Category Archives: Political Commentary

A Harrowing Account

from an Iranian protester:

5:30 pm, the battle zone

“Ely………….., Hooman,….. bodoeen, Omid…” screamed Jaleh. The police and plain clothed militia had cornered Omid and were beating him. We ran towards him and attacked the dogs. Hooman charged towards the guards in the street, opened his arms wide and with his operatic bas voice screamed “Bezan, Bezan,..(hit me, hit me), maadar gh.. bezan (mother xxx hit me). The guard raised the club but his hands were shaking and then brought his club down. I arched over Omid as Jaleh was screaming “bee gheirat” (a man without virtue) and people started chanting “bee gheirat” to the guards and the police. I felt the burning on my back as I tried to shield Omid, he was crying “man faghat mikhaam beram khooneh (I just wanna go home). They were hitting me hard, my hands, and my legs and suddenly there was darkness as I felt a terrible pain on the back of my head and the sounds and vision blurred into oblivion.

All we can do is hope for the best.

From A Concerned Pilot

This is an email that has apparently been making the rounds in the general aviation community:

As the days go by I find myself more and more apprehensive about the drift of America toward becoming what, not to mince words, can be described as a “police state.” To the average citizen this drift is not yet all that obvious, as except for the now-familiar hassle of taking a commercial airline flight most people can go about their daily activities without interference. The average citizen, therefore, reacts to this police state notion with something ranging from a shrug to an outright “B.S.-what’s he talking about?”

Where the drift is showing up is not yet in the world of the average citizen but on the powerless fringes of society… affecting only those who, in the judgment of the “authorities,” lack the political muscle to fight back. What follows is a perfect example.

A tiny minority of Americans, a minority of which I am a member, are airplane pilots and owners. We own and operate small propeller-driven aircraft, used primarily for personal recreational travel. In other words, for fun. I compare us to RV owner-operators, as these airplanes are equivalent in price range to the RVs and campers so many Americans own and enjoy.

Just like the RVers we airplane operators have historically enjoyed the freedom of travel our machines can provide. In other words, we have been able to get in our airplanes and go somewhere without seeking permission from some government security agency. This is all changing.

Utilizing their seemingly unfettered authority to do anything that strikes their fancy without oversight by anyone, Homeland Security has instituted a requirement that private aircraft operators seek government permission each time we propose to take off if we are planning to depart for Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean. We must provide advance detailed information about where, when, and who, including the names, social security numbers, addresses, etc., of all persons who will be in the aircraft. The justification for this, they say, is that we, our spouses, family or friends might be on their mysterious and top secret “No Fly List.” The most significant aspect of this is that Homeland Security has indicated that this is a preliminary step toward their ultimate objective of requiring this data submission prior to EVERY aircraft takeoff in America, regardless of destination. Keep this in mind as we continue.

It is important to understand that this requirement breaks entirely new ground. While ENTERING any country requires formalities, never, ever, has it been necessary to seek and receive government permission to LEAVE America, the “land of the free,” much less to travel within its borders. And never, ever, has it been proposed that such permission is somehow necessary to preserve “national security.” This is a requirement only previously seen in Iron Curtain dictatorships.

Another entirely new and very unsettling aspect of this program has just surfaced in the form of several incidents in which citizens who filed the required information and received official permission to depart the USA have been detained as they were preparing to take off and had their personal aircraft, luggage, wallets, purses, etc., searched by government agents. In one particularly frightening case (Long Beach, California) the airplane was blocked in by multiple vehicles with red lights and sirens and the occupants forced from their plane, hands on their heads, by “screaming” agents from several agencies pointing drawn weapons. In this and all the other incidents, after extensive searches the agents told the citizens it had been just a “routine ramp check” and departed, leaving the shaken travelers to repack their belongings. This activity, totally unrelated to traditional arrival customs checks, also breaks new ground. On the face of it, it seems to clearly violate the Fourth Amendment of our Constitution, as it is not a match for any of the situations Courts have ruled would make this type of warrantless “random stop and search” activity permissible.

Complaints to Homeland Security higher ups about these “routine checks” were answered by spokeswoman Kelly Ivahnenko with a statement that said, and I accurately paraphrase, “we maintain we have this power and authority, you can expect we will continue to do it whenever and wherever we wish, and there is no requirement that we justify ourselves or explain our reasons.”

This answer itself is, in my opinion, even more frightening than screaming gun-wielding agents. Having an American bureaucrat maintain that their police organization possesses unlimited discretionary authority should give pause even to the most passive among us, as it is exactly what the Geheime Staatspolizei (Gestapo) said when anyone complained. Overrides of our Constitutional rights by authorities are supposed to be backed by Supreme Court rulings based on clearly articulated justifications, not on the whim of some unelected bureaucrat.

What does this mean to the average citizen? Yes, you don’t own an airplane and, OK, you really don’t give a [bleep] about how airplane owners are treated. But consider this: Do you own an RV? A car or van? All the “justifications” being used to restrict, control and harass aviation people would apply equally to anyone who travels in RVs, cars, vans, busses, trains, bicycles or what-have-you. And if you think that if unchecked it will stop with airplane owners, well, I fear you are sadly mistaken.

First they came for the pilots, and I said nothing because I wasn’t a pilot…

He Wants Our Help?

Some interesting statements from Mousavi’s “external spokesman.” Jonah Goldberg has some thoughts:

It seems to me that this is at minimum a hint that Mousavi would be willing to put the nuke program on the table for negotiation — the complete opposite position of Ahmadinejad. Moreover, it hints or at least suggests that the way Iran meddles in other countries — i.e. financing terrorism, sponsoring terrorist groups etc — would not be locked in stone either. Now, of course, this could all be a ruse. Mousavi is no angel. But, again, these are not things the opposition would want to say if they wanted America to stay out of it. And yes, even if the opposition wants support, that doesn’t mean they’ve made the right calculation. The law of unintended consequences is universal as is the rule of thumb, “Be careful what you wish for.” But Obama supporters and others who think America should do nothing to help the opposition need to at least wonder whether they have a better grasp of the situation than the opposition itself does.

I’m sure they think they do, based on foolish statements by some of their supporters here.

[Update a few minutes later]

More thoughts from Pejman Yousefzdadeh:

Totten believes that it is possible that Mousavi has grown into less of a Khomeini-ist than he was in the past. One certainly hopes so, and I would pick him over Ahmadinejad as the lesser of two evils any day. But that is because Ahmadinejad is truly vile, while Mousavi’s past-at-least-semi-vileness may have been put in abeyance by events. Mousavi’s problem is that he remains wedded to a brutal and vicious regime. The protests he leads only have value and relevance insofar as they demonstrate that at long last, the regime must be swept aside. It’s nice if Mousavi wants to act as one of many vehicles and vessels for the revolutionary change that is so needed in Iran, and Obama was dead wrong to suggest that there is no real difference between him and Ahmadinejad. At the same time, however, it is equally ridiculous to think that Mousavi is the transformational figure that Kleiman thinks Obama is. Indeed, if Mousavi is Iran’s version of HopeAndChange, then the country of my ancestors is in more trouble than I thought.

Yes, let’s hope for their sake that they’ll be luckier than we have been in new leadership.

[Update a few minutes later]

Cracks showing in the regime? Let’s hope so.

I think that the next couple days will tell the tale, whether the Iranian people free themselves of these theocratic monsters, or their power is further entrenched.

Obama’s Failed Gamble

Jimmy Pethokoukis:

Obama wagered that the deluge of money coming from the Federal Reserve would do the heavy lifting as far as stabilizing the financial sector and keeping the already apparent recession from turning into a real disaster. Voters would, thus, continue to support his policies to assert more government control over healthcare, heavily regulate energy through a costly cap-and-trade program and further intervene into the financial industry.

The gamble appears to have failed miserably, both economically and politically. The terrible tale of the tape: a) the current downturn is arguably the worse since the Great Depression; b) household wealth has fallen by $14 trillion during the past two years, including the first quarter of 2009; c) while the economy may not shrink as much this quarter as it did in the previous three months (-5.7 percent) or the final quarter of 2008 (-6.3 percent), unemployment is soaring; d) Obama himself said the jobless rate will hit 10 percent this year; d) even worse, the Federal Reserve sees it approaching 11 percent next year. (Recall, that the original White House economic analysis of the Obama economic plan never saw unemployment exceeding 8 percent if Obamanomics was passed by Congress.)

While I don’t mind him failing, since his policy goals are disastrous, I’m furious that it’s wrecking the economy anyway.