Happy Fourth of July!

 

Specially these guys. 

Gov. Palin resigns. The mania and derangement will continue.

Now the question is was it for personal or political reasons?

If this turns out to be what it so far appears; a resignation which leaves a huge question mark on her political career, can you blame her? This lady has been through some very tough and extremely unfair media attention and treatment. There are already remarks being made that she just couldn’t handle the pressure. What Palin and her family have experienced and had to endure goes way beyond “pressure” in the ordinary sense. They have been subject to brutal attacks and a lynch mob like campaign where nothing was sacred, not even her infant son, Trig.

Palin is a perfect example of the state of our politics and the denigration and criminalization of opposing views. Sarah Palin was hated because she forced liberals and progressives to face their hypocrisies and shallowness. She was a woman. A powerful woman that accomplished much in a short time. But, she was the wrong kind of woman. The left made that perfectly clear. It is not so much about women as it is about the right kind. Like HRC. Therefore, she was a threat. An opposing image of a “strong, independent and successful woman.” 

If she drops out of politics forever, I wouldn’t think any less of her. It is criminal what she and her family have been through since August of last year.

• Hot Air | Is her career over?
• Michelle Malkin | Feel free to speculate
• The Fix | Time to focus on Presidential run

Marines and Afghan troops conduct operation ‘Strike of the Sword’ in Afghanistan

We’re going down there, and we’re going to stay – that’s what is different this time.
- Brigadier General Larry Nicholson

It is good fighting weather in Afghanistan. U.S. Marines along with Afghan forces have set out to raid several villages in the Helmand River valley in southwestern Afghanistan early Thursday morning. The region is seen as stronghold for Taliban fighters where they plan operations and sustain their existence from poppy harvests and their opium smuggling network. All in which, greatly assist their insurgency. The region is seen as hotbed for activity and is one of the deadliest areas for coalition forces to operate. 

This marks the first military offensive under President Obama. 

The offensive was launched shortly after 1 a.m. Thursday local time (4:30 p.m. EDT Wednesday, 2030 GMT Wednesday) in Helmand province, a Taliban stronghold and the world’s largest opium poppy producing area. The goal is to clear insurgents from the hotly contested region before the nation’s Aug. 20 presidential election.

Officials described the operation, dubbed Khanjar, or “Strike of the Sword,” as the largest and fastest-moving of the war’s new phase and the biggest Marine offensive since the one in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004. It involves nearly 4,000 newly arrived Marines and 650 Afghan forces. British forces last week led similar, but smaller, missions to clear out insurgents in Helmand and neighboring Kandahar provinces.

“Where we go we will stay, and where we stay, we will hold, build and work toward transition of all security responsibilities to Afghan forces,” Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson said in a statement.

Jules Crittenden writes on the apparent disconnect between this operation, The Obama administration and the military, all centered round Bob Woodward’s latest Washington Post piece,Preventing Another Iraq/US Says Key to Success in Afghanistan: Economic, Not Military.

The headline is not Woodward’s fault, except to the extent he buried and obfuscated his lede. He reports after the jump that National Security Advisor James L. Jones briefed commanders on the ground that there won’t be more troops, that requests for more troops will prompt a “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” response in the Oval Office.

That’s your lede, Bob. There’s your hed, Washington Post copy desk. Obama to Troops: “WTF?”

We can dicker if you like about whether he actually said that or not. But the president’s national security advisor only voiced in military slang what the president himself more formally enunciated with the unveiling of his Afghan strategy some months ago, when he indicated he didn’t want to be a wartime president. He liked the idea of running some counterterrorism ops and buying his way out of this one instead. Put another way, ”WTF?”

Meanwhile, Pakistan is finally on the offensive in coordination with the U.S. and Afghanistan. They are deploying more troops to the border to prevent the Taliban refuge when fleeing from the new onslaught. This comes on top of the Pakistan Army greatly pressing Taliban fighters along the border the past week. In fact, Pakistan’s effort was so productive and consistent many here in the U.S. were  criticizing Congress and the Obama Administration for inaction for a change. 

More now than ever, Pakistan is acting as if it is committed to fighting the Taliban. The military in recent days has expanded a high-stakes offensive along the Afghan border, while the government enjoys wide public support, even as casualties and refugees mount.

So naturally, the U.S. Congress is finding a way not to help. An aid package has hit repeated hurdles on Capitol Hill, while U.S. allies shortchange Pakistan on humanitarian assistance for the people displaced by the fighting. This is myopic and dangerous. If Pakistan fails to defeat the Islamist insurgency, the consequences will resonate far and wide, in the worst case with al Qaeda getting Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile.

Earlier this year, the Obama Administration prodded, pleaded and shamed Pakistan to fight. Passive acceptance of Taliban gains turned into the current counteroffensive. The military has since taken back the Swat Valley and shifted its sights to such tribal regions as Waziristan. Count that a tentative success for Pakistan and the Obama foreign policy team.

UPDATE: Soldier captured and missing in Afghanistan 

BREAKING NEWS —  Insurgents have captured an American soldier in eastern Afghanistan, the U.S. military said Thursday.

Spokeswoman Capt. Elizabeth Mathias said the soldier went missing Tuesday.

“We are using all of our resources to find him and provide for his safe return,” Mathias said.

Mathias did not provide details on the soldier, the location where he was captured or the circumstances.

Possible body of the Apostle Paul found?

Very interesting to say the least. This is a huge find for world history in general and the Christian faith in particular. It all started for Paul and the early religion of Christianity on the road to Damascus. He went on to write 13 books in the New Testament and traveled the Roman empire to become the major apostle of Christianity after the death of Christ. 

Check out this awesome google Timeline of the Apostle Paul’s life and legacy. 

Daily Mail | Have we found the body of St Paul?

Deeply moved, the Pope delivered the news on Sunday that fragments of bones found in the tomb traditionally considered to be that of Saint Paul did indeed date from the first or second century.

Which means that, in all likelihood, they are the bones of the Apostle Paul – bones that have lain there for 1,950 years yet, astonishingly, have only been discovered in our time.
You might say, so what? Aren’t Roman Catholics always making claims about bones and relics? Was it not said that if you measured all the bits of the True Cross venerated throughout the world you could build a bridge to the moon? Yes, yes.

But this is slightly different, and it is very exciting. The Pope was not saying that he revered some relics as a matter of faith. He was saying that scientists, by carbon dating, have come as close as possible to identifying the very bones of St Paul himself.

Why is he so convinced? Though the carbon-dating experts knew nothing of their origins, the bone fragments were recovered after a tiny probe was inserted into the tomb which lies in a crypt beneath the Basilica of St Paul outside the Walls in Rome – a church long held to have been built on the site where Paul was buried.

It was only three years ago that the tomb itself was discovered by Vatican archaeologists.

The fact that it was positioned exactly underneath the epigraph Paulo Apostolo Mart (Paul the Apostle and Martyr) at the base of the altar convinced them it was Paul’s tomb.

Now backed by the evidence of his carbon-dated bone fragments, the Pope has announced: ‘This seems to confirm the unanimous and uncontested tradition that the bone fragments are the mortal remains of the Apostle Paul.’

Military ‘Coup Document” discovered raises alarm in Turkey

The fact that the military appears to be active in Turkish politics and even advancing a strategy of a coup is not that surprising to those who know a little about Turkey’s history since Mustafa Kemal introduced polices now known as Kemalism. Turkey democracy has always worked until it doesn’t. When such a time arises, the Turkish military has customarily stepped in to restore stability and the principles of Kemalism and to uphold the constitution. The Turkish military has assumed emergency powers since those early days three times, in 1960, 1971, and 1980. After that, they forcefully removed the prime minister and setup his replacement as recent as 1997. 

Kemal himself helped to set that standard as early as 1925 when he enacted a series of emergency powers that lasted four years. But, very importantly he returned control back to civilian authority; however, only after he thoroughly “cleansed” the political system — Turkish style. In other words, Turkish democracy and government has always had a fine balance between civilian control, free elections (for the most part) and a pattern of active and sometimes brutal military intrusion into politics. 

World Politics Review | ‘Coup Document’ Raises Tensions in Turkey

ISTANBUL — Allegations that elements of the Turkish military may have been hatching a plot to discredit or even topple the government of the liberal Islamic Justice and Development Party (AKP) are threatening to raise military-civilian tensions in Turkey and further widen the country’s deep political divide. At the same time, the allegations are also raising questions about how the plot against the AKP fits into an ongoing investigation into another coup attempt, known as Ergenekon.

This latest Turkish political crisis was sparked when Taraf — a hard-hitting liberal daily that has been severely critical of the military in the past — published a document on June 12 entitled, “Plan to Combat Islamic Fundamentalism.” The four-page document, allegedly signed by a colonel in the military’s psychological warfare unit, outlined ways in which the AKP government could be weakened. Among them, the document suggested “mobilizing” moles within the party and stoking anti-Armenian and anti-Greek sentiments in order to strengthen the nationalist opposition.

The plan also called for discrediting the pro-government Gulen movement, Turkey’s largest and most powerful Islamic brotherhood, by planting weapons and ammunition in its members’ homes and even linking it to the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

Police found the document while searching the office of a lawyer who is representing a retired colonel linked to the Ergenekon case.

Will prosperity follow Iraq’s new ‘freedom’

As American troops pulled out of all major Iraqi cities citizens of the country celebrated and marked it as a defining moment in Iraq’s new history. Others expressed concern and worry that the sectarian violence may soon flare up at the new opportunity. However, one way in which to distract warring factions from resuming their deadly game is to introduce a dynamic and modern market economy that can bring wealth to the country the likes of which hasn’t been seen in centuries. As the GDP increases exponentially, as will per capita GDP, raising the standard of living, wages, opportunity, incentive, innovation, investments, and pride, people will be far more apt to supporting the government and national stability. 

But, to do that the Iraqi government has to decide on how to lure foreign investors and oil firms to setup shop in the many rich oil fields. With modern development, industry and organization Iraq could be a major producer and, potentially, one of the major countries in the world in just a few decades. So far, things haven’t exactly happened in the order many experts and investors hoped. The hang up is, of course, price per barrel. Companies were asking too much for operating in the country in the eyes of the government. Still, others were willing to operate at  loss just to get a foothold in the new market. 

From the Iraqi Oil Report

The ministry was offering 20-year contracts to 41 pre-qualified international firms, including the world’s largest – Exxon Mobil, Shell and Chevron – as well as smaller state companies from China, Russia and India, among others.

Companies would be paid to invest technology in the fields as part of the ministry’s efforts to rehab the large, producing fields, and increase production. The companies would also be paid an agreed upon fee per barrel produced beyond the target production plateau.

The televised, two-day auction was reduced to only Tuesday with a sandstorm shutting the Baghdad airport for Monday.

The ministry must now decide whether to continue negotiating with the bidding companies, alter the terms, or scrap the process. There are proponents of all sides.

One thing is clear in all of this. Iraq does have the right to ask for new proposals if they feel the deals presented are not in the country’s interest but they must not runoff investors by being overly demanding and difficult. They need foreign investment and development badly to get their oil industry moving forward. With Iraq being a dangerous and unstable market by normal standards, investors and oil companies may feel the risks involved are simply not worth the costs. 

Los Angeles Times | Iraq’s attempt to bring foreign investors into oil industry comes up dry

Iraq was seeking bids from firms to develop eight of its existing oil and gas fields, but only one contract was awarded to develop one oil field after a public auction that was televised live from Baghdad’s Rashid Hotel inside the heavily fortified Green Zone. The disappointing outcome to the widely anticipated event, which was planned a year ago, suggested international oil firms aren’t as eager to invest in Iraq as the Iraqi government had been hoping — and that there will be no quick fix for the country’s looming financial problems.

“It’s pretty much a total disaster,” said Peter Kemp of the New York-based Energy Intelligence publishing group. “It seems the Iraqis totally miscalculated the commercial realities of this process.”

The sole contract was awarded to a consortium led by Britain’s BP and including China’s CNPC International Ltd., marking the first time any foreign companies have been permitted to invest in Iraqi oil since 1972, when the oil industry was nationalized. Oil Minister Hussein Shahristani called it a “historic day” that coincided with the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq’s cities.

The bidding process was being closely watched for signs as to how the new Iraq is likely to go about developing its vast oil reserves, the world’s third-largest after Saudi Arabia and Iran. But as the bids by representatives of the world’s top oil companies were unsealed, it quickly emerged that there was a wide gulf between the maximum price the Iraqi government was prepared to pay investors to develop the oil fields, and the minimum price oil companies were prepared to accept.

Unprecedented and UnAmerican: “Climate Change” Bill passes house

Today it is far more fashionable and tolerable to say Jesus Christ never walked the earth or there is no God then to say Global Warming, or the newer modified version, Climate Change, doesn’t exist. America is now in uncharted waters as the Democrats have moved America further away from its historical roots and unmatched capitalist system. What is totally sad in the bill’s passing is, like socialism, it has been a total failure wherever it has been tried. Across Europe and even down to Australia, this nonsense has been scrapped. The economist in Spain blamed their own version of a climate change bill on their tragically high unemployment rate of 18 percent. The government reports that for every “green job” created equaled two losses in other private sector jobs. Energy prices have skyrocketed and businesses find it too expensive to produce. Therefore, they pass on the costs by cutting back production, which are driving prices higher, and laying off employees, which are driving unemployment numbers higher. Sounds like a recipe for contraction.

President Obama during the campaign speaking in San Francisco: “You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” 

This blueprint for disaster is out there. And strangely experts here at home are saying the exact same thing will happen here as well because of the simple principles of capitalism and our market economy. Assuming, of course, those two mentioned remain. Hyperbole aside, I am seriously beginning to wonder how much longer that will be, however.

There are so many Democrats who have personal investments in startup “green” companies and technologies. That includes Nancy Pelosi. So, most of them feel eager to build castles in the sky and create a new dynamic green energy economy, which translates into large subsidies for their investments and a new national energy tax. Hey, you have to help close that massive deficit somehow, right? Besides, they never had much use for the older system of our economy. But, this isn’t solely a Democrat problem even though they did send a taxi to break Rep. Patrick Kennedy out of rehab so he could vote yes for the bill. Here is a list of Republicans who voted for the bill. 

There is some good news to this. The bill still has to pass the Senate and both sides have voiced that is unlikely. 

The President’s Follow Through Problem

H/T to American Power

I harken back to the president’s Cairo speech and the words of “freedom, individual rights, human rights, justice and equality” were not just American values and thought but universal ones given down by God. When the people of Iran took those words seriously they turned out to be just words from the president. 

No one is advocating sending in troops, money or arms to the Iranian people. However, as the leader and standard bearer of the free world a little more should be offered from president Obama. And what should that be? I don’t know exactly. Then again, I’m not the one who traveled to Cairo and made a speech encouraging exactly what has now taken place. He has decided to play it safe and not offer foil for Iranian political games. He doesn’t want to be blamed or used as a scape goat if things escalate, or if the regime puts down the growing revolution. That might make him look bad — a victim of miscalculation. In other words, he is voting present. 

Her name is Neda

I’ll be out of town for the week

Denver, CO.

I am headed off to Denver for work related stuff. I’ll be back on Friday, Lord willing, if all goes to plan. I probably will not be doing any posting until I get back. In the meantime, I am sure the situation in Iran will be grabbing many of the headlines. 

Here is one in particular. CBS compared the murdering, tyrannical, holocaust denier, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to George W. Bush. Just another example of our pathetic and nasty journalism has gotten in our country. Politics is turning into a creepy and dangerous thing in our country. (See Flopping Aces also). I guess this CBS author hasn’t connected voter fraud similarities with Team Obama yet. 

The Other McCain fished out another comparison with the Bush Regime. This time involving Carl Rove: Karl Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Rove?

Besides that, the reaction from the voters is looking pretty convincing that this is more than just a group of irate protesters. It is turning into an Insurrection. 

Don’t forget Israel, and the big news involving Palestinian statehood. 

Be sure to check out Memeorandum, American Power, The Other McCain, Politics and Critical Thinking, Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, Gateway Pundit, Sanity Injection, Wintery Knight, Pundit and Pundette, Neo-NeoCon, American Digest, The Capital Tribune, The Red Hunter, Greg Mankiw, This Ain’t Hell, and The Classic Liberal. 

Also, here a few essays that didn’t get much traffic but I enjoyed writing them.

• It is time we loudly question President Obama’s foreign policy
  
• A proper rebuttal to a New York Times editorial, ‘End of the Clash of Civilizations.’
  
• Those rotten Bush Tax Cuts and the Richy Riches who benefit from them — Revisited
  
• Two years and two and a half trillion dollars in deficits
  
• President Obama has big choices to make over U.S.’s aging nuclear arsenal

God’s fingerprints and design (DNA, the Fibonacci Code and the Golden Ratio)

Three quick videos to peek your interest — not help you in becoming an expert. 

 

Reassessing the Crusades (Part of a Broader Study)

“The Crusades were violent and led to atrocities by the modern world’s standards under the banner of the cross and in the name of Christianity. But the Crusades were a counterattack on Islam. Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096.”

Middle East Forum | Raymond Ibrahim, “Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam?”

“There is far more violence in the Bible than in the Qur’an; the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam.” So announces former nun and self-professed “freelance monotheist,” Karen Armstrong. This quote sums up the single most influential argument currently serving to deflect the accusation that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant: All monotheistic religions, proponents of such an argument say, and not just Islam, have their fair share of violent and intolerant scriptures, as well as bloody histories. Thus, whenever Islam’s sacred scriptures—the Qur’an first, followed by the reports on the words and deeds of Muhammad (the Hadith)—are highlighted as demonstrative of the religion’s innate bellicosity, the immediate rejoinder is that other scriptures, specifically those of Judeo-Christianity, are as riddled with violent passages.

Reassessing the Crusades

And it is from here that one can best appreciate the historic Crusades—events that have been thoroughly distorted by Islam’s many influential apologists. Karen Armstrong, for instance, has practically made a career for herself by misrepresenting the Crusades, writing, for example, that “the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars against Islam.” That a former nun rabidly condemns the Crusades vis-à-vis anything Islam has done makes her critique all the more marketable. Statements such as this ignore the fact that from the beginnings of Islam, more than 400 years before the Crusades, Christians have noted that Islam was spread by the sword. Indeed, authoritative Muslim historians writing centuries before the Crusades, such as Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri (d. 892) and Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (838-923), make it clear that Islam was spread by the sword.

The fact remains: The Crusades were a counterattack on Islam—not an unprovoked assault as Armstrong and other revisionist historians portray. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis puts it well,

Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad, was itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation. But unlike the jihad, it was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory. It was, with few exceptions, limited to the successful wars for the recovery of southwest Europe, and the unsuccessful wars to recover the Holy Land and to halt the Ottoman advance in the Balkans. The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule. … The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.

Moreover, Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. The Fatimid caliph Abu ‘Ali Mansur Tariqu’l-Hakim (r. 996-1021) desecrated and destroyed a number of important churches—such as the Church of St. Mark in Egypt and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem—and decreed even more oppressive than usual decrees against Christians and Jews. Then, in 1071, the Seljuk Turks crushed the Byzantines in the pivotal battle of Manzikert and, in effect, conquered a major chunk of Byzantine Anatolia presaging the way for the eventual capture of Constantinople centuries later.

It was against this backdrop that Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099) called for the Crusades:

From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to our ears, namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians [i.e., Muslim Turks] … has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion.

Even though Urban II’s description is historically accurate, the fact remains: However one interprets these wars—as offensive or defensive, just or unjust—it is evident that they were not based on the example of Jesus, who exhorted his followers to “love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.” Indeed, it took centuries of theological debate, from Augustine to Aquinas, to rationalize defensive war—articulated as “just war.” Thus, it would seem that if anyone, it is the Crusaders—not the jihadists—who have been less than faithful to their scriptures (from a literal standpoint); or put conversely, it is the jihadists—not the Crusaders—who have faithfully fulfilled their scriptures (also from a literal stand point). Moreover, like the violent accounts of the Old Testament, the Crusades are historic in nature and not manifestations of any deeper scriptural truths.

In fact, far from suggesting anything intrinsic to Christianity, the Crusades ironically better help explain Islam. For what the Crusades demonstrated once and for all is that irrespective of religious teachings—indeed, in the case of these so-called Christian Crusades, despite them—man is often predisposed to violence. But this begs the question: If this is how Christians behaved—who are commanded to love, bless, and do good to their enemies who hate, curse, and persecute them—how much more can be expected of Muslims who, while sharing the same violent tendencies, are further commanded by the Deity to attack, kill, and plunder nonbelievers?

Read the entire essay, here. 

Protests in Iran erupt over “false election”

Informed Comment | Juan Cole  “Stealing the Iranian Election”

Wall Street Journal | Farnaz Fassihi “Ahmadinejad Confirmed Victor; Violent Protests Erupt in Tehran”

The violence ratcheted up the stakes in the most contentious election since the founding of the Islamic Republic 30 years ago. Prolonged strife or a political standoff would heighten the uncertainty hanging over a country that is one of the world’s biggest oil producers and Washington’s main irritant in the volatile Middle East.

Update: Reports coming in that Mousavi has been arrested and over 100 people have been killed. White House still interested in working with Iran. But seriously who are they trying to kid? This election says it all. For a regime that takes being authoritative and absolute seriously, how did they screw up something they are so good at? Worst. Fixed. Elections. Ever. 

Update II: Iran: There Will Be Blood

My contact predicted serious violence at the highest levels. He said that Ahmadinejad is now genuinely scared of Iranian society and of Mousavi and Rafsanjani. The level of tension between them has gone beyond civil limits — and my contact said that Ahmadinejad will try to have them imprisoned and killed.

Iranian elections are over, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the winner

I guess that circus will be leaving town now that President Ahmadinejad won reelection. The reports are back that he trounced Mir Hossein Mousavi, 63 to 34 percent. But, nothing is ever as it appears in Iran. Mousavi is already claiming voter fraud and “treason” from the results of the election. He is vowing not to “surrender to this manipulation” and that the “governance of lie and dictatorship” should be rejected. 

What is interesting is that state agencies delayed any official announcement of the results so that security forces could be notified and placed into position in various cities in Iran.

Riot police cordoned off the Interior Ministry, which directed Friday’s voting, and stood guard around key government buildings.

Plainclothes officers fired tear gas to disperse a cheering crowd outside Mousavi’s campaign headquarters after the pivotal presidential election ended in confusion, with both sides claiming victory.

With votes still being counted in many cities, Ahmadinejad, 52, a hard-liner who has antagonized the West, was leading by a 2-to-1 ratio in early returns, according to Iranian Interior Ministry officials. But supporters of Mousavi, 67, a relative moderate, dismissed those numbers, saying the ministry was effectively under Ahmadinejad’s control.

“I am the winner of these elections,” Mousavi declared late Friday, after heavy turnout resulted in a two-hour extension of voting across the Islamic republic. “The people have voted for me.”

Whoever “elected” Ahmadinejad did so out of approval of his style of leadership. His policies and tactics have received a green light for four more years thatwill likely seal his legacy as a provocative demagogue and Iran’s stance in the world. It leaves room for serious doubt that there will actually be shift in policy or a compromise with the West. The nuclear question will remain clear. Production will continue and complimentary advancement in technologies will likely be ramped up. A Mousavi victory would not have necessarily changed that outcome, however, his tone was certainly one that offered talks, negotiations and possibly a compromise on the the type of nuclear technology that Iran would produce. He seemed willing to be forthright in the nation’s plans that would more than likely lift burdensome sanctions and remove his country from an uncomfortable position of world scrutiny. 

Of course, it appears that the only person who really matters in this election did not approve of Mousavi’s idea of change. The extremely wide margin of victory for Ahmadinejad was obviously a blessing from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. And with the appearance of a clear majority his power circle tried to create the illusion that the rest of the country supported Ahmadinejad over Mousavi. This gives clear indication that Iran has set its own course and plans to follow through with its goals as an Islamic revolutionary republic. The Supreme Leader and the various controlling factions agreed that discussions and compromises with the U.S. is not very desirable. I think it is time the U.S. follows suit and reevaluate what this “selection” means for Iran’s future and America’s foreign policy with Iran.

Update: 

Miami Herald | WARREN P. STROBEL “Protests erupt as Iran declares huge win for Ahmadinejad”

Within hours after state-run news agencies reported a two-to-one Ahmadinejad lead late Friday, security forces that had remained in the background last week reasserted a heavy presence in central Tehran and sporadic clashes broke out between them and groups of young people.

A McClatchy Newspaper reporter saw groups of armored, baton-wielding special forces units charge and disperse groups of students along central Vali Asr Street, occasionally striking civilians with their batons. A few students threw rocks, some from the windows of buildings above.

Fox News | James Rosen “Official: Obama Administration Skeptical of Iran’s Election Results”

U.S. analysts find it “not credible” that Mir Hossein Mousavi would have lost the balloting in his hometown, or that a third candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, would have received less than 1 percent of the total vote, a senior U.S. official told FOX News.

Iran elections today

Interesting video with Mousavi and how his policies foreign and domestic differ from Ahmadinejad. But, I don’t see a lot of difference on the nuclear question though Mousavi may be more forthright and not so provocative in terms of what their aims are on nuclear energy and in regards to Israel. Some pundits are all predicting a run-off between President Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. Others are asking if it really matters on who wins. 

Washington Post |A Polarized Iran Goes to Polls

Standing on a high ledge safely out of the way, a group of cosmopolitan youths looked down at the crowd of mostly out-of-towners. “Go back to the zoo!” shouted a teenager with gelled-up hair and a green T-shirt, a sign of support for Ahmadinejad’s main challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi.

“Sissies!” the marchers yelled back.

As Iranians vote Friday to choose a president, the country is more deeply polarized than at any time since the Islamic revolution that overthrew the shah 30 years ago. After a bitter campaign that included personal attacks on some of Iran’s leading families, both sides are preparing to contest the results, and many Iranians wonder whether the social and economic rifts exposed by the election will deepen. 

Update: Conventional wisdom tells us in these kind of elections, with these type of candidates, a high voter turnout smells trouble for Ahmadinejad. Assuming any of that matters in Iran — Ceteris Paribus.

CNN | Ahmadinejad leads in early Iran returns

With polls closed and about 20 percent of ballots counted, Election Commission Chief Kamran Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad was ahead with just over 69 percent of the vote.

Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad’s chief rival, reformist candidate Mir Hossain Moussavi, had 28 percent.

Times of London | Ahmadinejad claims victory after Iran’s polling stations are kept open

Meanwhile, President Obama praises the Iranian “election”.