Slashdot Mirror
Mass Arrests of Journalists Follow Iran Elections
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Reporters Without Borders is alarmed by the fact that no less than 23 journalists have been arrested in Iran in the week following the elections, making Iran one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist. Online activists are trying to counter this trend by giving advice for helping Iranian protesters. One problem is that Iranian leaders are trying to delegitimize the reform movement by pretending that the reformers are puppets of foreign powers, so special discretion is required for anyone wanting to help the Iranian people."
Honestly, I was surprised the backlash against this didn't happen sooner. I guess this just confirms western fears that the elections in Iran were indeed a farce.
> "One problem is that Iranian leaders are trying to delegitimize the reform movement by pretending that they're puppets of foreign powers, so special discretion is required for anyone wanting to help the Iranian people."
I agree with this idea but should we think that foreign intelligence agents in Iran are currently seriously told to stay put and do nothing ? ;-))
Or even believe that there is no foreign intelligence agents in Iran ?
There definitely seems to be a momentum from the people of Iran taking place although, pendulum effect at work again ?
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273015&cid=28384711&art_pos=8
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
The regime seems to be fighting the last media war. They've been very effective in deporting and isolating professionals, only to discover how irrelevant that is when thousands of phone-cams are in the streets. Their attempts at jamming and filtering have clearly been quite porous. There's no such thing as a media blackout once word of mouth goes world wide.
www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/
It seems like it's always the same with these people: Blame Someone Else - they never take responsibility for anything.
"One problem is that Iranian leaders are trying to delegitimize the reform movement by pretending that they're puppets of foreign powers, so special discretion is required for anyone wanting to help the Iranian people."
Regardless of what one thinks about the Ayatollahs and Ahmadinejad, it is well known that the CIA and other western powers are spending millions stirring up trouble in Iran: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1543798/US-funds-terror-groups-to-sow-chaos-in-Iran.html
This article gives some historical overview of western meddling in Iran: http://www.voltairenet.org/article160670.html
What many of you also fail to understand is that while Musavi is less fundamentalist than Ahmadinejad, his views are hardly one of support for "human rights" and free society. It is sorta like the difference between Republicans and Democrats - a few differences on paper but little substantial difference.
My heart goes out to the Iranian people, but this is something they have to do for themselves.
their governement has to learn to respect the people they govern. as one post i read had stated, "we've traded one dictatorship for another".
if we in the west get involved there will always be accusations of puppets and strings.
the only way for the Iranian people to earn the respect of those that run the country and the other countries of the region is to do this on their own.
the worst is yet to come, but i wish them all the courage and strength they may need.
They did not learn the lesson that the last President Bush learned the hard way when he supported the coup in Venezuela before it was a done deal. After he said the coup was a good thing, Chavez used that to demonize Bush and the USA as a whole as (lets all say it together) "The Great Satan".
Now they want to do the same thing at the wrong time. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Let it play out even though it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
I'm not asking a rhetorical question. I'm genuinely curious about what the historical precedent is for regimes to be overthrown since it doesn't seem to happen.
My Russian friend used the colloquialism "every country is three meals away from a revolution" to describe the threshold for revolution, to make the case that nobody missed three meals during the Great Depression but did before the Russian Revolution.
I also read Robert Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" in which Heinlein asserted that revolutions are never started or run by ordinary people, but by well organized political factions.
There's also 1984, in which Orwell points out that revolutions always involve the middle class, and the proletariat never drives revolutions.
There's also the wild card of alleged CIA involvement, which was behind the Orange (Ukraine) and Rose (Georgia) revolutions.
All of these tidbits of information aren't helping me to predict the outcome of the latest situation in Iran. What's driving the protests other than the election results? Will the revolutionaries succeed?
This space left intentionally blank.
This is not the way Iran is pronounced, for your information, it would sound more like "he ran".
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
In some countries the people would just give in when an unelected legislature tries to overturn a majority decision.
"One problem is that Iranian leaders are trying to delegitimize the reform movement by pretending that they're puppets of foreign powers"
It takes no more than one Google query for green (orange, pink, whatever color) glasses to come down quickly:
http://www.google.com/search?q=400+million+iran
The reason it's so important to cut through the misinformation is that the Iranian government is now tweeting with false information, and it's crucial to keep track of what is real and what is FUD. They are taking other measures as well; there are several reports that a speech by President Obama (who has yet to speak in support of the protesters) was translated as a speech calling for revolution and the overthrow of the regime. This lets Iran claim that the protests are the result of meddling by the Western powers.
Fark seems to be doing a really good job of cutting through the FUD and getting solid, reliable information out there. One of their users, Tatsuma, has a quite detailed and extensive analysis of the crisis, the players, and what is happening now. Their Iran threads would be a good place to start.
Never underestimate the potential of Human stupidity. -Heinlein
The only way you can disagree with me is if you are under the influence of the Great Satan. So either you agree with me, or you are obviously evil. What better argument could you want?
I see this happening in Iran and even though I think the human suffering during this build up to civil war (and I have no doubt civil war will erupt from this) is immense, I look at the middle east overall and I wonder if Iran having this happen to it wouldn't be the best thing for everyone. With Iran fighting within itself, it doesn't have the focus on Isreal, Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq which has large issues with iran-funded militant groups. The money dries up, leaving the groups to fend for themselves, which they would find extremely difficult.
I personally hope that at the end of this there is a more 'west friendly' regime. It seems from all accounts that most of Iran's youth are wholeheartedly embracing technology and being part of the world stage. The middle east needs an country with an people-elected islamic leader which is willing to embrace the future.
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Ahmedinejad fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of an Iranian policeman (a Basiji with an AK-47) for about 20 minutes now while he attempts to beat a confession out of a protestor. 20 minutes. At home, in my local police department with a bunch of redneck cops, who by all standards should be a lot slower than this Basiji, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this interrogation, Facebook will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Twitter is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working with various Basiji, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Basiji that has run down a protestor in a car faster than his American counterpart, despite their access to cheaper oil. My Andy Griffith with arthritis in both knees runs faster than this 20 year-old militiaman on heroin at times. From a totalitarian standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that Iran is a superior country.
Iran addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use Ahmedinejad over other faster, cheaper, more stable dictators.
Reporters Without Borders is alarmed by the fact that no less than twenty-three journalists have been arrested in Iran in the week following the elections, making Iran one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist
23? That's it? At the RNC's and DNC's for the last decade, the cops have been putting people in holding cells by the bushels, charging them with all sorts of things like "disturbing the peace", or just simply letting them go after 24 hours.
Please help metamoderate.
The CIA.
We'll find out in five years than the hundreds of millions of dollars approved last year were for the purpose of overthrowing the Iranian government. That'll be the second time we've ousted their government. Should be good for relations in the future, don't you think?
why iran hates great britain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game
i understand why iran hates the usa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_ajax
but what the hell: it's not the colonial era and its not the cold war anymore
are the iranian people that deluded (or rather: the iranian government thinks so lowly of their own people) that anyone would actually believe this massive popular uprising is actually just manipulation by foreign powers?
propaganda only goes so far, then its just downright laughable paranoid schizophrenia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So this is the smell of "vigorous debate" in the morning.
The entire series of events was predictable almost to the minute. Mass bloodshed was never intended or delivered.
The Iranians did gain something, The "Supreme Ruler" may be less inclined to
precipitate these kinds of mass demonstrations by being more careful. He realizes he
no longer has a blank check.
You're either for me or you're for the terrorists!
The next decade or two will be very interesting to watch. What you have is an aging hard-line population and a younger generation who wants more freedom. What we're doing in Iraq by force may happen naturally in Iran in the near future. Who knows, maybe having Iraq for a neighbor has had something to do with it.
Not all people are journalists.
Reporters without Borders doesn't care about non-journalists being arrested (well they might care, but it isn't what they are talking about).
making Iran one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist
The US troops deliberately shelled hotels where journalists were staying during the early phases of Operation Iragi Liberation - sorry Operation Iraqi Freedom, and deliberately targeted Al Jazeera. Being shelled is a darn sight more dangerous than being arrested.
Anyway looks like Bush's $400M 2007 destabilisation program is finally publically underway.
no one in iran knows the truth, because there is no free press
everyone outside iran knows the truth, because there is free access to a free press
and what in your mind makes you think that the us govt can control the world media?
well, let's go with your paranoia, and make believe for the moment the us govt really can control the media. not even just american outlets, but even the likes of news.com.au and news.bbc.co.uk: any western media outlet. this is some extreme paranoia to believe that, but let's go with your bizarre pov for a moment
well then, what's preventing me from going to:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/
is your assertion the us govt can control these news sources?
but my whole point is right there in those links: the fact that i can even click on those news sources if i choose to, and no one is going to knock on my door for doing that, and no one is blocking my access to official russian or chinese news sources, and i feel no fear in clicking those links, then what the hell does that leave your assertion about who is controlling "the media" or your right to free access to news sources in the usa?
why the heck do you have the whole notion of a free press and its implications completely ass backwards in your mind?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Frankly I think most observers have extremely little information about what is real and reliable half way around the world.
The most reliable things I've seen so far are the large events, and the events reported independently in a similar way by several different sources: there was an election, it has led to unrest. One group in power is now in rising conflict with another group that wants power. Several people have died. Really beyond that, assertions of any particular thing day-to-day are pretty unreliable for me, and I've been reading and following this pretty closely.
As to whether a foreign power is involved, I think that is an extremely difficult question to answer as a remote consumer of "news" and Internet reports. Any group or nation powerful enough to be involved inside Iran now would have as a prerequisite the ability to control tightly the access and dissemination of information internally and the stories released to the public, plus would probably have a desire for secrecy regarding their involvement.
Given recent history of multiple invasions in the region, the high value of resources in the region, plus historical precedent for outside regime support (specifically in Iran) - on what basis of reliable fact does one base the conclusion of foreign involvement or non involvement in the current demonstrations and issues in Iran? What do you consider to be the most reliable sources in the current fog of conflict and disinformation? Twitter? Some random Blogger? CNN? Your government? People you know personally?
My only point is this: Even if there were outside groups directly influencing events, how would people know about it? I don't think they would.
Yes, there are well meaning people there providing useful information, but in general it is an echo chamber of people caught up in the excitement who are VASTLY overestimating their positive contributions as much as they visciously disregard their potential to do extraordinary harm with mind numbing platitudes about freedom and revolution while accepting little, if any, risk or responsibility themselves. The egos are so jealously guarded to protect that sense of involvement that the constant astroturfing essentially by Haaretz is taken as the ne plus ultra of all factual sources on the topic and 99.9999% of the people taking it as practically Talmudic haven't the foggiest idea of the source save for seven-letter nickname.
Using that environment to engage in direct action is frightfully dangerous.
I think a large number of people (Americans especially) automatically think a dictatorship is
a bad thing. A dictatorship is generally bad for Americans but perhaps good for other people.
There are benefits to a dictatorship. When you have a good dictator, things are generally pretty
good. The trick is to avoid the bad dictator.
As an analogy, think of a software company where the CEO was voted in by all the developers.
This software company is almost certain to never be competitive with a company that
is run by a tight-fisted, smart, savvy CEO.
So which company would you want to work for?
It would depend on your goals. Do you want to make money with Stock options? Do you simply
want to program any cool thing you wanted?
Probably Stalin too.
The United States killed about over 140,000 people with one bomb near the end of World War II, many if not most of them civilians and many of them children.
While we can argue forever if the Atomic Bombings were "justified warfare" or not, the facts remain that there are worse governments than Irans and that despotic regimes don't have a lock on mass killings of innocent people.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
scale
perspective
context
these are some wacky concepts. try using some of them next time when you compare:
1. cops putting rnc and dnc marginal characters with marginal concerns behind fences
vs
2. the sheer scale of the popular uprising in iran
3. what is at stake: the very heart of iranian society (as opposed to nothing more than the ability to disrupt a party convention by outsiders with grudge fringe issues that don't have popular support)
4. the modus operandi: sueable, accountable urban cops restraining people with nonlethal force, versus shady government unaccountable thugs and militia, the basij, unleashed on peaceful protesters
its completely out of scale, out of context, and out of perspective the way in which you are trying to compare these two events. at best, you qualify as a weak threadjack
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
making Iran one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist
If the journalists are being arrested I do not see how that makes Iran a "dangerous" place for a journalist...
Compare that to Mexico where journalists get kidnapped, physically assaulted, killed, and whatnot...
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
If you want a war, piss of some journalists. If you want a really BIG war, piss off a lot of journalists.
The last decade? Guess you missed the '68 DNC in Chicago.
history is often viewed as rote tired predictable trends playing out in rote tired predictable ways
this is an artifact of human mentality, of hindsight, of how we try to process our world. its not the truth
in truth, history is made by a few people groping their way in the dark, unsure of their efforts, but full of a strange conviction (for their time), and every once in a while, they hit a giant fucking motherlode of popular appeal or societal structural imbalance, and send the entire world careening on some dramatic unforeseen path of ebullition or madness
some assassinations result in nothing but a few changes in an administration, some assassinations result in world war i
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavrilo_Princip
some rebellions aren't even noticed, some foment a civil war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown's_Raid_on_Harpers_Ferry
what makes one event the start of a massive social earthquake and another event a forgettable hiccup? something strangely symbolic to someone somewhere, and whimsy
no really: whimsy
beware anyone who claims to know which event is nothing and which is an earthquake. the wisest person knows enough to say that no one knows. too many factors, too much complexity. no one controls anything, its all fumbling in the dark
contrast that to those who see conspiracies and dark controlling powers everywhere. paranoid schizophrenia is no replacement for true intelligence about the facts of history
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
how in a billion years can anyone with the slightest bit of cognitive coherence believe that what is going on in the streets of iran is a foreign plot!?
really, those millions in the street are puppets of israel or the usa or great britain? really?! you honestly fucking think that is even remotely fucking possible?!
i find it absolutely mindblowing how anyone could even begin to think that what is going on in iran is anything but an organic, natural, native uprising
how the HELL do you think some meddling foreign power convinced all those iranians to march in the street day after day?
how the HELL can you even begin to think that? how did the mossad, mi6, the cia, convince iranians to do that? mind control rays? hallucinogenic drugs in the water supply? chemtrails? ergot in the wheat in the food supply?
how? how did they do that? please: elucidate to the world your particular brand of paranoid schizophrenia that believes anything like what you are proposing is in the slightest fucking way possible
you're fucking insane. you really are, to even begin to believe that
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
its where arnold schwarzenegger and freud and hitler and the sound music are from... its just below germany ;-)
(awaiting the incendiary and mocking comments from people who don't have a sense of humor)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Wow, great way to show you have no clue what you are talking about.
i am just amazed that people can say that what is going on in the streets of iran day after day by millions of people is all some plot of mi6 or mossad or the cia
i mean you have to either laugh or cry that you live in a world where the people spewing this ignorant propaganda are this delusional and that those believing it are that moronic
it reminds me of this guy:
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/mss_history.html
someone should start a fark or 4chan meme mocking the delusion of some iranian mullah declaring how millions marching in the street day after day is the work of mossad
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
hate is politically expedient, like with our governments.
Don't feed the trolls, Anon.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
hmm...
That really is a load of crap. In the 1950s, Iran was well on its way to becoming probably the most secular society in the Middle East. It had a burgeoning middle class, and seemed to be moving away from authoritarianism. And then the Americans and the Brits, not liking the nationalization of oil by Mohammad Mosaddeq, helped the Shah to overthrow that government. That created the deep divide between Iran and the US and Great Britain, and it didn't help that the Shah became a ruthless, Western-backed dictator.
I doubt a lot of the Iranians who supported Ayatollah Khomeini did it because they wanted to replace the Shah's oppressive regime with a fundamentalist Islamic regime just as oppressive. They wanted the Shah out and flocked to those who seemed capable of a leadership position. Was it a mistake? Probably, but if there's still lingering distrust of the United States, it's hardly because Iranians are somehow culturally more likely to live willingly under dictators (which I don't buy, it doesn't really reflect where Iranian culture was going for the first part of the 20th century). It's because the US, shortsightedly, opted for a man they viewed as a friend as opposed to a man they viewed as an opponent who threatened both key oil reserves and who (in they're view) might be more prone to siding with the Soviets.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
how the hell does mi6 or mossad or the cia incite millions of iranians to march in the street day after day?
mind control rays? hallucinogens in the water supply? chemtrails? ergot in the wheat in the food supply?
look: i don't have definitive proof that the moon isn't made of cheese. nasa is clearly a mouthpiece of the us govt and obviously it has every reason to lie about and stage fake moon landings in hollywood sound stages, and deny a hungry world such an abundant food source, or otherwise the american military industrial food complex will go out of business*
*this delusional paranoid schizophrenic crackpot rant brought to you by the same mentality of anyone who wonders if what is going on in iran is manipulation by foreign governments or reality
i'm completely and utterly dumbfounded how anyone could believe what is going on in iran is anything but organic and genuine
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I find it amazing that this much of a stink wasn't made during the Zimbabwean elections...where anti mugabe supporters were being raped and murdered by the thousands Then again, I guess there are no economic interests in that part of Africa, like there are in Iran (read: oil)
I praise the internet for being able to illuminate to us all, the double speak and forked tounge of the supposed 'freedom force (or farce rather)' known as America.
Hypocritical Liars.
My main source of news about the elections in both Iran and Zimbabwe was national public radio, which is about as American as you can get. NPR made a big point about exposing the massive corruption and manipulation of the election in Zimbabwe, and with Iran it is taking a very different path, pointing out that there are allegations of fraud but that the only verifiable story so far is the unrest in Iran itself. The difference in coverage is quite appropriate for the differences in context.
America is many things, but above all else it's diverse. It's not accurate to characterize all Americans of sharing a single interest or world view.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Then, after the Kremlin exited Eastern Europe in 1989, the peoples of each nation in Eastern Europe rapidly established a genuine democracy and a free market. Except for Romania (where its people killed their dictator), there was no violence.
In 1979, after the Iranian people overthrow the despot whom the Americans supported, the Iranians immediately established a brutal, authoritarian theocracy.
Cultures are different. Eastern-European culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians bear 100% of the blame for the existence of a tyrannical government in Iran. We should condemn Iranian culture and its people.
if enough people are filled with hate, that certainly becomes a political tool, just as you say
but in a nondemocracy, the cynical use of hate isn't tempered by anything except the governments craven wants and desires
meanwhile, in a truly open democracy, the use of hate is limited by the free expression of alternate and equally valid human thought processes, thought processes that often overrule hate as a prime motivator
for example, we just witnessed the election of a minority in the usa, while the republicans suffered during the run up to the election last year for cynical shallow hate filled manipulations that backfired: he's a communist, he's a muslim... he's a communist muslim?
just 20-30 years ago, code worded racist fears were quite effective in us presidential elections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton#Horton_in_the_1988_presidential_campaign
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen
in an open democracy, such craven manipulations begin to backfire and fall short, because in an open democracy, alternatives to hate as a motivator are allowed to naturally assert themselves. in an autocracy, usually cynical thinking just like yours predominates in the official propaganda apparatuses, and no one bothers to think to use more noble motivations that might find deeper resonance with their populace than simple hate. that's why cynicism eventually fails
you really need to think more before you make such broad overarching and mindlessly cynical equivocations about your world, and especially the democracy you live in
yes, hate IS politically expedient IN GENERAL
but no, hate is NOT politically expedient "like with our governments"
with "our governments", ie, true liberal democracies, motivations more than simple hate can and do predominate. not so in autocratic governments. they push the hate to ridiculous extremes, like an organic native uprising is actually the result of foreign manipulations, because its all they know how to do. they are on braindead autopilot, so their propaganda begins to fail
the propaganda of hate only goes so far. it reaches its limits in true democracies. it is overused and backfires in nondemocracies
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
plus a million more other observations you could have also made, real or imagined, about foreign meddling in iraq:
1 ounce
millions of iranians organically assembling day after day:
1 million tons
that's about the weight difference in terms of compelling proof about whether or not what is going on iran is anything but a completely native and original domestic movement
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Students of history as not as naive as you are.
Last year congress approved 400 million dollars for covert operations in Iran. We just tried to overthrow Venezuela in 2002, where thousands of people marched against Chavez in the capital. They were mostly rich business people and the upper middle class, stirred up by the private televisions stations, upset that peasants were getting government sponsored help and seizing private assets in order to nationalize them. Sound familiar?
In any society, you can find people who want to overthrow the government. If China decided to spend a few billion dollars fomenting a war against Obama, they could drum up enough support to get a million people marching. Just think of all the Evangelicals who believe that Obama will be sponsoring baby killing marathons at abortion clinics.
Just because you're too stupid to understand nuance in politics doesn't mean it isn't there. I think there is a genuine movement in Iran, but I also know that the CIA would go to any length to undermine any government, and they've done so in the past. And yes, the CIA would kill civilians to foment more confrontations between the ruling party and the democratic movement. They have no shame and no conscience.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
- Sid Meier, Alpha Centaur
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
One problem is that Iranian leaders are trying to delegitimize the reform movement by pretending that they're puppets of foreign powers.
(Mod this down again, if you want; I'm going to keep making this argument until someone finally has the spine to actually respond to me)
The only problem with this is, that's fairly likely exactly what the reform movement genuinely is. Is anyone honestly going to try and tell me with a straight face that the reform movement would not have CIA agents within its' ranks?
Truthfully, if I'd been the leader of the Chinese government at the time of Tienanmen Square, the first thing I would have done would be to broadcast a message announcing that if all of the American intelligence people were to come forward out of the crowd and give themselves up, none of the actual university students would be harmed.
This is the single main reason why this entire issue (Iran, currently) is pissing me off to the degree that it is.
Americans want to get involved purely because they still view their role as being to solve the political and/or moral problems of everyone else on the planet. The only problem is that George W. Bush eloquently proved (even if none of your earlier leaders did) that you don't have the ability to solve your own problems. A tyrant and a murderer held office as the President for eight years, and virtually none of you did anything to challenge him.
Because of this, any desire you might have to be involved with the current turmoil in Iraq has exactly zero moral credibility. You let a tyrant hold office in your own country, but you still think that you have a moral imperative to help remove tyrants from other people's.
You are not rightfully the planet's police force, Americans. The only reason why any of you think that, is because you've been brainwashed to think it by your country's education system. I'm aware, however, that nobody who is capable of truly rational thought will respond to that statement, since nobody who is capable of rational thought actually believes in the exceptionalist global police idea.
The current regime in Iran might well genuinely need to be removed, but if you want to truly do the right thing where another country is concerned, for once, then back off and let the Iranian people figure out how to do that for themselves. Don't get involved, because apart from anything else, you are not on record as having intervened in a single foreign country, (except, maybe, during WW2) where it actually worked out well, for either you, or the other country involved. Vietnam was a mess, and Iraq largely has been both times. Do you really think Iran won't be?
Let the Iranian people sort it out. Don't sell them arms, don't try and escalate things either way, and pull your damn spooks out if they are there. (And of course, they would be at this point, even if they weren't earlier)
Any new government, in order for it to be legitimate, will have to be something that the Iranian people have devised for themselves, and if there is a tyranny that needs to be removed, Iranian blood needs to be shed to remove it. That is the only way that the Iranian people will see any future democratic system as being genuine or meaning something, and it is the only way that they will be able to retain dignity throughout and after the process, as well; because it will mean that they will have cleaned up their own mess, which is an essential part of being an adult.
Just stop interfering.
At least Kathrine Harris is not involved in the Iranian election. She is bad enough with make-up, could you imagine her without it?
i was with you, then my thinking went against you because i couldn't see the implications you were trying to make. its either something with uniting us, or something going against us in terms of common thought here, i just don't know
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
mod down accordingly
do you even understand what that word means? the way you think about how your world works is about as "nuanced" as a sledgehammer
let me ask you something: is a simple organic popular uprising even possible in your braindead cynical world? it's all secret societies and backroom deals and pulled strings? the french revolution was started by german princes? the american civil war was the machinations of british imperialists? the 1979 iranian revolution was started by russian kgb? you realize this stupidity is on the same level as your thinking about what is going on in iran right now. you realize that, right? the number of people in the streets: really just fucking consider for a moment the SHEER NUMBER of people in the fucking streets. oh right, that's a mossad/ cia/ mi6 lie i'm swallowing, right?
you honestly believe, even if china could give groups in the usa a trillion dollars, that a popular uprising could take hold? you really believe just a satchel of money is all it would take to foment revolution here? your faith in democratic institutions is that shallow and that cynical? your view of human nature is that craven and that brutal?
you honestly believe, that millions of iranians, across all classes and ages and all geographic areas, are acting on the motivations of the cia!
you're a paranoid schizophrenic retard
i'm sorry, i'm not trying to replace a conversation with a name calling contest
but calling you a paranoid schizophrenica retard is the simply the best impartial description i can come up with for your thought processes about how your world and the people in it works
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"if we in the west get involved there will always be accusations of puppets and strings.
the only way for the Iranian people to earn the respect of those that run the country and the other countries of the region is to do this on their own."
They are.
It's not like anyone is helping.
But it's also false to say that we should refrain from saying anything positive at all. Sometimes it's good to come out and just say "Good luck, our sympathies are with you, we hope all turns out well for you and we think what you are trying to do is the right thing."
If we can't say even that much, we should not even call ourselves human.
If they do not want these words, mere words, spoken, then they would have aid so in interviews. Instead we hear the opposition leader chastise Obama for saying he and current leadership are identical. Instead we hear Iranian people on the streets crying for Oabma to help (at least at first they were).
It's not like our speaking or not matters to what the government will actually do.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
vaccinations cause autism
absoutely true
but this conceit is a purely organic, original, and naturally formed conceit
no one is MAKING them believe that
which is my point: the cia are not forming these protests, the iranian people are protesting all of their very own independent volition
and to believe otherwise is simply paranoid schizophrenia, at the very best
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Your post is disingenuous - your "problem" is no more than a distraction from the facts. A kind-of chewbacca defence.
/best/ policies in the world, but their wild-west disrespect for the spirit of the rules is disappointing at best, and down-right Neanderthal at worst. The 2000 election isn't an isolated incidence in that regard.
More people voted for Gore in Florida, yet the state was given to Bush, and the supreme court cancelled the official re-count just hours before it was complete. It was a close election, but Bush lost. Facts are facts.
The Florida election wouldn't have been as close if the then governor of Texas didn't deliberately conspire to take as many democrats off the voting role as possible. "Cast as wide a net as possible", I think is the term that Jeb Bush used.
The Republican party might have the
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Most countries of this world seem to have strong governments, but, lack the necessary transitional mechansims to pass the baton from one generation to the next. Or they may have the mechanism, but, it is typically violent.
Russia, Greece, Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran come to mind as examples of this problem.
I believe that the condition in Iran is an example of older generations failing to pass the baton to the next generation. The riots in Greece earlier this year had basically the same overriding foundation but a different trigger (in Iran it was the election, in Greece it was a police shooting).
Governments must respect generational transitions and allowing younger generations increasing responsibility in their lives and in their countries.
Otherwise, revolts, riots, and revolution will occur.
Just my two cents...
you've been punched in the head by one of those alpine kangaroos one too many times ;-)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
chavez in venezuela uses a regular drumbeat: the usa are invading at any minute
the north korean regime tells its citizens since the 1950s: the usa is invading at any minute
iran uses a regular drumbeat: the usa is invading at any minute
its long since passed the sell-by date that the usa is doing any such thing to these countries, and it has entered the realm of cheap and easy propagandistic manipulation by whomever is in power
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I mean is anyone really saying the previous elections were free and fair and democratic?
No, the only question really is why has trouble flared up *this* time?
Deleted
Otherwise reasonable people take it on faith that the Iranian election was rigged.
The evidence that persuades them is the idea that six thousand poll workers cannot count forty million ballots in twelve hours, together with the understanding that one unscientific pre-election survey predicted different results.
I think it is at least equally plausible that the election was fair, and that Mousavi knew he was losing and switched his goal to creating the civil unrest that we see today. It is much easier to fake a telephone survey than to fake a national election.
And why are people so ready to believe the count was impossible? They didn't wait until the ballots were collected, they counted them as they were cast, in a very efficient distributed effort. The counting didn't take much longer than the polling, and thousands of people contributed to the task.
Personally, the whole religious and authoritarian nature of the Iranian government offends me but I don't think this election is really the problem. I don't even understand why so many people are ready to believe the election was rigged just based on biased opinions. The fact that the Iranian government is willing to kill protesters and jail journalists and so forth is a separate issue. That is a situation that transcends the effects of a presidential election no matter who "wins."
Someone needs to prove, to a strong standard of evidence, that the vote count was rigged. I'll be right on board if you do. But I can't be persuaded by "It had to have been a sham! Iran is corrupt as hell!"
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Those demonstrators, puppets of Western regimes?
Ha. If only.
America is the kind of country that could put a spy satellite capable of taking a crystal clear photo of a menu at an outdoor cafe in Tehran, but find itself unable to locate a Farsi speaker to translate it.
OK, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but the idea that we have the kind of human intelligence capability to create that kind of unrest is a joke. Even in the swashbuckling days when we sent Kermit Roosevelt to Tehran with a suitcases of cash to stage a coup, we did it the old fashioned way, buying off government and military officials. Even if we could manage that sort of thing today, there's no way we could create a popular uprising of this size. Even an indigenous opposition movement couldn't do it.
There's only one agency that could have created these protests: the Iranian regime itself. It started with a miscalculation: they underestimated voter turnout. Then they panicked, over-reacting again and again, until they are in danger of recreating the very conditions of the revolution that brought them to power. It's a mistake old men in power too long frequently make. They become the very thing they fought against and won when they were young men.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
People simply imposing their will on the rest is far more common than any "by the people" form of government. When a bunch of big guys with sticks say, "We're in charge, now go make me a sammich," the traditional response of the average person has been to bow down and go make the sammich. Most of us who live in societies that have some form of coercion built in to keep the authorities at bay didn't have to fight for that privilege. Our ancestors did. We grew up taking it for granted that our "rights" are obvious, inviolable and somehow self-sustaining. But they're not. Situations like this should teach us how unhealthy that kind of complacency is.
Not all people are journalists. Reporters without Borders doesn't care about non-journalists being arrested (well they might care, but it isn't what they are talking about).
Most everyone that was arrested were protesters; people trying to exercise their freedom equally or moreso than the reporters. But isn't it funny how the press largely ignore the abuses against protesters? Reminds me of how by and large the black community won't stand up for civil rights for gay people.
I don't recall Reporters Without Borders getting all bullshit when Houston mounted police trampled and beat the shit out of a bunch of Central/South American janitors. In fact, their profession largely ignored it. Go on, search for "Houston janitor protests" and find me a single news story that talks about the horses trampling the protesters (which is the sole point of mounted units; they're a legal loophole, because the cops argue the horses can't be completely controlled, thus they're not responsible for someone getting trampled.)
Please help metamoderate.
dude, the cold war is history
ii is useful to understand the previous era to understand why people think the way they do. but history is not an arcade of victimization that the usa or any other country is bound to forever
you don't really understand history. all you know is propaganda talking points from a dead era
does the turkish slaughter of millions of armenians define and limit turkish identity and behavior today? is japan forever bound by its war crimes in world war ii? is any discussion of rwanda nothing more than a rote recycling of talking points about the 1994 genocide?
none of us are prisoners of history. any country that escaped the manipulations of the usa in past eras understands that far better than you do
stop playing the blame game. that's not enlightenment via historical understanding, that's merely an exercise in reflexive recrimination
again: none of us are prisoners of history. where past atrocities are known, you learn from them, and move on. you don't sit there immobilized in perpetual blame
in fact your entire screed is more of an illumination of your own psychological failures in terms of learned helplessness and rationalizing your own inaction about how to behave in this world than any true historical understanding
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Its okay AC; Though they're counted, the don't actually count for anything.
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
is not something that imprisons you
turkey slaughtered millions of armenians. that's a historical fact. but what does that mean? does that mean that the only relationship turkey can ever have towards armenia is murder? of course not
japan was one of the most hardcore military imperialist powers the world has ever known just 70 years ago. japan today is probably the most pacifist major nation the world has ever known. this is a completely black and white change in attitude in less time than the span of one human lifetime
but what you are trying to tell me is: once an imperialistic meddler, always an imperilaistic meddler. you have an impressive list of crimes from the cold war. so that means this is the only way the usa will always behave to the world? of course not, but this is what you are telling me
history should illuminate your view of the world and its peoples and what motivates them and inform you of the potential for dramatic change. it shouldn't lock you into prejudicial thinking. but this what you are telling me historical facts are all about. bullshit. you are using history as a prejudice generator, little more, and your thinking about history and what it means is exactly opposite to the spirit of rational thought and a human conscience about the world
you'd make a great propagandizer, but a poor historian
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
in your mind for what is going on in the streets of iran right now:
1. the organic, domestic, natural desires of the populace
2. cia machinations
you speak of history as if it is a prison. your understanding of history doesn't illuminate your thought, it locks it into prejudicial thinking. history should inform your mind about the potential for dramatic change. but for you, history is merely a propagandistic tool for reinforcing your prejudice that no one ever changes
nevermind the fact that the most aggressive black ops intelligence effort any world government could ever devise could never in anyone's wildest fantasies create the magnitude of the demonstrations going on in iran
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'm not a twitterer. But when I read the suggestion that people provide cover for the Iranian protesters by setting their twitter to reflect a location in Tehran, one quotation popped into mind:
"Ich bin ein Berliner" (John F. Kennedy)
The situation is a little different. Berlin was a free enclave behind the Iron Curtain. Freedom is only a hope in the minds of the Iranian protesters.
Setting twitter to Tehran (and the appropriate time zone) is more than a technical step someone can do. It is a mark of solidarity with oppressed people fighting for freedom.
I join in urging all twitterers to do it.
is not something that imprisons you
turkey slaughtered millions of armenians. that's a historical fact. but what does that mean? does that mean that the only relationship turkey can ever have towards armenia is murder? of course not
japan was one of the most hardcore military imperialist powers the world has ever known just 70 years ago. japan today is probably the most pacifist major nation the world has ever known. this is a completely black and white change in attitude in less time than the span of one human lifetime
but what you are trying to tell me is: once an imperialistic meddler, always an imperiliastic meddler. you have an impressive list of crimes from the cold war. so that means this is the only way the usa will always behave to the world? of course not, but this is what you are telling me
history should illuminate your view of the world and its peoples and what motivates them and inform you of the potential for dramatic change. it shouldn't lock you into prejudicial thinking. but this what you are telling me historical facts are all about. bullshit. you are using history as a prejudice generator, little more, and your thinking about history and what it means is exactly opposite to the spirit of rational thought and a human conscience about the world
you'd make a great propagandizer, but a poor historian
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
...says Anonymous Coward. How fitting.
is not something that imprisons you
turkey slaughtered millions of armenians. that's a historical fact. but what does that mean? does that mean that the only relationship turkey can ever have towards armenia is murder? of course not
japan was one of the most hardcore military imperialist powers the world has ever known just 70 years ago. japan today is probably the most pacifist major nation the world has ever known. this is a completely black and white change in attitude in less time than the span of one human lifetime
but what you are trying to tell me is: once an imperialistic meddler, always an imperialistic meddler. you have an impressive list of crimes from the cold war. so that means this is the only way the usa will always behave to the world? of course not, but this is what you are telling me
the prime motivator for the usa's engaging in cold war crimes is fighting the ussr. the ussr is gone and dead 20 years. the entire gears of the entire miliary and intelligence apparatus of the usa has gone from fixation on the fighting communism to fixation on fighting global jihad. the usa once armed afghani mujaheedin, now they hunt them. things have changed 180 degrees in some ways in terms of agenda and strategy. and this is incredibly obvious to anyone paying the barest attention to recent world events. but according to you, the usa is still going to behave exactly like it did under dwight eisenhower. why do you think your attitude is remotely intellectually honest about the world we live in?
history should illuminate your view of the world and its peoples and what motivates them and inform you of the potential for dramatic change. it shouldn't lock you into prejudicial thinking. but this what you are telling me historical facts are all about. bullshit. you are using history as a prejudice generator, little more, and your thinking about history and what it means is exactly opposite to the spirit of rational thought and a human conscience about the world
you'd make a great propagandizer, but a poor historian
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Two words: Richard Nixon.
The most powerful plane in Iran's air force is the F-14, which was in service in the Iranian air force before the USAF or the Navy. At the time, Iran likely had more US military hardware than Israel.
Well, it ain't all Nixon's fault. In general, we screwed with their government waaay too much in the 50s 60s and 70s, without really understanding the long-term effects of what we were doing. In a lot of ways, the more we meddled, the more influence we lost, and the more the average Iranian came to hate the US.
For a very brief period between the Shah and the Islamic Revolution, there was a full parliamentary democracy in place (feb-apr 79). It had strong US support so no one trusted it, and Khomeini was voted in as the lesser of two evils as a result.
We are much better off letting Iran be what Iranians want it to be and dealing with whatever the results of that are, rather than trying to actively influence events there.
(wiki on the Revolution if you want the whole story)
At the RNC held in Minneapolis last year 55 journalists were arrested on various charges:
http://www.freepress.net/node/44232
So the arrest of 23 journalists is pale in comparison.
"How is historical fact propaganda? You can't just take history that disproves your belief system and call it propaganda. That's a recipe for perpetual self delusion."
propaganda never lies. it doesn't have to. propaganda always tells the truth...
propaganda tells HALF of the truth. half-truth is exactly that: bits and pieces of truth, taken out of context of the larger facts and events they exist in, to prove or support a notion which is essentially half-formed
for any assertion i make, you can bring me solid factual historical evidence by the truckload to refute what i say completely
its when you try to make sense of it all, to think about it, to put it in context, some perspective, some scale, to put the pieces together, that your prejudice generating machine reveals itself to have nothing to do with history at all
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Weird. My Iranian friends pronounce it more like "eee-ron".
forget the usa's potential for change
forget the usa's supposed inability to change
focus on the intellectual honesty of the statement that the usa will not change in its approach in international relations. tell me about people who believe that: are they replacing intelligence with prejudice and cynicism?
of course they are
cynicism is a loser's approach to life, its not intelligence, and that's essentially what i'm arguing about
there are people here however who cling so desperately to the tired cold war stereotype of the usa meddling in other country's affairs, that even when a brain dead obvious popular uprising occurs in iran, they have to talk about it being the product of cia meddling
fucking pathetic!
open your eyes. iran is experiencing a huge organic domestic popular revolt against the government. to talk about cia meddling in that context is... retarded. that's not name calling, that's a fair appraisal of the intellectual capacity of anyone who looks at the evidence and concludes foreign meddling is to blame for the iranian revolt taking place
all those people? cia stooges? really?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
please inform the author what you think of his opinion that solidarity was not an organic popular uprising of polish people, but a successful cia mind control experiment
fucking tired pathetic paranoid schizophrenia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Your analogy is flawed. A CEO is responsible to his shareholders and can be replaced if he does a bad job. This is more analogous to a democracy, where, in theory a leader doing a bad job can be voted out and replaced. A CEO who was such by birthright, had absolute power and held no responsibility to anyone other than himself would very likely be worse than a CEO responsible to shareholders, like a leader responsible to the people would be better than one not responsible to anyone.
Benevolent dictators are not unheard of, but are definitely in the minority.
it is impossible, in the entire history of the world, to find any popular uprising that was 100% organic. simply because every state that has ever existed has foreign enemies. the revolt naturally would be sympathetic to the foreign power, and the foreign power would naturally give some support, even if just vague and token
therefore, since it is impossible to say any motivation was 100% this or 100% that, saying it was a domestic popular revolt is all you really have to say, since token foreign support is always implied, and needs go unsaid as a valid description of events
what is going on in iran is obviously almost completely majority organic domestic popular uprising
so that some guy in langley virginia is celebrating is immaterial to the outcome: the cia is not even remotely the deciding factor here, like it was in operation ajax. so considering cia involvement is like considering if the papercut killed the man with the shotgun blast to the chest. pointless and trivial
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Agreed.
See Anonymous Iran.
http://iran.whyweprotest.net/
Interesting video:
Anonymous Message to Iranian Government.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hUFv5c4lFg&
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Not to mention that the Iranians remember that the US backed Sadaam Hussein in Iraq's war against Iran.
is what is going on in iran the product of an organic domestic popular uprising?
or the cia?
put your money where your mouth is
to me, it is braindead motherfucking obvious that what is going on in iran is purely organic
that the cia, whatever it did or is doing, is completely immaterial and pointless to how events are currently unfolding in iran. if the cia did nothing, or if the cia was pursuing every single effort it could possibly imagine to overthrow the government, it would be peaningless and pointless to what is actually going on in iran right now
meanwhile, what are you telling me? that if the cia didn't exist iran would happily accept ahmadinijad's claims of winning?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
This is even closer from the right pronunciation :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media:Iran_alborz.ogg
"he ran" was a follow-up on the original poster who tried to make a joke with "I ran". I wrote "it would sound more like"
NOT "it sounds like"
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Because Reporters Without Borders specializes in a specific category of human rights abuse, leaving other types to other organizations. It's impossible to dedicate your life to everything.
At the same time, you can't deny that Joe American would be more likely to stick his nose into matters involving Iran - historically, we, as a country, certainly _have_ - than Zimbabwe simply because of the fact that, if we don't, it means more for us at the pump. Zimbabwe - not so much.
And, if We, the People, don't chastise our government for doing the wrong thing at the wrong time, or allow our elected officials to remain in office after knowingly doing wrong, aren't we just as bad? If we were subjects of a ruthless dictator, then, yeah, I could see where we'd have some room to talk. But as "owners" of our government, it falls on us correct the wrongs of our elected machinery, when necessary.
I think standing on the sidelines is the prudent approach, in this case, but we, as a country, are certainly deserving of being called hypocrites. "Iraqi War" ring a bell? Whatever happened to that "yellowcake" that Saddam supposedly had? Or his involvement in 9/11?
Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
While I'm very glad their are reporters willing to go to places like this and report on what's going on, whenever I hear stories like this I can't help wondering: "You know this country isn't particularly safe for it's own citizens, what did you think would happen to you if you work/vacation/report from there?"
Granted this doesn't make it ok. It's just not... shocking. At all.
I see you've been modded down as a troll. Personally, I disagree with you, and I'll explain my disagreement. Obviously, those who modded you are incapable of doing so. ;)
_____________
Is the uprising instigated by the CIA? TBH, the CIA may or may not have something to do with it, but I can't see that they have the manpower, the influence, or the ability to muster hundreds of thousands of protesters. Keep in mind, precious few people in Iran have any reason to trust the CIA. I assume that you are familiar with Operation Ajax - if not, look it up. The average guy in Iran probably has a sentiment like "Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me!"
The obverse view of those same facts, are, the government is well aware that the CIA overthrew an Iranian government 50 years ago. It's simply wonderful, from their point of view, to have such a handy boogey-man. "Hey, world, look at this! The CIA overthrew our government once, and they are trying again!" True or not, the supreme leader is going to try to convince the world that it's just the CIA up to it's old tricks again.
Now, I'm not going to try to convince you, or anyone, that I'm familiar with Iranian politics, or even it's people. I've poured Iranian (and Iraqi) sand out of my boots, but that doesn't make me expert at anything other than pouring sand out of my boots. ;) But, I'm convinced that there really are two almost distinct populations in Iran. Stratfor.com publishes a lot of info, and I posted one of their newsletters in another thread on slashdot. City people, young people, businessmen who deal with the west, students, and educated females make up one group. These people see the benefits of western society, western industry, and some of our western values.
Country people, the poor, the uneducated (that is not to say "unintelligent") and the devoutly religious traditional Moslems question the wisdom of adopting western ways. Keep in mind, that portion of the population has been catered to by Ahmadinejad. A lot of wealth has been redistributed in Iran, almost all of it for the benefit of this second population.
While I don't see the Supreme Leader as being above tampering with the election results, I can see how, and why, his chosen boy may have legitimately won the election. IMHO, Ahmadiejab is probably the legitimate president. He may, or may not be, but my opinion is, yes. All the analysts who say differently have no evidence whatsoever, just speculation based on silly shit like numerology.
That out of the way - I think that the progressives are being stupid. Whether the election was rigged or not, they've staged a showdown in which the powers that be have lost face. They can't win the showdown, and they will be punished. They are going to lose strength, that they might have hoarded for the NEXT election. One simply doesn't squander their strength in battles that can't be won.
Whatever, I agree 100% with your statement, "Let the Iranian people sort it out. Don't sell them arms, don't try and escalate things either way, and pull your damn spooks out if they are there."
We are all to ready to jump in whenever things aren't going the way we would like it to. I would LIKE to see Iran made "free" of what I consider an oppressive regime. But, hey, if the majority of Iranians don't see it as oppressive, that's their business. What is the alternative? Invade, depose the regime, and set up a government that I approve of? Hell, THAT would be oppression!! In effect, because I disapprove on one oppressor, I become an oppressor myself. Duhh, hypocricy and idiocy combined, huh?
Well, you've been responded to, anyway. And, screw the mods - half of them are probably pimple faced teenage geeks living in their Mama's basement, and have never met a single Iranian in their lives. Miserable little creatures.......
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
"It's a product of both"
it's a product of the people of iran
i'm sorry but arguing any further with you is beginning to feel like arguing with a creationist or a scientologist. you are extremely prejudiced and it is clouding your perception of reality. you obviously have an axe to grind with the usa. which is fine, fuck the usa: this really has nothing to do with the usa, its a giant red herring
that your hatred of the usa should so color your perception of what is going on in iran is scary ignorance. the brave and inspirational people of iran are undertaking right now something by the millions of their own free volition that you are so cretinously cynical about, i don't know if it is possible for you to even understand what the concepts of hope and freedom really are
i'm just happy the iranian people understand those concepts
you want to know something about history?
watch what is going on in iran right now. that's history being made. i'm just afraid that you're so trapped in your self-reinforcing prejudical modes of thinking, you can't even begin to see the unique and singular brave people of iran through your thick fog of obsession with usa recriminations
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
i stopped reading here
I can't say I'm surprised. You know some great sounding words, but they are backed by little more than a thesaurus.
Central/South American janitors are also no reporters and hence irrelevant to Reporters without Borders.
They don't care that most people arrested arrested were protesters, they care about the subset that are journalists.
Just the FCC doesn't give a shit what you put in the pills you sell as Viagra - they let the FDA worry about that.
How many journalists are there in the US?
How many journalist are there in Iran?
While it is fairly well accepted that the US and Britain instigated the overthrowal of Mosaddeq. I also don't think it is fair to blame it ALL on them.
There is a very deep and long standing feeling of fanaticism in Iranian culture (especially in the countryside). The Shah most definitely offended such sensibilities. However, even a democratic secular society would have had to deal with this strong fundamentalism at some point.
Iranians have quite a bit of blame in this matter.
Yet, after the Eastern Europeans overthrew these brutal governments in 1989 and 1990, the Eastern Europeans immediately built liberal democracies and free markets.
The Iranians made different choices. In 1979, after overthrowing the Shah and his tyrannical government, the Iranians immediately created a brutal Islamic theocracy. No one forced this crap on them. They love a brutal Islamic theocracy.
Cultures are different. Eastern European culture and Iranian culture are different. The Iranians are 100% responsible for the existence of a brutal theocracy in Iran. The Iranians are 100% responsible for the terrorism waged by the Iranian government against the West.
God damn Iranian culture. God damn the Iranian people.
Behold the power of Eastern European culture. It is awesome!
I can't seem to play that file. Hopefully I'm not mispronouncing the word from an Iranian perspective?
No you had it close, sorry my message wasn't clear about it although that is what I meant ;-))
it sounds pretty much like eee-ron or more like eee-rawn.. maybe ;-)
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
You can also listen to Christiane Amanpour fron CNN when she pronounces it. She must know how to : ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiane_Amanpour
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Umm, but they are. Don't we all know this already?
Brian Ross Report on Covert Operation to Destabilize Iran - Aired 5/24/07
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wg3r2YSM9g
Also, Iran was on it's way before some oil interests of the US and Britain got in the way.
Iran Had a Democracy Before We Took It Away
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090622_iran_had_a_democracy_before_we_took_it_away/
But Americans have an attention span of two weeks.
Pitiful.
*Satan Laughs As You Eternally Rot*
Descriptive sentence about how this image is a .jpg of Slashdot 'sucking.'
That's actually just an effect of using the efficient JPEG compression.
It looks fine for me using PNG.
Try it for yourself
> I find it amazing that this much of a stink wasn't made during the Zimbabwean elections...where anti mugabe supporters were being raped and murdered by the thousands Then again, I guess there are no economic interests in that part of Africa, like there are in Iran (read: oil)
Most of them don't have internet. It's a lot different when you can actually communicate directly with the people who are being oppressed.
Also, most people can't do much of anything. About the best most of us can do is to set up proxies for the reformists. That's not a lot. I don't think proxies would do any good in Zimbabwe.
If it's any consolation, I hope they get rid of Mugabe. But I have no idea how, if at all, I can help them do that. A proxy won't help much, will it?
As to whether a foreign power is involved, I think that is an extremely difficult question to answer as a remote consumer of "news" and Internet reports.
Actually, it is quite easy. Just use common sense.
Want to know if foreign country X is involved, just consider these 2 questions:
1. Is it in the interest of country X to do so?
2. Does country X has the capability to do so without getting caught and does country X even care about getting caught?
As you say, since it is difficult to proof anything, it would easy for country X to cover their tracks to avoid any backlash.
Oliver.
Have long since been "intrigued" by the fact that USian news outlets intermix "real news" and "bullcrap news" (Not sure how foreign outlets behave on this issue)
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Iran is just initiating their new program of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'. That followed their recent successful program of 'Don't Count'. They'll explain later that all those demonstrations were 'victory' celebrations for Ahmadinjad.
Before I hop on the media blitz and anti-Iran bandwagon I'll note:
* American officials have admitted to having 100,000 spies around the world. The U.S. also uses academics and journalists as spies. For example, recent Rhodes Scholar in Bolivia asked to spy.
* National Endowment for Democracy is U.S. government organization that funds political opposition groups in foreign countries whose governments the U.S. dislikes.
* Psychological operations are common place now such as the staged Saddam statue toppling. Recent BBC protest photos that were really a cropped pro-Ahmadinejad rally.
* I have not forgotten the warmongering media blitz about WMD that was completely fabricated.
* The U.S. has not had problems supporting and funding dictators, as long as they are "our dictators." Pinochet, the Shah of Iran ( Can you say CIA puppet, anyone?)
* The Iran election is getting more attention than the stolen elections by Bush.
* Ahmadinejad is not even the supreme Iranian leader. Why all the hype?
I think I'd rather watch reruns of Amercian Idol.