The leaders of that wacky Iranian terror regime sure know how to hold a consistent view.

On Wednesday of this week the Islamic fascist terror state will mark the thirtieth anniversary of its takeover of the United States Embassy, with anti-Western rallies likely to be held again in front of the old embassy building. It was on November 4, 1979 that radical Islamic student thugs took 52 American hostages and effectively declared war on the West on behalf of fundamentalist Islam. They were backed by the ayatollahs and now many of those same radicals may be found among the power elite. The US responded in part by breaking off diplomatic relations. Under the circumstances, that gesture was moot.

Be prepared for some good old-fashioned “Death to America” posters being flashed for the television cameras to mark the festivities. There may also be some domestic blood spilled as a nascent protest against the regime looms as a follow up to the opposition that flared after the controversial re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the nation’s president.

As evidenced last summer, Iranian rulers are not likely to entertain any demonstrations of contrary views. An indeterminate number of protestors were killed in political demonstrations following the allegedly rigged presidential election in June. Poignantly, as I noted then, a sixteen year-old girl was snuffed out and for a brief time Neda Agha-Soltan was a symbol of Iranian repression. Women in particular are the targets of much violence in many Islamic communities as they are visible symbols of “Westernization” by their natural choice of trying to be individual women. This cannot be tolerated by the consistent primitives of Iran and elsewhere. The West largely ignores the plight of these women, as discussed here in a video excerpt from the film, “The Third Jihad”.

Some Iranian political leaders are already making it clear they will be harsh with any demonstrators. In a Reuters story posted on MSNBC.com, an Iranian MP was quoted as saying:

“Those individuals and groups that act against the revolution’s pillars and the views (of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei), will be considered as Mohareb (fighting against God) and corrupt on earth.”

That’s consistent with the preferred way of dealing with opposing views in Iran. “Mohareb” is serious stuff to Islamists. “Fighting against God” is punishable by death.

The West, as embodied primarily in the “Great Satan” United States, has responded inconsistently but tolerantly in its official stance toward Iran over the last thirty years. Occasional strong rhetoric by Western leaders has largely been betrayed by a lack of will to act in any way but compromise. Iran is a recognized state sponsor of terror and during the course of its de facto thirty-year war against the West has suffered more at its own hands than by Western intervention. Iran’s economy, as all collectivist systems eventually experience, is in serious trouble.

From Carter to Reagan to Bush to Clinton to Bush and now to Obama a diplomatic dance has been the favoured means of dealing with the regime. It’s as though Iran represented a Maypole and the Western leaders are young girls tethered to it by delicate ribbons, tugging tentatively with the connection as they skip in continuous circles around the core, until they get tired and quit. The pole remains firmly in the ground.

In any ideological contest between opposing sides, the most consistent side prevails. Concede to terrorists long enough and the end result is not going to be good for anybody.

©Copyright 2009 Edward Podritske