Iranian activist Masih Alinejad: The people of Iran did not mourn Qassem Soleimani’s death | Fox News

Image result for Masih Alinejad
Photo from a 2015 article on Masih Alinejad’s “My Stealthy Freedom” campaign.

Iranian journalist and activist Masih Alinejad told Fox News Friday that the people of Iran did not mourn the death of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Source: Iranian activist Masih Alinejad: The people of Iran did not mourn Qassem Soleimani’s death | Fox News

Our own media, and many of our politicians, pundits, and talking heads, are all too quick to filter the news through their own anti-Trump biases, take Iranian (and other totalitarian) news media at face value, or both. So there is a narrative that Iranians are livid at the “termination with extreme prejudice” of Quds force commander Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, and that we have somehow awoken an Iranian sleeping tiger by killing him.

There is no question that the Iranian regime forces are livid – in part due to fear – or that they will attempt reprisals. We hold those truths to be self-evident. It does not necessarily follow that their public pronouncements speak for the ordinary people of Iran, many of whom would like nothing better than to chuck the mullahs and their minions head-first into the nearest river.

This interview, with Iranian journalist and activist Masih Alinejad – best known for her campaign against the compulsory wearing of the hijab, called “My Stealthy Freedom” – shows that for many Iranians, at least, the death of Soleimani is a source, not of anger and sorrow, but of joy:

“Appearing on ‘America’s Newsroom’ with host Sandra Smith, Alinejad said that the Iranian media staunches ‘freedom of expression’ in the country.

“‘So, all you see in Iranian state television – state media – [is], like, showing some people took to the street mourning and showing their sympathy [towards] Qassem Soleimani,’ she told Smith. ‘But, the fact is this: many Iranians do not see him as a hero and if you go to social media, that they are very happy.’

“‘Why?’ she questioned. ‘Because they have been witnessing how [the] Revolutionary Guard killed people in the streets across Iran.’ Alinejad added that to many Iranians, Soleimani and the Revolutionary Guard are killers and torturers, responsible for acts of terror in much of the Middle East.”

When asked how she herself felt about the killing of Soleimani, she “said that while her dream was to see Soleimani and his cohorts in court, ‘this is what they had to face’ because they are responsible for the ‘misery’ in Iraq and Syria.”

Then there is this, from Baghdad, Iraq, where he apparently was not to popular, either! This video, from Ruptly, shows Iraqis demonstrating in the streets with great joy upon the news of Soleimani’s death.

“Protesters rallied in the streets of Baghdad to celebrate, hours after General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force, was reportedly killed during a US airstrike at Baghdad’s international airport, on Friday.

“Footage filmed in the early hours of Friday shows crowds gathering in the streets of the Iraqi capital to celebrate the attack, marching and waving Iraqi flags.”

Meanwhile, back here at home, we have the rabidly anti-Trump press thoroughly embarrassing itself in its coverage of the event… the mind fairly boggles.

 

Another one bites the dust: drone strike takes out Quassem Soleimani, head of the Iranian “Quds Force”

In this Sept. 18, 2016, file photo provided by an official website of the office of the Iranian supreme leader, Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qasem Soleimani, center, attends a meeting in Tehran, Iran. Iraqi TV and three Iraqi officials said Friday, Jan. 3, 2020, that Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force, has been killed in an airstrike at Baghdad’s international airport.

Yesterday, January 3rd, 2020, in a drone strike authorized by President Trump, US military forces took out Maj. Gen. Quassem Soleimani, long-time head of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRG) “Quds force,” just outside Baghdad in Iraq. The Quds force is a division which has been described as “primarily responsible for extraterritorial military and clandestine operations” (Wikipedia).

This is another way of saying “a terrorist force,” and Soleimani was a terrorist mastermind. A commentary essay in USAToday – far from a right-wing source – notes that “Iran, using Soleimani’s Quds Force as its spearhead, was responsible for more than 600 American deaths in Iraq from 2003 to 2011, 17% of all U.S. dead in that conflict.” I have seen accounts that put the number closer to 1000 American dead.

The essay – which notes that “Trump had been a model of restraint in the face of increasingly aggressive moves against American allies and interests by Iran and its proxies” – points out that

“The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps Quds force which Soleimani commanded was a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, which gave its members the same status as al-Qaida, the Islamic State or any other such group. According to the Pentagon, Soleimani was actively planning attacks against American forces, something he had done many times in the past,”

and further notes that “Iran has been escalating conflict in the Middle East for years. Iran supports insurgent and militia groups in Yemen, Afghanistan, Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, among others,” largely through the Quds force, and its commander, Soleimani.

That drone strike couldn’t have happened to a more deserving fellah.

Anyone who thinks it was a coincidence that Soleimani was in the Baghdad area at the same time as the US Embassy there was under attack by a pro-Iranian, militant Islamic militia, Kataib Hezbollah, is probably incapable of adding two and two, and getting four.

The Kataib Hezbollah militia – founded by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who was also killed in the attack – is closely connected to Iran, Iraq’s next-door neighbor to the east; and it is one of the country’s most loyal proxies in Iraq, according to analysts. It is difficult to conclude that Soleimani was there to advise, perhaps direction, and – if things had gone differently – gloat over the capture of the American Embassy.

Regarding al-Muhandis (a.k.a. Mohandes) – killed alongside Soleimani in the drone strike – Samuel J. Culper, intelligence analyst and founder of Forward Observer, notes:

“More than the news is telling you… Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes was the chief planner of the 1983 Beirut Bombing and the 1983 Kuwait bombings with attacks on six key Kuwaiti installations and US and French Embassy’s on 12 December 1983, two months after the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings.

“He was sentenced to death in Kuwait for involvement in the 1983 bomb attacks on US and French embassies there but fled the country.

“Mohandes also oversaw Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an umbrella grouping of paramilitary groups mostly consisting of Iran-backed Shi’ite militias that was formally integrated into Iraq’s armed forces.”

These are men who, as the old country saying put it, “needed killin’.” But of course, there are the usual explosions of hyperbole – primarily from the Left, naturally, but also from a certain sub-sector of right – about how this is a “dangerous escalation,” and may lead to another Iraq-war-like quagmire, or even “World War Three.” Well, anything is possible. But as this essay in National Review puts it,

“We have no clue how Iran will react to the elimination of its terror chief Qasem Soleimani. Religious fanatics tend to be unpredictable. One thing we can be certain of, however, is that every time the United States acts in its self-interest in the Middle East, a bunch of pundits and policy experts will start spouting lazy tropes about the Iraq War.”

Yep. The thing is – as this essay goes not to note – the issue with the Iraq War was not the Iraq War. We won that, handily and speedily. The problem was the interminable occupation and attempt at nation-building which followed. And as to that, the essay continues,

“As far as I can tell, there’s no evidence that Trump, or anyone else, has any appetite to invade Iran or force regime change. Many brave Iranians are already trying to do that on their own.”

They are, and I wish them well! As to Iranian reaction to the strike,

“Of course an Iran reprisal is likely to come sooner or later, and Americans will also likely be in danger. We shouldn’t dismiss these serious concerns. They are nothing new. Iran has been conducting a terror campaign against the United States and its allies for 40 years. It was the mullahs, not Trump, who ‘escalated’ tensions when Iranian-led militias stormed the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

“Until recently, the Iranians faced few repercussions for hundreds of Soleimani-coordinated murders and the maiming of thousands of American troops. And let’s not forget either that there is not a single conflict in the region that Soleimani wasn’t fueling or coordinating in some way. If this is not an enemy worth knocking off, who is?”

Indeed!

A Tale of Two Embassies… and two Presidents.

Image may contain: sky and outdoor
US Embassy in Benghazi, Libya, burning on September 11, 2012, following attack by Islamic militants that killed four Americans, including the Ambassador.
Image may contain: 1 person, outdoor
U.S. Marines assigned to Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force-Crisis Response-Central Command (SPMAFTF-CR-CC) 19.2, prepare to deploy from Kuwait in support of a crisis response mission, Dec. 31, 2019.

This was originally written for my Facebook timeline, and is posted here with minimal editing.

Benghazi, Libya, September 11, 2012. Under attack by Islamic militants, the US Embassy requests assistance. None is forthcoming.

As a result, four Americans die, including the Ambassador, Chris Stevens – the first U.S. Ambassador killed in an attack since 1979 – along with Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs, who fell trying to defend the Ambassador against overwhelming odds. The Embassy is burned.

Baghdad, Iraq, December 31, 2019. Under attack by Islamic militants, the US Embassy requests assistance. Within a matter of hours, 100 Marines are airlifted into the Embassy grounds via Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, supported by Apache attack helicopters; further air assets are reportedly overhead.

Shortly after, 750 soldiers – an infantry battalion from the Immediate Response Force (IRF) of the elite 82nd Airborne Division – are wheels-up on their way to Kuwait, with an additional 4,000 troops gearing up to follow, in case additional support is needed.

Now, it’s possible to argue that we shouldn’t be there in the first place, and I might agree with you. But we ARE there: that’s the reality of the situation; American lives were in danger, and the response was quick and, so far at least, has proven effective.

Do some of y’all understand, now, why some of us support President Trump, despite the fact that we might not like or agree with everything he says or does? He puts America first, as an American President should, and when Americans are in danger, he protects them to the best of his ability.

Based on past history, if Hillary Clinton was President currently, we might be looking at another dead Ambassador and another gutted Embassy. That is the difference. You either get it or you don’t. If you don’t, I quite honestly feel sorry for you…