Iranian Gov't Pledges Harder Line Against Protesters


From AP via Drudge:

Iran's police chief threatened Wednesday to show "no mercy" in crushing any new opposition protests and said more than 500 demonstrators have been arrested in the wake of this week's deadly clashes.

At least eight people were killed in street violence Sunday, the country's worst unrest since the aftermath of the disputed presidential election on June 12. One of those killed was the nephew of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, who was buried Wednesday in a hastily organized ceremony….

Police chief Gen. Ismail Ahmadi Moghaddam made a harsh threat to protesters to stay off the streets.

"In dealing with previous protests, police showed leniency. But given that these opponents are seeking to topple (the ruling system), there will be no mercy," Moghaddam said, according to IRNA. "We will take severe action. The era of tolerance is over. Anyone attending such rallies will be crushed."

Boy, that "era of tolerance" (i.e., detention, torture, murder or peaceful protesters) sure was fun while it lasted. Regimes like the Islamic Republic always fall. Here's hoping it's sooner rather than later.

More here.


NEXT: As Predicted, Irresponsible States Stay Irresponsible, Lobby for Stimulus II

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The best and the brightest left Iran already. That’s the good news for the rest of the world, but makes it harder and harder for Iran to be a better place.

  2. David, How is that good news? The best and the brightest kept some decorum of a civil society.

    1. Its good news for them, and good news for where they moved.

      Bad news for Iran, but the Iranians should have thought of that.

      I’ll take two out of three.

      1. When the brightest departed they not only forgot to turn off the lights but also forgot to pack the nuclear weapons.

  3. I’m keeping a close eye on this… to see which tactics work best for dealing with American insurgents who protest My Administration.

    1. L’etat, c’est moi.

  4. Good luck to the opposition.

  5. “Regimes like the Islamic Republic always fall.”

    Unfortunately not true. China seems to be doing quite well since using tanks against protesters. There’s also N Korea, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, …. Oppression works. 🙁

    1. I think he meant they always fail *eventually*. That could be a heck of a long time away, though, unfortunately.

      1. All regimes fail eventually.

        1. Including good ones. Nice regimes that provide freedom usually end up seeing the error of their ways. The current state of freedom in the US for example. Freedom is too risky for the state and its citizens. It’s the lesson that we learned from 9/11. The idea that you must balance freedom with security pretty much spells the end for real freedom.

  6. I wish I could find some place to explain to me what the opposition is about. What is motivating them? What is their grievance? What to they want? Do they want, for example, democracy, or just a different theological head of state? I’ve yet to see anything from the MSM to explicate the situation.

    1. Usually, the opposition is made up of all the people that disagree with the current regime. They are all after different ends, but work together to topple the regime. Once the regime falls they battle each other for control.

      1. Don’t strain yourself there Cabeza. I kind of figures that by the fucking mere fact that they are opposing that they somehow disagree with the regime.

      2. Don’t strain yourself there Cabeza. I kind of figures that by the fucking mere fact that they are opposing that they somehow disagree with the regime.

    2. The opposition is sort of moderate reformist. they want the powers of the clerics reduced, a stronger civilian president, and less of the morality police.

      It’s basically the same as the Khatemi opposition, only now possed off because Khatemi’s moderate reforms were blocked.

      However, all that may just be the “acceptable” face of a more liberal opposition. They just know if they came out boldly in favor of more liberal reforms that there would be a massacre.

  7. I wish I could find some place to explain to me what the opposition is about. What is motivating them?

    Based on the little I’ve heard, the leaders all seem to be mullahs or ayatollahs or somesuch. So it sounds like what they want is different bunch of theocrats in charge.

    1. Yes, but revolutions open the door to completely different groups taking power. There is still a definite liberal side to Iranian culture. It has little chance to rise now, but maybe it will if the current regime is overthrown.

    2. Well, the theocrats have complete control over who gets to run for election in Iran’s “democracy” (if it can be called such when the mullahs can veto whoever they don’t like).

      So anyone running for office has to at least *pretend* to support a theocratic state, which makes it difficult to tell if the opposition just wants a few minor changes, or wants more, but has to pretend they don’t.

      Mousavi was allowed to run because he was both a relatively hardline president, and an extremely popular figure in Iran, even while backing reforms that would have reduced the power of the Supreme Council, making it easier to enact broader reforms in the future. The “liberals” in Iran supported him because despite being a hardliner, he promised those political reforms.

      I get the impression though that the protests have expanded beyond just Mousavi’s camp to a broader range of forces that would like political reform. It’s not really just about the election results anymore.

  8. From AP via Drudge:

    There’s also (ahem) the related Google News story cluster.

  9. Personally, I think the US should start minding its own business.


  10. Perhaps it’s true that they always fall. Sometimes, though, it takes hundreds of years.

  11. Regimes like the Islamic Republic always fall.

    All regimes eventually fall. The minarchist government set up in the American Revolution has, arguably, fallen, albeit bit by bit over several hundred years.

    But, before a repressive regime inevitably falls, you can have hundreds of years of suck. And then get replaced by a different coercive regime.

    Perhaps the Iranians can fix or replace their government with something worthwhile in our lifetimes. Maybe not.

  12. There is still a definite liberal side to Iranian culture.

    Beverly Hills.

  13. you guys are completely forgetting that, according to Lew Rockwell, this is all an American conspiracy anyhow. So, the good news is that we get to decide how this turns out, eh wot?!

  14. Let’s drop Joe Lieberman on them.

    1. now that’s a dirty bomb!

  15. Headline 1:
    New at Reason: Radley Balko on the Criminalization of Protest

    Posted on December 30, 2009, 12:00PM

    Headline 2:
    Iranian Gov’t Pledges Harder Line Against Protesters

    Posted on December 30, 2009, 9:45AM | Nick Gillespie


    which country is this about again:

    Boy, that “era of tolerance” (i.e., detention, torture, murder of peaceful protesters) sure was fun while it lasted


    Oh yeah. No murder of peaceful protesters, and the era is still going on hier…

  16. Israel should hurt the Mullah’s nuclear program so it will lift the morale of the freedom fighters (and depress the morale of the Ernst Rhoem wannabes here).

    Two rotten birds with one stone.

    “There’s no need to fear. Underzog is here.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.