Iran’s Crispus Attucks: Demonstrators Chant the Name of Neda

1_61_neda4_320amd_neda_headshotAt the Boston Massacre, an unlikely figure emerged as one of the heros, a man of black or Indian parentage named Crispus Attucks. In Iran, women have played a key role in the protests and protesters have rallied around a female martyr named Neda Soltan, 26. Just as blacks in the United States were fighting from a position of slavery and discrimination, Iranian women have been throwing off of restrictions of the harsh Islamic regime and taken to the street. One such courageous young person was filmed as she died after being shot by Iranian security. The video is making it through the blackout curtain established by the Iranian government.

The video is difficult to watch as a woman named Neda is seen dying on the street shortly after she was shot.

Another amateur video captured showed of Neda and her father attending Neda minutes before at the protest, which had been peaceful. Minutes later she is lying on the street gasping for life. Appropriately, Neda means “calling.”

Tributes have been posted on Youtube to Neda:

For the full story, click here

52 thoughts on “Iran’s Crispus Attucks: Demonstrators Chant the Name of Neda”

  1. Buddha Isn’t Laughing:

    I don’t think you know what a troll is.
    I’ve seen you use it, but more often than not, it simply does not apply.

  2. Buddha Isn’t Laughing:

    I don’t think you know what a troll is.
    I’ve seen you use it, but more often than not, it simply does not apply.

  3. I have one simple rule: I won’t call you a troll if you don’t act like one.

    And as for any assessment you may have of my enlightenment, you can stuff a sock in that too, Gary T(roll).

  4. Sicillian:

    Well I am glad I could clear that up for you.
    Yes I agree that the Buddha name is a misdirection, you would think someone who picked that moniker would be a little enlightened, if not in knowledge at least in how to comport oneself.
    He is the very thing he accuses, a troll, but he doesn’t even know it.

    Oh, I will continue to post here at the JT blog.

    I consider Jonathan Turley to be one the best media commentators, he doesn’t kowtow for any political party and is always consistent to the Constitution. He is quick to point out hypocrisy eveb when it is politically incorrect to do so. I see him often on Olbermann and Maddow, but I think he could even do well on the Fox network. Ron Paul manages to show up on both networks, and I respect him in much the same way.

  5. Gary T,

    I’m gladed you cleared things up. Maybe I did misinterpret what you were saying.

    I agreed with ABSOLUTLY everything you said in the last 2 of your last 3 paragraphs except about your position on legalized gay marriage.

    I esprcially agree with what you said about both sides looking for gov’t to solve problems when they only muck things up.

    Do NOT ever think you can argue with Buddha intelligently. Buddha is largely ignorant on ALL topics except for the talking points he spews from the huffington post.

    His tagline of Buddha is just a rhetorical trick to present the false image that he has thoughtful insights. It is just a trick to disguise his ignorance and to allow him to hold the initial upper hand in any topic to outsiders looking in. The see the tag “Buddha” and the immediate instinctual inclination is to think the person behind the tag possesses intellect. It is a subliminal disguise to hide ignorance. As I’ve said to this complete ignorant, Siddarthura would not be proud. (That’s at least 7 and counting) (You’ve been exposed you charlatan) (Any comeback now will be inefficient)

    Buddha is well adept at the #1 progressive debating trick and that is the AD HOMINEM and all it’s many sub-groupings. All he can do is divert attention to personal name-calling, demonizing and unsubstantiated claims of biases to hide his complete ignorance of every topic and his own ingrained prejudices, bigotry’s and hatreds.

    He knows all too well the intellectual shortcut of all progressives to claim ownership of some psuedo moral authority to make all there positions seem some type of greater human cause. It is so much easier to paint his opponents with the broad evil brush of the compassionless than it is tio argue the points.

    The progressives like Buddha use that fake moral reasoning to assume greater gov’t control over every sector of society and when it inevitably fails they just repeat their old demonizing of opponents trick to grab an even greater degree of gov’t control.

    Notice how after a tome every one of this ignorants retorts degenertates into outright name-calling. That is b/c that is the only thing his truly feeble intellect will allow him to coome up with.

    I encourage you Gary T, to cpntinue to argue your points, explicate your opinions and never stop clearing up misunderstandings and the attempt to misrepresent your positions by these bloggers.

  6. And now you call me a troll.

    Lost your mojo.
    Reduced to blathering, sputtering vitriol.

    I rest my case.

  7. Unless you want to just lie about me some more.

    So take your outrage at “civility” and stuff a sock in it, troll.

  8. Hey, Gary.

    You’ll have just about as much luck telling me what to do as every other troll.

    Good luck with that.

  9. Buddha Isn’t Laughing:

    I can read just fine, apparently you can’t.

    You most obviously haven’t questioned the authenticity of the Neda video, AND I NEVER SAID YOU DID.
    It is obvious you have attacked others who did, including me for even thinking it might not be real.
    For that heresy, you not only call me a dipstick, and a liar, but even worse a Neocon.

    Now that you have gotten your ad hominems out of your system, where do you justify the invectives you throw at me – liar, dipstick, and Neocon?

    You know you can disagree with someone without cursing them out – or maybe YOU can’t.

    You are an extremist, an illiterate, a hot-head, and a boor, and I can justify each one by the way you ‘communicate’.
    Do you hang around here just to bludgeon people who don’t agree with you?

    I was quite civil in this thread, and you just vomit in my face, thank you for that.

  10. No. You need to learn to read, dipstick.

    I’ve never questioned the authenticity of the Neda video. I’ve in fact attacked others who did.

    So now in addition to being a Neocon propagandist, you’re an outright liar.

    Good show.

  11. Hmmm, Buddha, I see from your worldview I cannot both be in favor of the Iranian citizen protesters and still question the veracity of the Neda video. And thus, I must be a neocon.
    What kind of skewed, extremist thinking is that all about?
    Similarly, Scicillian implies my questioning of the video veracity means that I must be a progressive.

    Well, I guess I must be onto something here to be accused of being both an extremist neocon AND an extremist progressive.

    Well, I am certainly not a neocon, hated Bush and most of his policies/wars with a passion. And I doubt that I am a progressive (as it’s defined lately in political vogue), as I am becoming very dissatified with Brock Obama and his policies/wars as well, and can’t stand the uber PC world progressives have forced upon us all.
    I am freedom of choice for abortion and gun possession, I am against anti-smoking laws, and for medical marijuana laws. I am for legalized gay marriage, and I am against affirmative action laws.

    Both neocons and progressives look to the government to solve the problems of society, and government invariably mucks things up with a heavy, thugish hand.

    So take your pick – pigeonhole me politically with that repertory.

Comments are closed.