kactus Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 It has been mentioned on a numerous occasions and I know that for fact that some of the riot police in recent demonstrations taking place in Iran are imported from arab countries as they can only speak broken farsi. They have used brutal force against Iranian protesters. The irony is this regime spends more time supporting and financing hamas explicitly with iranian taxpayers money whilst currently terrorising and killing ordinary iranian citizens. The problem with these demonstrations is that they are not organised or lack leadership. The organisers have either been detained or killed. The level of protests speak a volume about the dissatisfaction of the major sect of the population with this antiquated, corrupted regime. Furthermore, there is no credible opposition to the regime unlike 1979 revolution that saw the overthraw of the shah facing opposition from communism and islam. Islam prevaded and that is the crisis Iran is facing today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 You can charge them all you wish. I'm sure BP was raking in the dough. That however doesn't excuse Mossadeq. I would say it does! And reviewing the history of the time, it's apparent that England was trying to set up a informal colonial system of economic domination after they given up political control of their colonies. The British had an attitude of entitlement -- they drilled the wells and felt that the oil was theirs at a small nominal fee to the landowners. Many Americans are bewildered by the hostile attitudes in the Third World, and it's not all "they hate us because of our freedoms;" a lot of the resentment is boiling because of economic colonialism of multinational resource companies, and the actions of the World Bank and IMF, that put them into debt bondage and start dictating government policy and economic policy to maintain access to credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 not being as simple and one dimensional as you, i see things differently. not agreeing with the shah does not mean that i agree with the mullahs. it doesn't matter how many times you repeat it. many of my iranian friends would say the same thing. shah was a step above the mullahs, as far as the state of the iranian people but he was not the elected leader and he sold out to the west. not to mention the brutal savak organization that make the basij look like dutch police. After you, my Jew baiting opponent. more blah blah? not surprising. Pretty sure we talked about the political spectrum in Poli-Sci. Will Wikipedia do for yah, duk? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum we talked about being one dimensional. i don't think you've taken any poli sci courses. only simpletons who get their que from entertainment news respond the way you do. they've got you hooked on this left vs right thing, don't they? it must be exciting for you, wulf, bonam, borg and jerryseinfeld to have your very own circle jerk. Iran was a wealthy nation under the Shah. iran made pretty good money from the world's increasing appetite for oil. imagine how much more they could have made if a big chunk of the profit didn't go to the foreigners. there is more about iran that you probably don't know. iran's rural areas were underdeveloped and was heading the other direction as far as literacy, employment and life expectancy. as shitty as the current regime is, they've at least improved the lives of millions living int he rural areas of iran by actually spending money on development. Except for women. It was the Shah that gave Iranian women rights as we know them...only to have them taken away when your Islamist buddies stole the revolution from the moderates Bolshevik style. But that's not a problem to one keen on Fundemental Islam...eh?Again...Iran was a wealthy, practically 1st world, nation right up until your Jihadi pals stole the show away from Bakhtiar. Then came the Dark Ages...or in your case...good times. another fact that you probably don't know is that women's literacy rate increased from the teens to almost 80% in iran during the mullah years. not to mention the increase of women in the work force. being allowed to wear mini skirts during the shah years was a right that every woman should have, but it was also a mask to cover the real situation of women in those years. iran's GDP fell hard during the iran/iraq war but it has surpassed the shah years since the late 90's. this, despite the heavy sanctions. so conclusion; no, iran was not all rosy and fun during the shah years. listen to the families of thousands of people who were killed by savak for speaking out against the government. not to mention the rural community that was left out which also fueled the hatred for the shah. the iranian people are not stupid. they are against the current corrupt government but they also know that they would not want to go back to the shah years. i guess it's your arrogance and bigotry that has you supporting the overthrow of a democratically elected official of a country. shame on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Many Americans are bewildered by the hostile attitudes in the Third World, and it's not all "they hate us because of our freedoms;" a lot of the resentment is boiling because of economic colonialism of multinational resource companies, and the actions of the World Bank and IMF, that put them into debt bondage and start dictating government policy and economic policy to maintain access to credit. ..and at least one Canadian doesn't have a clue about Canuck companies and their mining activity around the same Third World...amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 i guess it's your arrogance and bigotry that has you supporting the overthrow of a democratically elected official of a country. shame on you. Being "democratically elected" doesn't make a government legitimate or representative of the real best interests of the people. Just take a look at Hamas. we talked about being one dimensional. i don't think you've taken any poli sci courses. only simpletons who get their que from entertainment news respond the way you do. they've got you hooked on this left vs right thing, don't they? it must be exciting for you, wulf, bonam, borg and jerryseinfeld to have your very own circle jerk. So anytime there's a group of people that disagree with you and happen to agree with each other on certain issues they are a "circle jerk"? What a closed mind you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Being "democratically elected" doesn't make a government legitimate or representative of the real best interests of the people. Just take a look at Hamas. wtf are you talking about? they obviously know what's best for them if they've elected them. what's wrong with you? the people elected mossadeq into power and they elected hamas into power. both were legitimate elections. So anytime there's a group of people that disagree with you and happen to agree with each other on certain issues they are a "circle jerk"? What a closed mind you have. no. it's your simplistic right vs left or you're either with us or against us bullshit that has created your circle jerk. Edited June 22, 2009 by dub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 wtf are you talking about? they obviously know what's best for them if they've elected them. what's wrong with you?the people elected mossadeq into power and they elected hamas into power. both were legitimate elections. Legitimate according to who? Was the recent re-election of Ahmadinejad legitimate because the supreme leader said so? The "election" of Hamas in Gaza was not legitimate either; Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be under a single authority, Hamas had no legitimacy in forming a separate state in Gaza, with a separate government, and then violently suppressing its competitors (Fatah). Or is this yet another episode of Palestinian history that you choose to conveniently forget? no. it's your simplistic right vs left or you're either with us or against us bullshit that has created your circle jerk. Actually I have no such views. I disagree with both right wing and left wing parties on a variety of points. I find the religious-based policies of right wing parties almost as distasteful as the socialist dogma of left wing ones. Keep stereotyping everyone that happens to disagree with you though, I'm sure it makes you feel better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 wtf are you talking about? they obviously know what's best for them if they've elected them. what's wrong with you? That certainly explains the riots in the streets. the people elected mossadeq into power and they elected hamas into power. both were legitimate elections. Hamas shoots their opponents or throws them off buildings. no. it's your simplistic right vs left or you're either with us or against us bullshit that has created your circle jerk. Bonam, we may have to agree with dum as he's the expert re: jerking off males in a circle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Gotta be an expert at something I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Judiciary official Ebrahim Raisi said special tribunals will be set up to process hundreds of "rioters" and "thugs" caught in security sweeps during the unrest after preliminary investigation."The judiciary will set up special courts for those cases which are passed on to the judiciary," he said in comments broadcast on state television. "Hopefully, they will receive their legal punishments and our dear people will be informed of their punishments." The Tehran prosecutor's office said it had arrested at least 457 people in Saturday's unrest but a source inside Evin prison said nearly 1,000 had been brought in. It announced that it had launched a probe into a series of alleged killings of protesters, denying that police were behind the violence. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...0,4158764.story It's almost assured that all those arrested will be found guilty. Justice will be swift and certain. It's possible a new type of punishment will be devised specifically to make an example of those who would dare threaten the unity and peace of the Republic of Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 It amazing that the average Israeli youth...now looks at the rebels in Iran - and has figured out that the Persian people are not that bad and that the average Persian is not their enemy ---a little to late now....It's a very sad state of affairs ---For Persian youth to try to over throw the Maifa who are well armed and ready to kill all like bugs...it will be hell - all this time the west was not focusing on the head of the beast - but on the little digit that is the presidential henchmen for the god father..... How come no one in the west concentrated on the big cheese but instead all attention was paid to some half wit henchman with they eyes of a terrier....what's with us? No one blamed the top big dogs in Saudi Arabia for funding 911 - No one ever blames the top big dogs because - one mafia head does not rat the other out ---see I was right international orgainized crime has taken over the planet ---AND THERE IS NOT A DAMNED THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Legitimate according to who? there was never any discrepancy on whether or not mossadegh was fairly elected. no one disputed it. same goes with hamas. even steven cook acknowledges it: Steven A. Cook, a Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, started off the evening by acknowledging several facts, which he immediately said were entirely irrelevant. Yes, he said, Hamas was legitimately elected freely and fairly. Yes, Israel has illegally occupied the West Bank and, until recently, Gaza. Yes, Hamas has done much good with its social programs. But, he said, none of that matters. Hamas' central charter calls for the violent overthrow of Israel. Was the recent re-election of Ahmadinejad legitimate because the supreme leader said so? no. it wasn't. that's why you're seeing what is happening today. The "election" of Hamas in Gaza was not legitimate either; look above and learn. Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be under a single authority, Hamas had no legitimacy in forming a separate state in Gaza, with a separate government, and then violently suppressing its competitors (Fatah). Or is this yet another episode of Palestinian history that you choose to conveniently forget? they received majority of the votes and were elected by the palestinian people in both west bank and gaza. both parties clashed and people from both sides were killed. it wasn't a one way street. hamas threw fatah out of gaza and fatah threw hamas out of west bank. i hope we don't have to go through this again in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 It amazing that the average Israeli youth...now looks at the rebels in Iran - and has figured out that the Persian people are not that bad and that the average Persian is not their enemy ---a little to late now....It's a very sad state of affairs ---For Persian youth to try to over throw the Maifa who are well armed and ready to kill all like bugs...it will be hell - all this time the west was not focusing on the head of the beast - but on the little digit that is the presidential henchmen for the god father..... How come no one in the west concentrated on the big cheese but instead all attention was paid to some half wit henchman with they eyes of a terrier....what's with us? No one blamed the top big dogs in Saudi Arabia for funding 911 - No one ever blames the top big dogs because - one mafia head does not rat the other out ---see I was right international orgainized crime has taken over the planet ---AND THERE IS NOT A DAMNED THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. you need enemies to keep the system going. since 2000, it's been bin laden, saddam and now ahmadinejad. without an enemy (either real or manufactured), you can't have wars. without wars, you can't have the military industrial complex making money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 you need enemies to keep the system going. since 2000, it's been bin laden, saddam and now ahmadinejad. without an enemy (either real or manufactured), you can't have wars. without wars, you can't have the military industrial complex making money. Good ---- nice to see a realist so young - I trusted the sytem all my life - now in my mature years I have more respect for a beggar on the street than heads of state - and their handlers...look at the most respected banking and legal families ---if you take a close look - even in Canada at their fields of investment - you may stumble across this little phrase "war supplies". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Intereting article on collaboration of Nokia Siemens with the government of Iran last year: Any lawyers here? Nokia Siemens Networks, a joint venture between Germany’s Siemens and Finland’s Nokia, installed the monitoring equipment late last year in Iran’s government-controlled telecom network, Telecommunication Infrastructure Co., but authorities only recently engaged its full capabilities in response to recent protests that have broken out in the country over its presidential election. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/w...internet-users/ Edited June 23, 2009 by kactus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 IF the people of Iran are successful in over throwing their so called religious leaders ,they must insure that the new Iran separates Church from State. For there lies their biggest impediment to basic freedoms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 IF the people of Iran are successful in over throwing their so called religious leaders ,they must insure that the new Iran separates Church from State. For there lies their biggest impediment to basic freedoms. Church simply means the top big dog - the dictator..at least in Iran they identify the scoundrel. In the west that big top mad dog hides in the shadows - whether it be dictitorial rule by an individual or by quiet and secretive committee, it's the same thing. Gangsterism which is facism exists here also. You might ask why would I say such a wild and crazy thing..well there is a simple clue that explains this concept. Listening to CNN this morning - the voice of America...They refered to the Iranian "election". How could the west refere to this as an election when there is no election - never was and never will be an election...and election is to elect democratically...who ever gets the most votes wins. The head of Iran is the supreme leader - You could have a million so-called elections and he stays supreme - It's like trying to vote out god...Impossible! The FACT - that the west referes to the mess in Iran as the after effects of an election shows great and fantasitic dellusionism ----if they call the situtation in Iran the effects of and 'ELECTION' - Then that certainly means that elections in the west - America etc..are exactly the same - no matter who you vote for the same person or persons continue to be OUR supreme leader...Elections have become indulgent theatre to amuse and confuse the masses...Was Obama really elected? Was Bush - we will never know...are the powers that be still in place...I would say most certainly...nothing changes the status quo here and in Iran remains the same. There is no such thing as church - but there is such a thing as state of affairs. Not one church in America is godly - not one supreme leader in Iran is godly-- No point in going on about seperating God and state - there is no God for these people- just men playing God in Iran and here.....How dare they call anything an election when there is no real results? Wait for a year and you may as well paint Bushes face over top of Obamas..they are both church and state-- I just wonder how many and who our supreme leaders are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 ..and at least one Canadian doesn't have a clue about Canuck companies and their mining activity around the same Third World...amazing. Irrelevant! It doesn't matter what countries that multinational corporations are chartered in; they do not respect national boundaries, and do whatever is necessary to maximize profits. It's kind of ironic that so many conservatives rail on about One World Government and the United Nations, while at the same time supporting a system of corporate ownership that have no respect for national boundaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Irrelevant! It doesn't matter what countries that multinational corporations are chartered in; they do not respect national boundaries, and do whatever is necessary to maximize profits..... Then why did you single out Americans as bewildered at the impact of such "multinationals" ? Does this mean that the rest of the nationals understand the impact better but do it anyway? Investment capital and access to developed markets is not free. Loans are not free. Pump the oil out of the ground or mine bauxite by yourself if you can....good luck with that. Edited June 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjre Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 http://www.voltairenet.org/article160670.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moderateamericain Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 To all you liberal cowards who call me and mine war criminals: You were wrong about Iraq, its gotten 1000 times better then it ever was under Sadam Iranians now want freedom, I guess thats because of Obama right? Watch the Neda video, and look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself that invading these countries and freeing this peoples is nothing more then us waging war for oil profits. None of you have ever been on the ground and looked these people in the face. Or been thanked for all that you are trying to do. You all hid behind your keyboards and pass judgment on those of us who go to these countries and get to see the real horrors of war. So you sit back in comfort and mock us and make your swanky self serving sarcastic remarks about the intelligence of Bush but heres a little fact for you. IRAQ= Improved beyond anything they have had for 40 years Kuwait= Saved Iran= People wanting Democracy. dying for it Your moral Equivications dont mean dick when slapped in the face by reality. Long live Bush for making the unpopular decision and standing by it. Hopefully he will be remember in the same breathe as Truman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Lets ask the guy who threw his shoes at Bush what he thinks- he lives there. Oh wait he is in prison with broken ribs. Think they let him out the other day... he's considered a HERO by the people of Iraq. EVen his brand of shows were sold out. Theres your capitalism. Today- "Baghdad market blast kills scores" At least 61 dead, 116 wounded. On June 22 in Kirkuk: Truck bomb explodes, 73 killed, 200 injured. Yeah sounds grrreat Hooray for dixie... Hey, how many women do they "allow" now in the current Iraqi parliament? How many were elected under Saddam? Oh well, never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Lets ask the guy who threw his shoes at Bush what he thinks- he lives there.Oh wait he is in prison with broken ribs. Think they let him out the other day... he's considered a HERO by the people of Iraq. EVen his brand of shows were sold out. Theres your capitalism. Wonder what would have happened to a guy who threw a shoe at Saddam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Wonder what would have happened to a guy who threw a shoe at Saddam. Touche! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 I dont doubt that Saddam was brutal, but to think that things are all good there now seems a little naive. They paid a terrible price for the concept of democracy, which is not proven that it will hold for a length of time. Call me cynical but I do not believe that all situations are conducive to democracy- when there are great differences between tribal groups, when distrust has gone on for several generations, there will always be resentment and hate waiting just below the surface. Foreign occupiers may impose law and order but when they leave, the knives come back out. See Yugoslavia. For those types who will not live in civility the only way to maintain order, aside from breaking the country up is by dictatorship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.