Shabnam,
Initially, I thought you were one of those Islamic Marxists. But the more I read your post the more I realized that you were an agent. We have fought you for far too long not to recognize you. Pass on a message to your bosses. It’s true that the Iranian opposition groups are impotent and useless. But you have a much tougher opposition. The People. And wherever you go, there will be at least one of us who will stand up to you and your masters.

Here are a few facts for Bozhidar:
-Kurds have not killed Christians, not for decades. Right now the Shiites are killing Christians, Kurds are giving them refuge.
-Kurds are the descendants of the ancient Medes who predate the Arabs in that region by Oh a thousand years or so.
-Their territory has always been in the same area. This teritory has been split between three countries of Iran, Iraq and Turkey.
-Each country has slaughter them, systematically killed their leaders and intellectuals. Whether by the hand of the Turkish “Grey Wolves” or “Chemical Ali” or the Iranian “Revolutionary Guards”.
-Kurds are not easily subjugated. They are basicly impossible to control. They are fierce fighters. And as far back as I can remember, they have had a very strong (strong and militant) Left.
It would be nice for them to have a country of their own, to govern themselves and not worry about who is going to come and kill them and their families tomorrow.

Even German people are fed up with Zionist lobby where spread lies around. The leftist daily Junge Welt accused the German Zionist lobby of being involved in a “psychological warfare against Iran” by launching the so-called ‘Stop The Bomb’ campaign which is mainly aimed at discrediting Tehran’s peaceful civilian nuclear program. Political observers in Berlin stress that the German Zionist lobby had made similar baseless accusations about alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction leading up to the US invasion in spring 2003.

So far, Obama is following pro zionist policy which might ends with nuclear holocaust of Iran if American people do not protest. People have given Obama many opportunities to be elected to help them to shift American public and foreign policy to bring peace and end the war. Obama’s pro Zionist policy should not go unchallenged because it will have great consequences for Americans and the world.

But again, I ask you to not simply look at Nader who has been thoroughly demonized by the Dems and faulted with the worst crime you can even imagine – getting GWB elected in 2000.

This lie has so infiltrated the ranks of the Dem aligned progressives that that spout it at every chance they can, whenever Nader’s name is mentioned.

You talk about “failure” of the left to be a force in American politics. I agree with that assertion if by “left” you mean those who hug the cuff of the Dem Party. There are millions who look to the Dem Party. The media reinforce this with talk of how the Dems are the left and Pelosi is the ultra left of the Party (!!!!). They even call Obama the most liberal because he relentlessly (like a school boy) voted with the Dem leadership (now there’s a progressive definition if ever there was one(?)).

The Orwellian machine is at fevor pitch telling you day is night and night day until there is a mighty mindless chorus singing harmonically.

But to blame attempts to break down the wall by offering a truly grass roots organization and do more than scratch some votes FOR real change is like kicking the “dog”. Nader kept it going for most of this year, got on 45 ballots; and spoke a relentless truth on every venue he could find.

Why put this on one man for not changing America. If you’ve ever gone up against power, I mean massive force – it’s like a line backer hitting you in mid-throw, the feeling is so swift, powerful it almost feels good because it’s so totally overwhelming. That’s the kind of power the duopoly with its corporate non-stop media has.

Obama got money from every echelon of the might capitalist system, from the right and liberal. He blanketed the ideologies with a Yes We Can!

If you’ve never run against a machine, even at a local level, then you don’t know. You are non-existent in those situations – a curiosity item at best. And if you’re a threat, they know how to deal with you.

To be naive about this power and what stands behind it over history is embarrasing, DB.

That said, the fight goes on. Yes, strategies and tactics need to change. Some of it will be organic and much will need to be intentional. Some will happen because the collapse will demand an answer – will it be progressive? or will it be fascism?

At the end, the system cannot be what it is not. I don’t buy that it is mallable in terms of actually being positively responsive. It, the system, knows how to secure itself when under duress. It has all the levers of power at its disposal. It can bob and weave. It can commerialize and parade a right/left faux dichotomy, or play whatever word game works for the day. It can be a hip-hop, bebop, 30 second spot, it can be on the front page of your paper, or on Yahoo’s or Google’s or in your inbox. It’s litter ubiquitous.

Nader is an enemy of the people [re: state] and will be until he can be caractured on SNL or Jay Leno or David Letterman. Once you are a certifiable joke you can be tapped on the head and sent away.

http://www.payvand.com/news/08/nov/1033.html

So far, Obama is following pro zionist policy which might ends with nuclear holocaust if American people do not protest. People have given Obama many opportunities to be elected to help them to shift American public and foreign policy to bring peace and end the war. Obama’s pro Zionist policy should not go unchallenged because it will have great consequences for Americans and the world.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/flynn.php?articleid=13710

I would say, “The meaning is not in words, but in action.”

Obama talks a good game, but ultimately, we will have to judge him by his actions. That will be the true test.

Incidentally, he has already acted in some regards, the way he ran his campaign was historic. I believe most people do not understand that magnitude of his campaign accomplishment. A relatively unknown senator with very little experience going against the Juggernaught Hillary Clinton who was practicing her acceptance speech 3 years ago. Also in the mix, John Edwards, and the flirt of the name Al Gore. The fact that he won an uphill battle and redefined how you campaign (using the internet, accepting small donations, going overseas, etc) he really did rewrite the book on campaigning. So how will that energy, drive, and inventiveness serve him in the oval office?

Time will be the ultimate judge.

Mel…

This election advertised not only McCain’s stupidity but also the absence of an effective third force in American politics, at a moment when the credibility of both parties and of both major candidates is open to sweeping challenge. Voters were disgusted with the entire system and the direction the country has taken. Disapproval of Bush and of the Democrats running Congress has been at the same high level. Obama and McCain share many positions, starting with the bailout and continuing with endorsement of a belligerent foreign policy from Georgia to Iran, total fealty to Israel and a ramp-up of the doomed Afghan campaign. With this in mind, it is instructive to look back at the Perot campaign of 1992.

After scoring very high polling numbers in June of 1992, showing him to be in the lead over Clinton and Bush, Perot announced his withdrawal from the race, later disclosing that he didn’t want his candidacy to prompt release, by Republican operatives, of compromising photos of his daughter before her wedding. Perot didn’t re-enter the race until October 1. He talked his way into the debates and riveted the nation with his famous denunciations of free trade and laments for America’s industrial decline, which he blamed on both the major parties. Five weeks later, he won 19 per cent of the vote, thereby costing George H.W. Bush the election.

A similar scenario could have unfolded in this election, with the most likely standard bearer of a third force being Ron Paul, the libertarian congressman from Texas. Paul had plenty of money and a national organization. He would have able to launch effective attacks on both candidates, on the issue of war and the bailout. At his well-attended shadow convention in St Paul, he could have declared as an independent. He declined.

Ralph Nader is a man for whom the economic crisis has come as total vindication of everything he has been proclaiming for decades about the corruption of Wall Street, the ties between Wall Street and Congress, the economic sellouts of Clinton time, from free trade deals to the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Yet, Nader had no party and hence suffered from hugely diminished political purchase on everything, from volunteers to finance to media presence, at a moment when his message could have resonated hugely with the furious and fearful electorate. The political groups and coalitions that rallied to Nader in 2000 were all shadows of their former selves. Eight years of Bush have pushed the environmental and labor lobbies back into the Democratic Party, where their voices are inaudible and political influence scarcely visible to the naked eye. Obama pounds the drum for nuclear power and hugely toxic coal-to-gas conversion plants and campaigns through the industrial wastelands of the Midwest, while remaining more or less mute on “free” trade.