June 18, 2009, - 12:03 pm

Top Mossad, Israeli Officials Echo Schlussel: Stop Siding With Mousavi (Who is Worse); Iranian Faux-Uprising is Stupid, Pointless

By Debbie Schlussel
I continue to marvel and laugh at the many group-think dummies on the right and left who continue to whine over the Iranian election and side with this faux-”uprising” for democracy in Iran.
It’s like siding with one better-spoken HAMAS candidate in a HAMAS election, in which both candidates were picked by HAMAS, and telling me that this is somehow a fight for Palestinian democracy. We’ve already seen Palestinian democracy. And Iranian democracy is no different. The young Iranians in this “Uprising” are haters of Israel and Jews and supporters of Iran’s nuke program. It’s simply a waste to side with these “young democrats.”
The many people all over the internet putting HAMAS green on their sites and Twitter and Facebook icons and telling us “We support Free Iran,” or, “We support Iranian Democracy” are idiots. You’re just clueless.

moussavikhomeini.jpg

Top Israeli Mossad Officials Agree w/ Schlussel on Khomeini Disciple Mousavi
I said this last week, and I repeat it now: Mir-Hossein Mousavi is an extremist with nicer language. He’s no different from Ahmadinejad, and no better. As I noted last week, if anything, he’s worse because Moussavi is Ahmadinejad with lipstick on. He doesn’t say what he thinks, whereas Ahmadinejad does and makes it much harder to negotiate with. This is the same old dynamic in the Middle East over and over again.
But ignorant fools with zero critical thinking skills–who prefer slogans and gushing over “democracy” over reality–continue to go with the “Iranians uprising for freedom” false narrative. I guess if Mousavi’s deceased friend, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini got an extremist makeover, these many ignoramuses would be cheering for him and his revolutionaries (you know, the ones–including Mousavi–who took American Embassy officials hostage for 444 days). Or if the guys who head the terrorist group Mousavi founded, Hezbollah (which murdered over 300 U.S. Marines and Embassy officials) were well-spoken and got nice stories on ABC News, you’d be cheering for those “democrats,” too. Nauseating.
And top Israeli officials are now echoing what I said last week. Glad they agree and are far smarter than the “We support Iran” green echo chamber of dummies.
Schlussel, Last Week:

And while an Iran with Moussavi atop of it, would be no different than an Iran with Ahmadinejad at the top in terms of policy and radicalism, it might have been more dangerous. That’s because Moussavi thinks all of the same things as Ahamadinejad, but he’s not prone to stating these nutty views out in the open. We would be stuck negotiating with a kinder, gentler face of a man who is, privately, every bit as committed to the idea of Holocaust denial and Holocaust cartoons.
So, I don’t really care what happened over the weekend in the fake Iranian elections. To me, it’s the equivalent of two competing ants pissing. I couldn’t care less.
If anything, I’m glad the guy with the perpetual truth serum–who tells us exactly what they’re thinking about the Jews, Israel, nukes, and America–is the guy that’s still in there.
He’ll make it much tougher–and far less palatable to the American and Western public–for Barack Hussein Obama to sit at the table with him.

Top Israeli Officials, This Week:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has gained unlikely supporters amid spreading unrest in Iran: officials in Israel, a country he wants to eliminate.
Meir Dagan, chief of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency, told a closed Knesset committee hearing that Mr. Ahmadinejad’s reputation as a Holocaust-denying rabble-rouser makes it easier for Israel to enlist international support against Iran’s nuclear program, a committee member said. A victory for Mr. Ahmadinejad’s moderate challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi, in last week’s presidential elections would have presented Israel with “a graver problem,” Mr. Dagan said. . . .
“Both of them pose the same threat. But it’s better for Israel that you have a leader [in Iran] with a very dangerous ideology who speaks clearly so that nobody can ignore him,” said Knesset deputy speaker Danny Danon, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party.
A more careful, soft-spoken Iranian president who promised better relations with the West “would have made it harder for us to recruit the world to our side,” Mr. Danon added.
. . .
Israel would do well to pin no hopes on political change in Tehran, said former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy. While the recent turmoil might temporarily weaken Tehran’s support for Israel’s Arab foes, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, he said, they will have no effect on the strategic problem of Iran’s nuclear weapons.

(Emphasis added.)
Great minds think alike.
So, I’m awake. Top Israeli officials are awake. Time for the many mindless internet sheep on the right and the left all over the West to wake the heck up from your green phony baloney fantasies. You are no different than some guy who calls an 800 phone sex number and thinks the morbidly obese double-wide resident on the other end is a hot babe.
An extremist in green with nicer language is still an extremist. And he’s far harder to marginalize and ignore.

antigreen.jpg

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly




17 Responses

Agreed. Mousavi is the Mussolini to Ahmedinejad’s Hitler. They are both cut from the same Islamofascist-Khomeinist cloth and they both have the same view of the world. Israel and the West are not served by prolonging the life of Iran’s Islamic theocracy. The current struggle within Iran is over who is to serve as a figurehead for the mullahs. It is not about replacing the system with a truly democratic one and so from Israel’s point and the West – what is going in Iran is completely irrelevant. At the end of the day, Iran’s quest for a nuclear bomb must still be stopped. It doesn’t matter who represents Khamenei in Tehran.

NormanF on June 18, 2009 at 12:54 pm

Hey Debbie, isn’t it about time you give President Obama credit for not listening to Republicans on this one?

Norman Blitzer on June 18, 2009 at 1:38 pm

Agreed as well, that it’s pointless, to Iranians. Gee, which frontman for the same old maniacs. And I’m sure most Iranians realize that. But I have to ask myself, who is stirring this up? Which leads to “who benefits?”. Not the Iranians. Not Mousavi, he knew he couldn’t win going in. Certainly not Ahmedinajad. Hmmm… who benefits by stirring the pot in Iran?

linh on June 18, 2009 at 1:39 pm

I’m wondering if perhaps the public protests in Iran are against the government as a whole. There’s been growing discontent with the theocracy there for some time.
The Iranian economy was reported to be hurting last summer with petroleum prices at all-time highs. With petroleum prices fallen, the economy and the Iranian people have got to be hurting.
I sense a far bigger discontent than merely one candidate against the other. I sense a growing discontent with the government system. I also wouldn’t put it past the Russians to be exploiting public discontent.
One thing is for certain: the news media isn’t reporting this story accurately.

There is NO Santa Claus on June 18, 2009 at 2:41 pm

That it is stupid to protest this election, and yet people in Iran are taking great risks to do so, is why I posted in Debbie’s earlier article that something everyone is missing is going on here. I have no clue as to what that is.
Those who know what is going on in Iran know that no matter who wins the regime will still suck big time. I believe events are encouraged by parties with an agenda other than the election itself.

i_am_me on June 18, 2009 at 3:29 pm

i_am_me:
I’m thinkin’ the same thing. I think the Iranian protests are likely against the REGIME which selected both candidates.
I’m also thinkin’ that our news media doesn’t want to report this because it would open up a can of worms as to the corrupt BI-PARTISAN subjugation of the U.S. government to the Saudi Petrochemical Lobby. One political party kisses King Abdullah; the other bows. The net results are the same.

There is NO Santa Claus on June 18, 2009 at 4:04 pm

There no real uprising against the Islamic state in Iran. That should be obvious to every one with half a brain. You have two groups of Khomeinists taking their fight out in the streets about who should be the Supreme Jurist’s representative. This is not a revolution for freedom. Its the exact opposite.

NormanF on June 18, 2009 at 4:05 pm

In the end, either side of this will mean the same for Israel and the U.S.
It’s the Ayatollahs & Mullahs that run the show.
But that’s lost on folks here…..hence the term:
“Sheeple.”

SamAdams on June 18, 2009 at 6:18 pm

Mousavi is a bad guy, no doubt. Same could have been said about Gorbachev. There is some chance that events spin out of control, and the whole theocratic regime is toppled. That’s the hope, but the chances are slim.
If you’re Netanyahu, you’ve got to think very seriously that now is the time to strike. The IRG is preoccupied with events on the streets, the regime is weakened, Obama dosen’t quite know how to handle the situation, and Hezbollah and Hamas are at less than full strength (having sent thugs to help Dinnerjacket crack heads).
The Israelis may not have a better chance than this.

sonomaca on June 18, 2009 at 8:56 pm

[The Israelis may not have a better chance than this.
Posted by: sonomaca]
Politically speaking, this would be the worst possible time to attack. Iranians are divided and fighting amongst themselves; if Israel attacks now, the Iranians will be united and will want revenge. The White House would surely condemn it, even weakening the ally relationship more.

Norman Blitzer on June 18, 2009 at 9:05 pm

The Soviet elite lost confidence and the Soviet Union was eaten away by the clear evidence of Soviet decline – militarily, economically and demographically. By the end of the 1980s, the USSR was a third world country with nuclear weapons. Iran has very serious economic problem, internal unrest but its nowhere near defeated and the Khomeinist elite still has the will to rule. This is after all a young revolution. They do die of old age but that’s not true today in Iran.

NormanF on June 18, 2009 at 9:18 pm

Norman Blitzer:
Why attack Iran now when it is apparent that an opportunity exists for regime change from within.
The Iranian people are NOT America’s friend, but at least they are starting to see that their government is corrupt. It’s far better to exploit the native unrest than to attack militarily.
What bothers me is that the LIBS are totally silent on this; especially the O’Bama Administration. Having railed against the strategy of military regime change in Iraq, the left is now strangely silent about the prospects of NON-VIOLENT regime change in Iran. Rather, they wait in angst for the opportunity to negotiate with the Islamo-Fascist regime, thus legitimizing it.
Where is Jimmy Carter? Here is an Islamo-Fascist regime that blew him out of office in a landslide and he is silent on the domestic NON-VIOLENT opposition. This is the first significant, public opposition to the Islamo-Fascist regime since they blew him out of office 30 years ago. That did not stop him from endorsing a manifest violent and anti-Semitic HAMAS. It don’t get more hypocritical than that!

There is NO Santa Claus on June 18, 2009 at 9:24 pm

This argument that it is better to have someone who is an open hater then a secret hater I find to be seriously flawed for many reasons. Debbie blamed Muslims for this attack at the holocaust museum because of their open hatred. Open hatred has it’s drawbacks as well as Debbie has mentioned and now Debbie in this situation is taking the opposite position. Also, secret haters end up alienating their own people who are haters who think they are not vigilant enough. I think in the end people like Mad Jihad make it ok to hate Jews as Debbie mentioned in a prior post which I though was absurd quite frankly anyway as the guy likely hated muslims as he seem to hate anyone different and he certainlly hated obama.
Doing it secretly shows that you recognize that something is wrong with it and someone as unstable as Ahmidinajad I do think is more dangerous. Kim Jong Mentally Ill we know he is very dangrous and yet nobody is doing anything about him.
Would this other canditate attract people like Chavez, and other vicious dictators the way Achmidinejad does. Likely not as much because they see him as not as vigilant. So I am not convinced that a secret hater is better although yeah he likely isn’t a good person either.
I don’t think history shows that those that try to trick people in the end succeed because they cause other reaction among their own people and others who don’t know who they really are.
I do think that history shows though that people like Ahmadinejad are extremely dangerous if not stopped and ARE GENERALLY MORE DANGEROUS then the one’s who are more subtle because this being subtle also sends mixed messages to their own people and doesn’t get as much support from the haters in the world. Even in Israel I think Arafat was worse then this guy now Abbas who is a holocaust denier but by being slick he has alienated his vicious thug brothers. Egyot too Egyptians killed what’s his name and Egypt is extremely antisemitic and sends rockets to hamas but at the same time there has been no open wars with Egypt since this and Egypt sort of lost it’s place as the biggest giant in hatred of Israel and the other arab countries lost some respect for egypt. Yes, Israel gave up a lot of land they shouldn’t have given up but we don’t know if Egypt still was the leader of antisemtism what would have happened in Israel with the other vicious dictators.
This nonsense that someone who is secretly antisemitic is better then an open Jew hater I find to be historically very unconvincing and stupid.

adam6275 on June 18, 2009 at 10:24 pm

adam6275:
“This nonsense that someone who is secretly antisemitic is better then an open Jew hater I find to be historically very unconvincing and stupid.”
I disagree. I have long said that politically correct anti-Semitism is a far greater danger than the overt type.
In the case of Iran, it’s a far greater danger because it gives cover to the regime’s genocidal plan.

There is NO Santa Claus on June 18, 2009 at 10:38 pm

Oh no! You mean that the woman on the other end of the phone sex line really isn’t a hot babe?

CornCoLeo on June 18, 2009 at 11:41 pm

The Iranians I talked to here HATE the whole strict Islamic trip. They never wanted it. It was imposed on them. Their interests are secular. Green is the color of Islam, sure enough, but that is their cover, their way to say in a totalitarian Islamic universe that they are being faithful to the faith, even as they protest politically. It’s like presenting a peaceful face so as not to get shot at. Anyway, that’s true for some. When you have a crowd of 500,000, it’s gotta be mixed.

Madeline Brooks on June 19, 2009 at 1:27 am

Debbie is SUCH a party-pooper. I’ll never forget how excited I was when Israel was FINALLY going in to destroy Hamas and Debbie said its a farce, another big half-assed waste of time. I still can’t believe she was right but she was.
She’s probably right again.

poetcomic1 on June 19, 2009 at 12:02 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field