Posted on 06/19/2009 10:24:56 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
WASHINGTON (AP) - In the strongest message yet from the U.S. government, the House voted 405-1 Friday to condemn Tehran's crackdown on demonstrators and the government's interference with Internet and cell phone communications.
The resolution was initiated by Republicans as a veiled criticism of President Barack Obama, who has been reluctant to criticize Tehran's handling of disputed elections that left hard-liner President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power.
Rep. Mike Pence, who co-sponsored the resolution, said he disagrees with the administration that it must not meddle in Iran's affairs.
"When Ronald Reagan went before the Brandenburg Gate, he did not say Mr. (Mikhail) Gorbachev, that wall is none of our business," said Pence, R-Ind., of President Reagan's famous exhortation to the Soviet leader to "tear down that wall."
Democrats, who are quick to voice their support for Israel anytime the Jewish state is seen as under siege, easily agreed to push through the mildly worded resolution.
Rep. Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and co-sponsor of the resolution, said "it is not for us to decide who should run Iran, much less determine the real winner of the June 12 election.
"But we must reaffirm our strong belief that the Iranian people have a fundamental right to express their views about the future of their country freely and without intimidation," added Berman, D-Calif.
Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., have proposed a similar measure in the Senate, although a vote was not certain.
The policy statement expresses support for "all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and rule of law" and affirms "the importance of democratic and fair elections."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Yup, and the article went out of its way to insinuate that Democrats supposedly are knee-jerkers in defense of Israel when many are anything but. Republicans are much more friendly towards Israel because they know they are at risk and they are a vital ally.
It also says the resolution is a vieled attack on Obama.
Well, how do they know? Sources, please.
And even if it is, I think Republicans would have initiated such a resolution in the face of such an important historical event not really that long after the attack on 9/11 by radical Muslims!
And Berman stated it's not up to us to run Iran or determine the winner. But we should support the right of Iranians to a fair election where opposition parties can have representatives in the voting precincts. We should be supporting freedom and democracy as a matter of course and also be proud Israel is a bright example of democratic government.
Perhaps this is the biggest reason Israel is hated so much in the ME and why the Democrats you mentioned share that hate.
That seems to be issue number one with them along with prostitution.
And condemning the suppression of freedom is similar the installation and support of the Shah of Iran how?
That’s because the Founding Fathers advocated a non-interventionist policy, akin to the Monroe doctrine.
So, by default, I'm all for this.
I meant the people wanting to have a peaceful protest, without being killed and having internet/phones shut down. I’m not talking about a 1980’s hardliner.
Agree, Ron Paul is standing by the long-standing isolationist approach of Republicans (until the Bushs). Frankly, I wish we would return to an isolationist approach, but then blast SEVERLY any country that messes with us.
Read the resolutions. They were a declaration of war.
Wow. This thread sure did turn into a Bushbot reunion.
Ron Paul
>>I guess all he can do is just evoke the words of great leaders.<<
Like Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini and Chairman Mao? Or are those just the voices in his head?
ROFL!
Ron Paul was getting some abuse or love depending on your viewpoint.
Ron Paul in his statement (that you posted) says that he admires Obama for his cautious approach in regards to Iran. So can you show me a Ron Paul statement in regards to Obama’s extreme meddling in regards to Israel? Or in regards to Obama’s pre-election meddling in regards to Iraq as a senator? It seemed to me that Ron Paul himself had no problem in meddling in the liberation of Iraq with his constant speaking against it.
The only thing I see consistent (so far) in regards to Ron Paul is his sneaky anti-Israeli sentiment.
I’m not a libertarian like Paul, so there’s issues with which I disagree. However, there is one thing I will say for the man that I very much admire, even when I’m disagreeing, and that is that he is consistent. Anyone knowing what he’s said in the past on foreign issues would expect him to vote against this. He does NOT stick his finger in the wind to decide how to vote. He is principled and consistent. I always listen to what he has to say because he has won my respect.
Agree.
I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.