Human rights group wants U.S. quiet on Iran

By GottaLaff

In short, for now, and with all due respect, STFU:

The strongly anti-Ahmedinejad Hadi Ghaemi, New York-based spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, explains why that's a mistake.

Robert Gibbs' White House statement may not fully capture the depth of the crime committed against the Iranian people. "But I think it's wise for the U.S. government to keep its distance," Ghaemi says. The White House can and should "show concern for human life and protesters' safety and promote tolerance and dialogue." But to get any further involved, even rhetorically, would "instigate the cry that the reformers are somehow driven and directed by the U.S., whether under Bush or under Obama, and there's no reason to give that unfounded allegation" any chance to spread.

Ghaemi continues to say that the international community should present a united front that gives "no legitimacy" to the election. In particular, he wants U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to express "serious grievances" about how the election was conducted. "Sanctions and military threats, all these things are counterproductive," Ghaemi says. The initiative has to be expressed and promoted by the Iranians themselves

VIDEO-- Michael Isikoff: Obama clashes with human rights group in secret meeting today

By GottaLaff

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

UPDATE: Here's the video. I've changed the blog title to reflect the addition.

Michael Isikoff on Rachel Maddow right now. Liveblogging:

Emanuel, Holder, Axelrod, Greg Craig, Obama clashed with human rights groups in a secret meeting today. The groups complained that Obama was moving too far to the right.

After the military commissions announcement, the WH felt the need to reach out to them and listen to them. The leaders of the groups repeated their criticisms... that Obama's premises about Gitmo, commissions, that he was accepting BushCo's premises.

Obama didn't like that, saying he was left a mess by his predecessor. He said it wasn't helpful to equate him with Bush.

Obama defended his stance of moving forward, not back. His explanation was a little different than usual: Said it was too distracting to his staff, takes too much time, looked at Holder when he said this. But that's the reason for a truth commission. Obama didn't really reject that, but raised the issue of distraction.

RE: a trophy prosecution, to show torture wouldn't be tolerated again. Obama curtly rejected that idea. In other words, he didn't leave it up to Holder, as he'd previously said he would. He is meeting with people and answering on behalf of Holder. What he's saying in public v. private are two different things, something Rachel Maddow is highlighting strongly.

Obama will explain his decisions in a speech tomorrow.