberty is nourished by the blood of tyrants and patriots. People might get suspicious about the folks looking to take a chainsaw to the Tree of Liberty with their noxious poison of taxation being ‘good’ and that, really, the tree should be chopped down to make space for the sick, the poor and the lumber used to house the politically correct.
If you can’t stand up for liberty, what good are you? Not just as a President but as an individual citizen? And verbal support for it, abroad, should be damned easy, no?
Instead we get: ‘Present’.
The silence that speaks volumes.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:39 am 17. fnord:So, y`all are willing to risk Afghanistan and Iraq for the sake of the people of Tehran? Thats a interesting position, and reminds me of the way some folks were ready to go fight Russia over Georgia. Reality is for cowards, eh?
Jun 15, 2009 - 7:34 am 18. anton:Didn’t the Left have a hissy-fit over Reagan dealing with Saddam because he won via rigged elections?
But now it is OK for Obama to deal with Ahmadinejad even though he won by riggging the Iranian elections.
Am I missing something here?
The problem with realpolitik is that expediency can lead to incongruity
Jun 15, 2009 - 7:40 am 19. anton:17. fnord:
Iran is the most active destabilizing agent in the entire area (Saudi money and Paki tech also are bad news) if they change government in any way that leads to less lunacy it is a win all around. A “Velvet Revolution” would be best (far less blood in the streets and a quicker recovery) but a move to a more secular democratic model would be welcome by any route.
Iraq and Afghanistan would both be far more stable with a secular (or at least a less militant)Iran between them.
Jun 15, 2009 - 7:48 am 20. Meryl:“The post-election options couldn’t be any more clear-cut: fight for democracy and human rights — or cut a deal with a thuggish despot at any price. What will Obama choose?”
Uhhh…..hmmmmm….oh,…..let me guess…..
OH! I know! I know!….
He will indeed cut a deal with a thuggish despot at any price.
The reason I know that is because during the election campaign he SAID HE WOULD.
It’s not difficult to figure out what Soetero will do if we just check and see what Soetero said he would do.
There is this caveat: the only time he was lying was when he said the oath of office. He never had any intention of upholding the Constitution, or of protecting and defending the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That one was a lie in every context and every iteration.
Every despot in history has telegraphed their intentions in advance (Japan, 1941; Hitler, 1939, etc.)
Jun 15, 2009 - 7:50 am 21. CR:“…the Obama administration, which has embodied the Left’s total embrace of realpolitik…”
That’s the nugget right there. This administration has gone hook, line and sinker for Nixonian Realpolitik in a manner that would make Tricky Dick blush. The difference is that in those days they had the excuse (note; not justification) that America had bigger fish to fry vis-a-viz the USSR. No such excuse exists today. They really think they are doing the right thing by supporting the 3rd world despots and snubbing our democratic allies.
Jun 15, 2009 - 8:29 am 22. Drider:Kinda curious how the endgame plays out for this Iranian election.
The big K reversed his “Divine election” commandment and has moved for a recount.
Ajad has his opponent, who very well may be the true winner in a warehouse somewhere with bamboo under his fingernails and jumper cables affixed to his testicles in an attempt to get him to make speeches to quell those who got snookered into believing that their vote meant something.
So now they recount,if they come out with the real count, then they have to trot out whats left of a man of Ajad’s opponent and what will Ajad’s voters do??
If they determine that Ajad is the winner then they simply roll with the obvious farce that this election wasn’t rigged from the get go and the riots continue as they are until crushed or the people get their hands on the Mullahs and/or big K himself.
None of this recount is making sense, count me in as one of the crowd who is thinking this is a coup on Ajad’s part in trying to take over completely, although I think his plan on keeping the big K as a silent figurehead is falling apart.
Jun 15, 2009 - 9:10 am 23. Delia:Disgusting.
Jun 15, 2009 - 10:09 am 24. fnord:Anton: I agree with you 100%. All I am saying is that open US support for the democratic forces will propably be counterproductive. And that president Obama will have to weigh very carefully what steps he will take. The Iranians have kept to a sort of gentlemans agreement in Iraq and Afghanistan these last years, they could raise hell if they wanted to. So before you scream “Obama is throwing the Iranians under the bus! Fascist!” think about the consequences.
Jun 15, 2009 - 11:05 am 25. fnord:PS: Drider, “the remnants of a man” just held a speech to a rally of his supporters. Ho-hum.
Jun 15, 2009 - 11:06 am 26. bobdog:I fear that Ms. Rubin’s serial lack of knowledge of the basics of international relations have, once again, led her to undermine what is at its base a sound policy argument. Ms. Rubin shows a disturbing lack of appreciation for realpolitik (or realism, for that matter) and her article descends into a sort of bizarre attack on realpolitik by equating it with liberalism of the sort practiced by the Obama Administration. It is difficult to think of anything being much further from the truth (though it is true that the Bush Administration’s policies were no less no-“real”)….
Perhaps if Ms. Rubin were to take an introduction to international relations class at one of the colleges that are so often attacked on these pages she might find herself both more theoretically accurate and, perhaps, substantively enlightened as well (to be clear, I speak of political science departments and not sociology or ethnic or womens’ study departments). I teach such a class, in fact, and would be happy to aid her path towards some semblance of mastery of the field.
Finally, although Ms. Rubin argues that “… never before has it been so clear just how ruthless and indifferent [the Left] are to the aspirations of those who would be crushed by the boot of despotic regimes,” please note that these are the SAME people that defended and apologized for the Soviets brutal and repressive for 50 years (or at least their intellectual inheritors, a point made in today’s piece by Mr. Simon “Iran: NYT’s Roger Cohen is the new Walter Duranty”)! This level of, in Ms. Rubin’s words, “den[ial] and obfuscat[ion] the nature of these sorts of regimes” is NOTHING new to the Left; thinking otherwise would be to misunderstand them as badly as Roger Cohen (claim to) have belatedly misunderstood the Iranian regime.
Jun 15, 2009 - 12:23 pm 27. Avitar:Ask a Chicago politician to back an honest election? Are you kidding? The Census is being rigged even as I write this to make sure nobody comes close to unseating the Democrat control.
Jun 15, 2009 - 12:43 pm 28. masoudA:An Iranian prespective for you -
Jun 15, 2009 - 1:29 pm 29. Hyphenated American:The silent majority in Iran has finaly come out. People want an end to the theocracy – nothing short of it. One way or another we will get there. Hopefuly, the west will side with the people of Iran this time.
BTW – Islam has been forced into Iran – and majority of us just fake having a religion.
The events in Iran are an obstacle to Obama’s plans in the Middle East
Jun 15, 2009 - 2:11 pm 30. smith:http://hyphenatedamericans.blogspot.com/
I find it disingenuous that conservative Americans are pretending to ally themselves with the progressives of Iran.
The fact is that conservatives won in Iran and won the election fair and square. The protests look big because progressives in the cities voted for Mousavi, but the conservatives and family values voters dominated in the rural areas.
Western media needs to stop exploiting these protests and exaggerating them as a revolution.
Jun 15, 2009 - 4:28 pm 31. J_Snuffy:Wow, I would’ve never guessed that ACORNS voter fraud influence reached that far. /sarc
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:24 pm 32. guntotinglibertarian:smith: Hard to believe anyone can be so twisted as to confuse conservative Americans with the thugs who beat and kill protesters in the streets of Iran.
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:32 pm 33. EdGi:Sadly, Jen, Obi’s answer is no, nobody is entitled to “hope&change”. #2,6,9 above are right, Obi wants the “deal”, causing the Guardian Coucil to kill in the false belief they will get away with it, and leaving us and the Israelis with no choice in the end but to defend ourselves.
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:38 pm 34. Brian:#30 whos pretending?Despite what some think ,the political Right and Left worldwide arent going anywhere.Both have free market and human rights as the centerpiece of what they do have in common.Yes they can be at each others throats about other issues,but solidarity on human rights i like to think they do close ranks when it comes to that issue.
Jun 15, 2009 - 5:39 pm 35. Snake eater:I love it when reality explodes in a leftists face. Barry don’t change a thing you’re feckless foreign policy is imploding everywhere. As someone who wishes you all the worst I hope your arrogance and ego are more important than changing your cowardly policy of appeasement. Go Barry go!
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:31 pm 36. Marc Malone:#30 smith – This is another lie of the Left. Islamists are NOT Conservatives. They adhere dogmatically to a world domination principle by any means, preferably by force, but also by lies.
They do not believe in liberty. They believe in big government. They do not allow free will or dissent from the Party line. They are against abortion, but NOT because they are pro-life. This is a means to conquering the world. Numbers of devotees make great weapons. Same thing with homosexuality. They’re not busy breeding more troops for al Illah. Heresy! Death!
Because it is a “religion”, the Left sells the lie that the Muslims are on the right of the political spectrum, but they are not. They are for Statism. That means they belong on the political Left.
The problem is the misunderstanding of the term Conservative. It refers to conserving the Constitution and the ideals of America (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness). One can be ’small c’ conservative and be hidebound about anything.
Jun 15, 2009 - 6:49 pm 37. steeple:bobdog 26, perhaps you could eloquently educate all of the rubes here like myself (i’ll choose to leave Ms. Rubin out of this; i’ll let you just speak down to me for the moment) as to how diplomatic subtleties matter when one is dealing with a thuggish dictatorship like Iran? do you not believe that there a black and white place we can arrive at where we simply espouse our support for democracy, will of the people and “international law”? is it really any more complicated than that, given these particular set of circumstances (hey, maybe i’m starting to understand this realpolitik stuff)?
Jun 15, 2009 - 7:47 pm 38. John Dough:You’ve got it all wrong……. Obama took a bold step in the Iranian situation by….. I think I heard him whisper….. Present !!
Jun 15, 2009 - 11:20 pm 39. baluc/ka:I knew this day would arrive and I was hoping for John McCain to be the man in charge at the White House.
Remember when Russia invade Georgia last summer? And at his campaign stop, he told the Russians to cease hostilities and that “we were all Georgians now”.
What was Obama’s reaction: to take it up with the UN Security Council, that both parties cease their doing. It was only later that Obama issued a strongly worded statement against Russia.
Can you imagine McCain saying to the Iranian protesters right now : “Today, we are all Iranians”.
That Russian invasion cemented it for me in my decision to vote for McCain. He had good instincts then. Even his choice for Palin. But to drop his debate with Obama to do the bailout and to vote on it with all that pork.
His instincts failed him and he crashed and burned like an aviator pilot that wound up getting picked up on a Vietnam lake, to be sent to Hanoi Hilton, and be broken.
Obama, this is the moment of truth in your presidency and you are flinching from it badly. Your presidency has been about domestic issues. It is in events like these now in Iran (and soon Pakistan)that is paramount which can make you a great statesman.
Or a broken president like James Earl “Jimmy” Carter.
I can only imagine you in your post-presidency years putting up drywall for Habitat for Humanity for Gaza homes after more untold bombings by Israel and reconstruction by US.
Sort of like Sisyphus.
As with Carter today.
Jun 15, 2009 - 11:59 pm 40. jelloma5000:This was Obama’s chance to make a statement that would resonate throughout the world from Iran to Venezuela to North Korea; a chance to state that we stand united with those who stand up to a repressive regime and demand to have their voices heard.
The end result of course should ultimately be determined by the Iranian people, but those in Tehran who held up signs printed in English should not feel that they are alone. The United States must be circumspect in it’s actions, but it should be bold in it’s words.
America’s place in this world is special. As Reagan said, it is that “city on a hill”. It is not too late for Obama to accept Reagan’s mantle and speak to the oppressed masses yearning for freedom. We must stand with them.
Jun 16, 2009 - 3:48 am 41. Jim:Get over it, people. You lost the election, Obama won. The level of delusion here is breathtaking – election fraud, imploding foreign policy, the census being rigged…wow, I wonder how long it will be before we are thrown into the gulags that Obama is building in some secret place? This is a democracy, people. Democracies are messy. Your side doesn’t always win, but usually what a good citizen does (you remember the concept of citizenship, don’t you?) is carry on by contributing to the common good instead of retreating into a fantasy world in which the only voices they ever hear are those who echo their sour grapes and who agree with their paranoid fantasies.
Jun 16, 2009 - 4:07 am 42. willis:What will Obama do?
I think he will just ask himself: what would Reverend Wright do? Then peace will settle across his face as he answers proudly: of course! God damn America! Then he call Biden for some average American lunch with Dijon mustard, muttering screw America and the Iranians, I’m Obama, the chosen one.
Jun 16, 2009 - 4:20 am 43. bandit:The lefts love for totalitarian dictatorships knows no bounds.
Jun 16, 2009 - 7:47 am 44. mojo:He’ll take the low road and cut a deal with the Mullahs. It’s all about HIM, yannow. HE cannot be embarrassed, no matter what – and so he’ll screw over the Iranians without a second thought.
The man is a moral imbecile. Expecting anything but self-regard from him is just dumb.
Jun 16, 2009 - 8:23 am 45. Andrew:Truly I tell you, Barack Obama is the first anti-American president.
Jun 16, 2009 - 10:47 am 46. Kriska:Does anybody else notice that when Obama doesn’t react to an event, he is alsway reported by the White House to be “deeply concerned”? That makes me fell alot better.
Jun 16, 2009 - 2:07 pm 47. Hotpatch 6:There is little Hope for Change in that cesspool called Iran. Their so-called religion guarantees it!
Jun 16, 2009 - 2:29 pm 48. Kriska:#46
Jun 16, 2009 - 3:28 pm 49. Summer:“always” not “alsway”/”feel” not “fell”–sorry, long day.
I agree that Iran deserves hope and change, too. That’s why I think we should do the unselfish thing and give up Obama to be their leader while we hold another elcection. I think we’ve had enough change for now. Let’s spread the wealth and let Iran get a chance.
Jun 16, 2009 - 6:55 pm 50. SteveB/Colorado:#32 Gun toting libertarian (to smith): “Hard to believe anyone can be so twisted as to confuse conservative Americans with the thugs who beat & kill protesters in the streets of Iran.” Well, I guess it depends on how one defines “conservative.” I see similarities between the Iranian theocratic thugs and the home grown thugs of anti-abortion groups like Operation Rescue.
Jun 17, 2009 - 8:56 am 51. Class Clown:Reports indicate that Obama can’t find his Blackberry, even after he checked the couch cushions. Sources say that he is “very concerned”.
Jun 17, 2009 - 10:01 pm 52. K Philip:Dearest all,
My comment here is that we have seen this kind of action before. Whether it was UC Cali during the VN war or Chicago during the elections .. or even Kent State .. the photo of peaceful people with meaning getting killed…
Why are we so surprised?
I am so sorry for the death of a beautiful child in front of her Father.
Only God knows why.
This image will burn in my mind
I have no solution. I can only offer hope.
Since we have been killing each other since we crawled out of caves, I doubt there is no near term relief but hope.
Thank you.
Jun 24, 2009 - 1:44 pm 53. K Philip:/My heart tells me
/we just want the truth
/Just ask yourself
Jun 24, 2009 - 1:54 pm/What’s a soul to do?