Look up the word "Sarcasm"
Posted on 06/19/2009 2:40:05 PM PDT by DJ Republica
House Passes Bipartisan Resolution to Support Iranian Dissidents, 405 to 1
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) and Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) introduced the following resolution:
Expressing support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law, and for other purposes.
Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law;
(2) condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the Government of Iran and pro-government militias, as well as the ongoing government suppression of independent electronic communication through interference with the Internet and cellphones; and
(3) affirms the universality of individual rights and the importance of democratic and fair elections.
The House just voted to pass it by an overwhelming margin 405 to 1. Ron Paul was the lone "no" vote, with two voting present and 25 not voting.
So that is why you think he voted no? What earmarks has Paul voted for exactly?
Look up the word "Sarcasm"
And...for me...just more proof there is a God and he wants mankind to live free.
May God help those in Iran that want freedom. Let it reign.
|
|
||
|
Statement of Congressman Ron Paul United States House of Representatives |
||
| Statement Opposing Resolution on Iran | ||
| June 19, 2009 | ||
|
I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about “condemning” the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.
Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama’s cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.
I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions.
|
||
Ron Paul once again sides with the Dems and Islam.
Where did you get this quote prompting your "let's rumble on this one" statement?
I'm usually much harsher on Dr. Koolaid than that. Who ever wrote that must have written it on Mother's Day or some warm hearted occasion.
wRONg PAUL is an expert on shrimp.
Don't you realize that it's bad manners to stab people behind their backs?
UH? lol...rabs...are you a Ron Paul troll? ;)
Shhhh. You’re making sense.
You mean they aren’t?
Yeah... But other than that he’s a Poopy Head. (/RP Derangement Syndrome)
Here’s my take on this..... The ONLY REASON we’re not going through what the Iranian people are right NOW, this minute, is the Second Amendment. It will have to be up to these people to win their freedom, just like our founders did. And, if and when they do, they need to write their own Constitution, and include in it a Bill of Rights.
Here’s some info on Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Seems like he was a hardliner in his own day. I really don’t see a change, except for the name. However, it’s none of my business. These people need to start solving some of their own problems.
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/06/12/the-radical-roots-of-irans-ref/print
(SNIP) “The Radical Roots of Iran’s “Reformist”
By Philip Klein on 6.12.09 @ 3:41PM
The media has been eager to portray President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s chief rival in today’s Iranian elections as a “reformist” candidate, but a survey of Mir Hussein Moussavi’s record shows him to be yet another radical.
As prime minister during the 1980s, Moussavi was routinely described as a “militant” and “hard-liner” in press accounts. He celebrated Islamists’ seizure of of the U.S. Embassy, backed the Supreme Leader’s call for author Salman Rushdie’s murder, and had ties to Lebanese terrorist goup Hezbollah. He has been quoted as referring to America as “the Great Satan” and to Israel as a “cancerous tumor.”
A Nexis search of old reports from the New York Times yielded these descriptions of Moussavi (I’ve placed the dates in parentheses):
“...Prime Minister Mir Hussein Moussavi, one of the Iranian regime’s most severe militants.” (Feb. 17, 1989)
“Iran’s Prime Minister, Mir Hussein Moussavi, a prominent member of the militant wing in the Iranian leadership who has opposed economic liberalization at home and political openings to the West, added his voice today to the growing current of combativeness in Iran.” (Feb. 22, 1989)
“Another prominent hard-liner was also left off the new Cabinet list: Mir Hussein Moussavi, the current Prime Minister...”(Aug. 20, 1989)
In the Feb. 22 story I cited above, it says, Moussavi “asserted that Ayatollah Khomeini’s orders to kill Mr. Rushdie for what Iranian fundamentalists say is the blaspheming of Islam in his book ‘The Satanic Verses’ would be carried out, according to a Teheran radio broadcast monitored by the Associated Press in Nicosia.”
On October 9, 1981, the Times spoke to Moussavi, and he addressed the seizure of the U.S. Embassy:
In the interview, Mr. Moussavi said Westerners in general and Americans in particular also had difficulty understanding why Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The hostage affair served the revolution’s purpose, the Foreign Minister said.
‘’It was the beginning of the second stage of our revolution,’’ after the overthrow of the Shah, Mr. Moussavi said. ‘’It was after this that we rediscovered our true Islamic identity.’’
More info;
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/who-mir-hossein-mousavi-history-irans-opposition-leader
Yeah, he’s a “freedom fighter” to get behind. Sheesh.
People in Iran are not out in the streets because they liked mullah approved idiot #2 more than mullah approved idiot #1.
They are out in the streets because it was rubbed in their faces that the one small role they were given to direct the destiny of their nation (voting between religious authority approved candidates) was a lie and a sham.
Or as Ann Coulter put it ‘I don't think it is because they liked Mousavi’s answer to the ‘boxers’ or ‘briefs’ question better.’
|
All, see 54. Looks like the last laugh is Ron Paul's, since Mousavi is an anti-American hardline Islamist! Of course, McCain's support for Mousavi is no surprise. He also supported KLA terrorists in Kosovo in the 1990s. |
|
fyi-54
Interesting to see how many FReepers are taking the Obama position.
Or as Ann Coulter put it ‘I don't think it is because they liked Mousavi’s answer to “boxers or briefs” better’.
An example of Paul taking non-intervention to an unfortunate extreme.
Sure the Iranian ‘opposition’ is like a Dennis Kookcinich to the Mullah’s and Achmandinawhackjob’s Joe Stalin but this unrest is still a good thing.
Ping to #57
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.
