PDA

View Full Version : Iranians fired up over election



Pages : [1] 2

Güven
06-12-2009, 03:35 PM

Iranians fired up over election

By Jon Leyne
BBC News, Tehran


It has become an extraordinary day, at the end of what has been an extraordinary election campaign.

As soon as polls opened in Iran, it became clear that the enthusiasm of the last few days has been translated into what is likely to be a huge turnout.

There were queues snaking round the block from many polling stations.

The crowds gathered outside, in segregated lines of men and women. Even as they waited to vote, they continued the spontaneous debate that has been sweeping Iran in the last week.

At one polling station I visited, some voters came up to me, nervous that the government might be trying to rig the election.

They were worried that a bus being used as a mobile polling station was not as well monitored as the main polling centre.

Other voters say the system under which a reference number has to be written by the candidates' name on the ballot paper is confusing.

Good humour

Much of the mobile phone text message system seems not to be working, a system the opposition had been hoping to use to send back reports from their monitors at polling stations and election counts.

The opposition has complained to the government.

Rumours are sweeping Tehran that some satellite TV stations may have been blocked.

But for the most part election day has continued the good humour of recent days.

One supporter of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a woman in the long black religious chador, made a point of shaking hands with another woman wearing the green colours of the opposition contender, Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

Many of the polling stations are in mosques or other religious buildings.

At the Hosseiniyat Ershad in north Tehran, the number of women, particularly young women, queuing to vote is most striking.

The young voters who have been turning out in force for Mr Mousavi say they want more personal freedom, more opportunities and better relations with the West.

Extended voting

Supporters of Mr Ahmadinejad have praised him for pushing forward the nuclear programme, and say he has earned more respect for Iran internationally.

By mid-morning, the interior ministry announced that already five million people had voted. Voting was extended by two hours, and may be extended longer.

Such a high turnout will make Iranians more confident of the outcome.

They will remember the election in 1997, in which President Khatami defeated a candidate heavily favoured by the establishment.

His victory was so overwhelming it soon became clear that it could not be overturned, even if there had been those trying to do so.

Results are expected to begin coming in during the night. Almost every Iranian you meet is eager for any idea about what is going to happen.

Source
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
czgibson
06-12-2009, 07:35 PM
Greetings,

I'm intrigued to find out how this election turns out. If it's generally judged to have been free and fair I'll be immensely surprised.

Supporters of Mr Ahmadinejad have praised him for pushing forward the nuclear programme, and say he has earned more respect for Iran internationally.
These guys have an amazing sense of humour! :D

Peace
Reply

GuestFellow
06-12-2009, 08:03 PM
Iran rivals both declare victory


Page last updated at 19:50 GMT, Friday, 12 June 2009 20:50 UK

The two main candidates in Iran's presidential election have claimed victory, after huge numbers of people turned out to vote.

Reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi told a news conference that he had won by a substantial margin.

Shortly afterwards, the state news agency Irna said incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won.

Polling was extended because of the turnout, but Mr Mousavi has complained of voting irregularitie
Source

I did not expect this to happen. :skeleton:
Reply

Güven
06-13-2009, 11:53 AM
Ahmadinejad 'set for Iran victory'


Ahmadinejad had a seemingly unassailable lead with 80 per cent of the votes counted [AFP]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, has taken a seemingly unassailable lead in his bid for re-election, Iran's interior ministry has said.

With 80 per cent of the ballots counted on Saturday, the election commission put Ahmadinejad ahead with 63.8 per cent of the vote against 32.7 per cent for Mir Hossein Mousavi, his main rival.

"Doctor Ahmadinejad, by getting a majority of the votes, has become the definite winner of the 10th presidential election," the official IRNA news agency reported.

But Mousavi, who had himself declared victory just moments after the polls closed on Friday, described the decision to declare Ahmadinejad as the winner as "treason to the votes of the people".

"I personally strongly protest the many obvious violations and I'm warning I will not surrender to this dangerous charade," he said in a statement.

"The result of such performance by some officials will jeopardise the pillars of the Islamic Republic and will establish tyranny."

Mousavi complained that many people had been prevented from voting, in part due to a shortage of ballot papers, and said that the authorities had blocked text messaging, which his campaign has used to reach young voters.

'Question marks'


Trita Parsi, the president of National American Iranian Council, told Al Jazeera that the emphatic nature of the victory raised "a lot of question marks".


"There are so many inconsistencies, they are even reporting that Ahmadinejad won the city of Tabriz, which is Mousavi's home town, with 57 per cent. That seems extremely unlikely.

"How come the votes were counted so quickly, even though the polls were open six hours extra?" he asked.

Scuffles broke out between police and chanting Mousavi supporters in a Tehran square early on Saturday, witnesses said. Anti-riot police were deployed outside government offices.

Al Jazeera's Teymoor Nabili, reporting from Tehran, said that the results declared by the interior ministry would still need to be signed off by the state audit body and the audit commission of the supreme leader.

"These two bodies are headed by men who might not be so close to the present administration," he said.

"Mousavi has the option of going to these two bodies and saying 'look I want definitive proof from you that these are clean numbers' ... but Mousavi is going to have to make some very tough choices about how much trouble he wants to make over these results."

Ahmadinejad's supporters took to the street in the early hours of Saturday, waving Iranian flags and honking car horns, after IRNA had declared the election for the incumbent president.

"Where are the greens? In a mousehole," some of them said, referring to the campaign colours of Mousavi, whose supporters held mass rallies in recent weeks.

The two other candidates up for election - Mohsen Rezai, a former commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, and Mehdi Karroubi, an ex-parliament speaker - were set to finish a distant third and fourth.

Source
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
shock_proof
06-13-2009, 12:19 PM
I definitely don't think these elections were free and fair, the whole election seems quite fishy. But as a general point how many elections are free and fair nowadays.
Reply

Trumble
06-13-2009, 03:03 PM
Originally Posted by shock_proof
I definitely don't think these elections were free and fair, the whole election seems quite fishy. But as a general point how many elections are free and fair nowadays.
Many rather more so than this one, I suspect, but the numbers certainly seem to suggest Ahmadinejad would have won anyway... indeed I rather suspect he will be regretting any manipulation that may have gone on; 51% would probably have turned out rather better for him in the long run. I understand he is particularly popular among rural voters, though, and with some reason, and he may have just been particularly effective in mobilizing their vote.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-13-2009, 03:16 PM
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.
Reply

Thinker
06-13-2009, 03:38 PM
What were the sunni community hoping for, a victory for Ahmadinejad or Mousavi?
Is there anything in the Qu’ran explaining about the sunni shia split?
I know the questions are slightly off topic but I don’t think its worth staring a new thread for what I presume is a simple answer.
Reply

جوري
06-13-2009, 04:26 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
What were the sunni community hoping for, a victory for Ahmadinejad or Mousavi?
Is there anything in the Qu’ran explaining about the sunni shia split?
I know the questions are slightly off topic but I don’t think its worth staring a new thread for what I presume is a simple answer.

The Quran tells you not to innovate in religion or create factions.

if you want to learn more you may easily visit:

http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-divisions/

which covers the topic extensively, or type in the search feature and yield results like so:

http://www.islamicboard.com/advice-s...ah-friend.html

all the best
Reply

ardianto
06-13-2009, 04:33 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.
Don't be scared. This man is ready to fight but he will never starts a war.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-13-2009, 04:36 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.
I'm curious, on what asumptions do you believe Iran will start ''World War 3.''
Just sounds like U.S proganda. They never do give the full picture.

Personally, I am glad that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won. He is a strong political figure.
Reply

جوري
06-13-2009, 04:43 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.

I have to disagree, when the west is so instigating all the time..
yesterday I was watching one of my favorite travel shows 'Rick Steve' whose shows I enjoy immensely, he makes an effort with diplomacy and generally informative, well recently he took on Iran..

http://www.ricksteves.com/iran/

and I disliked all his sneaky comments here and there.. subtle, yet annoying nonetheless.. I dislike many things about Iran, but believing that only route worth taking is a western one, isn't only insulting.. It is wrong and unfounded.. given the mess the west finds itself in on social issues alone...

people should live and let live.. you can't think it is ok for you to have weapons and to instigate wars because 'you are good' others are evil.. says who? if the U.S drags itself into war with Iran, it will be its own doing.. already it has whittled itself away on useless wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, made an enemy with just about every country in the region, and drove its economy to the dumps..

I see nothing good with a continued war for the benefit of the little colonial cockroach of Israel... no it won't hasten the descent of a republican Jesus on a silver cloud, nor will the promised Moschiach come to aid those who have gone astray simply because they have made all necessary preparations including illegal excavation beneath al Aqsa for their imaginary third temple....

God bequeathed this earth to the righteous not the tyrants it says so in your Psalms but certainly not reflected in the actions of this fundi-Zionist govt.!

all the best
Reply

Pygoscelis
06-13-2009, 04:51 PM
This man will not start a war. He may be involved though. The USA is who will start world war 3. They have been starting wars constantly since their inception. Iran hasn't started a war in recent memory.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-13-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
I'm curious, on what asumptions do you believe Iran will start ''World War 3.''
Just sounds like U.S proganda. They never do give the full picture.

Personally, I am glad that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won. He is a strong political figure.
I think it will be either Iran under Ahmadinejad or it will be North Korea. Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and denies the Holocaust. Clearly to me this is a man who I would not consider to be mentally stable. I say the same about Kim Jong Il. I am not a Zionist by any means, I openly and publically condemn what Israel did in Gaza. Just because they are Jews does not give them liscence to do what they do. But Israel will not stand by and do nothing if he keeps calling for their destruction. If Israel does attack, than the US of course will be obligated to come to Israels aid. Hence we will be dragged into WW3. For this man to deny the Holocaust is extremly disturing and personally offensive to me. My maternal grandfather served in WW2, he helped liberate some of those camps. He saw the carnage that the Nazis inflicted and he being a product of his time was no friend of Jewish people. It was not just Jews who parished, but many Christians and other politcal prisoners as well. To deny history is to deny what happened to all who perished regardless of their religion. I do not want to see us go to war with either Iran or North Korea. We have done enough killing in the past decade in Iraq. Iran may not fire the first shot, but the tongue sometimes is more dangeruous than any weapon.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-13-2009, 08:20 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
I


people should live and let live.. you can't think it is ok for you to have weapons and to instigate wars because 'you are good' others are evil.. says who? if the U.S drags itself into war with Iran, it will be its own doing.. already it has whittled itself away on useless wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, made an enemy with just about every country in the region, and drove its economy to the dumps..



...

God bequeathed this earth to the righteous not the tyrants it says so in your Psalms but certainly not reflected in the actions of this fundi-Zionist govt.!
The US had no business going into Iraq. Saddam was no threat to us and had no connections to Al queda. Was he a merciless tyrant, you bet. Should he have been overthrown, you bet, but by his own people. Should we have helped trained the Iraqi army so that it could fuction on its own, yes, but that is all we should have done. As far as Afganistan, that is where priorty should have been placed in going after bin Laden and his cohorts. They were a direct threat to the US. I think if we had focused on Afganistan we would have gotten bin Laden either dead or alive, but he would have been brought to justice. And who are you calling a Zionist fundi goverment? Could you please clarify?
Reply

The_Prince
06-13-2009, 11:27 PM
well the results are out and ahmedinjad has won. the losers dont seem to like the fruits of democracy, sore losers, they must accept the result and move on, this is democracy, the majority have spoken and thats it.

its quite funny that all these pro western groups and people who always preach about freedom, democacy, rights etc always show their hypocrisy when their on the losing side. were seeing that in Iran now with the violence, and i am sure had the opposition won in lebanon we would have seen the same thing, the pro western groups and people would be comming out saying its a sham, they wont accept it, bla bla bla. we also saw this in palestine, when Hamas won the western world shunned them and continued to take abbas as the leader, although he lost and his time in the government has come to and end, they still act like hes the leader.

why arent western governments condemning the violence and statements being made by the loser candidate musavi???? surely if ahmedinad lost and his supporters turned to violence, and he said that the results were a fraud etc etc western governments would be out in force condemning him and saying look how this guy tries to silence the people and their democratic vote, but when its the other way round they dont say a word, rather they also join the wagon and accuse ahmedinijad of rigging the votes! amazing.

perhaps its time that these secularized pro western iranians and middle-easternes realize they are not in the majority, even in Lebanon the opposition actually won the popular vote, but just like in the U.S. the popular vote alone isnt enough to win you the election. poor guys, they have been brainwashed by their own propaganda.
Reply

KAding
06-14-2009, 12:12 AM
Once again goes to show that elections can have a highly destablizing impact in countries that are highly polarized and that lack a strong (read: long) democratic tradition. It often ends up in violence.
Reply

The_Prince
06-14-2009, 12:30 AM
Originally Posted by KAding
Once again goes to show that elections can have a highly destablizing impact in countries that are highly polarized and that lack a strong (read: long) democratic tradition. It often ends up in violence.
well, the opposition in lebanon didnt protest. :) neither did the conservatives in Iran back in 97 when khatami the reformist won.

fact is the ppl who are always protesting to losses are pro western groups. :)
Reply

GuestFellow
06-14-2009, 01:37 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I think it will be either Iran under Ahmadinejad or it will be North Korea. Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and denies the Holocaust. Clearly to me this is a man who I would not consider to be mentally stable. I say the same about Kim Jong Il. I am not a Zionist by any means, I openly and publically condemn what Israel did in Gaza. Just because they are Jews does not give them liscence to do what they do. But Israel will not stand by and do nothing if he keeps calling for their destruction. If Israel does attack, than the US of course will be obligated to come to Israels aid. Hence we will be dragged into WW3. For this man to deny the Holocaust is extremly disturing and personally offensive to me. My maternal grandfather served in WW2, he helped liberate some of those camps. He saw the carnage that the Nazis inflicted and he being a product of his time was no friend of Jewish people. It was not just Jews who parished, but many Christians and other politcal prisoners as well. To deny history is to deny what happened to all who perished regardless of their religion. I do not want to see us go to war with either Iran or North Korea. We have done enough killing in the past decade in Iraq. Iran may not fire the first shot, but the tongue sometimes is more dangeruous than any weapon.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not deny the holocaust. Firstly, he says why are there laws to prevent the Holocaust are being studied in a different perspective. To gain more knowledge and to consider other possibilities. To have laws to restrict freedom of expression on a topic, could possibily mean the government have something to hide. Now tell me, what is wrong with researching and gaining more knowledge on a particular matter? It may support the overwhelming evidence for the holocaust that has taken place.

Secondly he states, the holocaust took place in Europe. So why is Palestine suffering? He is simply speaking for the Palestinian people. What is wrong with that? The U.S has silenced Palestinian people. He is simply voicing his opinion that Europe should have dealt with the problem since they caused it.

Israel is an illegal state. It should not exist. If it must, then it must go through the correct procedure. They took Palestine through brutal force and put them under occupation.

Iran has not started a war from my knowledge. So what makes you think this ''mentally stable'' man shall start a war? What ill intentions does he have? All he is doing speaking for the Palestinian people in essence. He is developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The U.S government have sent down officals to inpsect his nuclear energy plans and concluded that they are peaceful.

You can listen to his interviews conducted by U.S reported if you want to gain the full picture. If U.S and Israel are going to war, over because they do not like what someone has said, then they sound like the bigger threat that need to be dealt with. Are you really going to start a war where thousands of innocent lives are at risk over because you don't like what someone has said?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 03:01 AM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Israel is an illegal state. It should not exist. If it must, then it must go through the correct procedure. They took Palestine through brutal force and put them under occupation.



. Are you really going to start a war where thousands of innocent lives are at risk over because you don't like what someone has said?

The displaced Jews needed somewhere to go after WW2 and present day Israel was the original homeland of their people. They have just as much right to be there as the Palestinians. However the Israeli goverment does not have a right to displace a whole group of people who have been there for centuries. If the people of Iran have reelected the man through fair elections they are a sovereign nation and have the right to elect their own leader whomever he/she may be. He can hate America and especially Israel all he wants to do, but he cannot call for Israel to be destroyed and wiped off the face of the Earth and not expect Israel to eventually take action. "I " personally am not going to start a war of any kind. If Israel and Iran want to bomb each other let them, I dont think my nation should come to the aid of Israel,they can take care of themselves. Yet America most likely will feel obligated to come to Israels aid and I will not support that personally as I dont like war and violence as it is. If people were smart Israel and Iran would set across a conferance table and negotaite a treaty of some kind.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 03:13 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The displaced Jews needed somewhere to go after WW2 and present day Israel was the original homeland of their people. They have just as much right to be there as the Palestinians. .

very misguided and historically and biblicaly wrong:

the land of Palestine was "supposedly" promised to the seed of Abraham. If one researches the Ancient Hebrew laws, the right of decent or inheritance is based on the eldest son, no matter whom the mother is. If this is the case, then the land was promised to Ishamel (for he was the eldest of Abraham's sons) and the Father of Palestinian Arabs. In addition, modern day Jews from Russia, Poland and most parts of Eastern Europe have NO genetic link to the ancient Hebrews - they for the most part are decendents of Khazars, who converted to Judaism in the 7th century (this has been documented by Jewish scholars, not Arabs). The modern day Palestinians can claim a more direct link to the Hebrew tribes than the founders of modern day "Israel." What the Western Press purposely avoids mentioning is the fact that at the start of the 20th century, less than 5% of the land of Palestine was Jewish. The modern State of Israel was built on lands illegally taken and assimilated from Palestinian Christians and Muslims. Also, the Hebrews only ruled the land of Palestine for a combined 411 years - the Muslims have ruled the land for 1,500 years. In addition, the land of Canaan (Palestine) had a history long before the Jewish tribes immigrated to the area.

I hope this helps..

pls read your own bible you'd see that upon Sara's death (even if we were to forgo all the above) Abraham P purchases a land from the Canaanites to bury Sarah, were the land 'promised' them why would there be a need for such a purchase....

I am kind of amused by the level of education or lack thereof of most Israeli sympathizers.. whether the Iranian guy denies the holocaust or not is inconsequential, what is of consequence is a European caused problem being shouldered by poor Palestinians..

all the best
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 04:06 AM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
very misguided and historically and biblicaly wrong:

the land of Palestine was "supposedly" promised to the seed of Abraham. If one researches the Ancient Hebrew laws, the right of decent or inheritance is based on the eldest son, no matter whom the mother is. If this is the case, then the land was promised to Ishamel (for he was the eldest of Abraham's sons) and the Father of Palestinian Arabs. In addition, modern day Jews from Russia, Poland and most parts of Eastern Europe have NO genetic link to the ancient Hebrews - they for the most part are decendents of Khazars, who converted to Judaism in the 7th century (this has been documented by Jewish scholars, not Arabs). The modern day Palestinians can claim a more direct link to the Hebrew tribes than the founders of modern day "Israel." What the Western Press purposely avoids mentioning is the fact that at the start of the 20th century, less than 5% of the land of Palestine was Jewish. The modern State of Israel was built on lands illegally taken and assimilated from Palestinian Christians and Muslims. Also, the Hebrews only ruled the land of Palestine for a combined 411 years - the Muslims have ruled the land for 1,500 years. In addition, the land of Canaan (Palestine) had a history long before the Jewish tribes immigrated to the area.

I hope this helps..

pls read your own bible you'd see that upon Sara's death (even if we were to forgo all the above) Abraham P purchases a land from the Canaanites to bury Sarah, were the land 'promised' them why would there be a need for such a purchase....

I am kind of amused by the level of education or lack thereof of most Israeli sympathizers.. whether the Iranian guy denies the holocaust or not is inconsequential, what is of consequence is a European caused problem being shouldered by poor Palestinians..

all the best

Thank you for opinion. Unfortuantly, it is faught with misinformation. You are correct in one thing a lot of these problems were caused by 19th century Anti Semitism and poor decisions by the allies at the end of WW1 (these decisions also caused the Vietnam War). But above all they were caused by Adolf Hitler, who sadly it seesms Amadenjaoud(sp) idealizes. Who not only made the extermination of the Jews along 5 million other who were not Jewish a poltical ideal, he also taught his ideas to many Arab leaders including the Syrian, Saudis and Jordanians. So in a way it is a "European" created problem.
Since you brought gentics into this longstanding myth about the legitmacy of the ancesrty of the Askanazti Jews there are also Sephardic Jews there seems to be an equal absence that the Palestianin are the descendants of the Caanites or the other local peoples who are mentioned in the Old Testament. Lets leave religion out of this. ( Since Turkish records indicate that poor Arabs were brought from throughout the Arab world to work the estates of the Turkish masters)
To address the Biblical comments, taken for their historical content that religion isnt an issue here . The story of Abraham counters several of your points. First, God promised the land to his desecdants, but that does not mean that private property did not exist and were not observed. The same is true in America today. If a city or state ceases land from an adjacent jurisdiction the privately owned property is still left to the owner he just pays his taxes to a different jurisdiction. Second Genesis clearly states that any notion of primo gentre ( european term meaning the first inherits) was circumvented by Jacobs duplicty. Furthermore Exodus, Number, Deutronomy and Levitcus all lay out Gods promise to Moses and his descendants/successors that the Israelites have a divine right to portions of Caanan. While the books of the OT were probably not put down in writing until about 700 BC there is clear available archelocial and anthropoligal evidence in Egyptian, Phonecian, and other existant nations at that time of the presence of a people who worshipped the God of Abraham and who alteranatly called themselves the Ivrite, Isrealites, and a few others that are obviously the local languages terms for these people. These words had meaning back than that are missed today. Ivrite or Hebrew meaning those who crossed over or Israelite or those who who came from Israel who was Jacob. I am sure do too conversion and intermarrying in this day and age it would be impossible to say even if all the first centry Jews were of "Jewish" ancestry. But such ancesteral eugenics are not relevant when a people accepts a religion, suffers for accepting it for 2 millenia and continues to accept it. There are also the 3 Disapera the best we can tell today is that both the Jews and the Palestinians are of mostly Semitic origin. As to rulership maybe the era of the Israelite, Samarian and Judean kings only lasted a few hundred to maybe a thousand years. Again there is evidence of continuous occupation. Even under Persian, Greek, Syrian, Egytpian, and Roman rule the community was still there. BTW it was the Romans who named the place Palestine. The pre Christian Romans.

Look at the evidence, Joshua and Judges show very clearly that those ancient Israelites lived more often in peace than at war with the Caanaties and the Philistines. ( who were probably an Indo European peoples).Why can that not be the case today. Just to let you know I am an American of Irish descent who is very concearned about the conflict in Northern Ireland, yet I want to see the situation solved peacefully and my husband is of Welsh descent and wants to see things solved peacefully as well. I do not sympathize with any goverment in that section of the world, but I cannot imagine any nation tolerating another saying that it should be wiped off the face of the map, no matther who. Islam is a religion that accepts all believers regardless of race, ethinicty or tribal affilation. It is sad when people on any side of a conflict forget their religion and put those other things ahead of it.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 04:28 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Thank you for opinion. Unfortuantly, it is faught with misinformation.
Then I challenge you to prove what you write with focus not Pathologically excessive and unrelated talk!

You are correct in one thing a lot of these problems were caused by 19th century Anti Semitism and poor decisions by the allies at the end of WW1 (these decisions also caused the Vietnam War). But above all they were caused by Adolf Hitler, who sadly it seesms Amadenjaoud(sp) idealizes. Who not only made the extermination of the Jews along 5 million other who were not Jewish a poltical ideal, he also taught his ideas to many Arab leaders including the Syrian, Saudis and Jordanians. So in a way it is a "European" created problem.
How did he teach them do you reckon? from the way it looks, Hitler has taught the Zionist a thing or two since they are doing to the Palestinians exactly what was inflicted on them during WWII.
Having a poor opinion of Zionism and exterminating Jews on the hands of Nazis doesn't equal to the same thing, other than in the jaded view of a few who think that if they create enough hype, anything that opposes it, is illegitimate by comparison!
and Palestinian shouldn't have to be made to bear that burden, or bury their children every day and have no hope or chance at all at a normal life, as in born and die in refugee camps so that your Zionist friends can live happy on stolen land!


Zionism= Nazism
you should read
http://books.google.com/books?id=eLo...ummary_r&cad=0

Since you brought gentics into this longstanding myth about the legitmacy of the ancesrty of the Askanazti Jews there are also Sephardic Jews there seems to be an equal absence that the Palestianin are the descendants of the Caanites or the other local peoples who are mentioned in the Old Testament. Lets leave religion out of this. ( Since Turkish records indicate that poor Arabs were brought from throughout the Arab world to work the estates of the Turkish masters)
How is the evidence equal? The term Semitic has come of late in the west to mean Jews because of their brain washing you, it is more correctly applicable to the inhabitants of Arabia, who more than any other group have retained their Semitic features, in manners, customs.. I reference to Von Kremmer,springer, syce, DeGoeje amongst many other scholars. What you write is neither scientific nor historically accurate, In the OT for instance many are put in the semitic stock while they are not such as the Elamite, and Ludim, while the actual semites and the inhabitants of the regions that have always been are excluded such as the Phoneticians and the Canaanites Quoting K.K hitti, history of the Arabs. pp 8-9


To address the Biblical comments, taken for their historical content that religion isnt an issue here . The story of Abraham counters several of your points. First, God promised the land to his desecdants, but that does not mean that private property did not exist and were not observed.
indeed and if that is the case then the old T laws are clear as to whom the right of inheritance goes to. You don't get to cherry pick to cajole your personal interests!
I am also glad you touched upon personal property, since that is exactly what is happening in Palestine, these non-semitic European Jews are displacing them from their homes and private property by every means imaginable
Media Tags are no longer supported

A very common occurrence to go into homes as in above video, kill inhabitants and claim it as their own!

The same is true in America today. If a city or state ceases land from an adjacent jurisdiction the privately owned property is still left to the owner he just pays his taxes to a different jurisdiction. Second Genesis clearly states that any notion of primo gentre ( european term meaning the first inherits) was circumvented by Jacobs duplicty. Furthermore Exodus, Number, Deutronomy and Levitcus all lay out Gods promise to Moses and his descendants/successors that the Israelites have a divine right to portions of Caanan.
inconsequential, what does America have to do with any of this, and why do you insist on circumventing the fact that Abraham is the father of the Arabs, middle eastern in origin and his eldest is Ishmael? he is not a European Jew nor as his descendants, you don't get to make them so by wishful thoughts!

While the books of the OT were probably not put down in writing until about 700 BC there is clear available archelocial and anthropoligal evidence in Egyptian, Phonecian, and other existant nations at that time of the presence of a people who worshipped the God of Abraham and who alteranatly called themselves the Ivrite, Isrealites, and a few others that are obviously the local languages terms for these people. These words had meaning back than that are missed today. Ivrite or Hebrew meaning those who crossed over or Israelite or those who who came from Israel who was Jacob. I am sure do too conversion and intermarrying in this day and age it would be impossible to say even if all the first centry Jews were of "Jewish" ancestry. But such ancesteral eugenics are not relevant when a people accepts a religion, suffers for accepting it for 2 millenia and continues to accept it. There are also the 3 Disapera the best we can tell today is that both the Jews and the Palestinians are of mostly Semitic origin. As to rulership maybe the era of the Israelite, Samarian and Judean kings only lasted a few hundred to maybe a thousand years. Again there is evidence of continuous occupation. Even under Persian, Greek, Syrian, Egytpian, and Roman rule the community was still there. BTW it was the Romans who named the place Palestine. The pre Christian Romans.
I don't understand why you are drowning me in this much nonsense? Khazars that converted to Judaism in the 7th century
see here:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/127483

written by jews if I may add, so you may not come and put a spin on terms. They are not the original Hebrews nor have any link to Abraham, they are promised nothing, they are colonialists! a Muslim from Malaysia can't call dibs on Makkah simply because they share the same religion nor does the fact that they too are Muslim make them Semitic people in origin a Semite isn't a religious rite it is a race of people, fortunately Islam doesn't make such distinctions nor classifications of people. Most of the original Hebrews became Christian then later Muslim, they are far removed from the colonial settler Zionists that currently occupy Palestine!

Look at the evidence, Joshua and Judges show very clearly that those ancient Israelites lived more often in peace than at war with the Caanaties and the Philistines. ( who were probably an Indo European peoples).Why can that not be the case today. Just to let you know I am an American of Irish descent who is very concearned about the conflict in Northern Ireland, yet I want to see the situation solved peacefully and my husband is of Welsh descent and wants to see things solved peacefully as well. I do not sympathize with any goverment in that section of the world, but I cannot imagine any nation tolerating another saying that it should be wiped off the face of the map, no matther who. Islam is a religion that accepts all believers regardless of race, ethinicty or tribal affilation. It is sad when people on any side of a conflict forget their religion and put those other things ahead of it.
I have no idea what your ancestry has to do with this topic and frankly not sure I care, but don't come entitle people to a land that isn't theirs and then ask us to be all forgiving and clement about it or else!
Jews are welcome to live under Islamic rule on Muslim land, they are not however entitled to do to the Palestinians what was done to them, displace them, commit massive genocides and then come cry about how we are trying to exterminate them..
Perhaps if you better understood history, you'd learn why there will NEVER be peace in that region, and why most hate Israel and its zionists with a passion. You don't get to have both, change history, steal a land and then have the indigenous folks of that region both love you and buy into your bull ****. It doesn't work out that way and it is certainly enough that they make out with enough of my and my family's tax money as well millions of other tax payers, which is funneled to that colonial state by the billions. It won't change a thing however.. you can't buy yourself out of God's wrath for being the very definition of evil!



sob7an Allah
Reply

islamic-s
06-14-2009, 04:28 AM
The U.S goverment does fund alot of money to Zionist Israel, but many people are against it, and more are awakining from this illuded subject. More americans are being more aware of whats going on now....

Back to the topic. I'm happy for the people of Iran with their choice in the elections.
Reply

Qingu
06-14-2009, 05:17 AM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
well the results are out and ahmedinjad has won. the losers dont seem to like the fruits of democracy, sore losers, they must accept the result and move on, this is democracy, the majority have spoken and thats it.
You don't think it's fishy that Ahmadinejad won twice as many votes as Moussavi in every single city and province of Iran? Even in Moussavi's hometown? (Almost all elections, including all previous elections in Iran, showed far more voting variation among individual places.)

Or that the government (controlled by Ahmadinejad) shut down facebook, text messaging, and Moussavi's web sites on the eve of the election?

Or that the dictator of Iran basically endorsed Ahmadinejad?

This isn't Hamas' legitimate election victory in Palestine. There are lots of indicators that this is rigged, despite what Iran's state-run media (controlled by Ahmadinejad!) says. And pointing those out doesn't mean we "don't like the fruits of democracy," it means we don't think this is democracy, period.

why arent western governments condemning the violence and statements being made by the loser candidate musavi???? surely if ahmedinad lost and his supporters turned to violence,
Western leaders haven't said anything of note yet.

I certainly don't condone the violence. That said, if Mousavi won under such sketchy circumstances, I certainly wouldn't support his victory.

perhaps its time that these secularized pro western iranians and middle-easternes realize they are not in the majority, even in Lebanon the opposition actually won the popular vote, but just like in the U.S. the popular vote alone isnt enough to win you the election. poor guys, they have been brainwashed by their own propaganda.
Could you explain what you're talking about? It was a parliamentary election.

Also, are you saying that the idea that democracy is good is "propaganda"? That seems rather ... inconsistent ... with the rest of your post.
Reply

Qingu
06-14-2009, 05:31 AM
I also want to make clear—as a resident kufr on here—that the reasons I dislike Ahmadinejad are largely the same as the reasons I dislike Bush. I think they are both incredibly ignorant men who use their religion as a prop to manipulate public support from ignorant people in their countries.

Both men have done incredible damage to their countries' standings in the international community and have ignored international laws. Both men ruined their countries' economies. Both men, when it comes to foreign policy, were basically puppets—Bush of Dick Cheney and his neocon advisors; Ahmadinejad, obviously, of Khameini, the actual leader of Iran.

I read in the paper that Ahmadinejad's supporters like him, not because of his policies or his intellect, but rather because he seems like he's a simple man that they can relate to. In America, Bush's supporters voted for him because they could imagine having a beer with him. I guess if beer was legal in Iran, you'd see a lot of people making the same statement about Ahmadinejad.

And now, it looks like both men have the honor of stealing elections in their countries.

I've always thought it was ironic that so many Republicans in my country want to nuke Iran and assassinate Ahmadinejad when they voted for someone so similar to him.
Reply

Abu Hannah
06-14-2009, 08:14 AM
Over 100 opposition arrested and counting.........
Reply

salafy_masry
06-14-2009, 10:10 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
This man scares me. I fear it will be either him or North Korea that will draw us into WW3.
He does not care much about killing other than muslims .. so I think you don't need to be scared.
Reply

shock_proof
06-14-2009, 10:20 AM
If anyone thinks that the Iranian elections were free and fair is seriously misinformed or underinformed. Unelected bodies actually control many aspects of Iranian law.

Also if anyone thinks Iran will start WW3 is ridiculous, they're not stupid enough to start a war. If any nation was to start another world war then most likely the USA.

PS Interesting how people believe that Ahmadinejad said he wanted to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, clearly they don't speak Farsi.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-14-2009, 11:19 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The displaced Jews needed somewhere to go after WW2 and present day Israel was the original homeland of their people. They have just as much right to be there as the Palestinians. However the Israeli goverment does not have a right to displace a whole group of people who have been there for centuries. If the people of Iran have reelected the man through fair elections they are a sovereign nation and have the right to elect their own leader whomever he/she may be. He can hate America and especially Israel all he wants to do, but he cannot call for Israel to be destroyed and wiped off the face of the Earth and not expect Israel to eventually take action. "I " personally am not going to start a war of any kind. If Israel and Iran want to bomb each other let them, I dont think my nation should come to the aid of Israel,they can take care of themselves. Yet America most likely will feel obligated to come to Israels aid and I will not support that personally as I dont like war and violence as it is. If people were smart Israel and Iran would set across a conferance table and negotaite a treaty of some kind.
I do believe Jews should have a country of their own. They always have been presecuted and been through horrific events such as the holocaust. However they should not taken the land of Palestine through violent force.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not specifically say ''wipe Israel off the map,'' or something along those lines. That was a mistranslation. He would like to negotiate with Israel; however, they will not even bother since they are living comfortably. At the Durban II conference he spoke and many people left without even listening to him. Some of the Israeli people made fun of him.

It is clear no one wants to give a chance to listen to him. The President himself accepts debates and challenges. For example, where he had accepted the invitation from Coloumbia University for a debate.
Reply

Banu_Hashim
06-14-2009, 11:42 AM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
For example, where he had accepted the invitation from Coloumbia University for a debate.
Was that the same university he went to, where even the person introducing him was rude to him? And he said something along the the lines of 'In my country we respect our guests'.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-14-2009, 12:25 PM
Originally Posted by Banu_Hashim
Was that the same university he went to, where even the person introducing him was rude to him? And he said something along the the lines of 'In my country we respect our guests'.
Yes that is the one. The President of Iran, went to that University to answer some questions.
Reply

Sahabiyaat
06-14-2009, 12:34 PM
i will be quite saddend if the voting process was tampered with...nevertheless i am glad ahmediejad won.He is a man of conviction (however reckless it may be), and there are very few like him....i was actually relieved that he won.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 04:10 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
T It won't change a thing however.. you can't buy yourself out of God's wrath for being the very definition of evil!



sob7an Allah

I gave you another prespective Skye. I am sorry that it did not satisfy you. The type of comments and evidence I have heard from you I have also heard from white supremicist. As for your comment that I quoted was that a general or personally directed? If it was a general comment then no offense taken. I never said the the Muslims or Palestinians want to exterminate the Jews. Do I think Amadenjad would like too exterminate Israel it seems that way. I am not brainwashed, God gave me a brain, I use it and I resent being told I am brainwashed and I am not a Zionist. I do not support what Israel did to Gaza and are still doing and I have publically condemned it myself. You seem to have a comtempt for non Muslims in general and those of us in the West. I dont know your background and it is none of my business, but I do myself get sick of being sterotyped. Just like the Muslims that I correspond with are tired of being sterotyped as terrorist. I take people as individiuals. II am curious about one thing, do you advocate the abolition of the state of Israel?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by Sahabiyaat
i will be quite saddend if the voting process was tampered with...nevertheless i am glad ahmediejad won.He is a man of conviction (however reckless it may be), and there are very few like him....i was actually relieved that he won.

All the world can do now is watch and wait and see how this situation developes. The US has rejected his declaration of victory for now.
Reply

czgibson
06-14-2009, 04:52 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
All the world can do now is watch and wait and see how this situation developes. The US has rejected his declaration of victory for now.
Has it? Have you got a link for that?

Peace
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 04:54 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I gave you another prespective Skye. I am sorry that it did not satisfy you. The type of comments and evidence I have heard from you I have also heard from white supremicist. As for your comment that I quoted was that a general or personally directed? If it was a general comment then no offense taken. I never said the the Muslims or Palestinians want to exterminate the Jews. Do I think Amadenjad would like too exterminate Israel it seems that way. I am not brainwashed, God gave me a brain, I use it and I resent being told I am brainwashed and I am not a Zionist. I do not support what Israel did to Gaza and are still doing and I have publically condemned it myself. You seem to have a comtempt for non Muslims in general and those of us in the West. I dont know your background and it is none of my business, but I do myself get sick of being sterotyped. Just like the Muslims that I correspond with are tired of being sterotyped as terrorist. I take people as individiuals.

Then what is the problem? You gave your perspective, I commented only on the portion of it that is historically and biblically incorrect!
I have shown you how it is incorrect from Jewish sources and historical sources. I called for the Jews to live peacefully under Islamic rule in Muslim land as they have done after their expulsion of Europe. Me sounding like a supremacist to you, I am afraid doesn't pack enough dynamism to sway anyone in any particular way.. Israel is indeed a colonial settler zionist state (zionism) was considered a crime by the way but after enough lobbying they got to reverse that ruling. Israel was built on terrorism from such groups as the haganah, irgun and stern gang-- you should also interview Arab Jews who were forced into Israel in spite of their will under scare tactics.

Beyond this, there is really nothing I can do to make it any more clear. It is a matter of whether you accept facts or your own empotionality.. the Muslim world should it wake up, knows that they are en enemy and we are at war with them to the day of recompense if so it takes!

You should read the thread about Israel's war ethics and Islamic war ethics before you take out the violin and call me a supramcist?

Name of Questioner
Sister - Turkey

Title
Jewish Fatwas on Killing: Politics or Religion?

Question
Respected scholars, as-salamu `alaykum. As you see, the brutal barbaric Israeli war againstGaza that has led to a horrific number of victims: more than 1400 people have been killed and more than 5000 seriously injured. The vast majority of them are women and children.

Before and during the aggression, Israeli rabbis and scholars issued a lot of fatwas that encourage attacking Gaza and its inhabitants, irrespective of whether such inhabitants are civilians or combatants. These Jewish fatwas incited Israeli soldiers to kill and destroy every thing, even to kill animals and cut down trees, and this is what happened.

Why do they have such extreme hatred towards innocent people and politicize fatwas for inhuman goals? Do Muslims have similar instructions that incite killing innocent people or destroying life?

Date
26/Jan/2009

Name of Mufti

Topic
International Relations & Jihad, Relations during War
Answer
Wa `alaykum as-salamu wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Dear sister, thank you for your question. We ask Almighty Allah to reward you and strengthen our faith in Him.

Islam never allows killing innocent people. Even in times of war, the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah prohibit killing civilians, women, children, elderly people and those who are not armed who have nothing to do with war. Moreover, international laws and conventions prohibit targeting innocent people.

Really, it is unbecoming of Jewish rabbis to encourage their leaders to target the helpless Palestinian people and their infrastructure based on a religious creed. We, as Muslims, believe that the Shari`ah of Prophet Musa (peace and blessings be upon him) never allowed targeting innocent people in the way the Israeli army did in Gaza.

In his response to your question, Dr. Jamal Badawi, professor of religious studies and management at St. Mary's University and the vice chairman of the Islamic American University, stated,

A proper understanding of Islam and its teachings concerning the ethics of warfare does not allow for deliberately harming innocent people. This can be amply documented from the Qur'an and the Sunnah. For example, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) instructed Muslim armies not to commit any act of treachery or to kill women, children, elderly people, the clergies of other religions or any non-combatants. He also forbade any unnecessary destruction such as residential homes, non-military targets and what we call today the infrastructure of the community. He also forbade killing animals for any purpose other than food.

Really, it is unfortunate that some rabbis, as you said, have abused the original pristine teachings of Prophet Musa (peace and blessings be upon him) to justify the way they massacred innocent people for political purposes. However, I must say that there have also been Jewish rabbis, intellectuals and ordinary, decent Jews who have loudly and clearly expressed their outrage both as Jews and as decent human beings at these crimes that were committed against their fellow human beings, namely the Palestinian people.

Any Muslim who tries to justify the deliberate killing of innocent, non-combatants or the unnecessary destruction of property must be condemned in exactly the same terms as any other person from any other faith or background. Certainly this would be a violation of the teachings of the Qur'an and the Sunnah when properly and contextually understood.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...EAskTheScholar

all the best
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 04:57 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



Has it? Have you got a link for that?

Peace

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090614/..._pe/us_us_iran

Here you go:)
Reply

mohsen1985
06-14-2009, 05:00 PM
:sl: everyone,
I know I haven't been on the forums for a long time, I just came here to say a few words as an Iranian living in Iran.

The elections were rigged, that's one thing no one can deny, and I've seen accurate proof, but as the officials say (in their secret meetings) it's for the best interests of the country (as it happens in all the elections over the world). The situation in Tehran isn't as bad as the media report, there have been some large gatherings and protests, but the numbers aren't in the thousands as the media reports. A couple of hundred to 500 at most, and the crowds have been dispersed by anti-riot police quickly.

There were many people shouting slogans on the rooftops in my neighborhood last night and a lot of traffic in the streets (I live near the Vali Asr st.), and at 9:25 PM as I am writing this post there's about one 50th of the people there were last night. Things are calming down.

I'm not a fan of Ahmadinejad, but in my opinion all the people have to support him and quit this rioting nonsense, because we are all one nation working together. Internal conflicts are not what this country needs right now at this time of hardship.

Well, it was good to be back for a few minutes, wish you all the best.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
Then what is the problem? You gave your perspective, I commented only on the portion of it that is historically and biblically incorrect!
I have shown you how it is incorrect from Jewish sources and historical sources. I called for the Jews to live peacefully under Islamic rule in Muslim land as they have done after their expulsion of Europe. Me sounding like a supremacist to you, I am afraid doesn't pack enough dynamism to sway anyone in any particular way.. Israel is indeed a colonial settler zionist state (zionism) was considered a crime by the way but after enough lobbying they got to reverse that ruling. Israel was built on terrorism from such groups as the haganah, irgun and stern gang-- you should also interview Arab Jews who were forced into Israel in spite of their will under scare tactics.

Beyond this, there is really nothing I can do to make it any more clear. It is a matter of whether you accept facts or your own empotionality.. the Muslim world should it wake up, knows that they are en enemy and we are at war with them to the day of recompense if so it takes!

You should read the thread about Israel's war ethics and Islamic war ethics before you take out the violin and call me a supramcist?


It is not 1948 anymore. The British who conquered that land from the Turks ceded a portion of it to Israel. I read your story on the Khazars who converted to Judiasm what of it? Alot of people converted after Roman sacked the temple in 70 AD, they are still Jews. That proves nothing of the legitmacy of the ancestry of the Jewish people. I did not call you a supremicist so please do not put words into my mouth. If I called you one I would have said it outright. I am not a Zionist and all I am interested in is peace. You say that the Jews can live under Muslim rule, if they choose to live in a Muslim nation where Shariah law is the law of the land than I would say you are right. Each nation has a right to make their own laws and if a person chooses to visit or live in a nation they are obligated to obey those laws. I personally have no desire to live under Shariah law as I am an American and I believe in seperation of church and state and have no desire to live under a theocracy of any kind. You say that I am basing all of this on emotionality, well it seems to me you are very emotional about the issue as well sister. It is hard not to be no matter what side one takes.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:15 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
:sl: everyone,
I know I haven't been on the forums for a long time, I just came here to say a few words as an Iranian living in Iran.

The elections were rigged, that's one thing no one can deny, and I've seen accurate proof, but as the officials say (in their secret meetings) it's for the best interests of the country (as it happens in all the elections over the world). The situation in Tehran isn't as bad as the media report, there have been some large gatherings and protests, but the numbers aren't in the thousands as the media reports. A couple of hundred to 500 at most, and the crowds have been dispersed by anti-riot police quickly.

There were many people shouting slogans on the rooftops in my neighborhood last night and a lot of traffic in the streets (I live near the Vali Asr st.), and at 9:25 PM as I am writing this post there's about one 50th of the people there were last night. Things are calming down.

I'm not a fan of Ahmadinejad, but in my opinion all the people have to support him and quit this rioting nonsense, because we are all one nation working together. Internal conflicts are not what this country needs right now at this time of hardship.

Well, it was good to be back for a few minutes, wish you all the best.
Brother thank you for the update. I will pray for the people of Iran as it looks like now prayers are much needed.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-14-2009, 05:20 PM
Thank you:)

I never liked politics and I'm staying away from all the rioting and shouting, but I do pray for the well being of the country and it's people.

(I think I spoke too soon, they're starting to shout slogans on the rooftops again:D)
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 05:24 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
It is not 1948 anymore. The British who conquered that land from the Turks ceded a portion of it to Israel. I read your story on the Khazars who converted to Judiasm what of it? Alot of people converted after Roman sacked the temple in 70 AD, they are still Jews. That proves nothing of the legitmacy of the ancestry of the Jewish people. I did not call you a supremicist so please do not put words into my mouth. If I called you one I would have said it outright. I am not a Zionist and all I am interested in is peace. You say that the Jews can live under Muslim rule, if they choose to live in a Muslim nation where Shariah law is the law of the land than I would say you are right. Each nation has a right to make their own laws and if a person chooses to visit or live in a nation they are obligated to obey those laws. I personally have no desire to live under Shariah law as I am an American and I believe in seperation of church and state and have no desire to live under a theocracy of any kind. You say that I am basing all of this on emotionality, well it seems to me you are very emotional about the issue as well sister. It is hard not to be no matter what side one takes.

The passage of time in a matter of a few decades isn't a factor determining on to whom this land belongs to, and we aren't even discussing the piece of land, we are discussing abominable acts performed on the hands of the IDF and daily to the Palestinians which you seem to not think much of, only that they are threatened by wars by a man you seem to immensely dislike though he is indeed akin to the lunacy practiced by your previous administration! ..
I am sorry I must have taken your this comment
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The type of comments and evidence I have heard from you I have also heard from white supremicist.
to liken my ideology to that of a white supremacist, you must have had some other meaning that evolved with this post.

and of course you have no desire to live under a theocracy, as folks reaped enough ignorance under Christendom, again, this post isn't about your feelings on the matter or a singular reading you have done. You are not a scholar in the field nor does the state of Palestinians affect you, so indeed, why should you care?

I have had enough nonsense and this post has to do with an Iranian election not your feelings of hatred or support, toward an alleged theocracy, toward Israel or Iran or any sovereign state in between!

all the best
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:24 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
Thank you:)

I never liked politics and I'm staying away from all the rioting and shouting, but I do pray for the well being of the country and it's people.

(I think I spoke too soon, they're starting to shout slogans on the rooftops again:D)


imsad. I just wish that people could live together in peace and get along.
Reply

Yanal
06-14-2009, 05:24 PM
Even Americians did not get that fired up when Obama got elected.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-14-2009, 05:28 PM
Things are different here bro,

before the elections the people put together a human chain in support of Mousavi just through SMS! The human chain was made up of 6 rows going from Vali Asr sq. to Rah Ahan sq., a 20 kilometer distance, in just 2 hours.

Anyways, going to bed now (all the shouting stopped =p), goodnight everyone
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 05:30 PM
salaam

It is not 1948 anymore. The British who conquered that land from the Turks ceded a portion of it to Israel.
You also have to remember that the Brits promised that land to the arabs too - so in other words they did double dealings. The other problem was that there were actually people living in Palestinain lands there before who were kicked out of ther lands - they ofcourse had be refugees in there own land - which created the resentmnet - furthermore the US has made the sitiution worse over time by Vetoing against the peace deals that the international community had planned (the two state settlement plan) - one Palestine and Isreal until now - before US and Isreal were set and not creating a palestinain state.


right now however the real first problem is to sort out which Obama has also said is to stop illiegal settlements on plasetine (the area that is meant to make a palestinain state) - there are over 500,000 settlements on that part which have to be stop and get demolished - ofcourse there are also other problems such as eastern Jerusalem too but this one is the most dangerous - If this continues there will be no Palestine left.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 05:36 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
salaam



You also have to remember that the Brits promised that land to the arabs too - so in other words they did double dealings. The other problem was that there were actually people living in Palestinain lands there before who were kicked out of ther lands - they ofcourse had be refugees in there own land - which created the resentmnet - furthermore the US has made the sitiution worse over time by Vetoing against the peace deals that the international community had planned (the two state settlement plan) - one Palestine and Isreal until now - before US and Isreal were set and not creating a palestinain state.


right now however the real first problem is to sort out which Obama has also said is to stop illiegal settlements on plasetine (the area that is meant to make a palestinain state) - there are over 500,000 settlements on that part which have to be stop and get demolished - ofcourse there are also other problems such as eastern Jerusalem too but this one is the most dangerous - If this continues there will be no Palestine left.

that is the whole idea, no Palestine left, plus excavation beneath Al aqsa to build their alleged third temple, which can't be any other place other than where Al aqsa presides.

They make up history to justify their end plus they are not even holding a Jewish state, it is a secular state with a rapid growth in atheism amongst them. Makes you wonder what this is all about save for down right hatred and tyranny.

I find your average American so ignorant that it isn't even worth my time to discuss anymore.. I don't think there is time left for discussion anyway when they are trying to expunge and entire region of its people. Then complain that people hate them and want to exterminate them-- isn't that in fact exactly what they are doing, creating hatred and exterminating people?

sob7an Allah.. I don't know how people's brains are wired, and frankly I have ceased to care.. it is just arguments for the sake of arguments.. no facts, none whatsoever historically, politically, religiously etc!

:w:
Reply

czgibson
06-14-2009, 05:36 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Thanks for the link. It's a strange article, though, isn't it? The assertions in the headline and first paragraph aren't really backed up by any of the direct quotes that follow.

Peace
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:39 PM
"to liken my ideology to that of a white supremacist, you must have had some other meaning that evolved with this post. "

I have only heard similar comments made by white supremcist, who very much hate Semites, especially the Jews.

" You are not a scholar in the field nor does the state of Palestinians affect you, so indeed, why should you care?"

Because if Amadenjad keeps saying the radical things he says, then it could possbily drag my country into another war as they would feel obligated to come to Israels aid if they decide to attack Iran. Bottom line I dont want to see the US go into another war. If it was up to me I would pull all of our troops out of Iraq today. Also I am sick of seeing people die for nothing!! In Israel, Iraq and Darfur. I am a peacemaker, a pacificst. I have a 20 year old brother stationed in Iraq and I worry myself sick over him everyday. I dont know if he is dead or alive. So i do have a vested "emotional" interest in the whole sitaution in the Mideast in general. When it all comes down to it they are interrelated.

"I have had enough nonsense and this post has to do with an Iranian election not your feelings of hatred or support, toward an alleged theocracy, toward Israel or Iran or any sovereign state in between!"

Iran is a theocracy! I think Amadenjoud is unstable, but I dont wish any ill to the man. I will pray for him like I do all world leaders.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
salaam



You also have to remember that the Brits promised that land to the arabs too - so in other words they did double dealings. The other problem was that there were actually people living in Palestinain lands there before who were kicked out of ther lands - they ofcourse had be refugees in there own land - which created the resentmnet - furthermore the US has made the sitiution worse over time by Vetoing against the peace deals that the international community had planned (the two state settlement plan) - one Palestine and Isreal until now - before US and Isreal were set and not creating a palestinain state.


right now however the real first problem is to sort out which Obama has also said is to stop illiegal settlements on plasetine (the area that is meant to make a palestinain state) - there are over 500,000 settlements on that part which have to be stop and get demolished - ofcourse there are also other problems such as eastern Jerusalem too but this one is the most dangerous - If this continues there will be no Palestine left.


The Palestinians need a seperate homeland or Israel needs to sign a treaty with them and give them full rights and full citizenship. Something has to be done, too many innocents on both sides have died.
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 05:45 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
that is the whole idea, no Palestine left, plus excavation beneath Al aqsa to build their alleged third temple, which can't be any other place other than where Al aqsa presides.

They make up history to justify their end plus they are not even holding a Jewish state, it is a secular state with a rapid growth in atheism amongst them. Makes you wonder what this is all about save for down right hatred and tyranny.

I find your average American so ignorant that it isn't even worth my time to discuss anymore.. I don't think there is time left for discussion anyway when they are trying to expunge and entire region of its people. Then complain that people hate them and want to exterminate them-- isn't that in fact exactly what they are doing, creating hatred and exterminating people?

sob7an Allah.. I don't know how people's brains are wired, and frankly I have ceased to care.. it is just arguments for the sake of arguments.. no facts, none whatsoever historically, politically, religiously etc!

:w:
Salaam

I agree - they are also destroying the palestinian houses in the eastern front.

There also some great intellectuals such Norm Chomsky, Norman Finklestin etc - even Jimmy Carter wrote a book on it. So i think things are changing in america - Insh Allah.

Yeah whats the most dangerous thing is constructing history - which is what the Zionist did in the past - it will take ages to get people back to the real facts.

peace
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 05:46 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The Palestinians need a seperate homeland or Israel needs to sign a treaty with them and give them full rights and full citizenship. Something has to be done, too many innocents on both sides have died.
They need to stop building on Palestinain lands for starters - and maerica needs to be a bit more fairer. Then we can hope for Peace.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 05:49 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
"to liken my ideology to that of a white supremacist, you must have had some other meaning that evolved with this post. "

I have only heard similar comments made by white supremcist, who very much hate Semites, especially the Jews.

" You are not a scholar in the field nor does the state of Palestinians affect you, so indeed, why should you care?"

Because if Amadenjad keeps saying the radical things he says, then it could possbily drag my country into another war as they would feel obligated to come to Israels aid if they decide to attack Iran. Bottom line I dont want to see the US go into another war. If it was up to me I would pull all of our troops out of Iraq today. Also I am sick of seeing people die for nothing!! In Israel, Iraq and Darfur. I am a peacemaker, a pacificst. I have a 20 year old brother stationed in Iraq and I worry myself sick over him everyday. I dont know if he is dead or alive. So i do have a vested "emotional" interest in the whole sitaution in the Mideast in general. When it all comes down to it they are interrelated.

"I have had enough nonsense and this post has to do with an Iranian election not your feelings of hatred or support, toward an alleged theocracy, toward Israel or Iran or any sovereign state in between!"

Iran is a theocracy! I think Amadenjoud is unstable, but I dont wish any ill to the man. I will pray for him like I do all world leaders.
Muslims from the middle east are Semites, I have given you an extensive list of what a Semite is. I being from the middle east am a Semite difficult to be a Semite and an anti-Semite at the same time . Semitism It isn't a religion it is a race of people, which the majority of modern Jews aren't see previous links.
a Semite by definition = A member of a group of Semitic peoples of the Middle East and northern Africa...

The Iranian fellow is as unstable as the U.S govt. I agree.
I don't think he is governing by a theocracy, unless it is his own brand of theocracy.. his is a type of dictatorship an autocracy, not much different than that of the previous admin.
If the U.S wants war, it will drag itself to it because it has alot of vested interest in seeing that entire region war torn and in shambles.. It is the same reason they re-instated the Shah after his excommunication back in 1951 or 52 I am not an Iranian so I don't have an exact date.. but the west pretty much had a grip on all things Iranian especially their oil, while he (the shah) lived on the lap of luxury there was nothing in it for the poor people...

that is why folks elect tyrants, because they'll take tyranny over foreign interests. There is the evil inside and the evil outside and I think most unanimously agree, they'd rather handle their own problems than have outsiders come in feigning interest in democracy and freedom fries and all other slogans that no one buys into except the idiots amongst us!

all the best
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 05:49 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye

I find your average American so ignorant that it isn't even worth my time to discuss anymore..
:w:


What a terrible thing to say. I am an American and I have my own POV on things. I am not an ideologue. Do you dislike Americans and Westerners that much? Why?
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 05:54 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
What a terrible thing to say. I am an American and I have my own POV on things. I am not an ideologue. Do you dislike Americans and Westerners that much? Why?
I dislike and immensely unread, bucolic oafs who are ready to imbue anything their media dishes out to them and then regurgitate it in various sectors-- that is what average means someone whose ill formed opinions are commonly encountered.. it isn't a generalization it is an observation!

all the best
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 05:55 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
What a terrible thing to say. I am an American and I have my own POV on things. I am not an ideologue. Do you dislike Americans and Westerners that much? Why?
to say your average american is very different in saying "western" - as i'm sure all muslims living in the west are westerners too.

But if you look at which way america has been going for the past 30 years with Isreal and palestine and especially the Vetos - it doesnt look good. One of the reasons why Obama actually had to make a speech to the muslim world - to undo all the work of Bush. Just watch Fox news and you'll understand - the sheer bias is shocking.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 06:09 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
I dislike and immensely unread, bucolic oafs who are ready to imbue anything their media dishes out to them and then regurgitate it in various sectors-- that is what average means someone whose ill formed opinions are commonly encountered.. it isn't a generalization it is an observation!

all the best
No that is an generalazation and unfair one at that. Bucolic ? I live and was raised in a city. I told you before all I care about is peace in the world. Have you ever been to America? How many Americans have you personally met? Sterotyping Americans all in one box is unfair and could border on bigotry. I could say all Arabs or Muslims are terrorist that want to destroy and kill all Americans, but I know that not to be true. Most Muslims are peaceful good decent folks. One of the things that made me want to learn and explore Islam was it tolerance of people regardless of race or ethinicity.
Reply

czgibson
06-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
I dislike and immensely unread, bucolic oafs who are ready to imbue anything their media dishes out to them and then regurgitate it in various sectors-- that is what average means someone whose ill formed opinions are commonly encountered.. it isn't a generalization it is an observation!

all the best
1. That is not what average means.

2. It's clearly a generalisation.

I don't understand how you can just sit here, day in, day out, pouring out hatred like this with no consequences at all from the mods.

Peace
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
to say your average american is very different in saying "western" - as i'm sure all muslims living in the west are westerners too.

But if you look at which way america has been going for the past 30 years with Isreal and palestine and especially the Vetos - it doesnt look good. One of the reasons why Obama actually had to make a speech to the muslim world - to undo all the work of Bush. Just watch Fox news and you'll understand - the sheer bias is shocking.


I did not vote for Bush and did not agree with anything he stood for. I dont watch FOX news or listen to conservative talk radio because as far as I am concearned it is just spewing messages of hate. I despise spewing hate and bigorty no matter what the prespective is. Bigotry and hate is against both the tenants of Christianity and Islam. I find Mohammed last sermon very informative on issue of race or ethinicty.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 06:16 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
No that is an generalazation and unfair one at that. Bucolic ? I live and was raised in a city. I told you before all I care about is peace in the world. Have you ever been to America? How many Americans have you personally met? Sterotyping Americans all in one box is unfair and could border on bigotry. I could say all Arabs or Muslims are terrorist that want to destroy and kill all Americans, but I know that not to be true. Most Muslims are peaceful good decent folks. One of the things that made me want to learn and explore Islam was it tolerance of people regardless of race or ethinicity.

Do you feel like a bucolic country oaf? The same way I should feel like a white supremacist as per your post correct?
I happen to be an american citizen and so is most of my family clearly the comment was directed toward a particular group which is loudest and most ignorant . Do you want to meander the topic from Iran to Israel to now your own person?

I know it is hard to believe but the world doesn't revolve around you, your feelings and your self-righteousness!

all the best
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


1. That is not what average means.

2. It's clearly a generalisation.

I don't understand how you can just sit here, day in, day out, pouring out hatred like this with no consequences at all from the mods.

Peace
sure it does-- go ahead and visit wordweb.com

and it isn't a generalization it is an observation..
if you don't like it either report a post, skip over it or don't post here no?


common sense!
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 06:21 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
Do you feel like a bucolic country oaf?
I happen to be an american citizen and so is most of my family clearly the comment was directed toward a particular group which is loudest and most ignorant . Do you want to meander the topic from Iran to Israel to now your own person?

I know it is hard to believe but the world doesn't revolve around you, your feelings and your self-righteousness!

all the best
Nice dodge. You said you were from the Mideast and now live in Britian. Sorry if I assumed that you immigrated to Britian. I have never said the world revolved around me, where you get that from I do not know. You asked me why I did not like Amadenjad and I listed my concearns and it went from there. You sound like a very bitter person with an ax to grind and I am sorry for that. You are the one who keeps adding subtle personal attacks in these post and very cynical to anyone who does not share your ideology or worldview. I think maybe the mods should close this thread. I am going to follow the example of Jesus and turn the other cheek.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 06:25 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Nice dodge.
unlike you, I don't 'dodge' --likening someone to a white supremacist or calling them an anti-Semite and then denying it in later posts. I have absolutely nothing to dodge, and have no reason for political correctness to coax your ego or that of someone who shares your views. In politics people are bound to have an opinion that differs than you, with any luck it should be based on some facts not an emotional crisis!


Do you think you can get back to Iranian election or are you hoping this thread would be closed?


all the best
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 06:30 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Nice dodge. You said you were from the Mideast and now live in Britian. Sorry if I assumed that you immigrated to Britian. I have never said the world revolved around me, where you get that from I do not know. You asked me why I did not like Amadenjad and I listed my concearns and it went from there. You sound like a very bitter person with an ax to grind and I am sorry for that. You are the one who keeps adding subtle personal attacks in these post and very cynical to anyone who does not share your ideology or worldview. I think maybe the mods should close this thread. I am going to follow the example of Jesus and turn the other cheek.
I am a middle easterner who happens to be an American, where you got that I am from Britain I guess has to do with the way you process information and then write a composition based solely on your understanding with very little interests in actual facts?
and No I didn't immigrate to the U.S my father was a diplomat to the united nations.

as for me being bitter, well I guess I'll add that to your list of accolades, a scientist, a historian and now a psychiatrist.. now pls do go on and be all Jesus like after you brought not peace but a sword...

all the best
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-14-2009, 06:30 PM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
unlike you, I don't 'dodge' --likening someone to a white supremacist or calling them an anti-Semite and then denying it in later posts. I have absolutely nothing to dodge, and have no reason for political correctness to coax your ego or that of someone who shares your views. In politics people are bound to have an opinion that differs than you, with any luck it should be based on some facts not an emotional crisis!


Do you think you can get back to Iranian election or are you hoping this thread would be closed?


all the best
I have nothing more to say to you Skye on anything. I have been civil with you and I never called you a white Supremicist. I never called you an Anto Semite, quit slandering me. May Gods peace and blessing be with you.
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 06:33 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I have nothing more to say to you Skye on anything. I have been civil with you and I never called you a white Supremicist. I never called you an Anto Semite, quit slandering me. May Gods peace and blessing be with you.

I guess a nice 'dodge' is in order here too?.. I think your statements quoted above are for all to see, or is civility only applicable to fundies of a certain brand and Zionists? you had nothing to say to me just two a post ago why beat a dead horse?
There is no point to a double blind hypocrisy!

all the best
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 07:03 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I did not vote for Bush and did not agree with anything he stood for. I dont watch FOX news or listen to conservative talk radio because as far as I am concearned it is just spewing messages of hate. I despise spewing hate and bigorty no matter what the prespective is. Bigotry and hate is against both the tenants of Christianity and Islam. I find Mohammed last sermon very informative on issue of race or ethinicty.
great - hopefully more people are like you
peace
Reply

czgibson
06-14-2009, 07:22 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
sure it does-- go ahead and visit wordweb.com
Oh, yes - here's the definition:
average [n., adj.]:

1. immensely unread, bucolic oafs who are ready to imbue anything their media dishes out to them and then regurgitate it in various sectors

2. someone whose ill formed opinions are commonly encountered
How silly of me. My faltering knowledge of the English language is no match for your staggering intelligence.

and it isn't a generalization it is an observation..
I understand now - everything you say must be true.

if you don't like it either report a post, skip over it or don't post here no?
What would be the point in reporting it? You clearly have special privileges here that are denied to the rest of us.

On Iran: I agree with the comparisons that have been made between Ahmadinejad and Bush. Both men are terrible advertisements for their countries.

The election result may well be unimportant, though. As long as you have religious leaders in charge of a country the people there will clearly never be free.

Peace
Reply

جوري
06-14-2009, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,
ah, so good to hear from you again!


Oh, yes - here's the definition:


How silly of me. My faltering knowledge of the English language is no match for your staggering intelligence.
Definition of average:
Lacking exceptional quality or ability to which I added, folks I find to be most like (oafs ready to imbue whatever is being dished to them).. other problems you might have or think others have in egotism and self-importance, I suggest you handle on your own private time?
as well any minor lingual nuances that you feel need highlighting or omission!

I understand now - everything you say must be true.
Good for you!

What would be the point in reporting it? You clearly have special privileges here that are denied to the rest of us.
That is news to me considering the permanent infarcts I have.. Perhaps the things that rile you are NOT as impressive as you'd like to believe?!
I know how badly you seem to want me off the forum with your episodic stalking, pouncing on every word and the oh so casual outcries of poor moderation, but I think it would be easier for you to just ignore me as a member than the occasional vulgar display of your distaste?

On Iran: I agree with the comparisons that have been made between Ahmadinejad and Bush. Both men are terrible advertisements for their countries.
you are so observant, good for you!

The election result may well be unimportant, though. As long as you have religious leaders in charge of a country the people there will clearly never be free.

Peace
so true, atheist leaders are so much better.. there is nothing like a massive genocide to set things aright!

all the best!
Reply

GuestFellow
06-14-2009, 08:22 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
All the world can do now is watch and wait and see how this situation developes. The US has rejected his declaration of victory for now.
I am not surprised. :skeleton:

Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
What a terrible thing to say. I am an American and I have my own POV on things. I am not an ideologue. Do you dislike Americans and Westerners that much? Why?

Well personally I don't. I think it is silly to make generalisations because everyone is different as an individual. I just don't like how Western government deals with international affairs however, I dislike something about every single government, in the West and in the East. Like I am not happy with how Iran operates internally, that needs some improving.

Personally I am tired of the American government. They are too interfering, though the American government have done some good, such as helping people cope with poverty in Africa.

I know some Muslims who have a grudge against Americans and Westerners due to Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Islamophobia, stereotypes, Palestine/Israel conflict and they dislike how the Western media portrays Islamic views. Some Muslims I know feel attacked. They dislike the negative attitude towards Muslims. That is pretty much it. o.o

Though of course, it should not give them the opportunity to make generalisations of the West.
Reply

Zafran
06-14-2009, 09:31 PM
salaam

I agree - I dont stand for nations - I stand for principles.
Reply

Banu_Hashim
06-14-2009, 09:33 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
On Iran: I agree with the comparisons that have been made between Ahmadinejad and Bush. Both men are terrible advertisements for their countries.
Ahmedinejad, whatever you may think of him, is much much smarter, eloquent and inspirational than Bush has been or ever will be. I think he's a credit to the Iranian people, as a leader who is outspoken rather than someone who gives answers everyone wants to hear, or even worse; someone like Bush.
Reply

Qingu
06-15-2009, 04:45 AM
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
The Iranian fellow is as unstable as the U.S govt. I agree.
I don't think this is true. Elections in the United States have their irregularities, for sure, but the results don't seem as blatantly made up. Most people agree that elections generally follow the will of the people, as opposed to the will of some third-party religious leader like a Christian version of the Ayatollah.

I don't think he is governing by a theocracy, unless it is his own brand of theocracy.. his is a type of dictatorship an autocracy, not much different than that of the previous admin.
Are you talking about Ahmadinejad? He isn't really governing anything. He's essentially a figurehead with a little bit of power over domestic affairs and a soapbox.

The real leader of Iran is Ayatollah Khameini.

If the U.S wants war, it will drag itself to it because it has alot of vested interest in seeing that entire region war torn and in shambles..
There you go, generalizing the entire United States.

You could certainly argue that certain politicians view it in our best interest to see Iran war-torn in shambles. This ignores the predominant school of thought by the Democrats now in power that it's better to have Iran as a stable trading partner and ally.

It's certainly not some abstract, objective truth that the United States would be in a better position if Iran and/or the middle east is war-torn. Reality doesn't work like that—the welfare of one nation isn't on a seesaw with the welfare of other nations on the other side.

that is why folks elect tyrants, because they'll take tyranny over foreign interests. There is the evil inside and the evil outside and I think most unanimously agree, they'd rather handle their own problems than have outsiders come in feigning interest in democracy and freedom fries and all other slogans that no one buys into except the idiots amongst us!
This I'll certainly agree with, and I hope Obama basically butts out of the Iranian election like he has been. Moussavi's people on Twitter have explicitly said that they hope we Americans shut up about it, so that their opponents can't accuse them of giving in to foreign manipulation.
Reply

Qingu
06-15-2009, 04:52 AM
Originally Posted by Banu_Hashim
Ahmedinejad, whatever you may think of him, is much much smarter, eloquent and inspirational than Bush has been or ever will be. I think he's a credit to the Iranian people, as a leader who is outspoken rather than someone who gives answers everyone wants to hear, or even worse; someone like Bush.
Bush was also outspoken and gave answers few people outside of his political base wanted to hear. Including the majority of Americans and other Western countries as well as pretty much the entire Islamic world. So I don't really see the difference on that count.

What statements and ideas by Ahmadinejad do you think support your claim that he's "smart," "eloquent" and "inspirational"? Maybe he sounds better in Farsi? In any case, like Bush, Ahmadinejad is simply a hypocrite. He whines constantly about foreign influence in Iran and the middle east while Iran bankrolls Hezbollah and Hamas. He whines about how the world should respect the democratic will of the people of Palestine and then blatantly steals elections in his own country. Like Bush, he provocates and ignores other nations and then acts all hurt and insulted when other nations don't give him respect. He's a pedagogue and a tool.

But of course, there is one difference: Bush had real power, and Ahmadinejad does not. The real leader of Iran is the Ayatollah, a non-elected dictator who rules by theocracy.

And I'd be much more fine with the Ayatollah if that's actually the kind of government the people of Iran want for themselves. Problem is, it looks like it isn't.
Reply

جوري
06-15-2009, 05:14 AM
Originally Posted by Qingu
I don't think this is true. Elections in the United States have their irregularities, for sure, but the results don't seem as blatantly made up. Most people agree that elections generally follow the will of the people, as opposed to the will of some third-party religious leader like a Christian version of the Ayatollah.
You really believe that Bush won fair and square? that the elections weren't rigged?

Are you talking about Ahmadinejad? He isn't really governing anything. He's essentially a figurehead with a little bit of power over domestic affairs and a soapbox.
He indeed talks alot, I'd rather he shut up and do (not sure what for his own folk), but I like the fact that he riles the west so

The real leader of Iran is Ayatollah Khameini.
You do know that khomeni is dead right? he was also 89 when he died


There you go, generalizing the entire United States.
No, I am really not, the way democracy works is that majority rules, sometimes majority rules by a landslide sometimes by the skin of their teeth.. we can agree that there will always be a portion of the population extremely unhappy, and extremely loud, and their loudness gets passed into laws that affect other people in far away places!

You could certainly argue that certain politicians view it in our best interest to see Iran war-torn in shambles. This ignores the predominant school of thought by the Democrats now in power that it's better to have Iran as a stable trading partner and ally.
when you risk war with Iran you'll only be serving Israel's agenda but I fear the Iranians put their Jews near their nuclear plants or so I have read I am not sure if there is any truth to that, I'd wonder how they'd save them to Israel before that show down takes place.. now I don't expect you to know anything about sunnis or Muslims or minor nuances that affect politics, I don't think the Iranian agenda is all that noble or differs much from western agenda only from an opposite end of the spectrum, it is an unusual takes me back to the Fatimid or Safavid dynasty "Safawiyyah'' a real dangerous path if they actually have power then the rest of us might be screwed indeed-- theirs is a third party element, I can't quite articulate into words.. they are not quite the hedonistic west, but they have their own brand of deviant and dangerous ideologies. Their lack of understanding of Islam allows them to do a great deal of harm and I fear push the sunnis who are a minority in their country to the Saudi border or God knows what else...

It's certainly not some abstract, objective truth that the United States would be in a better position if Iran and/or the middle east is war-torn. Reality doesn't work like that—the welfare of one nation isn't on a seesaw with the welfare of other nations on the other side.
Most people here have a very superficial understanding of politics no offense to you personally, but there is a real vested interest in keeping the middle east secular and divded followed by the entire Muslim world.. I don't know if the west quite understands what it means for a shiite state to come into power and move into other regions, it isn't as bad as a sunni one I'd think from their perspective given that the sunnis make up 85-90% of the Muslim world... being ruled by a majority Muslim rule would be a deadlier blow than a miniority one.


This I'll certainly agree with, and I hope Obama basically butts out of the Iranian election like he has been. Moussavi's people on Twitter have explicitly said that they hope we Americans shut up about it, so that their opponents can't accuse them of giving in to foreign manipulation.
one thing we can agree on indeed.. there is alot that needs to be fixed here, U.S can't afford to whittle itself away on another war for the sake of that zionist state. Of course you are a Jew you must have some loyalty even if you are an atheist at that, but religion plays a great part in this whether you like to admit it or not...
christian fundies think that if they hasten to the aid of the settler state a republican Jesus will descend on a silver cloud for a wonderful rapture.
Jews using the stupidity and funds of those fundies to hasten the coming of their Moschiach, even if they have a current secular state, it doesn't deter them from colonizing more displacing more from their home and excavating beneath al Aqsa, and the Iranian fellow wishes to establish some bizarre Shiite state, where he exterminates the only normal scholars left in favor of their deviant ideologies.

beam me up scotty!
Reply

czgibson
06-15-2009, 08:38 AM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
You do know that khomeni is dead right? he was also 89 when he died
Qingu was talking about Khamenei, not Khomeini.

Peace
Reply

GuestFellow
06-15-2009, 02:26 PM
Originally Posted by Banu_Hashim
Ahmedinejad, whatever you may think of him, is much much smarter, eloquent and inspirational than Bush has been or ever will be. I think he's a credit to the Iranian people, as a leader who is outspoken rather than someone who gives answers everyone wants to hear, or even worse; someone like Bush.
Yes I agree. Listening to Ahmedinejad, he is far more intelligent than George Bush.

Originally Posted by Qingu
Bush was also outspoken and gave answers few people outside of his political base wanted to hear. Including the majority of Americans and other Western countries as well as pretty much the entire Islamic world. So I don't really see the difference on that count.
You should listen to the President of Iran. If your open minded and willingly to listen, he actually speaks quite a lot of sense.

What statements and ideas by Ahmadinejad do you think support your claim that he's "smart," "eloquent" and "inspirational"? Maybe he sounds better in Farsi?
I don't speak Farsi. I listened to his translations and he speaks a lot of wisdom. He encourages people to gain knowledge etc

In any case, like Bush, Ahmadinejad is simply a hypocrite. He whines constantly about foreign influence in Iran and the middle east while Iran bankrolls Hezbollah and Hamas. He whines about how the world should respect the democratic will of the people of Palestine and then blatantly steals elections in his own country.
There is really no evidence that he stole votes in the elections in his own country. Personally I do think they might have been suspicious activities within the elections, though I don't think Ahmadinejad was personally involved. If he was, shame on him.


Like Bush, he provocates and ignores other nations and then acts all hurt and insulted when other nations don't give him respect. He's a pedagogue and a tool.
Well I was pretty astounded how immature people reacted to him when he made statements about the Holocaust and he even admits he does not deny it four times.

If they were so upset, should it not be better to prove him wrong, then to insult him? One question he has asked time and time again is:

Europeans/Americans claim the Holocaust took place in Europe. So why is Palestine is suffering and are under brutal occupations? This is what he said:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
"If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanction
Some Atheists came to me, and made brutal allegations about Prophet Muhammed P.B.U.H. They said Muslims beat women up and oppress them. They were rude and arrogant, however instead throwing tantrum, I gave answers and had a friendly discussion with them.

So why can't Americans do the same? They have a brain and are able to speak intellectually, just like everyone else. Why insult, when you can prove him wrong?

But of course, there is one difference: Bush had real power, and Ahmadinejad does not. The real leader of Iran is the Ayatollah, a non-elected dictator who rules by theocracy.
Yes and that is scary to see someone like Bush with so much power and authority. :skeleton:

One difference between the two Presidents: Bush starts wars and kills thousands of innocent civilians. President of Iran does not wish to start wars and resolve matters through dialogue.

If America calms down, sit down and have a discussion, international relationships would have improved. President of Iran even wrote a letter to George Bush to resolve certain matters, and George Bush chosen to ignore him.
Reply

Sahabiyaat
06-15-2009, 02:28 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
All the world can do now is watch and wait and see how this situation developes. The US has rejected his declaration of victory for now.
the US pretty much 'rejects' anything that doesnt tickle their fancy,so they can shove a sock up it.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-15-2009, 02:34 PM
Originally Posted by Sahabiyaat
the US pretty much 'rejects' anything that doesnt tickle their fancy,so they can shove a sock up it.
Nicely put. ^_^

The American government need to mind their own business. They do more harm than good. They are the one which actually increase tension between countries.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-15-2009, 03:18 PM
:sl:

Election update:

the actual results are as follows:

Mousavi: 19 million +
Karoubi: 13 million +
Ahmadinejad: 5 million+
Rezaee: 3 million +

I rounded down the numbers to millions.

and it's starting to get ugly. Hundreds of thousands of people protesting at the major streets in Tehran and the large cities.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-15-2009, 03:21 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
:sl:

Election update:

the actual results are as follows:

Mousavi: 19 million +
Karoubi: 13 million +
Ahmadinejad: 5 million+
Rezaee: 3 million +

I rounded down the numbers to millions.

and it's starting to get ugly. Hundreds of thousands of people protesting at the major streets in Tehran and the large cities.
Oh wow. :skeleton:

That is messed up. Source please?
Reply

mohsen1985
06-15-2009, 04:14 PM
Leaked information from the interior ministry, and another meeting which for my own safety I cannot name.



Sharif University (the #1 university in Iran, USA and Canada usually try to steal their students and offer them scholarships & etc to come to their country) professors are also on strike saying they'll come back when the real election results are announced. All their final examinations are postponed for at least 2 months. Other universities and colleges are gradually going to join in.
Reply

Whatsthepoint
06-15-2009, 05:04 PM
This is interesting, 69 spirit!
Mohsen, how can you be certain the results you posted are real? I though people were saying the votes hadn't even been properly even counted.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-15-2009, 05:33 PM
Like I said before, this is Iran, you have to live here to know what it's like. Imagine all our communications cut down and still 2 million people show up to protest against the election results. The results I posted were leaked out by the employees in the interior ministry, the words spread quickly here.

Two night ago as I was trying to read foreign news sites, they were filtering proxies by the minute. I actually went through several anti-filter applications and websites, and they got blocked within 2, 3 minutes. It's a different world here:D
Reply

salafy_masry
06-15-2009, 06:05 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
:sl:

Election update:

the actual results are as follows:

Mousavi: 19 million +
Karoubi: 13 million +
Ahmadinejad: 5 million+
Rezaee: 3 million +

I rounded down the numbers to millions.

and it's starting to get ugly. Hundreds of thousands of people protesting at the major streets in Tehran and the large cities.
Thanks for sharing, are you imamie ?
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-16-2009, 12:44 AM
Pictures coming out of Iran


Web Users in Iran Reach Overseas for Proxies

I hear that teenage kids from America (and all around the world actually) are sending proxies to Iranian protesters. Tell me the last time anything like that has ever happened?

Angry men showed their bloody palms after cradling the dead and wounded who had been part of a crowd that stretched more than five miles (nearly 10 kilometers) supporting reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi.

The huge rally — and smaller protests around the country — reinforced what has become increasingly clear since the election: the opposition forces rallying behind Mousavi show no signs of backing down. Their resolve appears to have pushed Iran's Islamic establishment into attempts to cool the tensions after days of unrest.

source -- NPR

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's call hedged his previous strong backing of the result of Saturday's vote. It appeared to be in response to two days and nights of violent protests here, and suggested growing unease among the clerics who sit atop Iran's complex power structure.

In the past few days, a number of senior clerics have met with Mr. Khamenei or written to him, urging him to intervene, according to a series of public letters from the clerics. One grand ayatollah, one of the highest-ranking clerics, issued a religious order demanding his followers not cooperate with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government.

source -- Wall Street Journal
Reply

Trumble
06-16-2009, 06:19 AM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
The American government need to mind their own business. They do more harm than good.
That is exactly what they are studiously doing, if anyone takes the trouble to find out before making assumptions. About all Obama has done is call for peaceful protests to be respected. He is perfectly well aware that Bush's expressed support for demonstrations in previous years was a huge mistake, and is leaving well alone. You can hardly blame them for not not rushing to welcome the Ahmadinejad 'victory' as even the Council of Guardians are now calling it "provisional" and Khamenei has done a U-turn and ordered an enquiry into possible vote-rigging.

It's also worth remembering that turmoil in Iran is even less welcome to the US and 'the West' than an Ahmadinejad victory.. it's the last thing you want in a major oil producing country during a world-wide recession.
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 11:49 AM
im loving the comments from so many westerners on blogs and websites telling the protesters to continue the fight and 'revolution', no doubt these are the same westerners who in the same breath claim that violence is never the solution, for instance how many times have we heard them telling Palestinians that they shouldnt use violence for their freedoms and rights! but obviously now when it suits them they are all calling for the violence to continue in Iran. and thennnnn westerners act surprised as why most Muslims dont trust them.

btw, dont be fooled by thinking that just because the opposition are being so loud on the internet makes them more popular, as one of twitters very own ceo's said, many of ahmedinijad's supporters are poor and dont have access to internet as many of the opposition easily do as they come from the rich and upper class.
Reply

bil_sal
06-16-2009, 01:20 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
im loving the comments from so many westerners on blogs and websites telling the protesters to continue the fight and 'revolution', no doubt these are the same westerners who in the same breath claim that violence is never the solution, for instance how many times have we heard them telling Palestinians that they shouldnt use violence for their freedoms and rights! but obviously now when it suits them they are all calling for the violence to continue in Iran. and thennnnn westerners act surprised as why most Muslims dont trust them.

btw, dont be fooled by thinking that just because the opposition are being so loud on the internet makes them more popular, as one of twitters very own ceo's said, many of ahmedinijad's supporters are poor and dont have access to internet as many of the opposition easily do as they come from the rich and upper class.
I agree with what youre saying but I dont think its true to say the opposition are all from the high classes of Iran, there are poor Iranians who support Mousavi too. I wrote about it on my blog, check it out here.
Reply

Gator
06-16-2009, 02:21 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
im loving the comments from so many westerners on blogs and websites telling the protesters to continue the fight and 'revolution', no doubt these are the same westerners who in the same breath claim that violence is never the solution, ...
What violent confrontations have there been? They aren't rioting in the street right? The whole thing seems pretty peaceful so far.

There have been no suicide bombings, killing of police or governmental officials, no attacks on governmental buildings, no rocket attacks and no mass riots.

The only person killed so far was one of the protesters. The only violence has been from the government.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-16-2009, 02:25 PM
Originally Posted by Gator
The only person killed so far was one of the protesters. The only violence has been from the government.
8 protesters have died. :skeleton:
Reply

mohsen1985
06-16-2009, 04:35 PM
The protest was very peaceful, I don't exactly know how, why and when during the protest it happened, but only 1 person was killed by gunfire during the protest. From what I hear that person was a 10 year old boy, but I cannot validate that.

When the protest was over, some people tried to break in a basij center. It wasn't a military center, and they opened fire on the people in order to keep them from getting in, since the place was loaded with guns.

This "basij" isn't really an official governmental force. It all started after the revolution. It was just a group of people gathering in the mosques together and acting somewhat like a secret police. They had little rights. They would set up road blocks from time to time and check the cars passing by, and they would actually find drug runners etc in these roadblocks they set up, so they weren't all that bad.

Ever since ahmadi nejad came, since he was a member of basij himself, he supported them, to the point where they think they're some kind of a special military force. Some of them are such extremists, they think they supreme leader is chosen by Imam Mahdi and he's in contact with him etc. They would actually give their lives for him. That's how stupid some of them are. Anyways, they all have guns now, and they all see these events as threats to the supreme leader. You just imagine the rest. . .
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 05:20 PM
"This "basij" isn't really an official governmental force"
I think it actually is.
And in yesterday's protest in Tehran apparently 7 people were killed.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 05:23 PM
At least7...
Reply

mohsen1985
06-16-2009, 05:47 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
"This "basij" isn't really an official governmental force"
I think it actually is.
And in yesterday's protest in Tehran apparently 7 people were killed.
It isn't, the whole ideology behind it was that it's a "people's thing".

1 person killed in the protest, 7 killed after. Many more injured.
Reply

Muhaba
06-16-2009, 05:57 PM
What is happening in Iran is really terrible. Seriously i think that anyone who encourages violence or doesn't tell his supporters to stop violent protests isn't fit to rule to start with. He should be disqualified simply because of that.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 06:01 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
It isn't, the whole ideology behind it was that it's a "people's thing".

1 person killed in the protest, 7 killed after. Many more injured.
But it sure is a right hand for them.A very good one.They provide them guns and have them under their control.I mean it's not official official but still....
Reply

Trumble
06-16-2009, 06:13 PM
Originally Posted by muhaba
What is happening in Iran is really terrible. Seriously i think that anyone who encourages violence or doesn't tell his supporters to stop violent protests isn't fit to rule to start with. He should be disqualified simply because of that.
Who should? Mousavi hasn't 'encouraged violence', or at least as far as we know he hasn't. That seems to have come from the authorities, unless you choose to believe the 'official' fairy stories (and I never do when those same authorities slap curbs on press freedom that would make the Burmese and North Koreans blush). But there are millions who, rightly or wrongly, believe they have been cheated and a movement like that either takes on a life of its own and grows, or slowly peters out.. I doubt Mousavi could influence it much either way any more.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 06:29 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Who should? Mousavi hasn't 'encouraged violence', or at least as far as we know he hasn't. That seems to have come from the authorities, unless you choose to believe the 'official' fairy stories (and I never do when those same authorities slap curbs on press freedom that would make the Burmese and North Koreans blush). But there are millions who, rightly or wrongly, believe they have been cheated and a movement like that either takes on a life of its own and grows, or slowly peters out.. I doubt Mousavi could influence it much either way any more.
Mousavi certainly didn't cause this violance.And they HAVE cheated.no Doubt.
Reply

Muhaba
06-16-2009, 07:11 PM
Well, he did say that the elections were rigged which caused all the problems. and he isn't clearly telling his supporters to stop the violence. (A website message isn't enough. He should tell them through speeches and through the press, etc). A true muslim would give up the presidencial post simply to stop violence even if he has the right to become ruler, as Ali (R) had done. If Mousavi's a true follower of Ali (R) then that is what he should do.

Also, I think that President Ahmadinejad rightfully won the elections. Most people in Iran support a hardline policy and don't even want relations with the West because of the West's anti-islam attitude. i think that Ahmadinejad could have easily gotten well over 50% of the votes.
Reply

Trumble
06-16-2009, 07:28 PM
Originally Posted by muhaba
Well, he did say that the elections were rigged which caused all the problems. and he isn't clearly telling his supporters to stop the violence. (A website message isn't enough. He should tell them through speeches and through the press, etc). A true muslim would give up the presidencial post simply to stop violence even if he has the right to become ruler, as Ali (R) had done. If Mousavi's a true follower of Ali (R) then that is what he should do.

Also, I think that President Ahmadinejad rightfully won the elections. Most people in Iran support a hardline policy and don't even want relations with the West because of the West's anti-islam attitude. i think that Ahmadinejad could have easily gotten well over 50% of the votes.
Your first paragraph does seem rather conditional on your second; or are you seriously suggesting that whatever the evidence may be for elections being rigged it should just be ignored? If so, I'd argue that licensing tyranny and dictatorship is far too high a price to pay, in the long run the violence will be far worse.

As to the result, I simply can't believe it was as reported. Obviously people are disappointed when their candidate loses, but if he is going to be defeated 2-1 on votes you know it and accept it long beforehand, not take to the streets with hundreds of thousands of others to protest, despite the attempts of the authorities to clamp down on communications. I doubt your explanation as well as, if the Iranian experience is anywhere near typical of elections everywhere else, foreign relations have little to do with who you vote for. You are worried about the economy, prospects for your children, eliminating poverty and improving healthcare; not 'taking a hard line' with anybody about anything.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 07:30 PM
Originally Posted by muhaba
Well, he did say that the elections were rigged which caused all the problems. and he isn't clearly telling his supporters to stop the violence. (A website message isn't enough. He should tell them through speeches and through the press, etc). A true muslim would give up the presidencial post simply to stop violence even if he has the right to become ruler, as Ali (R) had done. If Mousavi's a true follower of Ali (R) then that is what he should do.

Also, I think that President Ahmadinejad rightfully won the elections. Most people in Iran support a hardline policy and don't even want relations with the West because of the West's anti-islam attitude. i think that Ahmadinejad could have easily gotten well over 50% of the votes.
You really think this is an Islamic government?
And Mousavi didn't start all this.
And about those lines,whaaaaat?
May i ask where you're from?
Reply

GuestFellow
06-16-2009, 07:53 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Your first paragraph does seem rather conditional on your second; or are you seriously suggesting that whatever the evidence may be for elections being rigged it should just be ignored? If so, I'd argue that licensing tyranny and dictatorship is far too high a price to pay, in the long run the violence will be far worse.

As to the result, I simply can't believe it was as reported. Obviously people are disappointed when their candidate loses, but if he is going to be defeated 2-1 on votes you know it and accept it long beforehand, not take to the streets with hundreds of thousands of others to protest, despite the attempts of the authorities to clamp down on communications. I doubt your explanation as well as, if the Iranian experience is anywhere near typical of elections everywhere else, foreign relations have little to do with who you vote for. You are worried about the economy, prospects for your children, eliminating poverty and improving healthcare; not 'taking a hard line' with anybody about anything.
Well it would be better of Mousavi directly tell his supporters to calm down. Might have more of an impact.

The Iranian government are already investigating into this matter. What more do you want them to do?

Majority of the supporters are the middle class educated citizens. Honestly most of the demonstrations have taken place in Tehran. They have access to advance technology that the poorer citizens do not have access to. The particular consitency does not represent the views of every single Iranian. I hear negative points being made about the current President of Iran, however there is no clear reasoning behind these arguments unless if someone can state them.

I am well aware there is corruptions in Iran, however is President Ahmadinejad accountable for everything?

Originally Posted by MSN
And about those lines,whaaaaat?
May i ask where you're from?
I get the impression you seem to think the election beyond all reasonable doubt, has been rigged.

The truth is no one is exactly sure what has really happened. What are they hope to achieve through these elections?

It is the Ayatollah that makes the decisions. Whoever wins, does it really make a big difference? The Ayatollah had even arrested his own grandson for speaking against him. Should it not be him, people should be challenging?
Reply

Whatsthepoint
06-16-2009, 07:56 PM
I think one of Mousavi's promises in case he should win was to reform the presidential system and take power from the ayatollah to a certain extent.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 08:02 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Well it would be better of Mousavi directly tell his supporters to calm down. Might have more of an impact.


I get the impression you seem to think the election beyond all reasonable doubt, has been rigged.

The truth is no one is exactly sure what has really happened. What are they hope to achieve through these elections?

It is the Ayatollah that makes the decisions. Whoever wins, does it really make a big difference? The Ayatollah had even arrested his own grandson for speaking against him. Should it not be him, people should be challenging?
I think he has.

َAnd i don't think it's been rigged,i KNOW it's been rigged.
You're right about A yatollah,he's the one who calls the shots
Reply

GuestFellow
06-16-2009, 08:12 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
I think he has.

َAnd i don't think it's been rigged,i KNOW it's been rigged.
You're right about A yatollah,he's the one who calls the shots
I'm curious, on what basis do you believe the election has been rigged. Like something must have caused some of the Iranian people to believe the elections was a scandal. How many people actually believe what you claim?Tehran is not the only city. There are millions of Iranians. I highly doubt all of them share your views.

The only reasons I believe the elections could have been rigged due to, how quick the voting process was and how both candidates claim to have won. Hope you don't mind me asking, do you live in Iran?

The last statement, why don't people challenge the Ayatollah?
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
I'm curious, on what basis do you believe the election has been rigged. Like something must have caused some of the Iranian people to believe the elections was a scandal. How many people actually believe what you claim?Tehran is not the only city. There are millions of Iranians. I highly doubt all of them share your views.

The only reasons I believe the elections could have been rigged due to, how quick the voting process was and how both candidates claim to have won. Hope you don't mind me asking, do you live in Iran?

The last statement, why don't people challenge the Ayatollah?
Oh boy!That's like playing with fire.
What gave it away?:)
Reply

Zafran
06-16-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by Whatsthepoint
I think one of Mousavi's promises in case he should win was to reform the presidential system and take power from the ayatollah to a certain extent.
noway - otherwise Mousavi wouldnt be able to run - even if he had to pass that he had to get it through the supreme leader anyway - hes the real ruler of Iran.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by muhaba
What is happening in Iran is really terrible. Seriously i think that anyone who encourages violence or doesn't tell his supporters to stop violent protests isn't fit to rule to start with. He should be disqualified simply because of that.
This election was rigged, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. There was no way that they could have handcounted 40 million paper ballots in only a matter of hours. In the US even with our high tech voting system it takes a least a few hours to count votes. If it was a fair election than we would not have all of these protests and violence going on. This isnt a small number of sore losers, it is a pretty good amount of people protesting. These people have had their votes stolen. I was listening last night to a talk show on the radio and they had an Iranian expert on Iran who said what is going on now is very similar to when he was living there and the people were calling for the overthrow of the Shah. Over half of Irans population is under the age of 30 and they are wanted some form of democratic government and have had it with the hardliners in power. All we can do is watch and wait and hope for the best.
Reply

MSN
06-16-2009, 08:20 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
This election was rigged, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. There was no way that they could have handcounted 40 million paper ballots in only a matter of hours. In the US even with our high tech voting system it takes a least a few hours to count votes. If it was a fair election than we would not have all of these protests and violence going on. This isnt a small number of sore losers, it is a pretty good amount of people protesting. These people have had their votes stolen. I was listening last night to a talk show on the radio and they had an Iranian expert on Iran who said what is going on now is very similar to when he was living there and the people were calling for the overthrow of the Shah. Over half of Irans population is under the age of 30 and they are wanted some form of democratic government and have had it with the hardliners in power. All we can do is watch and wait and hope for the best.
The Supreme Leader like congratulated(other words kind of confirmed?!) his presidency BEFORE the Guardian Council.And it's the Guradian council's responsibility to confrim it.And i don't think they have yet.But again like i said,the Supreme Leader calls the shots.
Reply

Whatsthepoint
06-16-2009, 08:27 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
noway - otherwise Mousavi wouldnt be able to run - even if he had to pass that he had to get it through the supreme leader anyway - hes the real ruler of Iran.
Yes you're right.
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 08:30 PM
Originally Posted by Gator
What violent confrontations have there been? They aren't rioting in the street right? The whole thing seems pretty peaceful so far.

There have been no suicide bombings, killing of police or governmental officials, no attacks on governmental buildings, no rocket attacks and no mass riots.

The only person killed so far was one of the protesters. The only violence has been from the government.
are you kidding, or are you intentionally lying? you didnt see the footage of protestors burning things and smashing up places, as well as attacking a millitia headquarter? the goverment were restoring order to a violent mob, funny how you twist it and say its the other way round.

ppl keep saying a protestor was shot to death, yes he was, only after thousands of them were trying to storm a millitia headquarter, what did they expect?

but its ok, you can keep intentionally lying, ive to expect it from your kind.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 08:37 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
are you kidding, or are you intentionally lying? you didnt see the footage of protestors burning things and smashing up places, as well as attacking a millitia headquarter? the goverment were restoring order to a violent mob, funny how you twist it and say its the other way round.

ppl keep saying a protestor was shot to death, yes he was, only after thousands of them were trying to storm a millitia headquarter, what did they expect?

but its ok, you can keep intentionally lying, ive to expect it from your kind.


I think the people are just fed up in general with how things are in Iran, especially economically. I think this election was the straw that broke the camels back. It seems almost like the 1979 Revolution and the people want change.
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 08:46 PM
lol heres the funny thing, everyone saying its impossible to count all the votes so fast like they did, then how in the world was it possible for mosavi to be calling himself the victor by the next day????????? plz do let us know. nobody is saying anything about that, very strange.....mosavi is a politician, and he is playing like a politician, he knew he was going to lose, so he started this whole mess, first by calling himself the winner before anything was over, then by refusing the result like a baby and taking advantage of his sore loser base, and he knew the western media and governments would be very supportive of his losers demonstrating etc and he uses that to himself and then calls everything rigged.

mosavi, who is mosavi? most of you ppl on here saying wowwww its rigged oh oh so bad poor mosavi he is the reformist hero who will bring the dicatorship down bla bla. you guys never even heard of this mosavi guy until after the election result, and a few truthful journalists have even now admitted that mosavis silly election campaign was nothing special at all, and that it really only kicked off a week before the voting because of some comments that were being made during the debates.

since many dont actually know about mosavi, he was actually close with khomeini, yes that evil mullahhhhhh khomeini who overthrew the shah, yes, your hero, the hero you think who will bring the Islamic regime down actually worked and helped them get there, and he has no intention of ending it neither, so to all you ignorant westerners stop thinking that this mosavi guy is your messiah in Iran who will do your work and end all your problems from Iran.

perhaps when westerners here someone being called a reformist in Iran they think it equals= western puppet who wants to bring western secular way of life to Iran. sorry to burst your bubble, but thats not what it actually means. reformists in Iran are just the group who want to lighten a few laws, they dont actually want to get rid of the Islamic republic and total system, many of mosavis's supporters who are rioting are chanting Islamic shia slogans!!!! so many of you seem to have it twisted, you seem to think that this is a demonstration and fight against the Islamic republic, when its only a fight against ahmedinijad, as robert frisk just mentioned on the news.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-16-2009, 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by muhaba
Well, he did say that the elections were rigged which caused all the problems. and he isn't clearly telling his supporters to stop the violence. (A website message isn't enough. He should tell them through speeches and through the press, etc). A true muslim would give up the presidencial post simply to stop violence even if he has the right to become ruler.
Does that apply only to Mousavi? By your definition it seems that Ahmadinejad might not be a true muslim. For if he was you say that as a true Muslim he would give up the presidential post simpy to stop violence, even if he the right to become ruler. Since he presently is the president, and since he has declared that he has the right to become ruler, and since his giving up that right would no doubt bring an end to the present protests and violence associated with it, which do you think will happen:
Ahmadinejad will prove himself to be a true Muslim and step down?
Ahmadinejad will not step down and prove himself to not be a true Muslim?

BTW, I'm not sure that I agree with your assertion that a true Muslim would step down. But since you are the one who proposed it, I'm curious how you might apply that standard to Ahmadinejad?
Reply

Trumble
06-16-2009, 08:52 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
l you seem to think that this is a demonstration and fight against the Islamic republic, when its only a fight against ahmedinijad, as robert frisk just mentioned on the news.
Erm... nobody thinks that at all. It's 'Fisk', BTW.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-16-2009, 08:53 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I think the people are just fed up in general with how things are in Iran, especially economically. I think this election was the straw that broke the camels back. It seems almost like the 1979 Revolution and the people want change.
Yes but it does not justify some of the violent actions they have taken. Well it certianly does not help to address the issue.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-16-2009, 08:54 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
since many dont actually know about mosavi, he was actually close with khomeini, yes that evil mullahhhhhh khomeini who overthrew the shah, yes, your hero, the hero you think who will bring the Islamic regime down actually worked and helped them get there, and he has no intention of ending it neither, so to all you ignorant westerners stop thinking that this mosavi guy is your messiah in Iran who will do your work and end all your problems from Iran.
I can't speak for others, but I was already aware of all of this. As to who wins the election in Iran, I don't have a vested interest. I only know one person in Iran, a graduate student in university in Tehran, and she didn't think much of Ahmadinejad, but I never talked to her about Mousavi. So, whether he is the right leader for Iran, I'll let Iranians decide. I just hope that their votes are the actual deciding factor, and find it hard to believe that Mousavi lost his home city as has been reported.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 08:54 PM
If Amadenajad was fairly elected than he deserves to be President, the US and the rest of the world will just have to work with him. However this election was anything but fair and the people who voted have a right to have their vote count.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-16-2009, 08:56 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Ahmadinejad will prove himself to be a true Muslim and step down?
Ahmadinejad will not step down and prove himself to not be a true Muslim?

BTW, I'm not sure that I agree with your assertion that a true Muslim would step down. But since you are the one who proposed it, I'm curious how you might apply that standard to Ahmadinejad?
The issue is that there are people who support President Ahmadinejad and do not want him to step down.
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 08:56 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Erm... nobody thinks that at all. It's 'Fisk', BTW.
maybe you dont, but many others do. so yes ERMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM many do, including silly atheist secular iranians living abroad, and the others who still call themselves zorostrians, oh sorry, they dont call themselves iranians, but 'persians'.

fisk frisk my brain automatically thinks and says frisk when i say his name.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 08:59 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Yes but it does not justify some of the violent actions they have taken. Well it certianly does not help to address the issue.


I do not condone violence I detest it. However when people are oppressed and cenosred for so long they just eventual explode and do irrational things. The government cut off access to Facebook and in the past has shut down newspapers and magazines that were critical of it. I think this election is just the symptom of a much bigger problem. I have met a few Iranians in my life most were collegues of my late uncle and they were good decent people who loved their nation, but could not live under the current government.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-16-2009, 09:03 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
The issue is that there are people who support President Ahmadinejad and do not want him to step down.
Oh, I'm sure of that as well. I don't expect Ahmadinejad to step down unless it is ruled that he lost the election, and I don't expect that to happen either. But muhaba made the statement that "A true muslim would give up the presidencial post simply to stop violence even if he has the right to become ruler." I'm just curious to see if really means it and is willing to apply his own unique standard for determining a "true muslim" to Ahmadinejad with the same gusto he suggested it for Mousavi?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 09:16 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iran_a...lyYW5zcmVnaQ--
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 09:20 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
lol this article is complete rubbish and i just wrote an entire paragraph a few posts up.

and to mr trumble, here you goooooooooooooo.
Reply

The_Prince
06-16-2009, 09:23 PM
NOTE TO WESTERNERS, PLZZZZZZZZZZ UNDERSTAND THIS: demonstrations are NOT against the ISLAMIC REGIME, they are against AHMEDINIJAD. demonstrations are NOT calling for an end to the Islamic regime to be replaced by a secular western style government.
Reply

Zafran
06-16-2009, 09:59 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
NOTE TO WESTERNERS, PLZZZZZZZZZZ UNDERSTAND THIS: demonstrations are NOT against the ISLAMIC REGIME, they are against AHMEDINIJAD. demonstrations are NOT calling for an end to the Islamic regime to be replaced by a secular western style government.
Salaam

Yeah i agree - just understand this Mousavi or Ahmedinijhad dont realy chnage things whats so ever - the supreme leader is still the leader. Also both men have zero say on the nuclear issue - thats all supreme leaders control - although the prevoius supreme leader Khomnie was against a nuclear bomb calling it the work of the devil.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
lol this article is complete rubbish and i just wrote an entire paragraph a few posts up.

and to mr trumble, here you goooooooooooooo.
Is everything that is published in the Western media rubbish to you? What ever the outcome of this sitaution maybe all we can do is watch wait and pray, but really this condemnation of the West and Westerners is really wearing thin.
Reply

Zafran
06-16-2009, 10:10 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Is everything that is published in the Western media rubbish to you? What ever the outcome of this sitaution maybe all we can do is watch wait and pray, but really this condemnation of the West and Westerners is really wearing thin.
Salaam

Yeah she has a point as a lot of muslims are also westerners
Reply

czgibson
06-16-2009, 10:33 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by The_Prince
NOTE TO WESTERNERS, PLZZZZZZZZZZ UNDERSTAND THIS: demonstrations are NOT against the ISLAMIC REGIME, they are against AHMEDINIJAD. demonstrations are NOT calling for an end to the Islamic regime to be replaced by a secular western style government.
Everybody knows this.

Where are you getting all this stuff about "what Westerners think"?

Peace
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 10:38 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam

Yeah she has a point as a lot of muslims are also westerners


One of the Muslim ladies that I correspond with is an American born convert/revert to Islam. We both love America and she loves her faith and I love mine. Alot of Muslims are Westerners, some born into the faith, others embrace it as adults An Arab or Eastern born Muslim is not superior to those who are born in the West.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-16-2009, 10:45 PM
Personally I dont think that it would have been possible to make a voting cheat on such big scale. Ahmadinejad must have won in reality.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-16-2009, 10:51 PM
Originally Posted by Amadeus85
Personally I dont think that it would have been possible to make a voting cheat on such big scale. Ahmadinejad must have won in reality.
It seems a good number of Iranians would disagree. It seems now they are using Twitter now to get out to the world what is really happening inside as it seems text messaging and other media outlets have been shut down. This whole thing stinks worse than a dead fish.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-16-2009, 11:05 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
It seems a good number of Iranians would disagree. It seems now they are using Twitter now to get out to the world what is really happening inside as it seems text messaging and other media outlets have been shut down. This whole thing stinks worse than a dead fish.
I wwould be the last person to be called as Iran expert, but from what I know, Iran's majority people are conservative, not rich and living in rural areas. And they seem to support Ahmadinejad, meanwhile his opponent got votes of students, pro western intelectuals and upper middle class, which is a minority.
Reply

Zafran
06-17-2009, 12:05 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
One of the Muslim ladies that I correspond with is an American born convert/revert to Islam. We both love America and she loves her faith and I love mine. Alot of Muslims are Westerners, some born into the faith, others embrace it as adults An Arab or Eastern born Muslim is not superior to those who are born in the West.
True - alot of muslims were born in the "western world" - i'm sure most of muslims on this forum were born in the "west" too:D
peace
Reply

MSN
06-17-2009, 04:58 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
It seems a good number of Iranians would disagree. It seems now they are using Twitter now to get out to the world what is really happening inside as it seems text messaging and other media outlets have been shut down. This whole thing stinks worse than a dead fish.
Facebook,Twitter,Youtube,etc have been blocked.Text messaging has been disabled.BBC radio and television are being jammed and lots of other problems.
And bear in mind that no one's protesting against the regime.And yet see how people are shot at and beaten up,especially the students in dormitory!.
There was no cheating alright:blind:
Reply

The_Prince
06-17-2009, 11:52 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Is everything that is published in the Western media rubbish to you? What ever the outcome of this sitaution maybe all we can do is watch wait and pray, but really this condemnation of the West and Westerners is really wearing thin.
yes it is, because the western media isnt even reporting honestly. yes iranians are demonstrating, but not against the islamic republic, or the islamic regime, they are specifically demonstrating against ahmedinjad. its like if someone in the US demonstrates against bush, it doesnt mean their demonstrating against the foundation and system of their government, just the leader. but western newspapers have an agenda and want to twist whats actually going on.

and if you dont like the condemnation then keep your nose out of iranian affairs, i am an iranian, and i am telling you and your newspapers to do that, you dont like that? too bad, its not your country, and you dont know anything about the people or whats going on. i am sick to my stomach of seeing westerners making their stupid little comments and articles about issues they dont even understand, and issues they are intentionally twisting for their agendas.

how about you go to iran and join one of the demonstrations and enjoy listening to them chanting many Islamic slogans, then come back and post your stupid articles talking about how these ppl want an end to the Islamic system and a pure secularized western version.
Reply

MSN
06-17-2009, 12:01 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
yes it is, because the western media isnt even reporting honestly. yes iranians are demonstrating, but not against the islamic republic, or the islamic regime, they are specifically demonstrating against ahmedinjad. its like if someone in the US demonstrates against bush, it doesnt mean their demonstrating against the foundation and system of their government, just the leader. but western newspapers have an agenda and want to twist whats actually going on.

and if you dont like the condemnation then keep your nose out of iranian affairs, i am an iranian, and i am telling you and your newspapers to do that, you dont like that? too bad, its not your country, and you dont know anything about the people or whats going on. i am sick to my stomach of seeing westerners making their stupid little comments and articles about issues they dont even understand, and issues they are intentionally twisting for their agendas.

how about you go to iran and join one of the demonstrations and enjoy listening to them chanting many Islamic slogans, then come back and post your stupid articles talking about how these ppl want an end to the Islamic system and a pure secularized western version.
Easy easy!!Bikhial
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-17-2009, 02:51 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
lol this article is complete rubbish and i just wrote an entire paragraph a few posts up.

and to mr trumble, here you goooooooooooooo.
Did you actually read the article, or just the headline? For instance, if this article is complete rubbish, then you are suggesting that the following statement made in it is rubbish: "...the likelihood that Iran's clergy-ruled system will undergo a radical change remains dim."


I don't see a significant difference between the article's coments and yours:

quoted from the article you declare complete rubbish:
Many Iranians feel strong kinship with the revolution, its heirs and the system they created, and are reluctant to do anything that would trigger bloody upheaval again. Ahmadinejad has broad support among the poor and pious, who also venerate the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Yet Ahmadinejad's hard-line jousts with the West, his mishandling of the economy and, in particular, what many view as a blatant theft of the election, seem to be turning off growing segments of the middle class.
Originally Posted by The_Prince
NOTE TO WESTERNERS, PLZZZZZZZZZZ UNDERSTAND THIS: demonstrations are NOT against the ISLAMIC REGIME, they are against AHMEDINIJAD. demonstrations are NOT calling for an end to the Islamic regime to be replaced by a secular western style government.

Yet somehow you think that statements such as
There's no way to know if Mousavi will challenge, or would even want to challenge, the Islamic system itself.
and
Mousavi has made no direct threat to the Islamic system.
are complete rubbish.


What rubbish your critique itself is. You don't even take the time to actually read or listen to that which comes out of the west, you just attach the label "west" to it and equate that with rubbish. Such is as biased of a way of viewing the world as anything you might accuse the west itself of doing.

The reality is that the west does know this is not an attempt to replace an Islamic regime by some scular western style government. You can see that in the reports of western media and bloggers if you'll only look past the headlines and actually pay attention:
The Mousavi marches have been peaceful and have not in any way challenged Islam. In fact, they have, if anything, called for upholding the values of the Constitution.
Western onlookers weary of Ahmadinejad's antagonizing would be wise not to expect a sea change in Iranian policy. Though he has stressed the need to engage with the U.S., Mousavi has indicated he would not budge on Iran's right to pursue nuclear power.
The unrest that has rocked Tehran and other cities since results were declared on Saturday is the sharpest expression of discontent against the Islamic Republic's leadership for years.
Note that these reports recognize that this is about who the leadership of Iran is and that is all. It is not suggesting that Mousavi favors the policies that the west might like to see any more than Ahmadinejad does. We are not so naive.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-17-2009, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
Is everything that is published in the Western media rubbish to you?
yes it is, because the western media isnt even reporting honestly. yes iranians are demonstrating, but not against the islamic republic, or the islamic regime, they are specifically demonstrating against ahmedinjad. its like if someone in the US demonstrates against bush, it doesnt mean their demonstrating against the foundation and system of their government, just the leader. but western newspapers have an agenda and want to twist whats actually going on.
I think you are hyperventilating on your own anti-west rhetoric. You sound like this:
Tarverdi Chegine, a 35-year-old government employee, told Reuters: "We have a very brave president. I love him."

He said anti-Ahmadinejad protesters were not true Iranians. "They belong to the West. They belong to Bush. We are anti-Bush."
Hello. Bush isn't president. He's out of office, and doesn't set policy for our country any more. You can hate him all you want, but it is silly to paint all of the west with one brush, and even more ridiculous to think that those backing Mousavi are Bush-backers. It seems that we in the west understand that better than some Iranians do.
Reply

The_Prince
06-17-2009, 04:08 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I think you are hyperventilating on your own anti-west rhetoric. You sound like this:


Hello. Bush isn't president. He's out of office, and doesn't set policy for our country any more. You can hate him all you want, but it is silly to paint all of the west with one brush, and even more ridiculous to think that those backing Mousavi are Bush-backers. It seems that we in the west understand that better than some Iranians do.
are you playing silly, or did you actually fail to understand my simple statement. let me repeat myself, i know bush isnt in power, but during his days in power, people protested against him, it didnt mean they were against the foundation and the system as a whole, just against him. just like now, the protests in iran are against ahmedinijad, not the actual system etc. that was the point, how you couldnt see that i dont know.
Reply

The_Prince
06-17-2009, 04:11 PM
and yes, the article is RUBBISH, complete GARBAGE, it makes a few small sentences here and there with the quotes you just put, but its overall tone is to give the feeling that some revolution COULD take place, and everything is in the headlines, you say ignore the headlines, why? the headline is all in it. these journalists know what they are doing with the way they title the article, and with the over-all tone of the article.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-18-2009, 05:38 AM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
and yes, the article is RUBBISH, complete GARBAGE, it makes a few small sentences here and there with the quotes you just put, but its overall tone is to give the feeling that some revolution COULD take place, and everything is in the headlines, you say ignore the headlines, why? the headline is all in it. these journalists know what they are doing with the way they title the article, and with the over-all tone of the article.
First in journalism, the reporter writes the story, some editor adds the headline, not the reporter. So, yes, ignore the headline when you are critiquing an artilce.

Second to say now that it makes a few small sentences here and there but that your problem is with the overall tone, means that the word "complete" is used incorrectly in describing the article. Complete means everything. You might still think it is overall garbage, but it isn't complete garbage.


Originally Posted by The_Prince
are you playing silly, or did you actually fail to understand my simple statement. let me repeat myself, i know bush isnt in power, but during his days in power, people protested against him, it didnt mean they were against the foundation and the system as a whole, just against him. just like now, the protests in iran are against ahmedinijad, not the actual system etc. that was the point, how you couldnt see that i dont know.
Third, you are not repeating yourself when you say that you know Bush isn't in power. To be repeating yourself, you would had to have already said that, but you hadn't till now.

Fourth. Yes, I understood your illustration. My "Hello. Bush isn't president. He's out of office..." comment wasn't directed at you, but at Tarverdi Chegine who I quoted just before making that comment. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that point.

Fifth. If you understood my posts you would see that indeed I (and most of the rest of the western media) get that the protests in Iran are against ahmedinijad, not the actual system. Notice I said plainly:
The reality is that the west does know this is not an attempt to replace an Islamic regime by some scular western style government.
I also quoted a number of western media outlets all giving evidence of that awareness. Why do you keep projecting on to us that we don't get that.

Sixth. I still think you are hyperventilating. I think that because you don't get that we do understand that the protests are about Ahmedinijad and not the system. I think that because you have missed that point though apparently you've read at least two of my previous posts that showed that we got that. I think that because you asserted to another person that yes yo do think that everything that is published in the Western media is rubbish. And whenever someone makes such universal declarations to paint everyone with the same brush, I suspect that they are either so bigotted and foollish that they wouldn't know the truth if it was staring them in the face or they are so caught up in the moment that they are hyperventilating and momentarily can't think straight. I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are neither a bigot nor a fool, and that the only reason you are using terms like "all", "everyone", and "complete" is because you are so caught up in the emotions of what is going on in your home country that you momentarily aren't thinking straight.

I truly hope that things do work out for you and all Iranians. That your country can resolve its internal differences with one another peacably. And that you will learn to see that there is no monolithic opinion with regard to how people in the west view Iran or any other issue in the world.

But just a final note so that you can see that we get the point that you don't think we get. President Obama was quoted in nearly all the media outlets today saying: "It's important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised.” Those who had been paying attention to more than headlines knew that before the president said so.
Reply

Joe98
06-18-2009, 11:03 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
the protests in iran are against ahmedinijad, not the actual system etc. that was the point, how you couldnt see that i dont know.
We already know that! We have known that since the weekend. Somehow you don't know that we know it. From another comment on Monday:

It's clearly an Islamic protest against specifically the personality, the manner, the language of Ahmadinejad. They absolutely despise him but they do not hate or dislike the Islamic republic that they live in.

-
Reply

Qingu
06-22-2009, 02:45 AM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
NOTE TO WESTERNERS, PLZZZZZZZZZZ UNDERSTAND THIS: demonstrations are NOT against the ISLAMIC REGIME, they are against AHMEDINIJAD. demonstrations are NOT calling for an end to the Islamic regime to be replaced by a secular western style government.
Yeah, um, duh. :) They're chanting "Allahoo ackbar!" from the rooftops. I'm well aware this isn't about secularism vs. Islam.

Though I do think that Mousavi, Rafsajfani, Montazani (I'm probably mispelling their names) and all the clerics on "their" side tend to have a much more tolerant and open vision of Islam, and what an Islamic republic should be, than do Khameini and Ahmadinejad.

Prince, I do think the protesting has spread beyond the Ahmadinejad to include Khameini. I've seen tweets reporting on people chanting "Death to Khameini." So I don't think it's accurate to say that the people are just upset with their president and not their supreme leader as well. And I think a lot of Mousavi's rhetoric seems to question the legitimacy of having a dictator-like supreme leader (he said something like "how can one man of God's creation have absolute authority over millions"?) I also just read that one of the opposition clerics brought up the possibility of replacing the supreme leader with a council.
Reply

Qingu
06-22-2009, 02:50 AM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
and if you dont like the condemnation then keep your nose out of iranian affairs, i am an iranian, and i am telling you and your newspapers to do that, you dont like that? too bad, its not your country, and you dont know anything about the people or whats going on. i am sick to my stomach of seeing westerners making their stupid little comments and articles about issues they dont even understand, and issues they are intentionally twisting for their agendas.

how about you go to iran and join one of the demonstrations and enjoy listening to them chanting many Islamic slogans, then come back and post your stupid articles talking about how these ppl want an end to the Islamic system and a pure secularized western version.
I will not keep my nose out of Iranian affairs.

Similarly, you ought not to keep your nose out of American affairs. The internal affairs in both of our countries affect the whole world. This protest, revolution, whatever you want to call it, is probably the most important event in the history of the world in the past several decades.

And futhermore, I'd like to do whatever I can to help the reformists. You know I'm an atheist. Know also that I recognize that the reformists are Muslims. I don't care. I support them over the government, which I think is clearly corrupt, illegitimate, and dangerous to both Iran's citizens and the rest of the world. I think the reformers, if they succeed, will make the world a far better place. We all have a common interest here.

So no. I will not "keep my nose" out of Iran. And Prince, if you are one of these protesters who's risking your life to make your country a better place, I'd appreciate it if you could PM me and let me know how I can help.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 03:33 AM
dont worry Mousavi isnt a radical reformist - so it wouldnt change the country radically the way some people are making out. Furthermore as stated before its not a protest agaisnt the supreme leader but Ahmenjahd - You know the iranians could have easily solved this IF THEY JUST RECOUNT the election results.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 03:39 AM
"how can one man of God's creation have absolute authority over millions"?) I also just read that one of the opposition clerics brought up the possibility of replacing the supreme leader with a council.
which clearly shows that the one man isnt as powerful as everyone is making out to be - there are other clerics too which make up the council - which has the power to replace the supreme leader - but I havent heard of anyone replacing him!
Reply

KAding
06-22-2009, 10:20 AM
This election and its aftermath is a disaster for the Iranian regime. Even if they manage to suppress the demonstrations, there will for a long time be this uncertainty about the legitimacy of the government.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 04:03 PM
Originally Posted by KAding
This election and its aftermath is a disaster for the Iranian regime. Even if they manage to suppress the demonstrations, there will for a long time be this uncertainty about the legitimacy of the government.
whats even more crazy is that the whole thing could have easily been avoided of they just recounted.
Reply

The_Prince
06-22-2009, 04:31 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
whats even more crazy is that the whole thing could have easily been avoided of they just recounted.
why didnt the opposition just go with this measure through legal means? the ayatollah invited all members for an inquiry so they could discuss their problems and where they feel things went wrong. furthermore they agreed to have a recount in the areas where complaints were made.

the opposition are simply calling for protests, demonstrations, and its obvious they want to get their way through intimidation and force, and as khameini said, that is the real dictatorship.
Reply

alcurad
06-22-2009, 05:10 PM
what the election shows is that the regime will have to change, regardless of anyone really winning.
it does allow for elections/demonstrations etc, but then it's also oppressive.
it does have clergy controlling many aspects of government, but then many people believe in their right to do so, as it's part of most Iranians religion.
this might be dictatorship, but it's unlike any other before it, and certainly nothing like the European/former soviet Union dictatorships.

on the other hand, neither candidate is really going to change the system itself, just it's attitude towards some issues.
the young people protesting are well off middle class, and are protesting against the system more or less, hence the-subjectively-harsh treatment.
on the other hand, the rural population/poor are much more numerous, and they support ahmadi Nijad, seeing him as one who is part of the-corrupt-system, but one who is not corrupt. and thus he has their support.

it was mainly the western media's propaganda/spin that makes them make such a fuss over this, now that their perceptions have come down crashing, and to begin with, most people who voted for mousavi were not voting for him as much as against Ahmadi nijad.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 05:19 PM
I agree with alcurad - but nobody is re counting the results just creating more problems.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 05:21 PM
:sl:

Back from a 1 week vacation :D

A recount will absolutely not be the way to go, because they would have had enough time until now to make up fake votes?

This is beyond just people not wanting Ahmadinejad. In the debates between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad insulted Mr. Rafsanjani (former president and a major character in the Islamic revolution AND one of the top reasons why Khamenei is supreme leader atm) and his family. Rafsanjani wrote a letter to Khamenei asking him to step in and tell Ahmadinejad to backoff and apologize. But he kept silent. Two people who've fought side by side during the Islamic revolution and have been so close to each other are now at war.

The supreme leader supports Ahmadinejad. Why? I don't know. But Ahmadinejad is just a puppet in Khamenei's hands. Now all the other candidates, along with Khatami (former president) and Rafsanjani have teamed up against Ahmadinejad and the supreme leader. This isn't just a fight between candidates. It's a fight between 2 super powers (Rafsanjani and Khamenei) both fighting to take control over the country and the people are just like toys here.
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 05:37 PM
Call me a pessimist but i don't see light at the end of the tunnel.I don't think the protestors will win the fight.Afterall they're the ones with the cards.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 06:00 PM
It's a power struggle and it's anyone's game atm. People are mad because the government rigged the elections and want the true results, and the government can't let the people win, because if they do . . .Just imagine what will happen, they will be overthrown, there will be mass killings and etc... This is if the people win, if the government wins then in 4 years, everyone will boycott the presidential elections. So in both cases the government takes a big hit.
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 06:05 PM
^I disagree.Iran's government is like a casino.Both never lose!!(At least that's what i think)
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 06:20 PM
How can you not lose when you're facing 30 million angry people?

You don't think people boycotting the elections means anything? That's another loss itself.
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 06:25 PM
That's just a graze.Nothing serious.Have you ever been there?(if you don't mind)
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 06:46 PM
Been where?
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 06:49 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
been where?
ir.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 07:04 PM
Yeah, I was born here, lived here for 18 years of my life & 6 years in NYC.
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 07:08 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
Yeah, I was born here, lived here for 18 years of my life & 6 years in NYC.
Good!Pas hamdigaro mifahmim
Reply

alcurad
06-22-2009, 07:18 PM
true. not to mention, the system itself is not changing, the corruption will not end regardless of who wins, Nijad stayed away from it, but didn't do much to counter it.
the elite who ruled Iran under the shah are-more or less- the same ones reigning now, with perhaps the exception of the religous establishment which didn't have much power under him.

until those are confronted, Iran will face major challenges to everything that makes it a nation-state. it could be fragmented/atomized as Iraq was, the same methods will work-sectarian/class tensions being the main issue- the leadership now has been given a wake up call, and they're not stupid, i'm no expert though, so it remains to be seen how the powers that be-internal & external- affect this. because regardless of demonstrations, they are the ones who determine this, remember the demonstrations occurred mainly because of parts of the system allowed/called for it.

apparently the people are only a tool as the borther stated above,,
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-22-2009, 07:23 PM
I heard on the news that a 16 year old girl who was an innocent bystander was shot the the police. That has stoked the fire even more. It is clear that a good number of Iranians are sick of their government and will not stop until the death or they succeed in overthrowing it. This is not so different than what happened when the Shah was overthrown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8qk5...eature=related

Below is the CNN report.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf1wroSx2Q8&NR=1
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 07:31 PM
That's another mistake the government made. It could have ended peacefully, but when the first drop of blood was shed, they dug their own grave.


MSN: yes!


Youtube is blocked, yahoo is blocked, haven't checked SMS's yet, but I think they're still blocked. All the proxy servers I used are blocked, all my anonymizers and anti-filter programs are blocked. Can't even read CNN anymore!:cry:
Reply

MSN
06-22-2009, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
That's another mistake the government made. It could have ended peacefully, but when the first drop of blood was shed, they dug their own grave.


MSN: yes!


Youtube is blocked, yahoo is blocked, haven't checked SMS's yet, but I think they're still blocked. All the proxy servers I used are blocked, all my anonymizers and anti-filter programs are blocked. Can't even read CNN anymore!:cry:
CNN wasn't blocked!But it is now!!Use freegate.SMS is back but be careful
Reply

alcurad
06-22-2009, 07:43 PM
so, what should a government do in such a situation, allow the chaos, or use the Gauntlet even though some may be harmed?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-22-2009, 07:50 PM
Originally Posted by alcurad
so, what should a government do in such a situation, allow the chaos, or use the Gauntlet even though some may be harmed?
In America people have the right to protest and the goverment does not intefer with that right unless get violent and they would not fire live ammunition into a crowd to kill. Tear gas, rubber bullets maybe, but not lethal force. The people have a God given right to be heard and the government of Iran does not want the world to know what is really going on. This was an innocent 16 year old child who was doing nothing violent.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 07:53 PM
The first thing they should have done was not to lie to people?

But since they did lie, I don't think using real bullets and wood/iron clubs to beat people are the way. They could use harmless crowd control weapons maybe?


I can't download freegate :( all the sites leading to it are blocked :( Who can email it to me?
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 07:57 PM
Simple recount the votes quick as possible - that would have stop the protesting - clearly they are not doing that - the more they leave it the worse it will get because then it would seem that the regime is hiding something.
Reply

GuestFellow
06-22-2009, 07:57 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
Youtube is blocked, yahoo is blocked, haven't checked SMS's yet, but I think they're still blocked. All the proxy servers I used are blocked, all my anonymizers and anti-filter programs are blocked. Can't even read CNN anymore!:cry:
Ah O_o

What are they hope to achieve by blocking certain sites? I don't even know what is going on in Iran anymore. :/
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-22-2009, 07:59 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
The first thing they should have done was not to lie to people?

But since they did lie, I don't think using real bullets and wood/iron clubs to beat people are the way. They could use harmless crowd control weapons maybe?


I can't download freegate :( all the sites leading to it are blocked :( Who can email it to me?


I am sorry that you are having your internet access blocked. imsad May the Lord Bless and keep you during this time of tribulation.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 08:03 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Ah O_o

What are they hope to achieve by blocking certain sites? I don't even know what is going on in Iran anymore. :/

I find it stupid that they blocked all media/ contact access - its just going to make the whole thing worse - no wonder the Iranians are screaming "no to dictatorship".
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 08:08 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I am sorry that you are having your internet access blocked. imsad May the Lord Bless and keep you during this time of tribulation.
Hehehe, thanks, but I'm having a blast! I couldn't care less about who's president and what happens. I just like all the mayhem. It's so exciting to see the country in such a mess, kinda funny too. All the people screaming on the rooftops, the protests, it all gives me a great rush.
Reply

mohsen1985
06-22-2009, 08:11 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
I find it stupid that they blocked all media/ contact access - its just going to make the whole thing worse - no wonder the Iranians are screaming "no to dictatorship".
Well, in their opinion blocking the outside media will stop them meddling in the country's business and provoking people to continue the protests.

And they're screaming death to the dictator, meaning Khamenei
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-22-2009, 08:16 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
Hehehe, thanks, but I'm having a blast! I couldn't care less about who's president and what happens. I just like all the mayhem. It's so exciting to see the country in such a mess, kinda funny too. All the people screaming on the rooftops, the protests, it all gives me a great rush.

I think it we are seeing another revolution.
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 08:23 PM
Originally Posted by mohsen1985
Well, in their opinion blocking the outside media will stop them meddling in the country's business and provoking people to continue the protests.

And they're screaming death to the dictator, meaning Khamenei
its made the sitiution worse.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-22-2009, 08:24 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I think it we are seeing another revolution.
I doubt, people in tv who say that Iranians want democracy are in mistake I guess. They still want to live in shiite republic, but many of them dont like the way they country was ruled by the last few years. But on the other hand, only Iranians living there can say what it is all about.
Reply

abedsalam
06-22-2009, 09:15 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
In America people have the right to protest and the goverment does not intefer with that right unless get violent and they would not fire live ammunition into a crowd to kill. Tear gas, rubber bullets maybe, but not lethal force. The people have a God given right to be heard and the government of Iran does not want the world to know what is really going on. This was an innocent 16 year old child who was doing nothing violent.
My dear Brother
I'm afraid your memory failed to mentioned the Firing and Killing of US Students protesting against the war in Vietnam. If i remember well it was at Kent University. You might like to check to archives which count the US citizens being shot and killed demonstrating against the War in Vietnam.
Look at the Death Penalty Rate in the US, Texas, and compare it with Iran.
The Aids Program in Iran pays for all antiviral medication, also including Gender Change Operations. Look at the AIDS rate in Washington DC among Blacks, comparable only with some African Countries.
We should also be careful not to fall in the trap of prefabricated slogans like Iran denying the Holocaust. The Jewish Community in Iran is the largest in the Middle East, ca. 30.000 members. They have one seat in the Iranian Parliament. Ahmedinajad only said that Israel with its more than 40 years of occupations and suppression of Palestine and ignoring all UN resolutions will one day disappear from the map.
Ayatollah Khomeini declared the Nuclear Program which was initiated by the
US and Germany useless and condemned the construction and usage of Atomic Weapons as unislamic in a Fatwa.
Do you sincerely believe that the Iranians with one Atomic Weapon like a Hiroshima type bomb, would be an existential threat to Israel which possesses an arsenal of at least 150 nuclear devices with supreme delivery vehicles, cruise missiles, MIRVS etc. Iranians have never attacked any neighbor Country but where object of Soviet Occupation, British and US interference in the last 100 years.
Whether Sunni or Shia, that is not the Question. Look at the map and You will see that in each of the neighbor Countries are US bases.
I also find the pictures and Videos coming out from Iran very disturbing but we as Muslims should never forget that it is the very first time in the History of Islam that a country tries to develop an Islamic REPUBLIC.
I wish all the people so concerned about the violation of Human Right's would also demonstrate in front of certain Islamic Countries Embassies which do not even allow women to drive a car nor to leave the house alone, not to mention voting rights..
Or would demonstrate for the Rights of our Sisters to study and leave Analphabetism behind. IN many Islamic Countries the illiteracy rate among women is more than 60%. In Iran we have a female Vice President, the rate of female Students at Iranian Universities is higher than 50%.
Let our Iranian Brothers sort out their enormous problems without interference from abroad. I
Reply

Zafran
06-22-2009, 09:40 PM
Ayatollah Khomeini declared the Nuclear Program which was initiated by the
US and Germany useless and condemned the construction and usage of Atomic Weapons as unislamic in a Fatwa.
salaam

this is true

peace
Reply

O2K
06-22-2009, 09:44 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
In America people have the right to protest and the goverment does not intefer with that right unless get violent and they would not fire live ammunition into a crowd to kill. .
Unless your at Kent State.
Reply

The_Prince
06-22-2009, 11:24 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I think it we are seeing another revolution.
no we are not, because not all Iranians are against the government. you say this is like back in 1979, which is quite an ignorant statement to make. EVERYONE in Iran back in 79 was against the Shah, he had no support at all, in today's Iran everyone is NOT against ahmedinijad, infact he just won an election incase you didnt realize, no matter how much your own media brainwashes you with their propaganda that it was rigged bla bla, face the music, he won the election, so this isnt a revolution, its a bunch of thugs and hoodlums protesting because of sour grapes.

furthermore did you know that Tehran isnt the only city in Iran? and that 95%of all protests have happened in this city mainly? so no, there is no revolution, as much as you a western would love to see one.
Reply

The_Prince
06-22-2009, 11:26 PM
Originally Posted by Amadeus85
I doubt, people in tv who say that Iranians want democracy are in mistake I guess. They still want to live in shiite republic, but many of them dont like the way they country was ruled by the last few years. But on the other hand, only Iranians living there can say what it is all about.
most of the Iranians in Iran are on par with your first 2 sentences, they dont want a complete overthrow of the Islamic republic, just more flexibility and less strictness etc.
Reply

The_Prince
06-22-2009, 11:29 PM
also about Neda, yes what happened to her is bad, and they should find the person who did it if they can, but i find it really funny that westerners are using her death as some symbol, and saying awww how sad. where the hell were you guys when hundreds of nedas were being killed in Palestine just a few months ago? being killed with your tax dollars and your weapons, and the support of your voted government? where was the rage when a 1 week old baby died, or when a whole familly died in their house, or when a 5 month old baby died, where all of you guys??? bunch of hypocrites, dont even pretend that you guys give a **** about neda, its an insult to her.
Reply

abedsalam
06-22-2009, 11:34 PM
We should stop underlining the differences between Shiites and Sunbnis. It is an ISLAMIC Republic. Further generations will judge about it but we should leave our Islamic brothers i Iran alone to sort out differences. Think about the history of the French Revolution or the History of the Cuban Revolution, each of them a revolution sui generis
Reply

abedsalam
06-22-2009, 11:40 PM
[QUOTE=The_Prince;1173444]also about Neda, yes what happened to her is bad, and they should find the person who did it if they can, but i find it really funny that westerners are using her death as some symbol, and saying awww how sad. where the hell were you guys when hundreds of nedas were being killed in Palestine just a few months ago? being killed with your tax dollars and your weapons, and the support of your voted government? where was the rage when a 1 week old baby died, or when a whole familly died in their house, or when a 5 month old baby died, where all of you guys??? bunch of hypocrites, dont even pretend that you guys give a **** about neda, its an insult to her.[/QUOTE

Maybe I missed it but who spoke about the at least 120 civilians killed in the last US Air Strike in Afghanistan?
Hypocrites and Suckers who swallow every lie of the Imperium. Goebbels know how to do it Repeat the lies as often as possible under different disguise and they become reality. Where is YOUR historical conscience, Brothers?
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 12:13 AM
no one spoke about the 120 dead, no one cares, their just afghani villagers, their blood is worthless to westerners, just a small statement of 'regret' and thats it.
Reply

abedsalam
06-23-2009, 12:29 AM
sorry to correct you, I DO care and I'm a 'Westerner" lol
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 12:36 AM
Originally Posted by abedsalam
sorry to correct you, I DO care and I'm a 'Westerner" lol
when i say westerner= none-Muslim, if your Muslim it doesnt matter if ur westerner or from mars, your part of the ummah. im technically a westerner too, born in the U.S. and all that.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 12:55 AM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
when i say westerner= none-Muslim, if your Muslim it doesnt matter if ur westerner or from mars, your part of the ummah. im technically a westerner too, born in the U.S. and all that.

Of course we are all horrible evil people:enough!: I am just as outraged as anyone else about what is happening in Palestine and Afganistan. I do care about Neda and the other one like her. Muslims talk about Palestine and the atrocites commited there, but what about what is happening in Darfur, the murder and the rapes going on there? Since it is mostly Christians this is happening to it isnt as heinous?
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 07:18 AM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
In America people have the right to protest and the goverment does not intefer with that right unless get violent and they would not fire live ammunition into a crowd to kill. Tear gas, rubber bullets maybe, but not lethal force. The people have a God given right to be heard and the government of Iran does not want the world to know what is really going on. This was an innocent 16 year old child who was doing nothing violent.
You're probably just not old enough to remember. Though it usually wasn't like what we are seeing in Tehran today, we too have killed our own, and I don't just mean the Civil War. Ever hear of Kent State? And there were plenty before it that aren't known as well simply because they weren't on live TV.

(And I see that I was slow to make my comment, as many have already referred to Kent State before me.)
Reply

mohsen1985
06-23-2009, 09:01 AM
Neda was actually 26, not 16. Guess it's another lie made up by the media to make things look worse:blind:
Reply

north_malaysian
06-23-2009, 09:31 AM
!!! ایران آزاد
Reply

salafy_masry
06-23-2009, 12:43 PM
Same as the actions of the Jews .. they want to control the media to show that they are right :)
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 02:54 PM
Originally Posted by salafy_masry
Same as the actions of the Jews .. they want to control the media to show that they are right :)

I know a lot of people working in the media. I know owners, producers, reporters, and editors. I know TV, radio, and newspapers. I know small town markets and large city markets. I myself have been a newspaper photographer/journalist. And in that context I have known Christians and humanists and Muslims and pagans and even one Wiccan. But while I certainly don't know everyone, I can tell you that I personally don't know one single Jew in that entire group. (And it's not that I don't know any Jews at all either; I know plenty in other contexts, just not working in the media.) I'm not saying that there aren't any Jews involved in the media, there are, but the idea that Jews control the media is more than a little overstated. And, really, it isn't relative to the discussion underway in this thread.
Reply

Zafran
06-23-2009, 03:16 PM
I think he means the pro zionists control the media - they atleast used to control the media - For the past 30 years there was no discussion about Isreal was always one sided atleast in the US it was. You also have to take in account of large corporations and there influence on the media - thats no conspiracy theory thats preety much factual - lets not forget about the pro Isreali Lobby and its past influenece.

However back to the topic on the Issue on Iran - most of america is against Iran anyway. Dont realy expect anything new from Fox News or CNN.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-23-2009, 03:51 PM
Originally Posted by salafy_masry
Same as the actions of the Jews .. they want to control the media to show that they are right :)
I cant say about other countries, but in my country one of the biggest daily newspaper is own and ran by people with jewish roots. I dont know if I can call them jews, because they are mostly atheists or agnostics. All are very liberal, fiercely anti catholic, pro european and used to be radical communists in past. I can also say that great majority of our feminists had jewish parents or grandparents.
Reply

Zafran
06-23-2009, 04:02 PM
Originally Posted by Amadeus85
I cant say about other countries, but in my country one of the biggest daily newspaper is own and ran by people with jewish roots. I dont know if I can call them jews, because they are mostly atheists or agnostics. All are very liberal, fiercely anti catholic, pro european and used to be radical communists in past. I can also say that great majority of our feminists had jewish parents or grandparents.
are they heavily pro Isreal??
Reply

Amadeus85
06-23-2009, 04:10 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
are they heavily pro Isreal??
No, most of them sympatize with Israeli Left, they reject israeli nationalism (especially people like Netanyahu). But on the other hand, they are as pro israeli as israeli Left, wchich can be sometimes hardline. They dont support militar action on Gaza or Lebanon.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 06:45 PM
President Obama held a news confernance earlier this afternoon and took a more tough stance on condemning the violence in Iran and he mentioned Neda (may she rest in peace) specifically . He still stated that the US respects Irans soverignty, but that the protesters have a right to be heard and to free speech and that the US will not be the target of blame for what has happened.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090623/...pr_wh/us_obama
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 06:54 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
President Obama held a news confernance earlier this afternoon and took a more tough stance on condemning the violence in Iran and he mentioned Neda (may she rest in peace) specifically . He still stated that the US respects Irans soverignty, but that the protesters have a right to be heard and to free speech and that the US will not be the target of blame for what has happened.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090623/...pr_wh/us_obama
lol the same obama who supports israel, and doesnt say a word of condemnation when they killed hundreds of nedas, ah yes his opinion meanssssssss so much.

sheesh when will you westerners ever end this disgusting hypocrisy???????
Reply

Tony
06-23-2009, 06:56 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
lol the same obama who supports israel, and doesnt say a word of condemnation when they killed hundreds of nedas, ah yes his opinion meanssssssss so much.

sheesh when will you westerners ever end this disgusting hypocrisy???????
Bro were not all hypocrites you know :D
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:01 PM
Originally Posted by TKTony
Bro were not all hypocrites you know :D
lol, im not refering to the Muslim ones.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 07:01 PM
Originally Posted by TKTony
Bro were not all hypocrites you know :D

I am no hypocrite. I condemn the actions if Israel all of the time, just because they are Israel does not absolve them of responisbilty of unjust actions and deaths. Some Muslims not all protray non Muslim Westerners as evil and the blame for the ills of the world. What about what is going on in Darfur ? The rapes and murders of the Christian population by the Muslim government? Do Muslims think it is acceptable what is happening there?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 07:03 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
lol the same obama who supports israel, and doesnt say a word of condemnation when they killed hundreds of nedas, ah yes his opinion meanssssssss so much.

sheesh when will you westerners ever end this disgusting hypocrisy???????

What about Darfur? Hundreds of women there have been raped and killed, yet the Islamic community seems to remain mum on the issue.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:04 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I am no hypocrite. I condemn the actions if Israel all of the time, just because they are Israel does not absolve them of responisbilty of unjust actions and deaths. Some Muslims not all protray non Muslim Westerners as evil and the blame for the ills of the world. What about what is going on in Darfur ? The rapes and murders of the Christian population by the Muslim government? Do Muslims think it is acceptable what is happening there?
oh my, you do know the darfurians are not Christians but Muslims right?
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:05 PM
so what's the fight about here?
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
What about Darfur? Hundreds of women there have been raped and killed, yet the Islamic community seems to remain mum on the issue.
im not the one who is comming out preaching like a hypocrite, so what about darfur? YOUR the one, you and your president and your stupid media who is acting all sad and depressed for iran, but the same president, and same media were all supporting Israel and hardly gave the same attention to the victims.

see the difference??? yes, i condemn darfur, but i dont pick and choose which areas and conflicts to condemn as YOU AND YOUR PEOPLE DO, see the difference? see?
Reply

Tony
06-23-2009, 07:07 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
I am no hypocrite. I condemn the actions if Israel all of the time, just because they are Israel does not absolve them of responisbilty of unjust actions and deaths. Some Muslims not all protray non Muslim Westerners as evil and the blame for the ills of the world. What about what is going on in Darfur ? The rapes and murders of the Christian population by the Muslim government? Do Muslims think it is acceptable what is happening there?
easy now, I wasnt calling you hypocrite. and the rape and murder of any innocent is equally abhorrent as far as I am conscerned, that is why I will never be one of those who say we should stop anymore people seeking refuge here despite being overcrowded
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:08 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
so what's the fight about here?
the fight is about hypocrites acting all sad for the iranian protesters, and for freedom, yet say nothing about Israel when they do 20 times worst.
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:13 PM
The_prince,what do you think of the protestors in Iran?Do you think they're right?
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:16 PM
just in:

At least 45 people have died in a missile strike by a US drone aircraft in Pakistan, officials there have said.

The people killed in South Waziristan region had been attending a funeral for others killed in a US drone strike earlier on Tuesday.

Intelligence officials said at least 45 people had been killed and dozens more injured in the later strike, when two missiles were fired.

But a local official told BBC News the death toll was more than 50.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8115814.stm

lol and this is the same country who's leader just came out saying he is appaled by violence etc? wowwwwwww, the hypocrisy is utterly disgusting.
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 07:16 PM
Originally Posted by TKTony
easy now, I wasnt calling you hypocrite. and the rape and murder of any innocent is equally abhorrent as far as I am conscerned, that is why I will never be one of those who say we should stop anymore people seeking refuge here despite being overcrowded
I didnt meant to quote you, Im sorry. It was the post before yours.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:17 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
The_prince,what do you think of the protestors in Iran?Do you think they're right?
no i dont.
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:18 PM
Why not?
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 07:20 PM
The conflict in Darfur is the Arab goverment killing off the blacks. This includes Christians, Muslims and those who follow tribal religions. I have spent numerious times volunteering at my church sorting and packing up relief boxes to send to the refugee camps and the whole things is just sad.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:20 PM
because they are sore losers, and need to accept the reality that they lost the vote, that they are not the majority, and their not as special as they think they are. they are the real dictatorship, trying to get their way through violence and intimidation, trying to run the country according to their way, against the majority who voted for ahmedinijad, thats the real dictatorship as khameini said.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:22 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The conflict in Darfur is the Arab goverment killing off the blacks. This includes Christians, Muslims and those who follow tribal religions. I have spent numerious times volunteering at my church sorting and packing up relief boxes to send to the refugee camps and the whole things is just sad.
so why did you mention Christians specifically, Christians getting raped specifically, why try to decieve and make it seem that the conflict in Darfur is about Christians getting oppressed when it isnt??? its mainly Muslims, not Christians at all, why you playing tricks and games???????

as for the Arab government, last i checked their skin colour wasnt green or purple, they too are black.
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:24 PM
You live in Iran right??They didn't start the violence and how do you know that they're the minority??
Reply

Tony
06-23-2009, 07:25 PM
Come on people we all hate the sickening events that are happening not just here but around the globe to all types of people, let as least be united in speaking out together. I am sure that we feel the same things and seek our refuge from it in God. Not trying to be cheesy but we are all init together I think, so first lets wish peace for each other who are actually on the same side
Reply

alcurad
06-23-2009, 07:27 PM
^wasn't the 'arab' government though, al-basheer is a dictator.
Reply

GreyKode
06-23-2009, 07:30 PM
I agree with brother TKTONY.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
You live in Iran right??They didn't start the violence and how do you know that they're the minority??
im not in Iran but have familly in Tehran. how do i know their in the minority, well, because they lostttttttttttttttttt the vote!!!!

also let us look at the protests, 95% of the protests are taking place in Tehran, and as we know Iran is a big country with many other large cities etc, so where are all the equally large and chaotic protests taking place there? as one CIA analyst said, the protests in Tehran are but a drop in an ocean. Even at most, the protests in Tehran reached half a million, so even when we look at the ground effects, the protests etc, we fail to see this large huge number of angry ppl going for a revolution.

ppl are saying if Ahmed won the vote then where are all his supporters, its actually the other way round, if Ahmed stole the election then where the heck are all the angry ppl? all i see is half a million (reported by biased western media, so even that may be a lie, but ill go with it) protesters in Tehran, a city of more than 8 million people.
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:37 PM
^They're not protesting in other places most likely because they're afraid.They don't have any guns but the riot police do.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 07:39 PM
Originally Posted by MSN
^They're not protesting in other places most likely because they're afraid.They don't have any guns but the riot police do.
why did they do it in Tehran then? they are so big as we are supposed to believe, so whats the problem, if 500,000 go out the police cant do much.

heck i am sure 50 years from now, or even less, we will find out that the CIA and other western covert groups played a very big role in the protests taking place in Tehran, just like operation Ajax.
Reply

MSN
06-23-2009, 07:43 PM
I'm not really into politics so i'm not really on anybody's side here.
Because Tehran is a big city and therefor it's harder to keep them under control.
Reply

KooKoo
06-23-2009, 07:52 PM
The Prince is right, if the Iranian people (if there were no voting irregularities of course) want a government inept of handling their economy, interested more (like the west, I know) in other nation's affairs, eg: Hezbullah, than that is their choice.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 07:57 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince

sheesh when will you westerners ever end this disgusting hypocrisy???????
Originally Posted by The_Prince
lol, im not refering to the Muslim ones.

So you replace the sin of hyprocrisy with that of stereotyping and bigotism. I don't call that improvement.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
the fight is about hypocrites acting all sad for the iranian protesters, and for freedom, yet say nothing about Israel when they do 20 times worst.


"Twenty times worse."


The death of every innocent is an infinite loss, 20X or 1/20th of an infinite loss is still an infinite loss so comparing numbers isn't really the point.

You do have a point that some people will mourn the death of a person who they see as protesting rights in Tehran, or a few years ago in Tienamen Square, and ignore that some of their allies do the same thing in quelling other distrubances. Both are equally tragice.

However, to say as you have that nothing has been said over these events in Israel is simply not true. As evidence, I submit this from an article I found in a quick search of CNN articles:

The Palestinian death toll in the Gaza conflict climbed to more than 1,000 today after nearly three weeks of intensive Israeli bombing and fighting on the ground.
Red Cross describes situation in Gaza as 'shocking'
Brussels - The European Union's top foreign-policy official on Saturday condemned as "unacceptable" the death of Palestinian civilians in Israeli air-strikes and called for an end to violence.

"The current Israeli strikes are inflicting an unacceptable toll on Palestinian civilians and will only worsen the humanitarian crisis as well as complicate the search for a peaceful solution," EU High Representative Javier Solana said in a statement.

You see what you want to see, but what you fail to see is that the very things that you condemn "westerners" for not doing, they actually are doing. You ask us to quit being hyprocrits and to see not just the story in Iran, but to open our eyes to see the same story being played out in other places like in the Israeli response to Palestinians. Now maybe you will see that at least some have. So, please quit calling us all hyprocrits and open your eyes to the full story, not just that which is fits with your sterotypical view of the west.
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 08:18 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
because they are sore losers, and need to accept the reality that they lost the vote, that they are not the majority, and their not as special as they think they are. they are the real dictatorship, trying to get their way through violence and intimidation, trying to run the country according to their way, against the majority who voted for ahmedinijad, thats the real dictatorship as khameini said.
Do you speak out just as strongly against those in Hamas who fire rockets into Israel in an attempt to get their way through violence and intimidation, or those who strap bombs to themselves and then get on busses or walk into crowded markets and blow themselves up as an act designed to get their way through violenenc and intimidation? Or are you just as much of a hyprocrit as you accuse others of being?
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:23 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Do you speak out just as strongly against those in Hamas who fire rockets into Israel in an attempt to get their way through violence and intimidation, or those who strap bombs to themselves and then get on busses or walk into crowded markets and blow themselves up as an act designed to get their way through violenenc and intimidation? Or are you just as much of a hyprocrit as you accuse others of being?
there is a difference between hamas and the protesters. the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way.

hamas meanwhile, and the entire palestinian people are under OPEN OCCUPATION, there is no debate about it. they are ppl under occupation for 60 years, getting their land stolen, having no identity, no passports, no open freedom to even move around their own land etc etc. hence they have a legitimate right to resistence, they are fighting to be able to have a country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so you trying to compare the two is like comparing mushrooms with peanuts. try harder.
Reply

Tony
06-23-2009, 08:24 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Do you speak out just as strongly against those in Hamas who fire rockets into Israel in an attempt to get their way through violence and intimidation, or those who strap bombs to themselves and then get on busses or walk into crowded markets and blow themselves up as an act designed to get their way through violenenc and intimidation? Or are you just as much of a hyprocrit as you accuse others of being?
I hope Allah would give me the strength to fight for Hamas if I lived in Gaza
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 08:28 PM
Originally Posted by TKTony
Come on people we all hate the sickening events that are happening not just here but around the globe to all types of people, let as least be united in speaking out together. I am sure that we feel the same things and seek our refuge from it in God. Not trying to be cheesy but we are all init together I think, so first lets wish peace for each other who are actually on the same side
AMEN. Either you are for peace anbd those in power have a responsibility to those they serve or you believe that might makes right and we all go back to a sad time in world history.

I believe that people ought to have the right to peaceful assembly and protest, even against one's own government. I also believe that the government is fully within its rights to ignore that protest if it so chooses and accept the consequences at the next election and also to make sure that the protests remain peaceful by arresting those that incite violence in the midst of those protests. Those who deny these basic rights, not guaranteed by political will but by our creator are neither advocates of genuine peace. For shalom or salaam is not just about the cessation of violence but about living in a rightly ordered moral universe in which justice gives voice to the disenfranchised and the week are protected (rather than taken advantage of) by the strong and those in power. It makes no difference whether talking about Iran, China, Israel, Palestine, Iraq, northern Ireland, Darfur, the US-Mexican border, or your own neighborhood we all have a responsibility for one another.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:29 PM
people who are in the majority, living under occupation, with NO COUNTRY, and rise up to fight their occupiers for freedom is not bullying or intimidating to simply get their way, its them fighting for their freedom and right to live in their homes. but graceseeker u just exposed yourself, because from your latest comment it shows how you downgrade the Palestinian suffering and what their really going through with your shallow comparison, therein again highlighting the western hypocrisy. :)
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 08:30 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
there is a difference between hamas and the protesters. the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way.

hamas meanwhile, and the entire palestinian people are under OPEN OCCUPATION, there is no debate about it. they are ppl under occupation for 60 years, getting their land stolen, having no identity, no passports, no open freedom to even move around their own land etc etc. hence they have a legitimate right to resistence, they are fighting to be able to have a country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so you trying to compare the two is like comparing mushrooms with peanuts. try harder.

OK, delete Hamas. How about the Shi'a who walks into the Sunni market and blows him/herself up? Show me where you have cried over that.
Reply

din1184
06-23-2009, 08:31 PM
I'm very sad to Muslims acting in such a manor. The underlined problem in Iran is Greed. One man refuses to let go of his power. This is not Islam. As a convert, my Muslim brothers and sisters are setting such a bad example. They’re more worried about power money other then what needs to be addressed, the religion. When are we going to learn??? Its disheartening to see the last perfected religion Allah has given us, the human race has tainted it too. I'm spiritually confused.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:32 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
AMEN. Either you are for peace anbd those in power have a responsibility to those they serve or you believe that might makes right and we all go back to a sad time in world history.

I believe that people ought to have the right to peaceful assembly and protest, even against one's own government. I also believe that the government is fully within its rights to ignore that protest if it so chooses and accept the consequences at the next election and also to make sure that the protests remain peaceful by arresting those that incite violence in the midst of those protests. Those who deny these basic rights, not guaranteed by political will but by our creator are neither advocates of genuine peace. For shalom or salaam is not just about the cessation of violence but about living in a rightly ordered moral universe in which justice gives voice to the disenfranchised and the week are protected (rather than taken advantage of) by the strong and those in power. It makes no difference whether talking about Iran, China, Israel, Palestine, Iraq, northern Ireland, Darfur, the US-Mexican border, or your own neighborhood we all have a responsibility for one another.
those in power have the responsibility to restore order and law from a group of thugs who are calling for an overthrow of the democratically elected president, especially when covert western outsiders are playing a role in these plots for the overthrowing of the governemtn as a whole to be replaced by a puppet subserviant system as was done with the shah.
Reply

din1184
06-23-2009, 08:34 PM
Show me in the holy Quran where it says, muslims will be at war with each other. Whats this world comming too????
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
OK, delete Hamas. How about the Shi'a who walks into the Sunni market and blows him/herself up? Show me where you have cried over that.
there is a recent thread on the taliban where i speak against them for killing other Muslims, and you wont find any statement from me that supports such suicide bombings whether from a shia against a sunni or a sunni against a shia.

and with all that i have indeed spoken against the civil war violence in Iraq.
Reply

Tony
06-23-2009, 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by din1184
I'm very sad to Muslims acting in such a manor. The underlined problem in Iran is Greed. One man refuses to let go of his power. This is not Islam. As a convert, my Muslim brothers and sisters are setting such a bad example. They’re more worried about power money other then what needs to be addressed, the religion. When are we going to learn??? Its disheartening to see the last perfected religion Allah has given us, the human race has tainted it too. I'm spiritually confused.
as far as I can see only one man got politics and religion absolutely right, may Allah make us all to be like Rasulullah, Ameen
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
people who are in the majority, living under occupation, with NO COUNTRY, and rise up to fight their occupiers for freedom is not bullying or intimidating to simply get their way, its them fighting for their freedom and right to live in their homes. but graceseeker u just exposed yourself, because from your latest comment it shows how you downgrade the Palestinian suffering and what their really going through with your shallow comparison, therein again highlighting the western hypocrisy. :)
As you said about those who support Mousavi -- they lost. Well, the folks in Gaza did too. 40 years ago they attacked Israel and they lost. Israel made peace with it's neighbors and that peace included these territories where the Palestinians live. I don't have to agree that it was fair, but it is what it is and was decided between sovereign nations of whom these Palestinians should have been represented by their leadership. I don't think that the Egyptians or the Jordanians really cared much about what happened to them, but you can't blame Israel for that, they were the party that was attacked. Lots to blame Israel for since then, but if we are simply going to use the prinicipal you suggested -- "the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way" -- the hypocrisy is to think that the Palestinians are doing anything different than these protestors in Iran. Seems to me that you are exposing your own hypocrisy as much as anything you accuse me of.
Reply

alcurad
06-23-2009, 08:43 PM
actions of certain governments shouldn't be generalized, most people usually have very little say in such matters.
this thread took a downward spiral recently, we all would benefit from civilized disagreement, otherwise the prophet says:
مَن كانَ يُؤمنُ باللهِ والَيومِ الآخِر فليَـقُل خَيراً أوِليَصْمُت

Let The Believer In Allah And Day Of Judgment Either Speak Good Or Keep Silent.

not that truth shouldn't be spoken, and wrong-doing not condemned.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:45 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As you said about those who support Mousavi -- they lost. Well, the folks in Gaza did too. 40 years ago they attacked Israel and they lost. Israel made peace with it's neighbors and that peace included these territories where the Palestinians live. I don't have to agree that it was fair, but it is what it is and was decided between sovereign nations of whom these Palestinians should have been represented by their leadership. I don't think that the Egyptians or the Jordanians really cared much about what happened to them, but you can't blame Israel for that, they were the party that was attacked. Lots to blame Israel for since then, but if we are simply going to use the prinicipal you suggested -- "the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way" -- the hypocrisy is to think that the Palestinians are doing anything different than these protestors in Iran. Seems to me that you are exposing your own hypocrisy as much as anything you accuse me of.
zzz again your comparisons are fruitless. as for history, go check history, the zionists attacked first, killing and stealing land while kicking people out, so even at that front your wrong, your basically wrong on every point, each one, :).
Reply

ragdollcat1982
06-23-2009, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As you said about those who support Mousavi -- they lost. Well, the folks in Gaza did too. 40 years ago they attacked Israel and they lost. Israel made peace with it's neighbors and that peace included these territories where the Palestinians live. I don't have to agree that it was fair, but it is what it is and was decided between sovereign nations of whom these Palestinians should have been represented by their leadership. I don't think that the Egyptians or the Jordanians really cared much about what happened to them, but you can't blame Israel for that, they were the party that was attacked. Lots to blame Israel for since then, but if we are simply going to use the prinicipal you suggested -- "the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way" -- the hypocrisy is to think that the Palestinians are doing anything different than these protestors in Iran. Seems to me that you are exposing your own hypocrisy as much as anything you accuse me of.
eygpt made peace with Israel. As far as Iran goes things are going to get worse before it gets better.
Reply

The_Prince
06-23-2009, 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
eygpt made peace with Israel. As far as Iran goes things are going to get worse before it gets better.
yes, thanks to you.
Reply

Zafran
06-23-2009, 09:10 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As you said about those who support Mousavi -- they lost. Well, the folks in Gaza did too. 40 years ago they attacked Israel and they lost. Israel made peace with it's neighbors and that peace included these territories where the Palestinians live. I don't have to agree that it was fair, but it is what it is and was decided between sovereign nations of whom these Palestinians should have been represented by their leadership. I don't think that the Egyptians or the Jordanians really cared much about what happened to them, but you can't blame Israel for that, they were the party that was attacked. Lots to blame Israel for since then, but if we are simply going to use the prinicipal you suggested -- "the protesters lost a vote, didnt get power, so now they want to bully everyone else to get their way" -- the hypocrisy is to think that the Palestinians are doing anything different than these protestors in Iran. Seems to me that you are exposing your own hypocrisy as much as anything you accuse me of.

No idea what book you read that but Isreal stole land in 1948 - thats why there is a problem right now called the right to return problem. The only thing the palestianins have done wrong is suicide bombing - other then they havent gained anything from it.
Reply

Whatsthepoint
06-23-2009, 09:24 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
yes, thanks to you.
how do you know?
Reply

Grace Seeker
06-23-2009, 11:59 PM
Originally Posted by The_Prince
zzz again your comparisons are fruitless. as for history, go check history, the zionists attacked first, killing and stealing land while kicking people out, so even at that front your wrong, your basically wrong on every point, each one, :).

I suppose each person reads history differently depending on where one stands to view it from. I see a lot of similarity between the Palestinians and the protestors in Iran. I think both groups are in the right to express their disastifaction with the continuance of the status quo. But if you are going to say that having lost or won is sufficient grounds for determining who is right, then both Israel and Ahmedinajab one and the Palestinians and Mousavi's supporters can protest all they want, but they certainly shouldn't incite violence just because they lost. Get over it. Get on with your lives.

That you can't see the similarity and how your argument for one can also be applied to the other is, I suspect, because you support one and not the other. And that your support of their agenda is what determines your evaluation of the "rightness" of the various causes shows that you are less than an unbiased observer when you label others as hyprocrits and fail to see same presence in your own writings. Move on, you're becoming a one note singer.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-09-2012, 10:32 PM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 01:46 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-05-2007, 11:16 AM
  4. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-04-2007, 09:29 PM
  5. Replies: 53
    Last Post: 03-30-2007, 09:10 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!