As nutty and detestable as he is, Iran’s Ahmadinejad may have a point — but it’s not worth much…

Holocaust deniers are either liars or nut cases or both at the same time.

That said, Iran’s President Mamoud Ahmadinejad finally came up with the right argument, to a degree – not that the Holocaust (Hitler’s murder of some 6 million Jews – mostly Jews – during World War II) did not happen, but that it is one among many such events in history and that, in fact, things just as bad are happening right now.

But of course Ahmadinejad’s credibility is gone because in the past and probably still now, depending upon his audience, he has steadfastly denied that the Holocaust ever happened. There of course is far too much evidence (the Nazis loved to record their deeds in writing and in still photos and movies – and those who liberated the camps, not to mention the survivors, can testify as to what took place).

I hate to admit it, though, but he now, for the benefit of the American audience, makes a point I have always wondered about myself. As terrible as the Holocaust was, it was not the only such event to ever happen in history and genocide goes on today in places such as Darfur in Africa. And yet Hitler’s mass murder of Jews seems to get more attention and have more consequences than any of the other events. It accounted for the creation of the modern state of Israel through the collective guilt of the western world, which in turn has accounted for unrest in the Middle East for some 60 years.

Maybe one of the most troubling aspects of the Holocaust is that it took place in a highly civilized western nation (Germany) and the civilized nations it conquered. In effect, neighbors turned upon their own, or turned a blind eye to their fates, out of fear of the police state, our of jealousy, and out of some kind of rationalization that after all these people were of the wrong religion, the one that is blamed for killing Jesus.

And isn’t that the way? Religion always seems to lurk where murder and mayhem take place around the world. Stranger still, all three of the world’s major religions – Christianity, Judaism, and Islam preach peace but somehow seem to account for so much war and terrorism. Some religious leaders will explain that away by saying that it is just bad people using religion as an excuse, but many of those bad people call themselves religious leaders.

But getting back to Ahmadinejad, in my personal opinion, fellas like him and Gadfafy Duck or whatever his name is from Libya are so irrational and mean spirited that they should be largely ignored in serious discussions and should not be given a platform in serious events.

On the other hand, they need an eye kept on them.

Nut cases and evil people that they are, their actions can have consequences– Remember Adolf Hitler.

P.s.

I have not managed to get this blog mobile yet. Will be back out on the road, so unless I can manage to get a wireless connection, it may be a day or two until I post again or respond to any comments that might come my way.

P.s. P.s.

I think President Barack Obama sent the right message to the rest of the world at the UN the other day – to paraphrase, he said that while other nations have complained that the U.S. spent too many years going it alone in world affairs, they cannot sit back and now expect the U.S. to solve all the world’s problems (except I suppose the ones we may have created, but then again we need help on those too).

Struggle continues in Iran and change may be in the air, but the U.S. has to keep an eye on what is really important — nuclear capability

After blogging so much yesterday about the tumult in Iran and questioning in my last post as to what would happen there today, I feel compelled to write a few words today.

With the stranglehold on the free flow of information by the government there, it is quite difficult to get a clear picture of what is taking place or took place today (Sunday). I’ve read reports that there was an eerie silence on the streets and even more of a police presence and I have also read that there have been continued protests and continued violence. We know people have been beat up and that people have been killed (no clear figures on how many). And there have been arrests, some of those arrested were even in hospital beds reportedly. And militias or whatever they call themselves have reportedly broken into homes to go after or intimidate anyone suspected of dissenting from the government view.

And there is a split in the ruling clergy in this theocracy, as well as in the elected portion of the government.

Former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani, who heads up two powerful clerical institutions, the Assembly of Experts and the Expediency Council, is being intimidated, or at least that must be the intent, with his daughter and other relatives arrested. I understand the relatives were released (not sure), but his daughter remains under arrest. She had participated in a rally for opposition figure Hossein Musavi.

Another former president has criticized the government too, I heard.

But I want to pull back and just say I wish the people there the best and hope that out of all of this that they get a better government and get rid of that nut case Amadinejad who glibly denies the Holocaust, even visiting the U.S. to do so. No matter what your religion is or whether you support or don’t support the Jewish nation, if you have any knowledge of the world at all you know that of course the Holocaust happened, and the eyewitness accounts plus the documentation and documentary film footage taken both by the perpetrators themselves and the allies when they liberated the camps prove the case (I know, some people say we never went to the moon – that footage was shot in Arizona or New Mexico).

However, even though what happens in Iran, thanks to modern rapid communication technology, does not stay in Iran, I still say the best we can do is offer moral support. The Iranian government knows the world is watching. I think it has lost what little credibility it ever had on the world stage, let alone domestically.

I would say the U.S. needs to keep its eye on the ball (or should I say bomb?). More important in all of this is making sure Iran or no other nation, that does not already have it, gets access to nuclear weapons or the ability to produce them. It’s just something we have to do for survival. The U.S. let the genie out of the bottle back in 1945. And although we can’t fully put it back in, we have to do what we can.

We lived for decades wondering whether between us, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, we would manage to destroy the world by some terrible mistake or miscalculation. But apparently the Soviets were not nut cases who would launch nukes with no concern whether it might end the world.

That does not seem to be the case for the nut cases out of the Middle East or over in North Korea.

While we always want to do what we can to support freedom everywhere, the overriding concern must be to save the world from nuclear annihilation.

We now have a government in Iran that we know for sure we cannot trust and has lost its legitimacy.

And we have a government in North Korea we cannot deal with.

Interestingly, even if the dissidents win out in Iran or get some type of accommodation, that does not resolve the nuke question. The dissidents want their freedom, but for all I know they might decide nukes would protect them.

Our message must be clear – no nukes. And we have to have the resolve to do what is necessary to back that up.

I applaud President Barack Obama’s diplomacy expertise – he’s amazingly won high praise in the Islamic world.

And while I am 100 percent for open or transparent government, as I have blogged before, on the nuclear issue, we would do better to say little, but let those who would do mischief know what our position is and then let action speak louder than words, if that becomes necessary.

But in the end, some things are not negotiable, unless we want to risk the end.

Iranian authorities: we held back Saturday (really?), but don’t try it again Sunday; expert says turmoil a big civil rights demonstration…

Never on Sunday? Things might have been rough in the confrontation between demonstrators and the authorities in Iran Saturday but the dissidents have been warned not to try it again — so will they today (Sunday)?

Read a report on the Time Magazine site that quoted the Tehran police chief, I think it was, who claimed that authorities held back somewhat Saturday, but do not plan to do so Sunday or in the future should dissidents continue to conduct protest demonstrations of any kind.

Seems like the the Iranian religious authorities, who run the government, are not all in agreement with each other. Even the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is on shaky ground, I have read. The totalitarian government knows it has to clamp down hard on the protesters to maintain its authority, but is in jeopardy of losing its support if it creates a major bloodbath.

Some experts seem to think that the dissidents may be emboldened now that they have seen the elephant, so to speak. That is they may have lost some of their initial fear. Get folks mad enough and they lose some of their fear (even if the government has the guns).

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama seems to have been forced by the politics of the whole thing to take a somewhat more agressive tone against the Iranian government’s actions.

I began following the news early this (Saturday) morning. No one seems to know how many people may have been killed or hurt, but certainly there were casualties.

Through the night Saturday after the street protests, I understand, citizens have hollered out through the dark the slogan Allahu Akbar (God is great), ironically as they reportedly did during the revolution of 1979 when the Islamic revolution overthrew the secular (non-religious) government of the U.S.-imposed Shah of Iran. And now the Islamic-run government is threatened from within. These people have no beef with Allah (God), but instead those who claim to be his representative here on earth.

Interestingly they were reportedly also shouting “death to the dictator” and most interestingly. “death to the Ayatolla”.

And let’s don’t lose sight of the fact that not everyone by a longshot in Iran is against the present government. But apparently the current government did not have enough confidence in itself to run a free election. From what I read, they both stuffed ballot boxes and forbade a real count. Seems a strange way to go about things. Their fraud was too transparent. Why didn’t they go through the motions and then declare Ahmadinejad the winner as expected?

Opposition leader Hossein Mousavi as I understand it did not meet with authorities as they had offered today, probably because they had already closed the door on a new election as he has demanded. Who knows? maybe he is under arrest or house arrest anyway (don’t know). The Iranian government is working hard to prevent news from getting out. But modern computer technology and citizen journalists along with professional journalists are fighting back.

My favorite political cartoon is a protester standing up to a baton-wielding policeman and saying: “stop or I’ll tweet”!

What follows is my original post Saturday morning, plus several add ons:

ADD 6 (2:34 p.m.  PDT):  U.S. President Barack Obama is getting less neutral on Iran. He has now issued a statement in which he said in part: “We call of the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people…”

ADD 5 (12:32 p.m. PDT): If I have my calculations right it is in the middle of the night (already early Sunday) in Iran and I don’t know what is happening at this time. I just know that demonstrators defied the government and there was violence — saw one scene on YouTube (of course, as they say, it was not vetted). I read one blog said to be out of Iran and describing cries in the night of  “Allahu akbar” (God is great) and “death to the dictator”  and even death to the Ayatollah. Now I don’t know if that blog was describing Saturday night or Friday night or both. Also, I make reference in this blog that the U.S. official position is neutral in all of this. But I should clarify that. President Barack Obama may still be holding to we won’t meddle, but he did make a statement in the last 24 hours that said in part to the Iranian government: “The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching…. the universal rights of assembly and free speech must be respected.” One insider blogger claimed that Joe Biden made him say it (convinced him, okay). Seriously, there is some indication of a slight change of stance on all of this by Obama (he is getting political pressure). But what I don’t get is certainly we don’t make China live up to the standards we are calling for in Iran and last time I checked China has a most favored nation status in trade and is our bank and we owe them one heck of a lot of money (think I just figured it out).

ADD 4 (10:09 a.m.): I’m reading on the web that the main opposition leader Hossein Musavi has vowed that he is ready for “martyrdom”. There are reports that some demonstrators are carrying copies of the Koran, sometimes wearing them on their heads, the idea being that will protect them. I also read one blog that said a policeman was attacking a woman and she said: “Why are you doing this? Are you not an Iranian”? Also heard an Iran expert Iranian professor  at an American college describe what is going on as not a revolution or counter revolution or even civil war, but a “civil rights” movement. It is interesting to me — and others have of course observed — that so many of the protesters are women. As we know, women are considered second-class citizens in Iran, as well as in most or all Islamic-controlled nations (and I would say extreme conservative Christians consider women second class as well and I have read where one Islamic woman said she would rather men be in charge so that they can take the blame — I think I have heard Christians or just other women say that or imply that as well). Interestingly, I think, the protesers are not necessarily protesting religious rule or religion — they just want more freedoms. We’re not getting a lot of reliable information, but I have read that there has been much violence and many deaths (and so far, I believe that would be violence primarily from the authorities inflicted upon demonstrators).

I probably won’t blog more on this until much later in the day. Have other things to do — but this is important stuff with implications on the whole world and people who long for or want to preserve freedom everywhere.

One more thing. It is hard to know actually how widespread this discontent is through Iranian society — certainly there are many layers with their own wants and needs and preferances in Iran. And as much as people there want freedom (or not), I doubt that they want meddling from the West. They’ve had plenty of that over the past many decades.

 ADD 3 (7:20 a.m. PDT): Several news sources, including the one-sided Iranian state sites, are reporting a blast at the shrine of the late Ayatohllah Rubollah Khomeini, with at least one death. One web site implied that it could have well been a suicide bomber working on behalf of the government to discredit the opposition by making it look like they are committing violence. It said the current Ayatollah made reference yesterday to such violence as a cause for authorities to crack down. Meanwhile, there are reports of police beating demonstrators and firing off tear gas and water cannon to disperse the crowds.

———–

It seems that the confrontation in Iran between the dissidents of last week’s presidential election and the authorities has begun, with reports this morning that several thousand demonstrators defied the Ayatollah’s order and marched on the streets in Tehran and have been met by thousands of both uniformed and plain clothes police who are reportedly using tear gas and water cannon to disperse them.

Now I guess few on the outside can really know what is going on because the government there has done its best to shut off all communication. That of course is proof in and of itself that the Iranian government is corrupt and illegitimate. But as I have blogged consistently, I don’t think this affair is officially any of the U.S.’s business, although of course the hearts of the freedom-loving world go out to oppressed peoples everywhere. I think our president, Barack Obama, has struck the right tone so far saying we will not meddle in the affairs of Iran, but at the same time saying that we support the right to free elections. Two resolutions passed late Friday, one each by both houses of congress, in support of the dissidents I think were unecessary and somewhat meaningless, in that what could we or should we do if things go far awry in Iran? As one commentator said: what do we do? Invade Iran and shoot bullets that only kill the oppressors but not the opposition? On the other hand, I suppose the resolutions – which I have not read, only heard reported about – were probably harmless and maybe do give some moral support. I must say if the reports I have seen within the past 15 minutes or so on the web are true, the dissidents have a lot of guts and must truly believe in their cause.

It’s 6:30 a.m. PDT (here on the U.S. west coast) as I write this line and I saw the first reports of demonstrators vs. authorities activity on the web at about 15 minutes ago. I got up about 5:30 a.m., eager to read the news and hopeful that a bloodbath will not occur, and also hopeful that some people power will have some effect on another of so many oppressive governments in the world.

I also think of the major change we made here a few months ago and thankfully without violence.

Going to go back and check the web for more news updates, plus check out my local newspaper for what is happening here in local affairs. Will blog more in a while.

ADD 1: Not the same circumstances, but I can’t help but think about all the uproar back in the mid 1950s when the U.S. failed to support the Hungarian uprising when some thought we should have stood up to communism then and there. That short-lived uprising was crushed by Soviet tanks. Decades later people power fueled and augmented by modern communication won out and with little violence. That is why the tyrannical Iranian government forces are working so hard to keep a lid on communication.

ADD 2: I should have noted that there have been reports of people chanting “Death to the dictator” and “death to the dictatorship”. If that is meant to be literal, and what else could it mean? that sounds ominous (those slogans were reportedly chanted earlier the week too, I recall). Up until now and maybe even now the demonstrators have been for the most part peaceful with the violence done on the part of the govenment and its supporters, as far as I know.

The unyielding and corrupt theocracy in Iran is a clue to what would happen if the religious right had its way in the U.S.

The only thing about which that I agree with the Ayatollah is that other nations, the U.S. in particular, should stay of Iran’s business (that is except for making sure they don’t get the bomb).

I say let them stew in their own juices. If the dissidents or whatever you call them can make headway in improving upon what semblance of democracy is present in Iran I say go for it, more power to them – just don’t get us involved (and I doubt that they would want our help).

So it’s fairly obvious by now, to make an understatement, that the presidential vote in Iran last week was a sham (instant results in counting millions of hand ballots). And today I read that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei after blessing the results, then taking back his blessing by offering to have the government conduct some type of re-count (or partial re-count?), as a token accommodation to the opposition, now has re-blessed the elections and threatened to arrest anyone who disagrees and has forbade further demonstrations (and there have been reports that opposition members had already been arrested).

What happened to the re-count? Then again how would the government have conducted a re-count if it never conducted a count in the first place?

The last I heard the clergy was supposed to meet with the opposition Saturday, but now that the supreme leader has made it clear that it is either his way or the highway (to hell, or heaven, I suppose), what would be the point?

Iran has a strange system of government with supposedly democratic elections along with the power of the clergy to cancel out anything and everything done by supposedly elected leaders and the voters. It’s called a theocracy. It’s called a dictatorship.

But from what I understand from reading everything I can recently about the workings of politics in Iran most of the people there are quite happy to submit to the rule of religious despots. Even those who want more freedoms and want their votes to count still probably want the ultimate authority to be with the clergy – it’s all part of Islam.

And that folks – the way things work in Iran – might well be what it would be like here in the U.S. if the religious right were to ever completely have its way.

The American religious right likes to imply and is some cases claims outright that President Barack Obama is a secret Muslim, waiting for when the time is just right to declare the U.S. an Islamic republic. I doubt he will, but if he were to do that, what would be the difference between an “Islamic Republic” and a “Christian Republic”? Neither one has tolerance for divergent points of view. And who sets those points of view?

Religious leaders would have you believe that it is all written in the good book – the Holy (Christian) Bible or the Koran, for example (there are other religions and holy books).

Trouble is, the last I checked those books were printed and in fact written by mere mortals, even if they were done with divine inspiration.

I can’t speak for the other books, but one only has to read a little in the Holy Bible and realize that it is open to wide interpretation, with heavy use of symbolism and parables and such. There’s also confusion because it has been interpreted from more than one ancient language. Those who will tell you that certain passages mean a certain thing and that there is no other meaning will also offer their proof by saying such things as it is so because they know it to be and that they have faith and that only if you would have faith you would agree with them.

Why could one not counter that he or she believes a different thing and that only if they all had faith everyone would believe likewise?

There are people who cite visions, but that is generally considered dubious, because visions and the performance of miracles are apparently limited to ancient history (well sometimes it is accepted when someone claims they had a vision as long as they leave everyone the wiggle room that they only meant such in some kind of figurative way, that is you are not compelled to think they actually saw a parting of the heavens, but just felt strongly at the moment).

(And I offer this disclosure: no I did not have a vision, but although I have not actively practiced religion in my life, having been brought up by well meaning and well behaved non-believers, I am open to it, have prayed and have been prayed for by many – my sincere thanks.)

Getting back to Iran, what is going on there is fascinating and it seems a momentous confrontation is brewing for Saturday (or not) what with the Ayatollah laying down the gauntlet.

And if I may, I pray that it not all end in some type of bloodbath, and I also pray that the will of the people wins out in Iran. But again, that is entirely their business.

(slightly updated version) Are we looking at revolution, civil war, or just venting of steam in Iran???

One has to wonder just what is going on in Iran. Is there a budding counter-revolution against what is called the Iranian Revolution (of 1979)? Or would it be more accurate to call it a budding civil war? Or maybe it is just a manifestation of discontent (a letting off of steam) and not a strong enough movement to last or turn into any kind of major power shift.

Then again it’s hard to see things ever going back to status quo there.

As I’m blogging this I am looking to see what will happen in the coming hours of the new day after five days of street protest so far. Another protest rally has been called for today (Thursday) in defiance of the government.

—————–

UPDATE: Apparently tens of thousands (a million?) of protestors are out on the streets today, many of them wearing black or black arm bands in mourning for those who have been killed (precise numbers of dead — don’t know; I address that later in this blog).

The ruling religious authority has offerered to meet with the opposition leaders on Saturday.

ADD 1:

Now at about 3:07 p.m. U.S. Pacific Standard time, I want to mention that I just heard a correspondent in the Iranian capital, Tehran, say of the continuing demonstrations there: “six days in a row and it keeps building and no one knows where it’s going to stop.” 

—————

I still think that the U.S. is best to stay out of the Iran mess and let the Iranians sort things out. Any meddling on our part such as some, particularly neocon Republicans who maybe want to see Obama really get messed up, are pushing for would surely backfire against the opposition, giving the theocratic government proof of the meddling it is already falsely accusing the U.S. of (unless there is some type of black ops thing I don’t know about – I doubt we’re that adept).

(Not that I have a clue on Iranian politics, but don’t tell the neocons, but I just read an article that noted that some, only some, of the opposition members are communists or former communists.)

Not only would intervention on our part be like installing a government there like we did decades ago (for no other reason than it was non-communist and there’s oil there), but an added problem is there is not necessarily just two dogs in this fight, that is the current regime and the opposition. There seems to be a variation of ideas and allegiances among the opposition and in fact some true believers in reform are afraid that the opposition as it is will be hijacked by people up to no good.

So far, things have been relatively peaceful on the part of the opposition, save for some vandalism, with most of the violence from the established authorities and the Nazi-style brown shirt-type thugs called the Revolutionary Guards, from what I can tell. There is some fear that the government has planted trouble makers inside the ranks of the opposition to discredit it.

The last report I read said there have been at least 15 deaths (Bloomberg News).  UPDATE:  Since I wrote that last sentence: Since the authorities in Iran have clamped down on news it’s impossible to get accurate figures –  the McClatchy news service is currently reporting at least 32 dead.

There have been widespread reports of violence against demonstrators and opposition members and of arrests of people deemed to be defying the government.

The government has forbade journalists from active coverage and has tried, albeit not altogether successfully, to cut off communications among opposition members themselves and with the outside world.

Modern communication technology has a momentous effect. Even in its infancy (sans internet) it took down the Soviet Union and the whole Soviet empire without the need for outright war. It just might take down the iron and dictatorial rule of the mullahs in Iran. And that’s interesting to me, because what with Islam having so much influence there, I would think it would still hold much power in a new government.

I understand, though, that an added element here is that now there is even a division among the clergy.

The good thing for the U.S. is that from what I’m reading people longing for more representative government, that presumably would be more Western friendly, in neighboring states are watching the unbelievable spectacle of the internet-connected YouTube and Twitter and Face book and so on coalition of students and educated professionals and others looking for more modern government confront and stand up to the authoritarian establishment. The establishment has physical power but seems to be unable to completely stifle the modern electronics. Some young Arabs watching what is happening in Persia may lament there is not as much vigor or moxie in their own nations, I have read.

Last week, leading up to the Iranian presidential election and even just after when the government declared the winner darn near instantaneously (with hand votes?), apparently not bothering to count votes for real, few would have guessed that the leadership of Iran could still be in question at mid week this week.

The Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has reversed his blessing of the original and apparently sham election and ordered a partial recount, but the main opposition candidate Mir Hossein Musavi and other opposition candidates say they will settle for nothing less than a do-over.

One wonders at this point whether in the face of a building crack down on opposition and a waning of any tolerance for the opposition that the reform movement can continue, and the West does not even know whether reform to suit its desires is what they have in mind anyway (few people in the West or anywhere outside Iran seem to know much about what really goes on there politically, probably because the religious leaders pull the strings and the process is all but closed).

But with Iran’s own soccer team displaying opposition green wrist bands for the world to see at their games in South Korea, there is a sign that this reform movement is more widespread than originally thought.

To be sure, it could well be that Mamoud Amadinejad actually did get more votes – he does have support among the more conservative elements of the populace, who have demonstrated themselves. But it seems unlikely that with all the turmoil that it was the landslide the government reported, and again, reported before there had even been time to count votes. I’ve read the accusations that poll workers were ordered to not even bother counting.

And I note reports of Iranians demonstrating here in the U.S. and my understanding that they were able to vote — but apparently their votes were not counted either since the results were announced so fast.

But as someone who lived through the humiliation of the American hostage crisis in Iran a few decades back, there’s some pleasure in seeing the authorities there facing an uprising back at them (I just meant I watched it all on TV, but it was humiliating).

Let’s just sit back and watch.

P.s.

Something that nags at me is the question of how the thousands (millions?) of protestors in Iran find time to protest — are they students out of class, retired people, unemployed, on break? An honest question.

What goes around comes around for Iranian Revolution, maybe…

While it seems that the iron hand of the Islamic fundamentalist theocracy in Iran has crushed any hopes of increased democracy and better relations with the West with the questionable re-election of the dictator and Holocaust denier (I think there is a bit too much evidence to deny it) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it seems to me that the U.S. would do well to simply sit back and let things play out (not that anyone was planning anything different).

I’m not sure the elections there were rigged, but I imagine that is a good possibility.

——————–

ADD 1:

Well it’s Sunday now and from what I am reading it seems clear that the Iranian elections were rigged. It was so lopsided and the results were reported so fast — I understand that the official Iranian news agency reported the winner even before the first vote was counted. And do they use hand ballots or computers? Don’t know ( ADD 2: A Wall Street Journal piece I just read says they were hand ballots).

—————————

But it seems clear there is a major protest movement and I don’t know but that the whole nation may be in the middle of some type of popular uprising at this very moment. I suspect the government has enough power and hold on the populace that it will be able to stop the rioters. The government may have allowed the spirited debate between Ahmadinejad and Hossein Mousavi, the major candidates, as a mechanism to allow everyone to let off some steam, knowing it could always step in and decide the result in the end.

It was a revolution of the people that kicked out the U.S.-imposed Shah, a tyrant himself. Would it not be ironic if the Islamic fundamentalist Iranian Revolution of 1979 was toppled by another popular uprising three decades later in 2009?

Rigged or not, from what I have read recently, the protest movement in Iran is primarily among young and urban and educated people. The older set and the not-so-older but rural set are much more conservative.

One piece I read quoted a worker out in the rural area saying that since all he had was a high school education, he was willing to leave the complex issues of government and especially international relations to the government. I understand that Ahmadinejad has been able to largely buy off what we might call the lower classes with government goodies financed by Iran’s oil wealth. And less educated people are often more amenable to hard-line religious beliefs and tend not to be terribly open minded or receptive to change.

Nonetheless, I have read that Iran is a more open society than we are often led to believe. I get the impression, only an impression, that the average Iranian has no particular beef against the U.S., but he or she has pride in Iran and does not cotton to the idea of any other nations interfering.

With what to me appears to be more of another Great Depression than simply a recession, worldwide, but particularly in the U.S., I think we have too many of our own problems here, such as a need for affordable and universal health care and the need to make sure people do not go hungry (as many are) in this nation, and more access and encouragement for young people to be properly educated in order to cope with a changing world.

Let things play out elsewhere; let Iranians and others push for their own change. It seems they are doing it without our help, and they indeed do not need nor probably even want it.

P.s.

As I understand it, no matter who won, the Iranian government would forge ahead with its nuclear program, which most expect includes a nuclear weapons program along with an energy program. The U.S. cannot afford to let Iran have the bomb, that is one area into which we have to poke our nose.