http://tinyurl.com/ng8sez

Interrogation probe steams those on right and left

Without reading past the title, the basic assumption here is that the prosecution of torture is a Right vs. Left issue.  In other words, the vindictive Left Wing wants to exact REVENGE! on Bush and his cronies, and the Right Wing has the far more valid “opinion” which is “When you investigate American torture, you’re siding with the terrorists!”

“Agency interrogators once threatened to kill a Sept. 11 suspect’s children and suggested another would be forced to watch his mother be sexually assaulted.”

Absolutely lovely.  I love how they include the part “Sept. 11 suspect” as if to dull the impact of the horrendous shit we did.  After all this time with Guantanamo Bay, our very own torture chamber staying open, how can anyone take anything the government says about “terrorists” seriously?

We were lied to about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, Iran is still allowing International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors in its nuclear energy sites yet we’re told they are going to “bomb Israel”, and the lies just go on and on.

This is my favorite part:

“President Barack Obama has said interrogators would not face charges if they followed legal guidelines.”

The President is offering universal, categorical amnesty to war criminals as long as they were “just following orders”.  Isn’t this is the Nuremberg Defense the Nazis used which was deemed inadequate as a defense, and specifically included in the Nuremberg Principles, which the US signed onto?

“The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

Nuremberg Principle IV

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

Supremacy Clause, US Constitution

In other words: any treaty the US signs (as we did the Nuremberg Principles) automatically becomes part of the US Constitution, therefore following what we signed onto is not only the right thing to do, not doing so is unconstitutional and criminal.

And one of the few Senators who actually believes in following the law:

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said the Justice Department inquiry doesn’t go far enough.

“The abuses that were officially sanctioned amounted to torture and those at the very top who authorized, ordered or sought to provide legal cover for them should be held accountable,” Feingold said in a statement issued late Monday.”

I just read an editorial from Paul Krugman (Nobel Prize Winning Economist, Writer for the New York Times) about the health care debates going on in the country:

There’s a famous Norman Rockwell painting titled “Freedom of Speech,” depicting an idealized American town meeting. The painting, part of a series illustrating F.D.R.’s “Four Freedoms,” shows an ordinary citizen expressing an unpopular opinion…That’s a far cry from what has been happening at recent town halls…congressmen shouted down, congressmen hanged in effigy, congressmen surrounded and followed by taunting crowds.

So, aging liberal hippies think it’s OK to burn draft cards to protest the Vietnam War…but when it comes to health care policy we need to emulate old Norman Rockwell paintings?

These protesters are being told they’re “un-american” and wrong. Actually, in the land of the stupid and home of the ignorant, these types of stunts are the only things that work.

In the country with the stupidest politics in all the land, it’s important to find simple tactics which appeal to the doped up on cable news, brainwashed masses.

Maybe the crowds are managed and organized by front groups for corporate interests (http://trueslant.com/allisonkilkenny/2009/08/07/the-decay-of-the-healthcare-debate-astroturfing-and-manchurian-provocateurs/), but it’s irrelevant.

Certainly, the Republican Party manipulating populist anger for corporate gains is nothing new, but it’s irrelevant if they’re wrong.

Their tactics work.  Republicans have suffered stunning defeat after landslide loss the past 3 years, yet somehow they have complete control over the agenda.

Liberals or even worse “Democrats”  never hold their elected officials accountable.  When politicians don’t do what liberals want them to do, they make excuses for them. They live in an alternate reality where Obama has a master plan, and if you just trust him and love him unconditionally, we’ll all be ok in the end.

A most egregious recent example is from this month’s Rolling Stone magazine with Michael Moore. He has developed an almost pathological capacity to find a way to justify every Obama betrayal. He says, “Obama fakes right, and goes left”.

Sorry Mike, I loved Sicko and all, but where is this “left turn”? So far, I haven’t seen it.

The Democrats control both houses of Congress, the Presidency, and they have the support of the country on most of their issues they ran on.  So, let’s all be grown ups and face it. 

Obama is not a liberal. If he was he would have kept his promises to: overturn don’t ask don’t tell in the military, vote against immunity for the Telecoms that spied on us illegally, brought transparency and real accountability and reform to the banks and the bailout process, and closed Guantanamo Bay.

This is why I have more respect for Republicans.  At least they have principles.  The Republicans know what they stand for.  They are against government, and they are for the rich, period.

Even if the Republicans are stupid and wrong, at least they are consistently stupid and wrong according to their stupid, wrong principles.

Liberals, at least most “Obama supporters” don’t have actual principles.  They have a cult of personality.

Instead of coming to terms with the fact that they believed the Obama hype, and got shit on by the Democrats as usual; they would rather wear an Obama T Shirt that says “Yes We Did” because Obama makes them feel gooey in their private spots.

The bottom line is we can learn a lot from their example.  Grassroots action is what it takes to make change.  This is why liberals and Democrats lose.  It’s because we think we can just speak logically, and we will convince people of our position.  Republicans don’t care about convincing anyone.  They care about getting the job done.

So, what are we waiting for? Why aren’t we harassing congressmen who oppose health reform? Why aren’t we making death threats to Blue Dog Democrats?

If that’s what it takes to save thousands if not millions of lives, then so be it!

If liberals or Democrats fought like this maybe we would get some of our policies through.

Why aren’t we burning and/or hanging effigies of Obama to get him to do what we want him to do!?

So, here’s an idea. Let’s get angry, organized, and active.

Lighter fluid for the first effigy is on me.

Experts argue that such notion is impossible.

“When a government is based on religion, any religion, it cannot be democratic,” said Nayereh Tohidi, professor and chair of gender and women’s studies department at California State University, Northridge.

Tohidi continues to describe how a government based on religion favors one religion over another. Therefore, it makes the state an ideological state which discriminates those who do not adhere to the religion and ideology preferred by such government.

When I asked Tohidi, then why are the people of Iran routing for Mir Hussein Mousavi when he, like Ahmadinejad, is in fact another product of the same theocratic government, she responded like all others, he could take us one step closer to democracy.

Mousavi has been a significant force behind recent uprisings in Iran, despite all the hidden agendas he might or might not have within the Islamic Republic.

Mousavi’s green movement has brought a sense of awakening to Iranians all over the world reminding them of their strength as a united community, while resurrecting their buried desire for a free Iran, an aspiration they have suppressed within themselves for decades.

Tohidi explains that Mousavi had stepped aside for the past 20 years during which time he has become a painter and an artist.

“Maybe he has reformed. He sounds like a rational, moderate person. He’s not a liberal democrat, but his platform is much better than Ahmadinejad,” said Tohidi.

But, Mousavi being the better of the two evils cannot let us disregard the fact that he, or any other individual under the rule of the Islamic government, will not be able to bring democracy to Iran. This is a notion that we are all, pro-Mousavi or not, very well aware of.

And so what is the next resolution? People of Iran have risen; the younger generation are being tortured and murdered in front of our eyes every day. Who will rise with them to deliver the democracy and freedom they are fighting and dying for?

I do not want to point fingers, name individuals or groups; because I do not believe that I am politically intellectual enough to give myself the permission to do so.

Nonetheless, I am an Iranian-American, who has been witnessing certain individuals and political parties, over the past 30 years, persuading Iranian people to rise and break their silence, promising their physical and military support once they do so.

Recently, I have been wondering when these individuals and political parties are planning to step in. When I pose this question within the community, I get responses such as, “it is not the time,” or “the people are not ready yet.” Which takes me to my next dilemma, when is the right time? Who is to decide when the people are ready? Is anyone planning to ever step in?

“At this point, if the movement gets stronger, more and more government clerics will side with the people and eventually crack the government,” said Tohidi. “We need to let the course of change happen without intervention from outside.”

But going back to the original question, will this change bring the democracy and freedom Iranians are looking for? Is it possible for Iranians to obtain a democratic state within a theocratic government?

Obama rushes to quell racial uproar he helped fire

NANCY BENAC, Associated Press, July 24, 2009

This headline in a nutshell represents the incomprehensible stupidity of the American “news” media.  The Associated Press specializes in stories of stupidity, sensationalism and “controversies” but this one really takes the cake.

The article’s misleading title would lead you to believe President Obama called John McCain a jive turkey cracker or that he gave the Reverend Jeremiah Wright a terrorist fist jab on the White House Lawn while urinating in a United States Flag diaper.  This is not exactly what happened.

Actually, the stupid article in question doesn’t ever say what happened on the night in controversy.

Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is the Director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Studies at Harvard University.  On the afternoon of July 16, he came to his home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, only to find his front door jammed.  He tried to pry it open to let himself in, and a (presumably white) neighbor assumed he was a burglar and called the police to report a robbery.

Gates showed the arriving officer proof of residence, but the officer refused to believe a black man could actually live in that neighborhood.  Gates called the officer a racist, was handcuffed in his own home, and was then taken to jail and charged with disorderly conduct, a charge which was later dropped.

President Obama said the officers “acted stupidly” in the situation.

I smell a fake cable news / AP controversy!

“The fact that this has garnered so much attention, I think, is testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America,”

Obama said.

So…the fact that the “media” hopped lazily onto a statement Obama made (not about these police officers being racist pigs) but that they “acted stupidly”, and created a fake controversy which woke some white supremacists from their racist slumbers says something about progress we’ve made on racial sensitivity?

“Hours earlier, a multiracial group of police officers had stood with Crowley in Massachusetts and said the president should apologize.

Obama fell in line.  Knowing his place, he whistled Dixie and shined the shoes of the kindly po-lice officer:

“Obama, who had said Cambridge, Mass., police “acted stupidly” in arresting black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr., declared the white arresting officer was a good man and invited him and the professor to the White House for a beer..”

First Black President or Uncle Tom in Chief?  You be the judge.  But, don’t forget: we live in a glorious Post Racial Society, so the cop couldn’t have been a racist pig.

Unbelievably, it gets even stupider (and more racist):

“A Republican congressman from Michigan, Thaddeus McCotter, said he would introduce a House resolution calling on Obama to apologize to Crowley.”

In case you can’t understand sarcasm, I think it’s pathetic that we live in a country where a black president has to apologize to a white police officer who harassed another highly distinguished black man.  How did this country get so backward on race?

I guess it’s been that way since the very foundations of American hegemony.

This country was built on the genocide and enslavement of native Americans, and the blood sweat and tears of black slaves kidnapped from Africa.

This is without mentioning the anti Asian immigration bans of the early 1900’s, the internment camps for the Japanese, the legally sanctioned Apartheid conditions imposed on blacks up until the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and last but not least: the internment and torture of thousands of Muslim men as well as the genocide of between 500,000 and a million Iraqis (http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1627).

Why are none of these topics on the media agenda?  Maybe, because they require actual research, actual controversy, and cause uncomfortable feelings that are harder to sell ad space to American Idol viewers with?

What kind of stupid country do we live in when this manufactured garbage gets constant coverage, drowning out coverage of an issue of life and death for many Americans, health care reform?  Is a fake controversy more important than substantive and informative coverage on the stakes of reforming America’s health care “system” ?

“I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but nobody’s been paying much attention to health care,” the president said.

What does it say about a country that lets 22,000 people in one year die because they don’t have health insurance, yet celebrates celebrity gossip like the story highlighted above and where Michael Jackson’s brain ended up and if John is cheating on Kate plus 8? (http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/january/make_that_22000_uni.php)

What’s going on in this society we live in?  Is everyone just hopelessly brainwashed?  Do people know that they actually do have the power to change things if they just took off their Snuggies, put down the remote control to the idiot box, and took to the streets?

Statements such as: — is one of them; — is pretending to care about Iran but in reality does not support democracy; reform will not bring change so long as — is in power; — wants dictatorship; — is a dictator in disguise; — is a communist; — is a product of the British; — is with the Russians; — has no courage to take over Iran; — is planning a coup d’état; and the comments continue endlessly.

When those issues become exceedingly exploited, color matters come into play: lighter shade of green denotes the Islamic Republic and Ahamdinejad; dark-green symbolizes pro-Mousavi; white color attire is politically correct for demonstrations; black embodies the recent uprisings.

And from there it goes into the different types of flags protesters across the world have been displaying, what each of them mean and which political party they represent.

I have recently been criticized for wearing a green wristband, not being alert that in some minds, the shade of green displayed on my wrist is connecting me to a certain political party. How could Iranians ever claim democracy when they fail to recognize it in a free land, I thought as I watched this individual analyze, criticize and disapprove of my political beliefs based on incorrect assumptions.

Despite my recent curiosity in politics and as opinionated as I have become in this area, I have always had very little interest on the topic. I blame my past irrelevance, specifically on issues concerning Iran’s politics, to the tension and division I witnessed within the Iranian community while growing up in the United States. No one ever wants to hear the other person and everyone is always right, is my overall analysis of the subject.

Free of a specific political party, a sense of disgust took over me as the person persistently linked me to an association in which I have no affiliation.

At this stage, green with all its shades, represents democracy and freedom for Iran as it symbolizes the recent uprisings. I do not believe green to stand for a particular candidate or a definite organization. As an Iranian-American living in the United States, when I display the color green, I am reminding the people of America that a nation across the world is yearning for democracy.

By this point I was determined to rid myself of every piece of green belonging I ever owned, including my notorious wristband. But then I thought, if every Iranian would wear a green wristband, it could become a great preparation and rehearsal toward a liberated Iran under the condition that we all recognize it as a symbol of freedom and keep our opinions to ourselves.

It has been extensively repeated through articles, blogs, tweets and any other form of communication you can think of, that Iran can only gain freedom and democracy through the unity of its people. Iranians must put aside all differences, including political and religious, in order to obtain a democratic state.

So the next time you see a green wristband, an Iranian flag you despise, or hear a political slogan that gives you that same feeling of noxiousness my friend gave me, put aside all your personal beliefs and repeat after me, “Freedom for Iran.”

Secretary of State Clinton gave a policy speech at the Council on Foreign Relations recently. The United States must lead with diplomacy, Clinton said, as she outlined the administration’s approach to Iran.

“We watched the energy of Iran’s election with great admiration, only to be appalled by the manner in which the government used violence to quell the voices of the Iranian people, and then tried to hide its actions by arresting foreign journalists and nationals, and expelling them, and cutting off access to technology.  As we and our G-8 partners have made clear, these actions are deplorable and unacceptable,” Clinton explained.

“Neither the President nor I have any illusions that dialogue with the Islamic Republic will guarantee success of any kind, and the prospects have certainly shifted in the weeks following the election.  But we also understand the importance of offering to engage Iran and giving its leaders a clear choice: whether to join the international community as a responsible member or to continue down a path to further isolation” Clinton continued.

The United States is silently and diplomatically watching Iranians single-handedly rise in defense of the democracy they have been deprived of for the past three decades. This is quite a different scenario from what took place 30 years ago.

Older generation Iranians who suffered the 1979 revolution have always recognized that the commanding source which embodied that uprising, deposed the Shah and his world reputable army was beyond the people of Iran.

There was more to the story than what many experts describe the 1979 revolution as Iranian people under the supreme, spiritual leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, taken to the streets of Iran, rose against the detested Shah and overthrew the powerful dictator.

Yes there is some truth to the fact that by the middle of 1970s, Iranians were living in discontent caused by the continuous brutality of Reza Shah’s regime, socioeconomic changes that benefited some classes of the society at the expense of others, and the increasing gap between the ruling elite and the disaffected populace.

It is also valid to say the corruption and cruelty of Reza Shah’s monarchy gave way to Islamic leaders, such as Ayatollah Khomeini, to highlight the society’s unhappiness with populist ideas connected to Islamic principles and necessitate a civil war to overthrow the Shah.

But beyond all of that, Iran had become too modernized, the Shah had become too self-sufficient and high oil prices in the 1970s began hurting U.S. economy. The Shah and his empire had become a threat to the West and who better than a religious leader to take the nation hundreds of years back in evolution.

Unlike today, as mentioned in the past, the United States was a key player in the overthrow of the Shah and the foundation of the Islamic Republic in 1979. Although one of the slogans heard through the streets of Iran 30 years ago was “Death to America,” as opposed to what we are hearing today, “Death to Russia.”

Today, the people of Iran, being victims of previous political strategies, are not as patient as the Obama administration. Iranians across the globe want their country back.

Iranians want the freedom and democracy they were promised thirty years ago. They desire a constitution under which they can find humanity, equality and justice. Such constitution does not exist within the governance of the Islamic Republic.

The great difference between the 2009 uprisings and the 1979 revolution is that today it is truly the people of Iran who have risen and broken their silence without manipulation or persuasion of other nations. Iranians have demonstrated their inner strength to the world within the past few weeks like never before.

The commanding force behind this upheaval could only be found within the unity of the people. This is the beginning of a true revolution.

Follow me on twitter at http://twitter.com/sohbat.

“Until California changes its priorities . . .we only have bad choices”

Board of Trustees Chairman, Jeffrey Bleich

On May 13, 2009, the California State University trustees approved a 10% increase in student fees (articles.latimes.com/2009/may/14/local/me-calstate-fees14).  Bleich, along with 16 others, voted for the increase with only 2 board members voting no.

The working poor (and let’s not kid ourselves, most of us at CSUN fit into this category) struggling to afford a college education will now have to pay an average of $306 more each year.  It’s the sixth increase in basic student fees in the last seven years for the California University System.

One of the only two no votes was Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, calling the tax raise:

“a foolish and stupid tax”

His motion died for lack of a second.

Garamendi instead advocated support of AB 656.  It would levy a 9.9% severance tax on oil and gas companies extracting oil and natural gas from California, and its territorial waters.

Alaska and Texas are card carrying Bolsheviks compared to California when it comes to funding colleges and taxing oil companies.  California is the only oil-producing state without such a tax on energy companies (dailycal.org/article/105997/bill_calls_for_new_oil_tax_to_fund_higher_educatio).

Paying the people for taking their resources is a radical socialist concept to California Republicans.

Sarah Palin’s battle cry of “Drill Baby Drill” could be more accurately changed to “Socialize Baby Socialize” according to this logic, because in 2007, she championed and signed into law an oil and gas severance tax of 25%.

Before she resigned this week, it was widely held that she was the most popular governor in the country.  In fact, for much of her term, her approval rating hovered in the 80’s and 90’s (foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288722,00.html).

Socialism is popular.

Texas, another right wing wet dream,  funds their higher education with a reliable endowment, funded by an oil severance tax.

If passed, AB 656 would give the CSU system $270 million it otherwise wouldn’t have, saving teachers from layoffs and classes from being canceled.

“Everything is on the table”

CSU spokeswoman, Clara Potes-Fellow

CSU officials haven’t supported the bill so far.

What is actually on the table for the CSU?

California State University faculty could face furloughs under one proposal to help ward off a projected $584 million systemwide drop in state funding.

(http://www.modbee.com/local/story/771459.html)

CSU officials claim forcing teachers to take off 2 days a month without pay will save:

“$275 million and preserve about 22,000 course sections”

If AB656 would give the CSU $270 million, then why would we even consider taking teachers off the job and closing 22,000 classes?

Oil company profits decreasing by 9.9% or countless teachers off the job and 22,000 classes closed?

The fact that it’s a no-brainer to protect oil company profits over teachers jobs really shows what kind of society we live in.

The oil companies have warned they would leave the state if this law passed, because it would become too expensive for them to do business here.

You can’t outsource oil to where the costs are lower.  It’s here whether they like it or not, and at the end of the day, since they need our oil more than we need them, they’ll pay whatever we tell them to.

The California Independent Petroleum Association, a lobbying group for oil companies, paid scientists to conduct a study which concluded that passage of AB 656 would result in the loss of over 10,000 jobs.

“Those are 10,000 families who want to send their kids to school too”

CIPA CEO, Rock Zierman

These poor victims have their courageous defender vowing opposition to the bill:

“The governor has been crystal clear that he will not support tax increases,” said Governor Schwarzenegger’s spokeswoman, Lisa Page.

But isn’t raising tuition “fees” on students a cute way of saying you’re raising taxes on students?

A Fee = A Tax.

The ultimate logic of California government goes something like this…

New tax on hated industry=bad

New tax on struggling students=good

A type of tax that in Sarah Palin’s Alaska is almost triple as high…

…is a “tax increase” “Californians” just can’t handle.

The working poor attending college are the poor saps who bought into the American Dream.

If you work hard you can get ahead…maybe this Dream needs to be shattered once and for all anyway.

In the summer of suffering in Killafornia, for everyone besides the privaleged few, the American Dream is quickly becoming an American Nightmare.

We have been witnessing the gradual death of newspaper readership, forcing major publications to either cut back in order to survive, or simply fold, for quite awhile now. . .long enough that sadly we have all accepted the concept of having our morning cups of coffee in front of our computers.

Will this trend eventually work its way to affecting news networks such as CNN is the next reservation.

Microsoft plans to integrate Facebook and Twitter into its Xbox 360 gaming console, enabling users to follow and communicate through Internet services, without needing a computer, from the center of their living rooms, according to Reuters.

Organizations, educational entities, government agencies, public officials, and almost all other notable groups are relying on the Internet to spontaneously inform the public of the latest news updates on a range of issues from health to foreign affairs to local government.

Back in February, Food and Drug Administration used Facebook and Twitter to spread the word on the salmonella-in-peanut-butter outbreak and recalls.

Beginning in June, the nation followed the uprisings and turmoil on the streets of Iran on Twitter as they were not able to obtain the most recent information nor reveal the actual events as they were taking place and reported live through citizen journalism, on CNN.

Hollywood stars twittered their condolences, disbeliefs and grief as Michael Jackson’s death hit the media.  A tragedy that took over all other breaking news and catastrophes throughout the world as the media began covering it relentlessly 24/7, dissecting every aspect of the late star’s life, family and death.

Most recently, the former Vice Presidential candidate for the Republican Party, a probable nominee of the Republican Party’s 2012 presidential campaign and a soon-to-be-ex-governor of Alaska took the country by surprise as she announced her resignation 17 months before the end of her first term, according to Huffington Post.

Sarah Palin told reporters she will be stepping down as Alaska’s governor in a brief press conference from the back yard of her home without taking any questions. Yet, she turned to her Facebook page the next day, Fourth of July, to further explain her decision to the nation, as per Associated Press.  The Alaskan governor is hip to technology, what can I say.

“Palin’s press secretary, David Murrow had posted on his Facebook page Wednesday, ‘David Murrow is considering life’s ironies.’  He was hired less than a month ago.  Yesterday he wrote, ‘There’s gonna be some fireworks this weekend!’” Huffington Post blogger, Shannyn Moore posted on July 3.

It all gets better.  Moore has been threatened by Palin’s attorney, Thomas Van Flein, to get sued for making certain remarks regarding Palin.   But that’s another blog on its own . . . at the pinnacle of my career, I do not desire a lawsuit . . . this could all become a reality show . . . hey that’s an idea to prevent television from suffocating under the weight of Facebook and Twitter.

Troublesome tension in Afghanistan and Honduras, Iran’s fruitless uprisings in demand of democracy, missile show display by North Korea and uncertainties in our own nation, made this Fourth of July more meaningful than a family fun day in the sun.

Contrary to previous years when Fourth of July was simply a just cause for a barbecue and a lazy day by the pool, this year I could not allow myself to let this day pass without observing its significance.

On several occasions, I caught myself speaking of Thomas Jefferson, the Declaration of Independence and pointing out that our country separated itself from Great Britain and obtained its own independence 183 years ago, this day (July 2, to be exact).  My children, being familiar with the difficulties in Iran over the past few weeks, suddenly recognized that the basis of our celebration today is what people in other parts of the world are fighting and dying for.

“Why can’t Iran do the same thing Mommy? Just say we want our freedom and take it,” my 6-year-old said.  Her simplicity, yet clear vision, put a smile on my face as I replied, “That is exactly what they have started to do.”

But we all know that freedom does not come easy or quickly.  People of Iran attempted a peaceful strategy to change, but they were brutally silenced.

Unfortunately, breaking free of totalitarianism usually involves violence and bloodshed.

Abraham Lincoln praised the founding fathers on how they “brought forth on this continent, a new nation conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” in his prominent Gettysburg Speech on November 19, 1863.

In his speech, Lincoln honored the soldiers killed amongst the 51,000 who became casualties, either killed, injured or captured, in the Gettysburg battle which began on July 1 and ended on July 3, 1863.

“It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us…that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vein; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth,” Lincoln said.

As an American, I am grateful to be living and raising my children within the shadows of democracy.  As an Iranian, I pray that those who have lost their lives in Iran in request of freedom have not died in vein.

Democratic states are not free of all imperfection.  Currently, the United States faces several issues in need of evaluation and resolution as the government and past presidents have failed the nation and placed her in this era of complexity and distress.

Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged that we, citizens of the United States of America, have the right to scrutinize our government and president without being punished.  We have the right to freely interrogate and investigate the actions and decisions of our government without being suppressed.  Most importantly, we have the right to replace our president by the vote of the people.

That is what makes America a free land and that is the freedom so many others are in search of.

Iranian women face greatest instability within the last 30 years, as hard-liner President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets closer to serving his second term despite allegations of a deceitful election that sparked the most massive uprising since the 1979 Iranian revolution.

More than all other sectors of Iran’s society, women had the greatest venture in the 2009 presidential election.  Women groups demanded of all candidates to terminate laws that implement stoning and polygamy, plus those that favor men in divorce and custody cases.

“Women participated in this election in massive numbers in order to bring a moderate reformer like Mir Hossein Mousavi who could strengthen the democratic and constitutional aspects of this regime,” said Nayereh Tohidi, professor and chair of Gender and Women’s Studies Department at California State University, Northridge.

Modernization of Iran began during Reza Shah’s time and continued through the reign of his son, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahalvi.  Reza Shah modernized Iran through major developments such as the Trans-Iranian Railway and the establishment of Tehran University.  In addition, Reza Shah took it upon himself to enforce the Women’s Awakening movement during which the Islamic veil was gradually eliminated from the Iranian society.

“I remember soldiers in the streets of Iran forcing women to remove their veils,” recalls a 70-year-old Iranian-American woman who wishes to remain anonymous for security reasons.

While literacy became more enforced and modernization continued during Mohammad Reza Shah’s monarchy, women became more active within the society as writers, poets, teachers, and officials.   By 1963, under the White Revolution, Iranian women were extended the right to vote, Iran Chamber Society noted.

The 1979 Islamic Revolution of Iran gradually deprived women of all rights, socially and through Iran’s legal system. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the revolution and the supreme leader of the country at the time, encouraged women to wear the Islamic hejabs and rid themselves of western influences.

“Again, the mullahs have forced women to go back under their veils,” said the dispersed woman.

Iran did experience some reform under presidents Mohammad Khatami and Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as restrictions on girls’ and women’s public behavior and dress codes were gradually loosened.

“Private organizations and charities that handle women’s issues flourished under the presidency of Khatami, growing by as much as 700 percent,” Tohidi said.

However, when Ahmadinejad came into power in 2005, laws pertaining to women leaned more toward Islamic laws allowing men to behave and practice in ways contrary to the pragmatism norms of society, as it became more challenging for women to reach the remotest level of equality within Iran’s legal system.

The 2009 Iranian presidential election suggested hopes of reform within the system, particularly on issues concerning women’s interests. Although none of these candidates are ideal for women activists to vote for, but given the choices presented, Mousavi would be more hopeful for women, Tohidi explained.

Zahra Rahnavard who is labled as a Muslim feminist, assured Iranian women during her husband’s campaign, that she will do her part in pushing Mousavi to be active in reforming very discriminatory laws, Tohidi said.

Nevertheless, despite Mousavi’s massive followers of all segments of society and immense uprisings alleging a fraudulent presidential election, Iran’s 12 clerics who make up the Guardian Council, have confirmed Ahmadinejad’s second term election to presidency.

Ahmadinejad’s re-election has stripped Iranians of all hopes of democracy and freedom, as well as women of any dreams of equality, justice, and reform.

“Women in Iran actually have more rights than men do.  Some of the reforms they are asking for would work against women rather than toward women’s interests,” said Ahmadinejad, according to Tohidi.

A statement which outraged Iranian women as it reveals that Ahmadinejad does not even acknowledge the existence of discriminatory laws against women in the current regime, Tohidi stated.

“At this point, it looks like the government has won as they have successfully suppressed demonstrations, arrested activists and journalists.  But at the same time, they have galvanized many people toward the government and damaged the legitimacy of the regime,” Tohidi said.

“In long term, they have created a way for a much bigger uprising against the regime,” she added.

Meanwhile, Iranian women face the most challenging era within the history of the Islamic republic of Iran.