Ahmadinejad defiant about result of Iranian election

wes

Deleted User wrote: »

They'd manage it if they could misquote him..

Some of the stuff attributed to him, were not mis-quotes. He is a incendiary figure.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not to repeat myself but it didn't stop them for the last few years..

Well, the difference this time is that people are seeing the protests on there TVs, and aren't going to buy the same old crap again.

Iskenderun

Some more pictures from Iran. Close up and personal.

CCCP^

So if mobile phones are being blocked why aren't they blocking website like the other candidates one?

wes

CCCP^ wrote: »

So if mobile phones are being blocked why aren't they blocking website like the other candidates one?

Well, unless the turn off the internet, information will still get out. There are hundreds if not thousands of sites they can use.

There are also ways around the various blocking tech they use.

Sesshoumaru

I think there might be something to all these claims of CIA and MI5 interference. Must be the British government behind this:

BBC behind the death of Neda

The order to shoot one young female protester and have someone nearby with a smart phone to record it must have come from Gordon Brown himself I reckon. Perhaps Mossad has some sort of mind control over Gordon Brown? So responsibility for the girls death might lie with Israel? Thought provoking stuff!

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I think there might be something to all these claims of CIA and MI5 interference. Must be the British government behind this:

BBC behind the death of Neda

The order to shoot one young female protester and have someone nearby with a smart phone to record it must have come from Gordon Brown himself I reckon. Perhaps Mossad has some sort of mind control over Gordon Brown? So responsibility for the girls death might lie with Israel? Thought provoking stuff!

Yeah, pretty terrible stuff from Iran, but hardly a unique claim coming from a Middle Eastern government.

SkepticOne

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

The order to shoot one young female protester and have someone nearby with a smart phone to record it must have come from Gordon Brown himself I reckon. Perhaps Mossad has some sort of mind control over Gordon Brown? So responsibility for the girls death might lie with Israel? Thought provoking stuff!

According to the article:

However the Javan newspaper has made an extraordinary claim, saying that she was killed by "thugs" hired by BBC correspondent Jon Leyne as he wanted to make a documentary film. Mr Leyne was recently expelled from Iran for his reporting on the protests.

The plot thickens...

mike65

Comical Ali didn't dash across the border in 2003 did he?

wes

mike65 wrote: »

Comical Ali didn't dash across the border in 2003 did he?

If he did, the Iranian's would have probably executed him. So maybe its his ghost .

Overheal

After the whole WMD thing, im not ready to jump to any conclusions about wtf is going on over there.

Sesshoumaru

Overheal wrote: »

After the whole WMD thing, im not ready to jump to any conclusions about wtf is going on over there.

The Guardian live blog makes for interesting reading

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/24/iran-crisis

I find the 3.32pm entry to be most informative. When Iranians become wary of beating and torturing their own people just hire some foreign thugs to do it.

3.32pm:
Newspaper Roozonline has an interview (in Persian) with one of the young plainclothes militiamen who have been beating protesters.

The Guardian's Robert Tait sends this synopsis:

The man, who has come from a small town in the eastern province of Khorasan and has never been in Tehran before, says he is being paid 2m rial (£122) to assault protestors with a heavy wooden stave. He says the money is the main incentive as it will enable him to get married and may even enable him to afford more than one wife. Leadership of the volunteers has been provided by a man known only as "Hajji", who has instructed his men to "beat the counter-revolutionaries so hard that they won't be able to stand up". The volunteers, most of them from far-flung provinces such as Khuzestan, Arak and Mazandaran, are being kept in hostel accommodation, reportedly in east Tehran. Other volunteers, he says, have been brought from Lebanon, where the Iranian regime has strong allies in the Hezbollah movement. They are said to be more highly-paid than their Iranian counterparts and are put up in hotels. The last piece of information seems to confirm the suspicion of many Iranians that foreign security personnel are being used to suppress the demonstrators. For all his talk of the legal process, this interview provides a key insight into where Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, believes the true source of his legitimacy rests.

Overheal

And yet nobody is making any expression of interest in going in there to do anythign about it. Just a lot of poorly worded "Shame on You Ahmadinjad"'s.

Naturally, it seems to me like the rest of the world is expecting Team America to take up the charge once more, so they won't have to do jack ****.

wes

I have yet to hear anyone want the US to do anything about whats going on in Iran. In fact any US intevention would be a gift to the hard liners, and the protest movement would die a death for at least a couple of decades.

This would also apply to anyone else who could get involved (to a lesser degree), it would just be a huge mess and would probably back fire horribly.

Its best to let the Iranians sort out there own problems.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

I have yet to hear anyone want the US to do anything about whats going on in Iran. In fact any US intevention would be a gift to the hard liners, and the protest movement would a death for at least a couple of decades.

This would also apply to anyone else who could get involved (to a lesser degree), it would just be a huge mess and would probably back fire horribly.

Its best to let the Iranians sort out there own problems.

At the same time I can't help but feel that all these smart phone videos are a cry for help. I mean the Iranians are going to a great deal of effort to put them up online, not just for their fellow Iranians, but also mostly so the world can see what is happening. If that's not a cry for help, I don't know what is?

Sure maybe military action at this stage would be counter productive. But surely something more than strongly worded letters can be done?

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

At the same time I can't help but feel that all these smart phone videos are a cry for help. I mean the Iranians are going to a great deal of effort to put them up online, not just for their fellow Iranians, but also mostly so the world can see what is happening. If that's not a cry for help, I don't know what is?

I would disagree, a lot of young people communicate via facebook, twitter and Youtube and what not. Now in Iran things are pretty restrictive and these services are even more of an outlet for them. They throw these video's up, as this is how they have been communicating for years.

I am sure, a huge part of it is that they are trying to communicate to Iranians outside the country and making the regime lose face in the world, but until Mousavi or someone comes out asks for help, its best we leave them to it and not get in there business. People getting in Iran's business in the past, has made things worse.

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

Sure maybe military action at this stage would be counter productive. But surely something more than strongly worded letters can be done?

Which will be at best meaningless and at worst rally the hardliners. Let the Iranian's sort out there own problems. Long term they will be far better to sort things out themselves, rather than having a solution imposed.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

I would disagree, a lot of young people communicate via facebook, twitter and Youtube and what not. Now in Iran things are pretty restrictive and these services are even more of an outlet for them. They throw these video's up, as this is how they have been communicating for years.

I am sure, a huge part of it is that they are trying to communicate to Iranians outside the country and making the regime lose face in the world, but until Mousavi or someone comes out asks for help, its best we leave them to it and not get in there business. People getting in Iran's business in the past, has made things worse.



Which will be at best meaningless and at worst rally the hardliners. Let the Iranian's sort out there own problems. Long term they will be far better to sort things out themselves, rather than having a solution imposed.

I'm not advocating direct military action at the moment. I'd still think it is best left up to the Iranian themselves for now. But if the death toll starts going into the thousands in the near future.... what do we do then? Just stand back and let civilians keep dying? wash our hands of the affair like Pontius Pilate?

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I'm not advocating direct military action at the moment. I'd still think it is best left up to the Iranian themselves for now. But if the death toll starts going into the thousands in the near future.... what do we do then? Just stand back and let civilians keep dying? wash our hands of the affair like Pontius Pilate?

Well, seeing as "we" have already washed out hands, of the Congo, Gaza, Sri Lanka, and Darfur, why would I think Iran would be any different? If an "intervention" did happen it would have nothing to do saving lives, as if it was about saving lives, there would have been an intervention in the Congo or Darfur a long time ago.

Thousands were killed during the recent Sri Lanka and Gaza conflicts. Hundreds of thousands have died in Darfur, millions in the Congo. Seeing, as those conflicts (those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head) have already resulted in 1000's dead (and in Congo's case millions), shouldn't someone intervene in those places? If its about saving lives, I would assume the Congo and Darfur would be at the very top of the list for it.

I already know that "we" don't give a **** about people being butchered and any invasion against Iran, will have nothing to do with saving lives. Hell any invasion of Iran, will kill 1000's more than the Iranian regime has at present. I really wouldn't put it by the Iranian regime to go on a murderous rampage, but they haven't done so as of yet, mean while 1000's (in 1 case millions) dead in those other conflicts.

Still, who exactly is in the position to invade? The US is still knee deep in 2 wars, along with there buddies. There doesn't even seem to be anyone in a position to invade.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

Well, seeing as "we" have already washed out hands, of the Congo, Gaza, Sri Lanka, and Darfur, why would I think Iran would be any different? If an "intervention" did happen it would have nothing to do saving lives, as if it was about saving lives, there would have been an intervention in the Congo or Darfur a long time ago.

Thousands were killed during the recent Sri Lanka and Gaza conflicts. Hundreds of thousands have died in Darfur, millions in the Congo. Seeing, as those conflicts (those are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head) have already resulted in 1000's dead (and in Congo's case millions), shouldn't someone intervene in those places? If its about saving lives, I would assume the Congo and Darfur would be at the very top of the list for it.

I already know that "we" don't give a **** about people being butchered and any invasion against Iran, will have nothing to do with saving lives. Hell any invasion of Iran, will kill 1000's more than the Iranian regime has at present. I really wouldn't put it by the Iranian regime to go on a murderous rampage, but they haven't done so as of yet, mean while 1000's (in 1 case millions) dead in those other conflicts.

Still, who exactly is in the position to invade? The US is still knee deep in 2 wars, along with there buddies. There doesn't even seem to be anyone in a position to invade.

If the West had unlimited resources I'm sure you'd see Europe and America meddling in all those places you mentioned. However it is a fact that war is expensive and like running a business your resources should be targeted where they can give maximum ROI. Iranians are smart, well educated and definitely in urban areas at least they are looking for more freedom. Besides having the women wearing Islamic head dress, I'm sure everyone has noticed that the young people look very "Western" in their dress code.

By the way I'm not saying invade. It's hard to just sit back and watch, but definitely letting them try and sort out their own problems is the bet course of action for now. We don't need to give Imadinnerjacket any false excuses for his thuggery.

We

http://threatswatch.org/rapidrecon/2009/06/unimaginable-horror-in-tehran/

Just today :mad:..

Sesshoumaru

We wrote: »

http://threatswatch.org/rapidrecon/2009/06/unimaginable-horror-in-tehran/

Just today :mad:..

This is definitely turning into a massacre :mad:

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

If the West had unlimited resources I'm sure you'd see Europe and America meddling in all those places you mentioned. However it is a fact that war is expensive and like running a business your resources should be targeted where they can give maximum ROI. Iranians are smart, well educated and definitely in urban areas at least they are looking for more freedom. Besides having the women wearing Islamic head dress, I'm sure everyone has noticed that the young people look very "Western" in their dress code.

So what if they look Western?!? Doesn't make there lives any more valuable than the people in those other places, I mentioned, who are dieing in there thousands. The current situation in Iran doesn't even come close to as bad as the other places, I mentioned.

Also, in the case of Darfur, we are talking about Genocide, all the people there are looking for is live. They hardly have the time to worry about stuff like freedom, when they could be murdered any day.

Congo actually has a great deal of natural resources, in fact that is the cause of the mess there. Sudan also has plenty of oil as well. In the end, "we" don't care about a lot of dead people. The only reason anyone wants intervention in Iran, is that they had the temerity to stand up to the US.

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

By the way I'm not saying invade. It's hard to just sit back and watch, but definitely letting them try and sort out their own problems is the bet course of action for now. We don't need to give Imadinnerjacket any false excuses for his thuggery.

Sure its hard to watch. Just like it was hard to watch those Monks protesting in Burma and what not. The only difference is that the people involved seem to have Internet access and can communicate via Facebook.

wes

We wrote: »

http://threatswatch.org/rapidrecon/2009/06/unimaginable-horror-in-tehran/

Just today :mad:..

I haven't seen this reported any place else.

Horrifying if true.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

So what if they look Western?!? Doesn't make there lives any more valuable than the people in those other places, I mentioned, who are dieing in there thousands. The current situation in Iran doesn't even come close to as bad as the other places, I mentioned.

Also, in the case of Darfur, we are talking about Genocide, all the people there are looking for is live. They hardly have the time to worry about stuff like freedom, when they could be murdered any day.

Congo actually has a great deal of natural resources, in fact that is the cause of the mess there. Sudan also has plenty of oil as well. In the end, "we" don't care about a lot of dead people. The only reason anyone wants intervention in Iran, is that they had the temerity to stand up to the US.



Sure its hard to watch. Just like it was hard to watch those Monks protesting in Burma and what not. The only difference is that the people involved seem to have Internet access and can communicate via Facebook.

I never said their lives were worth more because of the way they dressed. I understand you are cynical about all Western motives. But don't try to put words in my mouth. My point was fairly simple. Life isn't a comic book where super heroes can come in and save the day for everyone. We can't save everyone all at once. I was simply pointing out that Iranians may in the future be more interested in being "saved". May be! They do after all have a long history of advanced civilization. It's not like you'd be starting from scratch anyway. Like a business you have to invest where you stand a higher chance on getting a return on that investment. That's just the real world unfortunately.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

I haven't seen this reported any place else.

Horrifying if true.

It was part of the Guardians live blog on Iran yesterday.

We

Any sort of protests going on in Dublin about this?

blackgold>>

We,

You post a site that has a video clip from youtube with just audio on it?
Then they show a dead man with no name.

America should most definitely invade Iran

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I never said their lives were worth more because of the way they dressed. I understand you are cynical about all Western motives. But don't try to put words in my mouth. My point was fairly simple. Life isn't a comic book where super heroes can come in and save the day for everyone. We can't save everyone all at once. I was simply pointing out that Iranians may in the future be more interested in being "saved". May be! They do after all have a long history of advanced civilization. It's not like you'd be starting from scratch anyway. Like a business you have to invest where you stand a higher chance on getting a return on that investment. That's just the real world unfortunately.

Again, the oil infrastructure exist in Sudan as well. It could easily be exploited. Money could be made there. In the Congo, the infrastructure to exploit the metal used in Mobile Phones exists despite the ongoing conflict.

In Iran, there oil infrastructure is falling apart and they were evening importing oil at one point due to there messed up infrastructure.

Also, you will find that people in Darfur were directly appealing to the West to save there lives, and in the case of Iran, reformists have been telling the West to leave them to it.

Look, your basically saying that the "West" will only "save" people, when there is money to be made. Seems to me, it has nothing to do with saving anyone and making money. Its hardly alturism, when helping people is dependent on making money. Its basically war profiteering, which isn't really a good thing. Look, at Iraq, where the cure seems to have been no better than the disease, considering the huge mess created there.

wes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

It was part of the Guardians live blog on Iran yesterday.

Must have missed it, I was actually reading the live blog yesterday.

wes

We wrote: »

Any sort of protests going on in Dublin about this?

There was one last Thurday outside the Iranian embassy, if I remember correctly.

Haven't heard about any others.

Sesshoumaru

wes wrote: »

Again, the oil infrastructure exist in Sudan as well. It could easily be exploited. Money could be made there. In the Congo, the infrastructure to exploit the metal used in Mobile Phones exists despite the ongoing conflict.

In Iran, there oil infrastructure is falling apart and they were evening importing oil at one point due to there messed up infrastructure.

Also, you will find that people in Darfur were directly appealing to the West to save there lives, and in the case of Iran, reformists have been telling the West to leave them to it.

Look, your basically saying that the "West" will only "save" people, when there is money to be made. Seems to me, it has nothing to do with saving anyone and making money. Its hardly alturism, when helping people is dependent on making money. Its basically war profiteering, which isn't really a good thing. Look, at Iraq, where the cure seems to have been no better than the disease, considering the huge mess created there.

Jaysus Wes I used business terminology to make a point! I never meant we should only go into places where our ROI will be money!! You've got blinkered vision there. The ROI I was talking about is a stable, functioning democracy and a happy populace! You've completely misunderstood what I was saying. When taking a course of action you should always have a clear set of objectives and they should be realistically attainable. That's where the business thinking comes into play. A business won't invest in a product if it thinks it is going to be a failure. The chance of failure I'm talking about is a population that rejects the invaders no matter what their intentions are.

I'm not obsessed with money you know! It has never crossed my mind when thinking about Iran. I am just very angry at the inhumanity of the Iranian regime.