Rue Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 This site discusses the persecution of minorities in Iran and no its not from Mossad or the CIA: http://alekhbariya.net/en/node/4751 https://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/iran/Iran-05.htm http://www.christiansinparliament.org.uk/uploads/APPGs-report-on-Persecution-of-Christians-in-Iran.pdf http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/17/iran-persecution-gay-community-revealed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Right, so on a thread commenced to spout the virtues of the state of Iran, no one can point out its dismissal human rights failures and the fact it is the leading financier of world terrorism....r because you now know I and others only care about gays if its to slag Iran. Got it. Thanks. You want to extol those virtues? Tell me this. How many countries has Iran attacked invaded in the last 100 years? You just like Israel's government make Iran/ Israel's war of words the worlds problem. It isn't. Geographically Israel is not the West as we know it. Sanctions are lifted and there is no incentive for further hostility between Iran and the West. But all the reason for Israel to be concerned because of the balance of power in the Middle East and they know it.... Edited April 18, 2016 by kactus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) That is because the agenda for certain members here is to piss on Iran and Iranians.... But hey you don't have a problem with that. Using human rights in Iran is just an excuse the demonise them all... Now why would that be wrong if someone did the same thing to Israel and criticise their governments brutal policies? Hmmm... How is bring to light the Iranian governments persecution of its people pissing and demonizing those victims? In your zeal to defend the regime you fail to be coherent in response. Show me one word where I have demonized an Iranian. See the difference between us is you do not differentiate between Israelis, Israeli Jews, Israel, Iran and Iranians. I do differentiate with them and its precisely because my comments are directed at misjustice to Iranian people. You just can't handle the criticism of anything but Israel. If you are that emotionally connected to the Iranian government you can't handle the truth about what its doing, it speaks for itself. You want to go on the piss on Israel thread and actually piss on its government's policy and not its people for choosing to be Jews, good for you. Edited April 18, 2016 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Que? You are the one contradicting yourself. I have criticised the actions of the Israeli government their treatment of Palestinians and their illegal settlement. There is no denying and I will continue to do so. There is a clear distinction. But you cannot handle this because you do the same and if someone criticises your country you take it as anti semite. I have not seen you once talking good of Iran or Iranians. Infant like the silent majority here you wouldn't care about Iranians unless it is for political motivations....Why should I give you the benefit of the doubt that you make that distinction clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 This site discusses the persecution of minorities in Iran and no its not from Mossad or the CIA: http://alekhbariya.net/en/node/4751 https://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/iran/Iran-05.htm http://www.christiansinparliament.org.uk/uploads/APPGs-report-on-Persecution-of-Christians-in-Iran.pdf http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/17/iran-persecution-gay-community-revealed It would be foolish to deny the involvement of CIA in the Iranian affairs since 1953 coup... As for Mossad..... http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/just-who-has-been-killing-irans-nuclear-scientists-8861232.html https://www.rt.com/news/iran-obama-assassination-scientists-443/ http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2014/0717/Covert-war-against-Iran-s-nuclear-scientists-a-widow-remembers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CITIZEN_2015 Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Your comments and national geographic special on Iran can be summarized as follows. 1. Iran is not and has never been in the Middle East no more than Turkey is-geography is not your strong suit; 2. this shtick you engage of in taking all the horrors Iran has engaged in and in one quick poof, deny them and claim its made up by Mossad and the CIA is lame; 3. Iran is standing up for its rights? Go tell that to the citizens of Iran whose rights it crushes each and every day. What on earth is this. 1 - When did I say that Iran is not in middle east!!! You make up things to cover your weakness and discredit me for things I have never said. 2 - Iran has not engaged in horrors more than Israel has. Edited May 4, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Without the the Iranian Army...which had zero interest in being best buds with the Soviet Union...there would have been no coup. The Army actually did the coup...not the CIA. The CIA provided bribe money and a large cargo aircraft for the Shah to get in, out and around Iran as needed. The Shah is made out as a CIA stooge by numerous folks who conveniently forget that the Shah was put on the Peacock Throne by Stalin in 1941...not the CIA in 1953. Edited April 18, 2016 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CITIZEN_2015 Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Without the the Iranian Army...which had zero interest in being best buds with the Soviet Union...there would have been no coup. The Army actually did the coup...not the CIA. The CIA provided bribe money and a large cargo aircraft for the Shah to get in, out and around Iran as needed. The Shah is made out as a CIA stooge by numerous folks who conveniently forget that the Shah was put on the Peacock Throne by Stalin in 1941...not the CIA in 1953. Rewriting the history!!!! As Reagan said a good Russian historian is the one who can predict the past accurately. On 19 August, a pro-Shah mob paid by the CIA marched on Mosaddegh's residence. According to the CIA's declassified documents and records, some of the most feared mobsters inTehran were hired by the CIA to stage pro-Shah riots on 19 August. Other CIA-paid men were brought into Tehran in buses and trucks, and took over the streets of the city. Between 300 and 800 people were killed because of the conflict. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat Edited April 18, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 You want to extol those virtues? Tell me this. How many countries has Iran attacked invaded in the last 100 years? You just like Israel's government make Iran/ Israel's war of words the worlds problem. It isn't. Geographically Israel is not the West as we know it. Sanctions are lifted and there is no incentive for further hostility between Iran and the West. But all the reason for Israel to be concerned because of the balance of power in the Middle East and they know it.... Outright invasions don't happen unless you are bigger players like the US or Russia. Iran, like Saudi Arabia sponsors a good deal of terrorism in the Middle East. Now whether that is a response from western aggression, or something Iran does for kicks.. who knows. But we could stay on topic regarding Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Rewriting the history!!!! As Reagan said a good Russian historian is the one who can predict the past accurately. On 19 August, a pro-Shah mob paid by the CIA marched on Mosaddegh's residence. According to the CIA's declassified documents and records, some of the most feared mobsters inTehran were hired by the CIA to stage pro-Shah riots on 19 August. Other CIA-paid men were brought into Tehran in buses and trucks, and took over the streets of the city. Between 300 and 800 people were killed because of the conflict. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat You're free to point out all the CIA men in the pictures of the Iranian Army conducting the coup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Outright invasions don't happen unless you are bigger players like the US or Russia. Iran, like Saudi Arabia sponsors a good deal of terrorism in the Middle East. Now whether that is a response from western aggression, or something Iran does for kicks.. who knows. But we could stay on topic regarding Iran. Russia invaded Iran in 1941 and installed the Shah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Russia invaded Iran in 1941 and installed the Shah. Sure, but what is the point you are making here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Sure, but what is the point you are making here? The Shah wasn't installed by the CIA...duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 The Shah wasn't installed by the CIA...duh. I don't believe I made that statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Russia invaded Iran in 1941 and installed the Shah. Russia and the British invaded Iran and replaced the father with the son, in order to secure Iranian oil fields and ensure Allied supply lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 Russia and the British invaded Iran and replaced the father with the son, in order to secure Iranian oil fields and ensure Allied supply lines. The British got involved as not to lose the oil fields to Stalin. The 1946 UN Crisis relived this event. Want to discuss? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 The British got involved as not to lose the oil fields to Stalin. The 1946 UN Crisis relived this event. Want to discuss? Not really, as the topic is Iran being a key to the peace process in the M.E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 I don't believe I made that statement. The Shah came to the throne in 1941. Want to bet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted April 18, 2016 Report Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) The Shah wasn't installed by the CIA...duh. The Shah was re-installed by the CIA/British after the democratically elected prime minister was pushed out through a U.S./British backed coup d'état. Edited April 19, 2016 by marcus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 Not really, as the topic is Iran being a key to the peace process in the M.E. By supporting international terrorism? Please...do tell how this goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 The British got involved as not to lose the oil fields to Stalin. The 1946 UN Crisis relived this event. Want to discuss? Discussion begins with being accurate about what happened. So far, you have failed in delivering the information correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 The Shah was installed by the CIA/British after the democratically elected prime minister was pushed out through a U.S./British backed coup d'état. No...Stalin 1941. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 Discussion begins with being accurate about what happened. So far, you have failed in delivering the information correctly. Describe the 1946 UN Crisis in Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 No...Stalin 1941. There was already a Shah in power. The father. But you need to stay focused: It was the Russians AND the British who invaded Iran and pushed in The Shah's son who was more willing to give the Allies what they wanted: Oil and the supply route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 19, 2016 Report Share Posted April 19, 2016 There was already a Shah in power. The father. But you need to stay focused: It was the Russians AND the British who invaded Iran and pushed in The Shah's son who was more willing to give the Allies what they wanted: Oil and the supply route. The Father was pro-Nazi....Stalin removed him during Operation Barbarossa. 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.