Senate Bill Supports Replacing Iran's Government with a Democracy

Iran Democratic Transition Act of 2010 (Introduced in Senate)

To establish a program to support a transition to a freely elected, open democracy in Iran.

This bill was introduced to the Senate on February 11, 2010 and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations on the same day.

In all honesty, there may be nothing to this other than a feigned response of good will toward the Iranian people. However, if you read through the bill it has all the workings of a declaration of war without actually declaring war.

Congress makes the following declarations:

(1) The interests of the United States and international peace are threatened by the ongoing and destabilizing actions of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, including its--

(A) massive, systematic, and extraordinary violations of the human rights of its own citizens;

(B) continued interference with the internal affairs of its neighbors, including Iraq and Afghanistan;

(C) support for, and facilitation of, terrorist activities; and

(D) attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction and long-range missile delivery systems.

(2) It should be the policy of the United States to deny the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran the ability to continue--

(A) to oppress the people of Iran and use violence and executions against pro-democracy protestors and regime opponents;

(B) to interfere in the internal affairs of its neighbors, including Iraq and Afghanistan;

(C) to finance, provide safe-haven, or otherwise support terrorist organizations; or

(D) to develop chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons, and ballistic missile delivery systems.

(3) It should be the policy of the United States--

(A) to fully and publicly support efforts made by the people of Iran to oppose and remove the regime headed by Supreme Leader Ali Hoseyni Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from power in Iran; and

(B) to promote the emergence of a freely elected, open, and democratic government to replace the political system of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

S. 3008 IS

I don't get what the big deal with Iran's government is.

In this country we throw people in jail for wearing clown masks and asking police why they have to move off of a sidewalk.

The Senate seems to have an issue with the Mullahs still having some margin of political control, but this strikes me as hilarious since Iran has more democratic representation than the US does.

Right now, the only people represented in congress are either A. banks or B. looters who want free stuff

Actually, I could just boil that down to A. looters who want free stuff.



[edit on 26-2-2010 by mnemeth1]

In this country we throw people in jail for wearing clown masks and asking police why they have to move off of a sidewalk.

Lol.... It is truly hilarious when the country with the largest, per capita, prison population tries to spread freedom around the world.

They should start to spread freedom here first.


Maybe they will overthrow the current Iranian regime and put in.... I don't know.... a SHAH!

Yes, a pro-western Shah would be perfect for them.

reply to post by BlackJackal


Good find OP. Definetly paves the road for military action.

2nd line

Ha! I bet that Iran has a bill in their Senate/Parliament that suggests that they should make the US into a Muslim theocracy.

This idiotocracy shows that CONGRESS IS BROKEN and WE THE PEOPLE must fix it. VOTE:
NO to Congress Persons with over 12 or 18 years.
NO to Congressional retirement & perks.
NO to Congress having DIFFERENT Health Care & Retirement Plan than they give us.
NO to lobbyists.
NO to Congressional greed & corruption.
NO to bailout of banks & corporations.
NO to CEO bonuses on taxpayer money.
NO to Derivatives & money laundering.
NO to lending money not in hand.
NO to brokers selling & repackaging mortgages.
NO to credit card interest >10%.
NO to tax breaks for overseas manufacturing & out sourcing.
NO to foreign oil.
NO to unequal Money Base.  Compare cost top 100 items; bread, meat, milk, small car, small house of each country.
NO to FCC control of internet.

YES TO VOTER POWER.  Yes to Congressional Term Limits. 
In EVERY election VOTE: “NO CAREER CONGRESS PERSONS over 12 or 18 years”

All I can say it Hypocrisy


Hypocrisy is the act of persistently pretending to hold beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually hold. Hypocrisy is thus a kind of lie.

I think the bill outlines general majority of thoughts on ATS regarding Iran. Although most people are against military intervention, a mild "heh" would be a reaction to some kind of military involvement. But still CIA is usually enough as they don't take credit and cannot be caught.

Here's some snippets from the actual bill:

(13) On June 2, 2008, Ahmadinejad stated that Israel--
(A) `will be wiped off the pages of history'; and
(B) `is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene. . . . Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started'.
(14) Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei--
(A) gave a speech on March 4, 2009, in which he referred to the State of Israel as a `cancerous tumor' and indicated that negotiations with Israel were a `big mistake'; and

That is a common argument here on ATS, although primarily quoted as "Israel will be wiped off the world map".

Of course, the WMD arguments include:

(15) On September 21, 2009, Iran revealed to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it was constructing a second uranium enrichment at an underground site near Qom.
(16) United States intelligence officials have said that despite this notification--
(A) Iran originally intended for the facility to be kept secret;
(B) the United States had been `observing and analyzing the facility for several years'; and
(C) President Barack Obama has noted that `the size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program'.

A issue currently "sensitive" in US is being used as an argument:

(2) According to the Department of State's 2008 Country Report on Human Rights Practices, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its agents--
(A) have tortured detainees and prisoners; and

Also as we all know Iran is the new biggest sponsor of terrorism, right after Iraq. I am not being sarcastic, there are many arguments supporting this. But it is also true that they can be used to mark any country in the world as terrorist sponsor, it is very easy to do this. Especially in middle-east, with all facts actually pointing towards Saudi Arabia as the "mother of terrorism". But, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, UAE, Arabia, they're all just other names for "terrorists" in western media.

(9) According to the 2008 Department of State Country Reports on Terrorism, published in April 2009, Iran--
(A) `remained the most significant state sponsor of terrorism';
(B) `has long employed terrorism to advance its key national security and foreign policy interests, which include regime survival, regional dominance, opposition to Arab-Israeli peace, and countering western influence, particularly in the Middle East';

These things are based in Israel/US intelligence reports. Those familiar with "Iran issue" know all that already.

(10) Iran's support for militant and terrorist organizations--
(A) has directly bolstered Hamas' ability to strike Israel; and
(B) includes the supply of arms to Hezbollah in direct violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701.

These are also based on allegations and disclosed intelligence reports, but the sheer volume of such reports make it for an average Joe hard to analyse - the data and overall history record is huge.

(11) The report also states that--
(A) `despite a dramatic decrease in attacks in Iraq since August 2008, security remains fragile, in part because the Qods Force continued to provide lethal support to select Iraqi militant groups that target U.S., Iraqi and Coalition forces'; and
(B) `Iranian weapons transfers to select Taliban members in Afghanistan in 2008 continued to threaten Afghan and NATO troops operating under UN mandate and undermine stabilization efforts in that country'.

The point of all that is to establish a envoy for promoting democracy, which would basically assist the opposition party in propaganda and resources. Being an envoy, it would also function as a intelligence reporting unit. I am not sure what this envoy will consist of, as it can easily be a guy going there and telling media how Iran is crap and should be nuked.

SEC. 5. SPECIAL ENVOY FOR DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN IRAN.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON ESTABLISHMENT OF REGIONAL FRAMEWORK ON HUMAN RIGHTS.
SEC. 7. OTHER SUPPORT FOR TRANSITION IN IRAN.

That's about it. It could serve as a nice outline of all "anti-Iran" arguments.