Demonstrators must die, Iranian cleric demands

[jbg]

These death-obsessed "people" are at least honest about their intentions¹. I cannot see what use these "people" or ones like them havein the U.N. or any international body. They specialize in hatred death. They use their seat at the table to alternately shake a tin cup at us, extort us, and threaten us with death. Any "negotiations" are fatuous. (link to article, excerpts below):

Demonstrators must die, Iranian cleric demands

June 27, 2009

Thomas Erdbrink

WASHINGTON POST

TEHRAN – An influential Iranian cleric told worshippers yesterday those stirring unrest in connection with the recent election should be punished "ruthlessly and savagely" and convicted for waging war against God, a crime punishable by death under Shiite Islamic law.

In a sermon at Tehran University that was broadcast live to the nation, Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami amplified the ominous tone that the state has adopted this week toward the tens of thousands of demonstrators who have massed in the streets to question the results of the June 12 presidential balloting.

**********

"I want the judiciary to ... punish leading rioters firmly and without showing any mercy to teach everyone a lesson," said Khatami, an influential cleric close to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. "Based on Islamic law, whoever confronts the Islamic state ... should be convicted as mohareb (those who wage war on God) ... They should be punished ruthlessly and savagely.

"Anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people, they are worthy of execution," Khatami said.

***snip***

¹This thread was inspired in part by this post (link) by the esteemed August 1991.

Edited June 28, 2009 by jbg

[Sir Bandelot]

What I read is, not the demonstrators, but the riot leaders. They are going after the ones who instigated violence using weapons.

As part of your quote shows-

"I want the judiciary to ... punish leading rioters firmly ... anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people"

Not saying I condone it, as I generally oppose capital punishment. But that is the distinction, one must avoid the reactive headlines that tend to omit certain facts.

Also as I mentioned elsewhere, any state would prosecute those who incite riots, especially when there is violence and burning of buildings. Again I don't know if that happened, but the reports of it are out there. Although, suppressed. What exactly happened, we'll never know. But in the first several days of protests there was no violent retaliation by the state, so to this extent it was tolerated.

Even Obama was reserved in his criticism, until the republican dogs cornered him on it. Those clues show its not as one-sided as the media and certain politicians would have us believe. All else is mere political manipulations.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[Bonam]

What I read is, not the demonstrators, but the riot leaders. They are going after the ones who instigated violence using weapons.

As part of your quote shows-

"I want the judiciary to ... punish leading rioters firmly ... anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people"

Not saying I condone it, as I generally oppose capital punishment. But that is the distinction, one must avoid the reactive headlines that tend to omit certain facts.

Also as I mentioned elsewhere, any state would prosecute those who incite riots, especially when there is violence and burning of buildings. Again I don't know if that happened, but the reports of it are out there. Although, suppressed. What exactly happened, we'll never know. But in the first several days of protests there was no violent retaliation by the state, so to this extent it was tolerated.

Even Obama was reserved in his criticism, until the republican dogs cornered him on it. Those clues show its not as one-sided as the media and certain politicians would have us believe. All else is mere political manipulations.

Read the quote:

"Anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people, they are worthy of execution," Khatami said.

Anyone who takes up arms. Of course, one cleric suggesting it doesn't mean that that will be Iranian policy, but it does show how crazy and blood-thirsty some of the theocratic establishment there is.

As for any state prosecuting rioters, I don't think so, just check out how Canada deals with the natives ;p

[Sir Bandelot]

As for any state prosecuting rioters, I don't think so, just check out how Canada deals with the natives ;p

You mean, like Dudley George?

[jbg]

You mean, like Dudley George?

Was he some FN rioter who was killed?

[KrustyKidd]

Even Obama was reserved in his criticism, until the republican dogs cornered him on it

All four arms of Iran's security services called up along with people getting their heads shot off in the streets for wishing a recount of forty million ballots that were supposedly counted within two hours of the closing of polls and the leader of the free world is 'reserved?'

We all were pretty sure this was a rigged election from the start. If you have evidenced that this should be considered anything but then bring it forth but for sure, asking for a recount is not a capital offense and, if it is, Obama agrees with you. At least for the first few days. Now for some reason, he feels that dissent is not a capital offense go figure.

[kactus]

The current mullahcracy in Iran is the worst tragedy of repression in the 21st century. Frankly, where there's strict media censorship, the videos uploaded by these brave demonstrators illustrate only a fraction of the crimes committed by this regime. The only visibility that they have is to have mullahs piecemouth on the state television herding their bunch of supproters. Their grip to power is seriously under question. The regime is terrified by the magnitude of the demonstrations and losing power.

[wulf42]

The sad thing is i was really hoping the Iranian people would have succeeded over throwing these idiotic religious

fanatics out...there is no place in this world for religion mixed with politics (Personally i think all religion is a farce)

Unfortunately for Iran Israel will be forced to act in the near future!

http://www.poligazette.com/2009/04/18/isra...-nuclear-sites/

[Oleg Bach]

How does this take place?--- a group of men who show no signs of Godliness or goodness what so ever - place themselves on top of the human herd and delare they are representatives of God? In ancient scripture there is "Belsebub" - meaning "your god is of the manure pile" - or Lord of the Flys - what these clerics are creating in Iranian society is a potential shit pile - and they want to rule as satans..and they refere to their challengers as satans....the youth of Iran do not want to be treated as human waste...and they refuse to be ruled by the king of maggots - some creep that bashes their brains in and says - God told me to hurt you - this is much like killing in the name of the Almighty - and by doing so the Mulahs are stating that God is weak and not almighty and needs their help to murder -------------THIS FACT MAKES IRANIAN CLERICS INFIDELS.....liars!

[Sir Bandelot]

Was he some FN rioter who was killed?

Yes.

On September 6 1995, police riot squads stormed the Ipperwash Provincial park to apprehend the protestors. Various police officers fired on vehicles and buildings. Acting Sergeant Ken "Tex" Deane, fired three shots at Dudley George, who was carrying an elongated dark-coloured branch. After repeated unanswered appeals from the protestors for the police to call an ambulance, George was finally loaded into his sister's car and driven to hospital. They were arrested and delayed for over an hour en route to the hospital.

George was declared dead at 12:20 a.m. on September 7, 1995 at Strathroy-Middlesex General Hospital.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudley_George

The Premier of Ontari, Mike Harris, was implicated in his death, having ordered the police to attack the protestors

Former attorney general Charles Harnick in November 2005. Harnick testified that former premier Mike Harris said "I want the f****** Indians out of the park," during a high level meeting about the Ipperwash occupation just hours before the fatal shooting of Dudley George."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ipperwash/

[jbg]

The Premier of Ontari, Mike Harris, was implicated in his death, having ordered the police to attack the protestors

Former attorney general Charles Harnick in November 2005. Harnick testified that former premier Mike Harris said "I want the f****** Indians out of the park," during a high level meeting about the Ipperwash occupation just hours before the fatal shooting of Dudley George."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ipperwash/

One death hardly equals the senseless nature of the typical Islamic massacres.

[Sir Bandelot]

We all were pretty sure this was a rigged election from the start. If you have evidenced that this should be considered anything but then bring it forth but for sure, asking for a recount is not a capital offense and, if it is, Obama agrees with you. At least for the first few days. Now for some reason, he feels that dissent is not a capital offense go figure.

I have done that already here in these forums, a few times lately.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=435385

Post number 37.

"asking for a recount is not a capital offense "

And yet, the authorities have offered a recount as a means of settling the dispute, but Moussavi refused, saying he will accept nothing short of a new election.

This article was pulled from CNN. The link now shows a different article. But using the same wording in Google I found it elsewhere.

The supreme leader called on those who don't believe the election results to use legal avenues, such as requesting a recounting of ballots in their presence.

Meanwhile, the Iranian government said Saturday it was ready to randomly recount up to 10 percent of "ballot boxes."

The Guardian Council, which supervises the country's elections, invited three candidates -- Moussavi, Karrubi and Mohsen Rezaie -- to its meeting Saturday, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency.

Two of them, Moussavi and Karrubi, failed to show up.

http://news.findtarget.com/world/the_big_q..._rallies_today/

Edited June 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[Oleg Bach]

A party contends with B party - they have an election - party C wins( who is not even named on the ballot)..that does not consitute an "election" by any stretch - that's called theatre.

[sharkman]

I have done that already here in these forums, a few times lately.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=435385

Post number 37.

"asking for a recount is not a capital offense "

And yet, the authorities have offered a recount as a means of settling the dispute, but Moussavi refused, saying he will accept nothing short of a new election.

This article was pulled from CNN. The link now shows a different article. But using the same wording in Google I found it elsewhere.

The supreme leader called on those who don't believe the election results to use legal avenues, such as requesting a recounting of ballots in their presence.

Meanwhile, the Iranian government said Saturday it was ready to randomly recount up to 10 percent of "ballot boxes."

The Guardian Council, which supervises the country's elections, invited three candidates -- Moussavi, Karrubi and Mohsen Rezaie -- to its meeting Saturday, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency.

Two of them, Moussavi and Karrubi, failed to show up.

http://news.findtarget.com/world/the_big_q..._rallies_today/

I think you, CNN and anyone who thinks they can conduct a poll in a theocracy dictatorship is sadly unaware of the fear Iranians live in. If a typical Iranian gets a phone call from someone claiming to be taking a 'survey' and wanting to know who they will vote for, do you really think they would just believe it? And truthfully say they don't support the existing leader in a country that arrests people for just about anything? Some would definitely lie, thinking its the government on the other end of the line, no matter what the call display says(if they even have that over there).

So whatever results these surveys say is not worth the paper it's printed on. Ditto a recount, the leaders will engineer the result just as they did the election, without bothering to actually count it.

Edit: In reading the responses to your post 37 in the other thread, you never answered some responses to your post. One such from kactus brought up some good points, here is the main part for your consideration:

The results of the election were known 2 hours after the polling stations are closed. I mean how on earth is that possible through counting the ballot boxes?

Yet, the representative from the guardian council confirmed recently that on 50 provinces there were more than 100% votes. How rediculous is that? The results of this election was already known. It favoured Moussavi but the generals and commanders saw that his victory would result in a green revolution, which is why it was annuled!

Edited June 28, 2009 by sharkman

[KrustyKidd]

Meanwhile, the Iranian government said Saturday it was ready to randomly recount up to 10 percent of "ballot boxes."

Ten percent and finding irregularities in fifty polling stations is not a recount, rather confirmation it is out to lunch and a total rrecount should be done if it is to be called an election.

[Oleg Bach]

Ten percent and finding irregularities in fifty polling stations is not a recount, rather confirmation it is out to lunch and a total rrecount should be done if it is to be called an election.

I thought that the supreme leader did not involve himself in random acts or random re-counts-- but I guess 10% sound like a nice cryptic cosmic number - Jeeez I wonder what Jesus would do if he was in Iran? He would probably make a whip and beat the crap out of the supreme leader - for being so random and using random violence to frighte the sheep.

[Sir Bandelot]

I think you, CNN and anyone who thinks they can conduct a poll in a theocracy dictatorship is sadly unaware of the fear Iranians live in. If a typical Iranian gets a phone call from someone claiming to be taking a 'survey' and wanting to know who they will vote for, do you really think they would just believe it? And truthfully say they don't support the existing leader in a country that arrests people for just about anything?

Edit: In reading the responses to your post 37 in the other thread, you never answered some responses to your post. One such from kactus brought up some good points, here is the main part for your consideration:

I don't respond if I have no verifiable facts. That only leads to pointless arguing. "I think this, I think that..." Everything else is pure conjecture. Prove your initial statement, that I and CNN "are sadly unaware". Whats your source? How is it that you more aware?

Its not easy to prove much about whats going on thousands of miles away.

Also, just because I give the counterpoint to whats being fed us by the mainstream media, does not mean that I support the islamic regime. So I will not defend them on every point, since I don't agree with the way their country is run. ie. by Theocracy.

BUT, if a vote is fair and its what those people truly want, I say they should have it. Let them lead themselves, by self determination. Let no foreign governments impose their ideology on a people who actually want islamic laws.

Its s tough situation for those who vote against the regime. Remember Bush won in 2004, despite the fact that many didn't want him in again. Of course, they didn't have riots over it. I would have been more impressed with the protesters and Moussavi if they did keep it a civil peaceful protest. But stories showed it was violent almost from day one. That means, irresponsible troublemakers. They undermined the protest and call for democracy by burning buildings and smashing cars. Moussavi should have taken more care to control the protestors, it would have had miuch more impact that way. But now some will say, they had it comin.

[sharkman]

I don't respond if I have no verifiable facts. That only leads to pointless arguing. "I think this, I think that..." Everything else is pure conjecture. Prove your initial statement, that I and CNN "are sadly unaware". Whats your source? How is it that you more aware?

Its not easy to prove much about whats going on thousands of miles away.

Also, just because I give the counterpoint to whats being fed us by the mainstream media, does not mean that I support the islamic regime. So I will not defend them on every point, since I don't agree with the way their country is run. ie. by Theocracy.

BUT, if a vote is fair and its what those people truly want, I say they should have it. Let them lead themselves, by self determination. Let no foreign governments impose their ideology on a people who actually want islamic laws.

Its s tough situation for those who vote against the regime. Remember Bush won in 2004, despite the fact that many didn't want him in again. Of course, they didn't have riots over it. I would have been more impressed with the protesters and Moussavi if they did keep it a civil peaceful protest. But stories showed it was violent almost from day one. That means, irresponsible troublemakers. They undermined the protest and call for democracy by burning buildings and smashing cars. Moussavi should have taken more care to control the protestors, it would have had miuch more impact that way. But now some will say, they had it comin.

There are very few in the way of verifiable facts. You are making a number of assumptions. Prove your statements that it was a fair election. Prove that the result is what the majority voted for. Prove that the violence stemmed from irresponsible troublemakers. You can't prove any of it, and neither can CNN. But my statement that the people live in fear is borne out by the brutal actions of the government killing its own citizens.

You are assuming that an accurate poll can be taken of people in a dictatorship. But a poll is a function of a free people in a democracy only, where people are actually free to speak their minds without being arrested. You have nicely sidestepped the points put to you by me and others. If you can't address simple counterpoints based on opinion and speculation which is also what your opinions are based on, then your opinions become suspect.

Which foreign governments are imposing their ideology on Iran? Comparing the American election process to Iran's is an insult. Do you know what you are saying?

[Sir Bandelot]

Prove your statements that it was a fair election. Prove that the result is what the majority voted for. Prove that the violence stemmed from irresponsible troublemakers. You can't prove any of it, and neither can CNN. But my statement that the people live in fear is borne out by the brutal actions of the government killing its own citizens.

I did prove, to the best of my ability, that there were indications of a majority by Ahmedinejad. That does not mean I believe anything, but there is some evidence. For your assertions that the people live in fear, and the polls are invalid, you've provided no evidence whatsoever.

You have nicely sidestepped the points put to you by me and others. If you can't address simple counterpoints based on opinion and speculation which is also what your opinions are based on, then your opinions become suspect.

I have not sidestepped it, I (try) not to make claims without substantiation nor do I have an urgent need to defend Iran. There are many easy ways to condemn Iran for what they do. But when I hear Tony Blair and others condemning Iran as causing problems in the region, by meddling it makes me laugh. Let the pot call the kettle black!

Which foreign governments are imposing their ideology on Iran? Comparing the American election process to Iran's is an insult. Do you know what you are saying?

I never said that is happening in Iran, as far as I can prove. But it has happened elsewhere that people voted for the leader that was not the preferred choice of the US, and there are many ways to interfere, like by funding insurrection. Barack Obama has approved millions of dollars to fund protesters in Iran:

U.S. grants support to Iranian dissidents

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...an-legislation/

etc

Edited June 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[sharkman]

You have not proven anything and you are doing no more than mimicking opinions. But please continue.

[Sir Bandelot]

Links to real news, is not opinions. Give me something to work with, in other words, debate, and I will continue. Otherwise, zzzz

[Sir Bandelot]

This is so good, I have to quote it from the USA Today article:

President Obama said this week the United States "is not at all interfering in Iran's affairs," rejecting charges of meddling that were renewed Thursday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Asked how the democracy promotion initiatives square with the president's statement, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said, "Let's be clear: The United States does not fund any movement, faction or political party in Iran. We support … universal principles of human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law."

Obama is like a smiling, friendly liar.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[kactus]

By far this is the best and most accurate statistical analysis that supports the claims of opposition in Iran that the polling was indeed rigged.

In 2005, in a run-off ballot, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president with 62% of the vote compared with 36% for his opponent, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

In 2009, in the first round, President Ahmadinejad was re-elected with 63% of the vote compared with 34% for Mir Hossein Mousavi.

So what is the problem?

According to a study edited by Professor Ali Ansari, of the Institute of Iranian Studies at the University of St Andrews and of the London think tank Chatham House, the problem lies in the increased turnout.

In 2005, Mr Ahmadinejad got 17 million votes and in 2009 he got 24 million.

The question is, where did all those extra votes come from?

The answer, according to this study, is not at all clear.

...

Professor Mansoor Moaddel of the University of Michigan pointed out that "key political events occurred between the data gathering and the election" and that "of 1,731 people contacted, well over half either refused to participate (42.2%) or did not indicate a preferred candidate (15.6%)."

Due to the nature of this brutal regime harrassing their own citizens I am not at all surprised that respondents are reluctant to take part in surveys as confirmed by this report. The entire election process was a farce and prediction of Ahmadinejad winning the election was already known before the election results were announced.

Full article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8119658.stm

[Oleg Bach]

IF - I was Obama - I would go for the gustos and send a nice message to all the supreme leaders --- the message would consist of this "You guys are a bunch of assholes" quote unquote..it would fly in the translation no problem...what other way would be more effective than telling it like it is? BUT instead they will stroke them with half threats and silly weak willed rhetoricals.

[Sir Bandelot]

IF - I was Obama - I would go for the gustos and send a nice message to all the supreme leaders --- the message would consist of this "You guys are a bunch of assholes"

Of course he would never say that, since they are the source of his power and he is like their whipping boy. Nobody gets power, unless they kiss the hand of the Theocrats.

Ironically, neither would Moussavi say anything like that. All our debating, and the protests of the Iranians are moot since both are loyal to the Ayatollahs. Obama and the US political media also recognize this- there is hardly any difference in the choice of these two, as far as the west is concerned.

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday there appeared to be few policy differences between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and rival Mirhossein Mousavi.

"The difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised," he told CNBC.

Several U.S. analysts have been cautioning for weeks against any giddy optimism over a Mousavi win and said he should not be seen as an easy sell in any negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, which the West suspects is aimed at building a bomb and Tehran says is peaceful.

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews...6?symbol=9432.T