News

Yes it is indeed sad

I haven't seen this phenomenon as prevalent in the so-called "real world". It seems to be more common here online, where there's still a measure of anonymity. I doubt that most of these people who we're referring to have the guts to speak out like this in public. That of course raises the issue of sincerity and transparency within the diaspora, amongst and to ourselves.

Thanks to you as well. It has been a refreshing change. Hope to see you around.

intimadation

I've often wondered why the need to intimidate on iranian.com even exists. Perhaps it's not limited to iranian.com. Certainly this forum is unique but what I have noticed with increasing disappointment is the need for certain individuals to express their opinions as facts and with increasing agitation. This site has desintegrated into a battle of words. Notice the absence of the old guard who contributed with regularity on cultural issues. Not that there shouldn't be political issues as well but these issues aren't DISCUSSED. They are FOUGHT. For all the rhetoric about peace and lack of violence from these people, God forbid that they ever have their finger on the "red button". I can't imagine a less peaceful group of people. I've come to the conclusion that this sense of superiority and arrogance on iranian.com translates into a certain lack of success in their personal life. This "need" to dominate on a WEBSITE exemplifies the lack of a substantive life beyond iranian.com. And this is what I find to be the saddest aspect of what iranian.com has become.

Thanks for the conversation. It's been enjoyable.

Yep

I truly believe that no one should be intimidated by anyone on this site or anywhere else. Especially by someone who is essentially powerless.

Let's look at her fan base for a moment. A small group of self-proclaimed illuminati who, like her, have egos the size of some planets. Who are they? For the most part, they are just another inconspicuous face in the crowd. They don't stand out in the so-called "real world", and you might not even notice them even if they bumped into you in a crowded public place.

They're just another employee on the payroll at work, just another shopper at the grocery store, just another car stuck in traffic.

As to letting her get the best of me, I admit that from time to time I will say things that I otherwise wouldn't say. Then again, I'm usually not confronted with such unbelievable displays of arrogance, pomposity and elitism, especially from someone who has absolutely nothing upon which to base those characteristics.

Does she like to set me up? She's accused me of stalking her posts in order to comment against her, which just leads me to believe she's paranoid. As to anyone coming to her rescue, that's simple. She just has to play her "as a lady, I'm deeply offended" act, and "POOF!" cyber Prince Charmings will appear faster than computer pop ups.

So, I get a "charge", do I? Is it THAT obvious? What gave me away? :-x

Yes, I know, sometimes the line between confidence and arrogance can be blurred, and at times I appear that way. Diplomacy has never been my strong suit. I loathe phoniness, and I can spot it from great distances. I can honestly say that this person hates me, and to be perfectly candid, I am truly glad for that. She should hate me. I see right through her BS and I have called her out publicly on it. These are things I'm certain she's not accustomed to, and I know she can't stand being challenged because she gets more agitated when she is challenged.

As to whatever influence I may have on this site, It's purely unintentional. I'm not out to seek fame or recognition. And I certainly don't want to dictate to others how to think or live their lives. It's not my place, nor do I want the responsibility. 

If anything, I want these feelings of intimidation, reluctance or fear that you mentioned to be erased. We shouldn't feel intimidated or scared by anyone, be it some khareji, and certainly not some horribly misguided, uninformed, unhappy Iranian woman who covets validation from complete strangers on the internet in order to make herself feel better about her lot in life.

Thanks for taking the time to write.

re: question

Perhaps the word "scared" is a little misleading. Reluctant or intimidated might be more relevant. With a fan base following such as hers and with the current climate and attitude on iranian.com, personal observations turn into personal attacks faster than the speed of light. I believe that is what you yourself are referring to. What has escaped the notice of those followers such as the Captain is the veiled and subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) insults that she has perfected. So who is to say what is worse. I, myself, would prefer a more direct approach such as yours. But I WILL take this opportunity to suggest that you LET her get the best of you by responding in a, shall we say, less than gentlemanly manner ON OCCASION. You can easily best her with logic and fact. I might also suggest that she likes setting you up knowing that Captain, or someone similar, is going to come to her rescue. Though why a horned viper needs protecting is beyond me.

Power is a dangerous thing. When one lets the idea of power, however unintentionally, go to their head, the result is usually the same. Arrogance and a sense of superiority result. While I think you yourself would accept, and quite possibly be proud of, a charge of a small measure of arrogance yourself (:-), the arrogance expressed by her and Captain becomes personal and vindictive. Both of them, as well as yourself, garner a great deal of respect and influence. This could be used to the advantage of the website. Unfortunately it is used to wield a sword over the heads of those unfortunate enough to stand in their way, or worse, disagree with them.

"If you want to test a mans character, give him power".

To "yep"

Captain is a good man, and I have no doubt that he means well and that his intentions in raising this issue are sincere.

I also appreciate your gesture in support of my position on the matter.

Your post does raise a question whose answer seems to evade me....why is it that anyone is scared to say anything?

If you can help me understand that, I'd appreciate it.

To: "right on"

I disagree with you that Fritz Hollings' views are more Republican than Democrat.

If you look at politicians from the South, you will see that people like Fritz Hollings, George Wallace, and Lester Maddox, to name a few, are/were members of the Democratic Party.

Another prominent politician, Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, is a Democrat, and also a one-time dues paying member of the Ku Klux Klan. He voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, like Fritiz Hollings. He also voted against the nomination of both Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas  to the U.S. Supreme Court, and has voted against the nominations of several other blacks to juidicial or cabinet positions.

One of the cornerstones of the Democratic Party has been the separation of socio-economic classes, classes that have generally been defined by race or ethnicity or religion. In the past, their efforts were much more overt and hostile, whereas now, it is more subtle, employing the strategy of keeping the lower classes dependent upon government for their well-being, mainly through social programs such as welfare. If you look deeper, none of the Democrats' programs call for ways of reducing or eliminating this dependence upon government, as that would have the undesired effect of reducing the constituent base the Democrats depend on for their continuity.

be fair

you need to be a little less partial captain. if you followed either or both of them, you would see that what kaveh says is true. he might be a little (?) outspoken but it IS true. most of us are just too plain scared to say anything to her. but alot of people and i mean ALOT, ARE getting a little tired of her attitude.

truer words were never spoken

Fritz Hollings is the embodiment of white trash. His record speaks for itself, and it speaks in volumes where his character is concerned. That character must be factored when reading and interpreting anything he says.

he is NOT well thought of in south carolina. there aren't too many democrats in the south you know. his being a long term senator has nothing to do with his popularity. but you have to admit that his views are more republican than democrat and THAT is why he remained so popular.

Captain

Believe me when I tell you that the feelings of respect are mutual. You and I are polar opposites, politically speaking. The fundamental difference is that you have always presented your positions in a way that does not belittle those with whom you disagree. You are consistent as well.

The issue I have is not in the fact that this person and I disagree. Virtually from the beginning, we have almost always viewed most issues from opposite ends of the spectrum. It has been like this long before any animosity developed. I've said it previously, that if all of us agreed upon everything, this would be one truly boring website.

The issue I have is that over the course of many months, her tone has gone from one of polite, friendly disagreement to one of overt hostility towards anyone who does not see eye to eye with her. You're absolutely right when you say we can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, she doesn't leave it at that. She makes it a point to emphasize her sense of superiority towards an adversary.

Belittling someone for not having lived in Iran for decades, proclaiming that because they lived in Iran through the turmoil of the revolution that they are more of an Iranian than someone who didn't, referring to some people as "so-called" Iranians......these are clear indicators that she doesn't view or treat people with differing opinions as equals, despite her protestations that she is a fair, open-minded, liberal individual.

She has created an atmosphere where it's acceptable to criticize and patronize, yet takes great offense and acts as if suffering a tremendous indignation at being on the receiving end of such criticism. I'm sorry, but that's not OK with me.

I'm not seeking anyone to come out and corroborate or expand upon what I'm telling you, but I know I'm not alone in feeling this way. I do admit to probably being the most outspoken about it.

Cheers.

Kaveh

First of all I never take sides even though I hold great deal of respect for the person in question.

I have said this many times, you and I are in totally opposite spectrum of political arena, but I do respect you for you are consistent and logical.

However my friend, you at times take issues very very personal, as a result you end up getting belligerent with your opposition. She is truly a fair, nice and educated. Her only deal is that she does not hold the same beliefs as you do. This is not to say that I agree with everything she says but your comment about her and your occasional confrontational manner has placed distance between two of the progressive minds in this dotcom, being you and her.

Dadash you are bigger than that to be resorting to condensing tone. You two MUST come to an agreement that you two disagree so you can conduct dialogue in better fashion.

You two disagree SO WHAT? try to learn from one another rather than jumping at her. It happens that I am super sensitive toward this issue of Abu Garib.

Regards my friends, you two are better than that, trust me.

-YT

Captain

As much as I enjoy our occasional cyber "tete-a tetes", two things:

One, the person you're seeking to help has this nasty, dirty little habit of thinking she should not be questioned, disagreed with or insulted, while believing she should have free reign to "correct", or "educate" people, whether in matters of decorum or in matters pertaining to the subject at hand, and does so in a manner that is condescending and spiteful. She posesses an ego so overinflated it makes a room full of celebrities and professional athletes look like a den of modesty. Her arrogance is offensive.

Two, Ernest "Fritz" Hollings is probably one of the most blatant bigots on Capitol Hill.

In 1981, Hollings referred to Sen. Howard Metzenbaum as "The Senator from B'nai B'rith" on the Senate floor.

In 1993, Hollings told reporters that he attended international summits because, in his words, “Everybody likes to go to Geneva. I used to do it for the Law of the Sea conferences and you'd find those potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva."

Hollings was one of only 11 who voted against the confirmation of Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court in 1967.

Hollings was one of two who voted against the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.

As governor of South Carolina, he ordered the raising of the Confederate flag at the state capitol, to: A) honor the 100th anniversary of South Carolina's secession from the Union and B) protest the Civil Rights Movement.

Just before his term as governor ended, he allowed the first black man to attend Clemson University, after declaring that "we've run out of courts, and we've run out of time". That man, Harvey Gantt, earned his Bachelor's Degree in architecture from Clemson (with honors), and earned his Master's at MIT.

Fritz Hollings is the embodiment of white trash. His record speaks for itself, and it speaks in volumes where his character is concerned. That character must be factored when reading and interpreting anything he says.

Let me help

//www.ihr.org/news/040716_hollings.shtml

Excerpts:

When
a prominent American political figure speaks boldly about
Jewish-Zionist power, that's news. So the remarks by South Carolina's
senior Senator in May 2004 that Iraq was invaded "to secure Israel,"
and that "everybody" in Washington knows it, are indeed remarkable.

Ernest
"Fritz" Hollings, a Democrat who has represented his state in the US
Senate since 1966, is now serving his final term in Washington. That
fact may also help explain why he's now willing to defy the pro-Israel
lobby and speak candidly about its power.  

It
began with an essay, headlined "Bush's Failed Mideast Policy is
Creating More Terrorism," which appeared in the Charleston daily Post
and Courier, May 6, 2004.

"With
Iraq no threat, why invade a sovereign country?," he wrote. "The
answer: President Bush's policy to secure Israel. Led by [Paul]
Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Charles Krauthammer, for years there had
been a domino school of thought that the way to guarantee Israel's
security is to spread democracy in the area."

Several
Zionist organizations, as well as some prominent Jewish political
figures, quickly chastised Hollings, and his remarks were denounced as
anti-Semitic.

But he didn't back down. Instead, he rose in the Senate on May 20 to defend and explain his essay.

"I
don't apologize for this column," he said. "I want them to apologize to
me for talking about anti-Semitism." President Bush went to war in Iraq
"to secure our friend, Israel" and "everybody knows it," Hollings
declared.

End Excerpts

-YT

Kaveh

There is absolutely no doubt that Israel propagated the Iraq war, and that Zionist Lobby has been behind it from the inception:

//www.ihr.org/leaflets/iraqwar.shtml

Excerpts:

Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush’s decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel and America’s Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish
“neo-conservatives” holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush – who was already fervently com­mitted to Israel – resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel’s chief regional enemies.

This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq “to secure Israel,” and “everybody” knows it. He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the
Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author.

Remarks by Ernest F. Hollings, May 20, 2004. Congressional Record – Senate, May 20, 2004, pages S5921-S5925. See also: M. Weber, "”Iraq Was Invaded to Secure Israel,” Says Senator Hollings..."
(//www.ihr.org/news/040716_hollings.shtml

Same game is being played by the group about Iran as we are witnessing. So please lets get the facts straight.

Regards

-YT

Well,

initially, it was smhb who equated this matter with "zionism", but it indeed appears that you have boarded that runaway train as well.

The source of the link and/or website is irrelevant. The content is the relevant issue. Eric Holder can't do anything to George Bush or Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld, or any of the commanders, officers, or others involved. The case is closed.

As to manners, how strange is it that someone whose tolerance level for those who disagree with her is nonexistent sees fit to raise the issue of manners, claiming to be insulted.

If you truly stand on the side of righteousness, morality, and good as you incessantly claim to be, while I and other like minded people are the embodiment of everything you despise and are against, you wouldn't be feeling insulted.

Perhaps this feeling stems from the inability to defend this 'zionist plot' nonsense that permeates and penetrates so many threads throughout this website. I imagine that it must be frustrating.

since my english fails me

would you please tell me what "you are a pathetic and sad creature. both of you." meant? 

btw that link I provided was from an American website. I didn't write the letter myself.

IRANdokht

PS: next time you address me mind your manners please! these personal insults are going too far

Now the other half speaks

So now you know what others meant to say? Your arrogance has no limits, does it?

To someone with even the most rudimentary command of English, it's obvious that Anonymous What was not attacking you, IRANdokht, but was calling out SMHB for playing the usual zionist card.

If you knew the first thing about civics in this country, you would know that Eric Holder cannot do anything, as it is A) out of his jurisdiction, and  B) that the Abu Gharib matter has already been adjudicated to it's fullest extent.

And even if the law allowed him to do so, how would he be able to? That president you voted for has already blown over a trillion dollars and can't account for a penny of it. There's no more money, and the Chinese have begun cutting off the line of credit.

Transparency and accountability my foot.

harfeh hessab

...zionists not only were the biggest advocates of invasion of Iraq but they have staged and managed it all along. The same way [they] are advocating a war with Iran

smhb

I only removed a few adjectives from your comment just to show that what you meant to say made sense. I think it's pretty obvious why you are speaking of them now and what kind of involvement you see.

Sometimes we can bring our point home in a more effective way if we try to state the facts without an emotional outburst. 

It's amazing how "anonymous what" started attacking me for this post right away... I guess he could also see the connection! 

Thank you all  for your comments,

yes I think the high-ups need to be held accountable. 

please click on this link:

//www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer?pagenam...

and tell Eric Holder: Appoint a Special Prosecutor for Torturers!

Thanks

IRANdokht

smhb

Can you debate any subject without having to resort to this overused, ineffective blather about Israel, or are you just fundamentally incapable of doing so?

You're what they call a "one trick pony".

You're exactly like a Mexican who starts yelling "viva la raza" or a black person who pulls out the race card. Just once, try and debate or argue a topic without pulling the "zionist" card.

That's of course if you're actually able to debate an issue.

Anonymous WHAT?

Look you pathetic zionist. Just in case our freinds on this site dont know but I am sure you know the follwoing.

US military has employed israheli techniques in Iraq that have been used and perfected by the thieves of Palestine. That includes torture of all sorts. Its been a very long time since the Americans had to fight an urban guerilla war and they tapped into the israheli experience including israheli personel who are in Iraq wearing american, british, aussie, polish, german and ........... uniforms. What a mistake.

The criminal zionists not only were the biggest advocates of invasion of Iraq but they have stage managed it all along. The same way these thieves and murderers are advocating a war with Iran and be actively managing the whole thing to the detriment of the US and Iran.

Now go run to your dumb masters. 

well the main problem is

well the main problem is that this acts are not on the soldjers, in the case of Abu grab and other jails in Iraq or Afghanistan it was also private contractors who have access to this prisoners. they have contract with CIA and they work for them. this young army are from small town ,use so they get excided when CIA or contractors ask them for help.

and the whole act is very logical. its not about some sick military personnel , this is about the psychic tactics. and it happens right now as we chat about it. and they are not only in middle east . south America, south east Asia and African country also do their part in this cases.

so if you really want to stop this thing you should forget about this solder and go after their leaders . and they try to hide it from us , you forget what you don’t see daily and now they like to sell Iraq war as liberation campaign so that will interfere .

Terrible...

Thanks Irandokht for the info!

I think it is a very important subject.

If the victims don't oppose to the publication of these pictures, I don't understand why these pictures shouldn't reach the public eyes? 

I hope that these criminals have already been arrested and tried by the American authorities. It is the first step toward a global peace... 

what a nightmare (re: Capt'n)

That is the worst thing a mother can live through! losing a child is hard, it's unbearable, it's heartbreaking... but watching people inflict pain on your child is 1000 times worse. I can't even imagine what these poor people have gone through. There is no excuse in allowing suchcriminal acts to take place. That's why I am 100% in support of taking Bush and his administration to trial for crimes against humanity and war crimes. Those soldiers were certain that they were doing nothing illegal, otherwise they wouldn't record those scenes. It was their commanders and the commander 'n chief who allowed it to happen. They have to be held accountable!

IRANdokht

Clearly

The acts of abuse described here and depicted in the photos we all know about and have seen are not part of any prescribed military protocol. Nine people have been convicted already. It's been dealt with as much as it could have been under the circumstances.

But would releasing them to the general public serve any useful purpose? I doubt it, unless adding more agitation to an already agitated crowd is something one considers useful. For Obama to have even considered releasing them makes no sense at all, for just that reason.

And to those of you who want to turn this into yet another one of your tired, pointless, endless and meaningless "zionist" things, consider taking a long walk on a very short pier.

horrible

Thanks IRANdokht jan for the article.

While ago I read the similar report claiming that  little boys in Abu Gharib were raped in front of the their mothers and other women in order to get them to confess.

//current.com/items/90055786_hersh-children-s...

Respectfully

-YT

what?

and you're making this a zionist issue...

why?

you are a pathetic and sad creature. both of you.

IRANdokht

Lets see what our resident zionists like FK and MM have to say.

thanks Irandokht

hope the interventionists (pro war and pro sanction) Iranians come to their senses ...