IDEAS

A recall

Before the election I was arguing about the fact that Iran has many voices

that Iran is not based on one mentality

that Iranian politicians are divided over some issues

that Iranians don't want revolution but reforms

that Mousavi would be a great choice

that Iranian families are similar to many families, with many voices and not centralized...

Today I hope many agree. These were all said before there was such a thing as Green movement. Green is gone and life goes on, but Iran still holds those voices and has chances to reform...

Good thing for the internet that all the records all still there for those who want to check. 

Oh.

Well that... Sucks!

You never cease to amaze me

Abarmard jan as you say in Farsi: big bilakh to everyone who said Iran wants war. lol

Did not know Ahmadinejad

Did not know Ahmadinejad and Khamenie had a representative on IC??lol

And the handshake between the US and Ahmadinejad will help the Iranian silent majority how?

Iran doesn't want confrontation

Here is the new report about Ahmadinejad writing to president Obama:

//www.payvand.com/news/10/apr/1138.html

Another point that if US wants a hand shake, Iran will take it. 

Actually, very believable

Because we, as human beings, have allowed religions and those manipulating religions to take our minds hostage. Here's an article that appeared in the Guardian in April 2004. (it's not news, so hopefully JJ won't mind). The similarities are remarkable.

US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy

George Monbiot
Tuesday April 20, 2004
The Guardian
In the United States, several million people have succumbed to an extraordinary delusion. In the 19th century, two immigrant preachers cobbled together a series of unrelated passages from the Bible to create what appears to be a consistent narrative: Jesus will return to Earth when certain preconditions have been met. The first of these was the establishment of a state of Israel. The next involves Israel's occupation of the rest of its "biblical lands" (most of the Middle East), and the rebuilding of the Third Temple on the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques. The legions of the antichrist will then be deployed against Israel, and their war will lead to a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. The Jews will either burn or convert to Christianity, and the Messiah will return to Earth.

What makes the story so appealing to Christian fundamentalists is that before the big battle begins, all "true believers" (ie those who believe what they believe) will be lifted out of their clothes and wafted up to heaven during an event called the Rapture. Not only do the worthy get to sit at the right hand of God, but they will be able to watch, from the best seats, their political and religious opponents being devoured by boils, sores, locusts and frogs, during the seven years of Tribulation which follow.

By clicking on www.raptureready.com, you can discover how close you might be to flying out of your pajamas. The infidels among us should take note that the Rapture Index currently stands at 144, just one point below the critical threshold, beyond which the sky will be filled with floating nudists. We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. American pollsters believe that 15-18% of US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure included 33% of Republicans. And among them are some of the most powerful men in America. John Ashcroft, the attorney general, is a true believer, so are several prominent senators and the House majority leader, Tom DeLay.

So here we have a major political constituency - representing much of the current president's core vote - in the most powerful nation on Earth, which is actively seeking to provoke a new world war. Its members see the invasion of Iraq as a warm-up act, as Revelation (9:14-15) maintains that four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates" will be released "to slay the third part of men". They batter down the doors of the White House as soon as its support for Israel wavers: when Bush asked Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received 100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never mentioned the matter again.

For 85% of the US electorate, the Middle East is a foreign issue, and therefore of secondary interest when they enter the polling booth. For 15% of the electorate, the Middle East is not just a domestic matter, it's a personal one: if the president fails to start a conflagration there, his core voters don't get to sit at the right hand of God. Bush, in other words, stands to lose fewer votes by encouraging Israeli aggression than he stands to lose by restraining it. He would be mad to listen to these people. He would also be mad not to.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Basijee and

Basijee and logic? whatever abarmard. Enjoy the power of being on top while you can..

May some day Basijee and their tribes see the light...

Lastly

All the things that I stood for, I still stand today. And as this page shows it has been you who has directed your comment at me not the other way around. The request for me not to get in a "logical" discussion with you is now granted, as logic is far from your mind as it appears.

It's very interesting to see virtual characters assuming that their approval/disapproval is the main point for their virtual existence.You got something specific to debate bring it, otherwise it's pointless. 

Thanks vildemose

I will use your comment to show to IR agents so I can collect my large sum. And thank you for your support :)

Abarmard, I still remember

Abarmard, I still remember your rabid pro-IRI  arguments pre June 11. You were one of the most faithful supporter of the IRI and after the stolen election  you changed your tune.

I also doubt you can lecture anyone on objectivity given your basijee/Islamists mentality. Please do not bother engaing me in a rational debate. I have no time for quislings...

PS. If you don't like the US and its policies because they weaken your beloved IRI, then tough. Maybe, you should take up arms against the US if you're so devoted to IRI. You're a perfect candidate and I'm sure the IRI will pay you handsomely.

vildemose

I mentioned in my comment about Iranian media also. What I am saying is that many here (you included) are critical about Iranian news sources, or possibly Asian based sources also, you question them. Do the same for all. If you find something wrong with this statement than it is you that needs to double check what constitutes as "fact".

We are hearing over and over from some of the members of this site that Iran is causing chaos in the region. How so? Because Iran talks tough? Since when talking tough is creating uncertainty and destruction? 

I disagree with the author about this very "fact" that Iran is the problem here. Iran is perhaps "half" of the problem, let's be fair. If we say one side is doing wrong, then we have to mention the other side and party also. We can't have an eye for shortcomings from one side and ignore the other. 

I can bring one by one scenarios as what US has done to Iranian neighbrohood and livelihood vs what Iran has done. Iran today enjoys a better than decent relation with those countries that US tries to "fix" militarily. That shows that Iranian foreign policies have been sane and properly aligned with country's international political objective. This is regardless of you love or hate for a system. It's analysis. Why do those who "act" as opposition always have to talk negative even when something is not? That's how one loses credibility. 

I disagree with Israeli policies, however I would welcome an approach from Israeli government that I perceive as positive. I would do the same for Iran.  In that sense your eyes begin to see multi-dimensional rather than everything from that place is dark and bad. It doesn't work like that in life, marriage, family, and also politics. 

Hope this clarifies my position better.

Abarmard: You're entitiled

Abarmard: You're entitiled to your opinions unfortunately not the facts. Noone has been more active in the misinformation industry than the IRI apologists and sympathizers...Nobody is buying Vevak's official talking points as "truth" or "news" or information. I wish someday quislings  get their commeupance  for perpetuating division and hatred on those who are not part of the regime's khodi. Quislings are instrument of war and division in the name of Islam.

Return of Masayah is not the goal

It's OK to use these kinds of mumbo jumbo to throw your hate for the regime, but one thing that the system has proved so far is that their foreign policies are much more practical and sane than most of the European countries.

If those Europeans and US did not enjoy the historical economic power, they would have been in big trouble because of their incorrect policies.

However, based on my previous experiences I have given up debating these issues all together.

Come to think of it, from practical perspective, the current chaos has been created by the United States and not Iran. US blames Iran to have caused uncertainty by "supporting" this or that, which is another story. Iran has also shown much more maturity in politics than US in the regional affairs.

One should not change what they believe ideologically, but one should not accept misinformation. The first step to free oneself from biases is to be critical and double check historical and informational pieces, as mostly here do for Islamic Republics media. 

Finally, no news is lie or wrong. Every news is right but is focused on the area that they want you to form your opinion. This is very important when one reads the news to try to distinguish the reasoning for the report. Most of the time there is a reason. After all, it's a war of words between Iran and the US and many Western media sources take side. It's only natural. It is us that need to be aware about the whole picture.

Happy Wednesday. 

Encycloepedia Iranica does not disagree:

From the above article:

..." The quietist conservative interpretation of Ḥojjatiya is akin to a pre-millenarian world-view that, while advocating the ardent and pious practice of “awaiting” the savior, discourages active revolt in order to hasten the appearance of the “Mahdi” or any attempt to build the promised Islamic utopia in the absence of the awaited one. ......"  

Translation:

If you are not in power, don't change anything (according to Hojatieh) as the oppersor  staying in power will expedite the return of Mahdi (and by that token, opperssion is the ncessary condition for his return, as much as justice will prolong his absence).

If Ahmadi-Nejad (really Rahim Mashaii, and his other ardent allies) are already in power (i.e the power dropped into their laps, then what to do?)   This is not in the original doctorine (read that again before calling things nonsense, that will never make your point any stronger) because  they did not ever think prior to Mehdi's return they will be in position of power.

So you can make some sense:   If the return of Messaieh is the goal, and he will not come until all "hell brakes loose" then knowingly or unknowingly the supporters should make conditions APPPROPRIATE (i.e hell) for his return.

In reality, as  we have seen most of Ahmadi-Nejads "help" for Palestinian are not really much of help.   Notice he will never set reasonable conditions (like referendom or the like) to pursue legitimate rights of Palestininas.   Instead, he focuses on ambiguity:  " If  Holocaust happened in Eruope, why should people in middle-east pay the price ..." argues Ahmadi Nejad.   That approach would only bring more bloodshed, and  expedite Mahdis return, not just in Middle East but if Ahmadi Nejad has his say in Europe as well.

In the meantime I wonder why he is so infatuated with Jam-Karan?

Messianic Ahmadinejad will

Messianic Ahmadinejad will get his Armageddon of these days. Jordan's King Says Israel-Hezbollah-Lebanon War "Imminent"

Encycloepedia Iranica disagrees

What total rubbish. Hojjatiyeh was banned by Khomeini not because it was "so radical" but because they didn't endorse the concept of the Velayat Faghih. And, it was a pacificist society dedicated to "scientifically" debunking Bahaism, not to causing Armageddon. There's no evidence at all that Ahmadinejad was ever a member, but its membership has included all sorts of individuals, radicals including moderates.

I suggest you read up on it in the Encyclopedia Iranica which totally discredits your claims about their messianism

//www.iranica.com/articles/hojjatiya