Iran arrests student editor over insulting Islam

[democratic]

Source: Khaleej Times

TEHERAN - Iran has arrested the editor of a student paper after the publication of material deemed insulting to Islam in four reformist papers at a prestigious Teheran university, press reports said on Saturday.

“Ahmad Ghassaban the editor of Sahar (Dawn), a student paper in Amir Kabir University, was arrested on Thursday,” the reformist Etemad daily said.

His arrest came after caricatures and articles deemed insulting to Islam appeared on campus in papers bearing the insignia of Sahar and three other student publications.

Amir Kabir University was involved in student demonstrations that rocked Iran in 2002 and has often been seen as a hotbed of student radicalism. A speech by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the university last year was interrupted by heckling and jeers, with one student burning his picture and another hurling a shoe.

Read more: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2007/May/middleeast_May88.xml§ion=middleeast&col=

[DavidDvorkin]

1. Umm, must be a bad translation

Or maybe, just maybe, for once we won't see anyone defending Ahmadinejad's government.

[Cant trust em]

2. Who is really surprised by this?

Terrible, but not a justification for war.

[MADem]

4. Are you suggesting we'd go to war over this INTERNAL matter?

All this does is show the world what assholes the present government is--they are NO better than the one they overthrew in 79. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

This isn't an American report, at any rate. This won't even make our news broadcasts.

[Cant trust em]

12. No

I said that it's not a justification for war.

[MADem]

20. This won't even hit our radar, really. It's not 'big' enough.

If war eventually evolves out of this incident, it will be a ways down the road, and it will be CIVIL war.

The protests, which were actually more than a single picture burning and a single shoe throwing (as suggested in the article) were pretty important--they shocked the shit out of the Midget Mayor, who is used to being treated like a petty prince at the least.

It is getting VERY interesting, on an internal level, in Iran. And it's all student-driven, too--those students are fantastic, they aren't going away, they aren't layin' down, and they aren't puttin' up with shit. We'll see if the 99 Riots are repeated--I wouldn't be surprised if they were:

... Debate thrived in Iran's universities and intellectual forums. Academics talked freely -- in a typically colourful, dramatic, manner, favouring grand, totalising theories.
They would often be acerbic about President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's grandiloquent pronouncements, even about the wisdom of vilayat-e-faqih (government guided by the clergy). They would debate everything from Persian culture to tapping high oil revenues for social welfare.

Last year, Iran's growing feminist movement launched a campaign to collect a million signatures demanding pro-gender justice amendments to the Constitution.

Votes against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency produced consternation, not paranoia. Iran signalled it was ready to engage with the world and keen to be accepted as a normal state.
However, last fortnight, "Café 78" was closed down. The Artists' Forum witnessed tighter self-censorship -- in anticipation of pressure from the culture Ministry.

The government took other repressive measures, arresting scores of feminists involved in the signature campaign. Schoolteachers were arrested for agitating for higher pay. Some 28 students' unions and 47 publications have been banned.

Even worse were purges of secular university teachers, said to number at least 40. More pro-reform publications were closed down.... Now, Tehran University for the first time has a cleric, Ayatollah Amid-Zanjani, as its chancellor --which sparked vigorous student protests, including the knocking off of his turban.

Fear and apprehension pervade Iran's intellectual institutions today. Some of the scholars who spoke candidly to this correspondent a year ago did not answer calls this time. There is resistance and angry opposition to the repression. But the state's broad-spectrum coercion has made the task of defending freedom and promoting democracy considerably more difficult.

What explains the present repressive climate? According to many social scientists and political analysts, three factors are at work....
http://www.tni.org/detail_page.phtml?act_id=16772

[joshcryer]

94. Would you support helping if another civil war broke out?

[MADem]

3. Well, FREE AHMAD, then!!!

Anyone who stands up to the Midget Mayor Butthead is OK with me...

Ahmad Ghassaban for President of Iran!


Of course, if he ever got out of jail and stood for office, he'd be struck off the ballot, as thousands of reformists routinely are....the Supreme Leader likes to pick his puppets as foils for himself, so that he always looks better by comparison. No fool, that fellah...

[seriousstan]

5. Islam is a religion of peace, it's also very thin skinned.

[DawnIsis]

6. I've got mixed feelings about seeing these articles on DU everyday

and I've got to ask myself what purpose they are supposed to serve? To make me angry at Iran? Well certainly I am but Iran is hardly the only country denying religious freedom.

In the article it says "The Iranian judiciary said on Wednesday it had arrested five people -- none of them students -- linked to the publication of the material in question."

It seems people not associated with the student paper published materials they knew were offensive. That is a lot different than arresting students for publishing materials and being arrested don't you think?

But I noticed the poster didn't include that in her snip. WHY only snip the most inflammatory part?

I'm not excusing Iran for denying free speech but everyone needs to ask themselves why all this negative focus on Iran and none of the other countries that deny religious freedom. There are much worse countries to focus our attention on.

[dave_p]

7. Well said

... and people should recall that Iran had a parliamentary democracy until August 1953 - when it was overthrouwn in a US-masterminded coup.

[MADem]

28. Ahhh, so we should ignore the fact that since 79, the theocracy has been brutally repressing the

rights of EVERYONE, save the mullahs and ayatullahs?

Come on. Two wrongs do not make a right. Gee, because we booted Mossadeq and installed Shah, we can't take note of the fact that there's a new set of assholes in charge? That's just silly.

If Iranians could vote, freely, the clerics would be GONE. They'd likely go to a parliamentary system, with a President and a PM, is my guess. The younger generations have had enough of this shit, and they're in the majority. Many are fatherless, thanks to the Iran Iraq War...they've had to grow up fast, and think about the world and their place in it.

That said, this is NOT our business. It's theirs. But there's no law against cheering on the students from the sidelines, and that's what I'm doing. I hope they kick the clerics to the curb and set up a government that suits them best. I'd like to go back before I get too old to do so...

[Karenina]

31. Americans do not clearly understand

the role their MIC has played in world politics/events. We're born and bred to believe that WE are the "good guys." NOTHING could be further from the truth.

[IronScorpio5]

8. Exactly...

people who post these kind of articles and the hundreds if not thousands of other accurate articles that portray iran as a fascist, medieval, misogynist reactionary regimen are the problem.

:eyes:

[DawnIsis]

9. I'm not interested in engaging in Iran bashing at the behest of a misleading post

as you seem more than ready to do. I don't engage in hate and as for Iran being a "fascist, medieval, misogynist reactionary regimen" that sounds like Bush & co. to me so maybe we should focus on our own country.

[IronScorpio5]

10. Oh puleeze

hate is good when youre dealing with countries/regimes thst...

suppress freedom of speech
suppress freedom of expression
treat women as 2nd class citizens
suppress freedom of religion
that are known to support terrorism


dont be sfraid to hate for the correct reasons. its ok.

[DawnIsis]

11. So you think your "hate" is gonna spread freedom of religion throughout the Middle East?

All of the reasons you list to hate Iran can be applied to our own country so again I think your energy is misplaced and your "hate" causes you to finger point before cleaning your own house.

[IronScorpio5]

14. No , I am quite capable....

of hating many things at the same time.

[DawnIsis]

16. Some quotes for you to ponder....

Hating people is like burning down your own house to get rid of a rat. ~Henry Emerson Fosdick

If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us. ~Herman Hesse

I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain. ~James Baldwin

[seriousstan]

18. WOW, any other bumper stickers you like?

[SayWhatYo]

37. Does that mean no one should hate Bush?

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Stranger]

24. That list would include most regimes on the planet, but the ineffable focus is always Iran,

not, coincidentally, also the focus of the Neocon war machine.

[MADem]

27. Every Iranian I know, many under 35, would agree with the assessment of the regime.

Just because Bush is an IDIOT doesn't make the Iranian government wonderful. There CAN be more than one crew of fuckstick assholes on the world stage, ya know....and in the case of Iran, they too fit the bill.

One of my favorite Persian bloggers tells it like it is (his English is sometimes a little fractured, he writes as if he is translating directly sometimes, but his message gets through)--this kid is gutsy and worth a read:

http://jadi.civiblog.org/blog

[The Stranger]

22. Nice strawman there!

And nice indignance, but I suspect DUers are too sophisticated not to know what is going on.

[JohnLocke]

85. It IS a reactionary regime!

[brentspeak]

13. Uh, ok.

People should stop posting threads about Iran because other countries deny religious freedom also. That sure makes a lot of sense...

I suggest that if you don't want to be offended, limit your reading to the Ayatollah Khomeini Dispatch.

[IronScorpio5]

15. Careful...

you'll be excused of spreading hate.

[The Stranger]

21. This is propaganda disseminated by the corporate media and Neocon administration

intended to create in the public mind the caricature of an entire nation in order to wear away at people's natural inclination not to go to war and bring about the murder of tens of thousands of innocents.

The text is all "Progressive," but the subtext, played to the tune of a U.S. Presidential candidate singing "Bomb Iran!" is war propaganda.

[MADem]

26. Oh, please...and they started this a decade or more ago??

The world does not revolve around America. The students were protesting when Clinton was President.

In fact, back then, they were RIOTING....

[The Stranger]

33. I believe the question was about DU and the interminable stories about Iran here.

And with people around the world struggling for human rights, why there is so much focus on Iran (coincident with people like Richard Perle (who is no spokesman for human rights) clamoring for war with Iran).

There is text, and then there is the subtext.

[MADem]

34. There sure is....and all I am saying is that Iran is now IN the news, so

their internal struggles WILL be discussed more, often by people who would have, in the past, read the headline with a blank stare and five percent comprehension, and turned the page.

But my point, as someone with a history in that nation, is that these internal struggles aren't new, and they've been covered in the press before, with the same basic tack taken--the students, the youth, are dealing with a repressive, authoritarian regime that refuses to allow true representation in the government...it's just that no one, save people like me who worried about old friends or had family there, paid attention to the coverage back then.

Text, and subtext. You can't blame everything on Richard Perle. Some shit is the fault of a bunch of asshole, repressive clerics.

[The Stranger]

40. You almost had it: now ask yourself why "Iran is now IN the news"

in particular since, as you point out, these struggles have gone on for decades.

[MADem]

43. I honestly think you have it backwards; Iran has BEEN in the news, it's only now that people are

picking these articles out, like corn from a turd, where in the past they would have gone unnoticed.

I've already posted articles from 1999, BEFORE BushCo, that demonstrated that these issues WERE covered in the media.

You're saying that because no one in your sphere "noticed" them before this, that the articles weren't there. They were. You just weren't reading them. I was, though, and so were others.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

50. Because IT'S A FUCKING NEWSPAPER IN DUBAI.

Did you even LOOK at the source for this article? It's like asking "Why is New York" in the news if you live in Jersey.

[MADem]

55. Heh, heh....

How dare they cover issues affecting their neighborhood? Why, the "NOIVE.."

Those neocons, how insidious they are! First they take over GUARDIAN UK, and now the Dubai English language rag!

[The Stranger]

82. What makes you think that Neocons are LIMITED TO BEING IN THE U.S.?

The "FUCKING NEWSPAPER IN DUBAI" can parrot this shit with the best of them.

And calm down. Take off the caps lock.

[IronScorpio5]

86. OMG !!

So now the neo-cons are in DUBAI?

worldwide even?

you scaring me.

[The Stranger]

92. You are easily scared.

Do some research. Stick around these boards. Learn something.

[MADem]

88. Ahh, and they've infiltrated the GUARDIAN UK as well?

Come on, you're being silly. Your assertion is absurd. Not everything is a neocon conspiracy. Some stuff is just news, of interest to neighboring countries or substantial portions of populations. Take a walk, breathe some fresh air. Get some perspective.

I've been reading about Iran in papers and on the internet for years. Since 1979, in fact. The news has always been there--it's just now that more people are actually paying attention.

If a tree falls in the forest...

[The Stranger]

93. Sure, just ask Presidential Candidate John McCain about it.

I forget, what was he singing again? Or just listen to Perle, Kristol, Cheney or any other of their brood. You ask them a question about the weather, and their response will be about how Iran is a threat, it must be addressed, everything is on the table, it is close to a bomb, the world must be safe for Democracy, etc.

[MADem]

95. Way to avoid the point--they've infiltrated the GUARDIAN, eh?

The left of left GUARDIAN UK? And a middle eastern English language paper?

We aren't talking about McCain, Perle, or any of those clowns, we're talking about leftwing British and regional middle eastern papers covering this matter.

The only one with a tinfoil approach, talking about Americans, here, is you. Guess what? Not everyone thinks America is the center of the universe.

What, we're only allowed to talk about things that are covered in American media? Well gee, what's up with Paris Hilton?

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

29. I totally agree with The Stranger

This is propaganda disseminated by the corporate media and Neocon administration.

[MADem]

35. Ahhh....so the "arch conservative" Guardian newspaper is in cahoots with the neocons?

Those "far righties" are conspiring with Bushco?? Come on.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2070106,00.html

Seized - for showing their hair

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2068365,00.html
Reformists prepare to take on Ahmadinejad and his militias


http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,2063615,00.html

Iranian regime penalises university activists


Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. This isn't propaganda, it's NEWS from IRAN. It's always been there, only no one ever paid attention before.

Good grief.

[CJCRANE]

99. The Guardian is somewhat of a

"left-wing gatekeeper". If not then we would see the same focus on Saudi Arabia and many other repressive regimes.

[Odin2005]

39. Right, and I bet the Neocons have super-secret invisible death rays too...

:sarcasm:

The way some DUers treat the neocons, a bunch of moron authoritarian ideologues and cynical corporatist suckups, as if they were like some "Illuninati"-like bunch is hilarious.

[The Stranger]

41. Try to take a more sophisticated view of the media, especially the U.S. corporate

media. The way some DUers take blatant propaganda to heart -- even when what is happening is being pointed out to them -- is far from hilarious. It is sad.

[Odin2005]

42. I bet the cranks who rant on about the Illuminati use the same talking point

:eyes:

[leftynyc]

45. Gosh - whatever would we do without your wisdom

Your condescension is nauseating.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

49. This ISN'T from the US corporate media.

For fuck's fucking sake! They're in Dubai and they publish Chomsky editorials!

[JohnLocke]

84. Best. Post. Ever.

[ButterflyBlood]

106. Totally agree

I love how some here think the neocons are capable of rigging elections in non-neocon-friendly countries such as France. Of course, no evidence of this is ever given, we're just supposed to accept it as true and fact.

[leftynyc]

44. It sounds like you want to stifle any criticism

of Iran because obviously the people on this board are not sophisticated enough to have two thoughts in their head at the same time. I can still feel bush is a danger to the world and also think that Iran is a virtual shithole when it comes to human rights - especially for women and gays.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

48. Right.

The Khaleej Times certainly is a monster of the American corporate media. :crazy:

[IronScorpio5]

51. "Propaganda"?

i see propaganda and its NOT in the OP.

hmmmmmm......

[IronScorpio5]

52. OMT......Is this propaganda ?

Iran: Voices Struggling To Be Heard


Restricted - Freedom of Expression

The Iranian regime severely limits freedom of speech and the press, intrusively monitoring weblogs and blocking access to many Internet sites.

Citizens who peacefully exercise freedom of expression and voice opinions contrary to the regime's can be prosecuted for instigating crimes against the state.
Insulting Islam, as interpreted by the regime, can be punishable by death.
Journalists are often threatened, and many have been jailed. Imprisonment can involve torture or deplorable solitary confinement conditions.
Since 2000 the regime closed more than 100 reformist newspapers and magazines - sentencing many managers to jail.

Prevented - Right to Assemble

Iranians face severe restrictions on their ability to voice grievances through public assembly. On March 8, 2006 and on June 12, 2006 Iranian security forces dispersed peaceful women's rights assemblies in Tehran, beating and arresting many participants. Nine of the women who participated in the June protests are being tried for "acting against national security by participating in an illegal gathering." Five of those women faced trial on March 4, 2007. Thirty women who gathered outside a courthouse in Tehran to show solidarity with the five on trial were beaten and arrested. Iranian authorities also attacked peaceful women's rights protestors in March at a gathering to mark International Women's Day. These repressive actions by the regime highlight an alarming trend of intolerance toward any expression of independent views by the Iranian people.

Unjust Treatment of Women

Women in Iran are speaking out against inequality and violence against women.

In the run-up to the December 2006 elections, all women candidates for the Assembly of Experts were disqualified. Iranian authorities sentence women to lashings for appearing in public without appropriate covering.
Iranian authorities have convicted victims of rape as adulterers, a crime punishable by death.
In December 2006, the UN General Assembly renewed its call for Iran to legally abolish the practice of stoning. There were continued reports in 2006 that judges imposed sentences of stoning for women charged with adultery.
Persecution of Religious and Ethnic Minorities

The status of religious freedom is extremely poor, particularly for the Baha'i and Sufis. The current regime continues to repress Iran's minority ethnic and religious groups, which also include Ahwazi Arabs, Azeris, Kurds, Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians. Religious and ethnic minorities in Iran face varying but significant degrees of social, economic, or cultural discrimination.
Such discrimination has captured the attention of the international community. On December 19, 2006, for the fourth year in a row, the UN General Assembly Third Committee passed a resolution on the country's human rights situation, expressing serious concerns about increasing discrimination against religious and ethnic minorities, citing the escalation and increased frequency of violations against Baha'is. It called on the government to implement the 1996 UNSR report of the Commission on Human Rights on religious tolerance, particularly in regard to the Baha'i community.


http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_21500.shtml

[JohnLocke]

83. Whatever.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[MADem]

25. People are waking UP and NOTICING Iran, is all. This shit is NOT new.

Here, read this, check out the pictures--it's from 1999: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/394155.stm

The reform elements have been trying to get a voice for a LONG time. Every time they get a little traction, those assholes in dresses and bad headgear push them down, led by the Supreme Leader who plays all ends against the middle. The problem in Iran IS the damned theocracy. They'd do better with a different system, a secular government with sharia elements in the Judiciary to shut people up. The clerics NEED to go--they're way more corrupt than the Shah's crew could ever THINK about being.

This isn't a "negative" focus on Iran. It's a POSITIVE focus on the population, the majority, who all were born AFTER the 79 'Revolution' and are eager for change. They just want to listen to music, and walk down the street with their damned girlfriend--who isn't dressed in a black bedsheet.

Iranians are great people. This young generation is especially remarkable. They want LIBERTY, they want JUSTICE. I'd like to see them go get it, all on their own, without our interference.

How can you construe that as "negative" is beyond me, and surely no one will endorse the hamhanded shit the Islamic government is doing. Heck, when our government does one-one hundredth of that kind of crap over here, the noise level gets impossible--the shit they're putting up with is a lot worse than, say "free speech zones." It's getting ugly, and the students deserve our sympathy and our support, not "Tsk, tsk, don't talk bad about the repressive regime..."

This has NADA to do with BushCo. But it has everything to do with the future for a vibrant population of a fascinating nation that wants change.

[Mike Daniels]

30. Ahh, but you're missing the point....

The only thing that matters to some people is that the repressive gov't of Iran told Bush to go piss up a rope.

Because of this, all negative coverage of Iran's government is the by-product of a news force totally beholden to the Bush administration and therefore is not worth noting or commenting on.

[MADem]

36. So I guess the kids of my friends in university over there can just go piss up a rope, then, eh?

Because anything that makes BushCo feel bad is good, even if they have to live under a fer-shit regime that denies THEM basic freedoms and discriminates against an entire gender along with huge groups of people...

How very progressive, not!

[Mike Daniels]

96. Sorry for any misunderstanding. I didn't think a sarcasm tag was needed in my initial post

but I guess it was.

[skipos]

32. What purpose? Trying to find out what is going on in the world

seem like a good purpose to me.

[fujiyama]

17. The word "radical" is kind of odd here

Usually you think of "radicals" as extremists. The reformers are anything but. It's Ahmedinahad's guys that are the radicals.

But then again, maybe it's just a matter of who is fighting the status quo. In this case it's definitely the students and I wish them the best of luck. The recent increase in government crackdowns is troubling and should leave no doubt that Ahmedinajad is a theocratic fanatic and so are his followers.

[Lurking Dem]

23. They want reform

so, technically, they are "radicals", no?

The current regime is better described as "reactionary".

[ohio2007]

19. "Islam" insulted? maybe 'Islam' needs to get a life

or new thought police need to be minding the cult

[IronScorpio5]

47. "new thought police need to be minding the cult"

dont laugh....its coming.

[ohio2007]

54. It has been in place for some time and some are revolting

in all the strange places and all the strange ways

warning,this is a video link to a Saudi MSM story and not meant to be shown to a non Saudi viewer

http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=214&ar=1439wmv&ak=null

Saudi Women, Oppressed by Husbands, Turn to Stripping in Internet Chat Rooms in Search of "Admiration"
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1439

[MADem]

73. Well, small correction there--the report is carried by MEMRI

which is a 501(3)c charitable outfit located in Washington DC. http://www.memri.org/aboutus.html It's not a report that is "not meant to be shown to a non-Saudi viewer." In fact, the Saudis never got to see this on their over the air stations--it's quite a long haul from the cleric reading the Quran or the boring news reports. It's why satellite dishes are the rage over that way.

The original TV report was carried in Lebanon, on LBC (what you'd expect it is, Lebanon Broadcasting Corp) television. http://www.lbcgroup.tv/lbc/en/home/

I had to laugh at the rather attractive scold towards the end with her abaya and Burbury accessories -- no mistaking she's not poor!

[ohio2007]

78. The report was "translated" by MERMI from arabic into English subtitle

MERMI didn't produce it, only provided a translated subtitle imo.
What I meant to bring to the discussion was it's a news program from the middle east ( not syndicated or affiliated with our for profit media giants )
A topic on how repression in Arab countries may be on the 'back burner' and ignored by western MSM.

It's a closer Arab perspective from Lebanon covering an Arab concern in what looks to be a Night line or 20/20 program format.
bottom line, this is only one of the many reasons why so many arab countries want full control over internet access.

[MADem]

87. NO, LBC produced it--Lebanon Broadcasting Corp. in Beirut

MEMRI is well known for excerpting pretty interesting chunks of media from all over not just the Middle East, but southwest Asia (Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan) as well.

They also are the "go to" guys to see what's up with those whacky Islamists and their jihadi websites: http://www.memri.org/iwmp.html

Yep, they sift through the shit so we don't have to....

They also spend some time on the Arab-Israeli back-and-forth--they get the unfiltered perspective from the Arab world, without the US peeing-on-the-tree to obscure issues. They're quite useful.

My only point is that the stuff they post is either published or transmitted over the airwaves. It isn't "secret" or "internal." In fact, if you have a dish, you can watch LBC in the US. My old neighbor used to get stuff from them with his package--I used to watch it at his house before he moved.

Most countries over there want to keep tabs on people, and some are worse than others. The Iranians are total assholes when it comes to internet control, but they're also stupid. If any website has FREE in it (like Free Coupons, Free Sample, anything like that) you get the "ACCESS FORBIDDEN" page--because they think it might have something to do with FREE Political Prisoners or FREE IRAN....they haven't gotten the proxy server thing down yet, fortunately...

[Odin2005]

38. How many more stories like this will it take to get the Iran apologists to STFU?

Just because the theocrats hate Bush doesn't been they are good guys. The enemy of our enemy is NOT necessarily our friend.

[IronScorpio5]

46. Well said....

if you dare comment on the iranian reactionary regime , its turned around thst "youre a neo-con shill " when the subtext msy be othr reasons.


good post.

[MADem]

58. How many stories before they realize that this regime is full of fucksticks?

They try to morph these miserable, sexist, authoritarian bums into the old Tudeh Party (the Communists, in essence) who held such sway half a century-plus back under Mossadeq, like they're all of a piece; all fist in the air, socialist(ish), nationalized oil, power to the people, well funded by the late and unlamented Soviets, and the old Red Chinese had their oar in, too, way back when.

Most of them would shit if they realized that the damned Tudeh is OUTLAWED now, and has been since good ole Khomeini took over. They are illegal, banned, their crappy little leadership, like that of the constitutional monarchists, operates from exile. They'd also shit if they realized how much of Iran's oil reserves goes to keeping those mullahs in the lifestyles of the rich and famous, and how little goes to infrastructure improvement, refinery repair, and investment in a post-oil future. Hell, Iran actually has to IMPORT half of their gasoline, because they don't have the capacity to refine it at home. They're barely making payroll (and payroll includes the underpaid government worker and the pension payments for the war wounded from the Iran - Iraq War, and the widow's stipends as well).

The mullahs retain power taking lessons from BushCo--rattle the sabre periodically; use repression (here we use no-fly lists, homeland security shakedowns, dire commercials about duct tape, plastic sheeting, and where to meet, to say nothing of scary specials on TV about dirty bombs and whatnot; there, they just hang "immodest" young girls from cranes by their necks until they are dead in the town square--for starters) and employ "just in time" politics. When the students get TOO pissed, have the Supreme Leader get up and deliver a few platitudes (with no real change) to mollify them until the security forces can regroup for another beatdown.

Same shit, different assholes. I am amazed when people don't see it. They've got to have a binary construct, even when one does not exist--if one is bad, the other MUST be good.

[barb162]

62. Your posts are extraordinary.

Your insights blow me away.

Kudos.

[MADem]

70. Aww, gee

Thanks! I do have a great fondness for Iran, the land and the people, who deserve a better government than they have now.

I really would like to go back one day, but the way things are now, that's just not happening.

[ShortnFiery]

104. That's an understatement!

"Blown away" is an apt term also, but with a different rationale. :eyes:

[ShortnFiery]

103. "Iran's apologists"!?

Oh shit, are we back to an "us versus them" type mentality?

There are moderate leaders in Iran who have not risen to the top. The more the USA meddles in their affairs, the more the people will elect right wing leaders. Not all that much unlike our country electing these asinine right wing nutcases because far too many of us would forego our Constitutional Rights in exchange for a little *security.*

My point: The Iranian People are subject to fear-mongering too. Therefore, the more we threaten the right wing religious leaders, the more that the frightened people will cling to the insanity of re-electing them. Well, duh. ;)

[Jester_11218]

53. Question for Democratic

Why is it that the only human rights stories you post relate to Iran? Where are your articles on China, Israel and the US when it comes to human rights?

What exactly is your mission with all of the posts about Iran?

Jesse - Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lurking Dem]

57. Look over there!

THE JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOZ!

People post about what they are interested in. If you want to take part in a discussion that interests you, start one.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

67. Maybe this is why...

Why i'm considering leaving the Democratic Party
Edited on Sat Nov-20-04 04:24 AM by democratic
I'd been an advent Democrat since the early 1970's. Mainly because I remember when our party supported freedom, human rights, and values throughout the world. Afterall, it was the Democrats who helped bring media attention to the harsh human rights violations in my native Iran.

The NY Times brought attention to the overthrow of the only democratically elected leader in Iranian history, secular nationalist Dr. Mossadeqh and the Democrats denunced the eventual overthrow of Mossadeqh and the installation of the Republican backed Shah of Iran.

But, the modern day Democratic party has become the party the Republicans were in the 1970's . Human right and democracy has become rather mute, so mute that various groups not only make excuses for the reigning dictatorship in Iran, but go so far as support them.

This is not the same party who I strongly endorsed throughout the 70's, 80's and 90's.

Our party by being silent and often times supportive of a deeply unpopular dictatorship are no different than the opposing party in the 70's.

Many of my compatriates have left the party and i'm considering leaving.

This is not the party i joined in the early 70's.

(empahsis mine)

Source

On edit: Of course there is also this reason:

That's not his point. I'm Iranian myself. I visit Iran about 5 times a year. Most Iranians inside Iran are very pro-US and most love President Bush because he's been more hard-line with the Iranian government. To most Iranians anything and everything is better than an Islamic Republic. But while some do support invasion most merely want US moral support.

Friedman is a brilliant Democrat. Why don't you want to face reality?

source

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ohio2007]

79. Did you get "name deleted"banned?

I see your post contains the LBN name an dclaims some sort of "profile" pattern?
Some people come here and only bash bush.
Wonder what they will do when he is gone?

[MADem]

60. Well, there's a lively discussion of that very issue in the I/P forum, if you're interested.

Why do you care if 'democratic' (who I see has been here for quite a while) has an interest in Iran? What motivates YOUR question? Why should it matter? And who are you to insist that 'democratic' post stories to your liking? You've got fingers, hit the POST button and put up the stories that you want to see, if it means that much to you.

You don't have to be a closeted neocon to have an interest in the subject; and frankly, your post infers that--do correct me if I've mistaken your intent.

I used to live in Iran, that's MY interest, FWIW. I miss the old country, frankly. It's turned into a repressive, worn down, scary place; kinda like the direction that America is headed...

[Jester_11218]

63. Who am I

I am a long time member that has noticed that this one poster seems to be posting quite a few human rights stories about Iran...and only Iran. Being a media analysts and one that studies and monitors, full time, propaganda...I am questioning this biased focus while our certain people are trying to build public support for invading Iran.

That's who I am and why I question this oddly suspicious string of recent posts.

[MADem]

66. One poster, who has been here as long as you have.

Not that duration matters in any event.

For all you know, that person you are not-so-subtly accusing of having an agenda might be Persian. That might account for an interest in Iran--not everyone is Charlie Caucasian, the European-American Poster Boy. Or have a loved one over there, or from there. Or have a fondness for the country. Or simply be a "one issue" poster for academic or other reasons, as many advocates for candidates, or those who get involved in a particular, singular cause, are.

Frankly, I find your questioning of this person's motives a bit inappropriate, to be polite about it. If you continually post articles about media propaganda, or ask questions with regard to that topic, should we question your motives, too? Wouldn't you be offended if someone suggested that your posts, say, were geared solely towards hyping your website, perhaps, or advancing some specific cause of your own?

I'd find it interesting if someone "laid in wait" for over four years to launch a "propaganda campaign," as you suggest, about this subject. Patience like that deserves respect, certainly. It's also a bit tin-foilish to think anyone would wait that long to "pounce" with postings, especially since Ahmadinejad, if the opposition to that baastid is the issue, wasn't elected until 2005.

You certainly wouldn't appreciate it if the same thing were said of you.

I think your accusations are baseless. Iran IS in the news. It IS a topic of interest. And there's damned little coverage of it in the US papers, so any reports, be they from Dubai (like this one) or the UK, or anywhere else, are of interest to those of us who are watching the drama play out between BushCo and Teheran.

[kineneb]

74. hear, hear!

I have lived in Iran and still have relatives there. I would like to see them have more freedoms and get rid of the theocrats running the place. I also would like to be able to visit and see some of the historical sites.

[IronScorpio5]

75. You may or may not want to read this then....

http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_21500.shtml

[kineneb]

76. already know about most of the topics

My parents had to escape the Revolution, and I am quite aware of the situation there.

[MADem]

77. It's an incredible country, it's got it all--sea, mountains, desert--and some of the best SKY I have

ever seen. At night, in the desert, it's like deep blue velvet and the stars look like diamonds. And in the day, it's the most amazing color of blue, a color you don't see in other regions of the world.

Fabulous countryside, wonderful and welcoming people who are so courteous (and boy, doncha have to clue in the nitwits who don't get the 'politeness' code!') and pleasant. Of course, there's no shortage of folks who like to live life out loud, too, and that makes it all the more vibrant a society.

The historical sites are really something--Esfahan takes your breath away; even the mosque at Qom (a rather repressive city nowadays, naturally, being the birthplace of Khomeini--not much to do there if you aren't a religious scholar) is something to see, though not recommended in this current environment.

Some day...insh'Allah!

[ShortnFiery]

101. Yes, I know, because I've lived there ... you seem to be part of the wealthy ex-patriot crowd ...

a la Chalbi for Iran. Further, I've not ever seen a thread started by "democratic" that didn't totally spin Iran as an "evil empire." :eyes: What's up with that? :shrug:

Yes, Iran is being ruled by a harsh theocracy but, believe it or not, it is NOT NEAR as brutal as when the USA's buddy, The Shah of Iran ruled in favor of everything American. The Shah had a covert secret police force that rivaled the Nazi SS. The Shah was JUST AS MURDEROUS, if not worse. So we must have faith in "the people" of Iran to continue to select moderate leaders. Us going over there and stirring things up (bombing with mini-nukes) will just ensure that the right wing religious nutcases will remain in charge for another generation.

IMO the information you provide along with your spin? Well, let's say - less than insightful, i.e., see disinformation and propaganda. :thumbsdown: I would also not be too surprised if you have ties to The Thug, murderous Shah of Iran's exiled family. Those ultra wealthy boys and girls are chomping at the bit to get back in power. :(

Bravo! <sound of one hand clapping>

[Marrah_G]

98. I love reading your posts

I too despise regimes like those in power in Iraq. Everytime I see someone defending the Taliban or the Iranian governments treatment of people I want to scream. It is not comparable to here (yet). For people to insinuate it is just as bad here is a complete insult to those trying so hard to change things where they are. It's along the lines of comparing someone kissing you when you weren't agreeable to it or someone locking you up and raping you in every imaginable way for years.

I never see these same folks defending Saudi Arabia..... could it be "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" syndrome? I'm pretty sure if Bush loved Iran that the same people defending Iran would be the first to be screaming out against their policies.

[barb162]

61. There's nothing at all wrong on posting this and I wonder

why you question it. I wonder why you mention three countries only when there are far more severe and numerous human rights violations going on in Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MADem]

68. Gee, why aren't you pointing out the agenda of those who

have a candidate's bumper sticker as their sig line? Or the face of a candidate as an avatar? Why aren't those topics on your radar? What do you have against Persian-Americans, or friends of Iran and Iranians?

I really think you are out of line, here. How you can take a post about student protests in Iran and hoist the Israel flag makes me wonder, bluntly, what the hell you're doing. And why?

Why are you so concerned about this discussion? Why isn't it appropriate for the concerns of the Persian students to be discussed? Why are YOU marrying this issue to Israel, when no one else is? What's YOUR agenda?

To paraphrase you, all I'm doing is questioning YOUR motives. And my concern is valid. The pattern is clear.

You might want to spend less time trying to stifle discussion of a topic you happen to dislike, and more time starting threads and contributing to topics more to your liking. You might benefit from use of the IGNORE THREAD feature if this topic causes you angst.

This latest crackdown (and only the latest of many) IS a valid concern, BushCo notwithstanding, and it would be, at least as far as I'm concerned, if Al Gore had won been declared the winner of* the election, 9-11 never happened, and we were on the tail end of eight years of peace and prosperity under a Democratic administration.

You need to rethink your not-so-veiled accusations. IMO.

*Edited, for obvious reasons--Gore DID win that election.

[Lurking Dem]

71. To get roughly back on topic

(since there are clearly agenda-laden people here who wish to discuss it! :+ )

Wasn't there a plan in place during the Clinton administration to fund/support these students and newspaper editors, etc. in order to help them overthrow their government?

Whatever happened to that?

[MADem]

72. I seem to recall the Clinton administration being a bit more geared to

a hands-off and nonconfrontational attitude. They weren't gonna support those kids (in a Kim Roosevelt fashion, if that's what you mean) beyond calling on the world community to apply pressure to Iran from a "Human Rights" perspective. There wasn't any 'hook' they could grasp to 'work it' internally.

They didn't engage, or get aggressive, like BushCo, IIRC. See here:

July 20, 1999

Two decades after Iran's Islamic revolution of 1978-79, another US administration has been surprised by violent demonstrations on the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities. The Clinton Administration and members of Congress watched with alarm and some helplessness as Iranian student protests persisted and spread--despite official warnings, the brutality of religiously inspired vigilantes claiming to protect the Islamic Republic's interests and carefully orchestrated counter-demonstrations. The US Department of State has reacted cautiously to these developments, while members of Congress--usually eager to criticize the Clinton Administration's intelligence failures--have remained silent ...As initially peaceful marches in Tehran spread to other cities and sparked clashes with security forces last week, the State Department issued terse statements urging the Iranian government to safeguard the students' rights to free assembly and expression in accordance "with international human rights standards." The students' core demands--respect for the inviolability of university facilities, the release of their jailed leaders and other dissidents, and freedom of the press--are consistent with the Clinton Administration's rhetoric favoring democratic movements worldwide. The US, however, has hesitated to embrace the students, who, along with other constituencies, voted overwhelmingly for Khatami in the May 1997 election.

The Administration's stance towards Iran's latest unrest reveals a historically flawed understanding of democratization. While articulating a discourse of popular freedom, Washington has traditionally worried that genuine democratization in the Middle East would subvert American interests and goals, namely, the containment of radical forces and great power competitors, the protection of Israel and the free flow of reasonably priced oil. At the height of the Cold War, US presidents used these interests to justify policies that undermined democratic forces in Iran. Now, well after the Cold War's end, Iranian students are implicitly testing the Clinton Administration's commitment to democracy in the Middle East.

Four key factors underlie the Administration's reluctance to support the Iranian student movement unequivocally. First, the students lack a clearly identifiable leadership, despite their strong organizational potential. Rather, the protesters have referred to themselves as "Khatami's students," imploring their president to restrain the security forces....The US also worries that embracing the students could give hard-line conservatives the excuse they need to suppress the protests brutally. Supreme Leader Ali Khamene'i, believed to control the state's security apparatus, has already warned the demonstrators against manipulation by "foreign agents." Recent press reports from Iran indicate that hard-liners are now openly blaming the US for fomenting last week's violence.

Third, the "less-said-the-better" approach to Iran's unrest reflects divisions within the Clinton Administration and Congress over whether and how to deal with the Islamic Republic. Even after pronouncing the policy of "dual containment" in 1993 to thwart the influence of "rogue regimes"--Ba`athist Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Iran--US decision-makers have differed over whether isolating Iran merely intensifies anti-Americanism within the clerical leadership. Moreover, those in the Administration who favor restoring diplomatic relations have disagreed about how this should proceed: Would Tehran or Washington make the first move? And with which Iranian leaders would the US talk?

Khatami's victory in 1997 seemed to answer these questions. Advocating a "dialogue of civilizations" and the beginning of people-to-people contacts between Iran and the US, Khatami gave the Clinton Administration grounds for guarded optimism. Yet Iran's president has not proved consistently able or willing to challenge his conservative rivals. .....
http://www.merip.org/mero/mero072099.html

In my personal opinion, any 'revolution' needs to come from within. We don't need to be sticking our beaks in. If the students and/or other secular and reform entities are successful, we should hold out the hand of friendship, but it's up to them to make it happen--that way, it has a chance of lasting. Imposed governments tend to have a twenty to forty year shelf life, at best--and then there's the issue of blowback, another issue entirely, but one that is none too fun to deal with.

[IronScorpio5]

90. I hope....

they throw that reactionary regime out of office asap.

[MADem]

91. It's up to them. It won't work if we get involved. They've got to organize and do it on their own.

[ShortnFiery]

102. The people are being represented by some moderates, with time they will OUST the nutcases.

If we don't get our grubby little Empiric fingers in Iran's Political Pie, I honestly believe that moderate leaders will rise to the top.

Please remember that Iran has turned further politically right-wing when the USA intimidates and threatens them. If you want to see moderate leaders emerge, stop threatening to bomb Iran. :shrug:

[IronScorpio5]

89. OUCH.

NT

[barb162]

59. That's a despicable violation of their civil rights

[ShortnFiery]

105. Yeah, if the Shah of Iran were still in power, he'd just cut off an ear and release them. n/t

[treestar]

81. That these countries clerics' are often medieval on this sort of thing

is something we have known ever since 1979 at the least. No reason for any new actions against them, IMO. Suddenly the right wing cares about these things, but they are really using these types of things to try to scold the liberals into line with their next military action. In reality, the RW envies the Muslim theocracy this type of power and wishes they had it for their fundie religions.

[CJCRANE]

100. True.

And the neocons in power wouldn't lift a finger against the repressive regime in Saudi Arabia. It's all hypocrisy.

[JVS]

97. In soviet russia, Islam insults you!