POINT

Parthian - do you doubt yourself?

Dear Parthian:

Did I mention YOU? I said those who lie, misinform, disinform, fabricate and provide wrong information. Now it is up to individuals to know if they fall into these categories.

As for those two ladies, I can assure you, I don't make unwarranted remarks.

And as for Soraya, I can assure you with 100% certainty she is nobody's agent. Not the U.S., not IRI, not CIA, FBI, Mossad, AEI, NED, NO ONE. As I said she is not sellable or buyable.

Ari..how do you know all of these?

How do you know that rest of us who completely oppose Soraya are propagandists, and agents, "sellable, or buyable" as you put it? how do you know this? How do you know Soraya is not on the payroll of IR?

Please bring proof that those two ladies have "questionable" reputations.

Here is something I will do: I will be more than happy to provide all my personal information, including a signed authorization to do complete background check on me. In return I ask you and Soraya to do same. Are you willing to do that?

For many many years I have worked hard in this country, put myself through school without a penny from anyone. I sure the hell ain't gone sit down and listen to degenerates like you labeling those who oppose you as "agents", and "neo-cons" or anything else.

Both the U.S. and Iran should be proud of Soraya!

Iran should be utmost proud to have a true lover of Iran defend her rights, and sovereign integrity such as Soraya. As should our Presidential Candidate Obama who is seeking to bring true change for this country, and the American people.

Should Senator Obama, really want to know the truth and nothing but the truth about Iran - Soraya should be on the top list of Iranian-Americans he should be speaking with. In fact, I would highly encourage him to do so.

Unlike many, Soraya is not a propagandist, nor an informant, nor an agent of anyone, but only an agent of her own principles of truth, honesty and integrity. A very rare commodity in our world today when most people want some kind of payback or glorification.

Soraya cares deeply about the United States and how its misguided foreign policy has only brought shame to a great nation which at one point stood as the beacon of hope and liberty for all.

While President Bush was seeking information from anyone who was willing to provide him with wrong and fabricated information so that he could formulate his policy for the invasion of Iraq, Senator Obama should understand that the likes of Ahmad Chalabis come in all different colors, forms, and shapes. We too have many Iranian Ahmad Chalabis. But he should take note, did the Iraqi Ahmad Chalabis with all of their lies and misinformation garnered democracy, freedom, security, and a better standard of living for their compatriots, besides filling their own pockets with $$$$s? The proof of what has become of Iraq is far too obvious for those of us who care to see, hear, and watch the cries of the Iraqi people as well as the coffins of the young American soldiers which fly in the darkness of the night without any photo-ops to the bosom of their families.

To those opposition forces who use all propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, fabrication of information to present a different picture of Iran in order to serve their own opportunist agenda, I would say the time has come for a real CHANGE!

And that real CHANGE will come from those of us who are not going to betray this country or our mother land whom we love with every particle of our body and soul. The truth shall be heard loud and clear from individuals who are neither sellable nor buyable, because their love for humanity stands above all.

As such, I would not take seriously anything that Ms. Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi or Mandana Karimi-Zand-Ervin have to say. Their reputation is already damaged even among their own opposition groups - why look any further.

Iran’s security is sacrosanct for those of us who truly lover her.

Thank you as always Soraya!

Oh you've got to be kidding! What was this deletion?

There was NOTHING inappropriate in Kaveh's reply to me.  Caustic, yes, bitter, maybe, satirical, yes, highly critical of Soraya, yes, AND OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE MODERATION SYSTEM but the language was NOT inappropriate.  Whoever deleted it, remember me?  It's Rosie.  If it had deserved deletion I would've deleted it myself.  And my reply was also fine.  I responded about his concerns on moderation and told him we should move it to the moderation blog on the homepage.  Please be more judicious.  This is getting out of hand. Jahanshah, I know you've been concerned about this thread, as I am with ALL of Soraya's threads.  Do you happen to know who made the deletion?

Barack Obama strode on to

Barack Obama strode on to the international stage for the first time as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee-elect and vowed to use “all elements of American power” to eliminate Iran’s nuclear threat.

He told America’s powerful pro-Israel lobby: “I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything.”..
Mr Obama’s speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington was designed to assure sceptical Jewish voters — who could be decisive in swing states such as Florida this November — that his pledge to hold talks without preconditions with Iran’s leadership is not a soft option.

In previous speeches Mr Obama has played down the danger of Iran, even likening it to that of Venezuela and Cuba. But yesterday he said that there was no greater threat to Israel than the Islamic republic.

The Democrat had already begun to draw back from his promise of talks with Iran, saying there would be "preparations" before any such meeting and that it would not necessarily be with President Ahmadinejad - who has promised to wipe Israel off the face of map.

//www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and...

Thank you Mammad; you are right

Iran has not breached the NPT but it has breached the Safeguard Agreements in several ways.

And yes, of course, even if there hasn't been a resolution on USA's breach on NPT, there is little doubt that it is in breach of it.

Right Question, Parthian

You asked the right question. Therefore, why don't you also answer the question yourself, and enlighten the rest of us.

I am guessing your answer is no. Therefore, also enlighten us with your way of handling, treating, confronting, opposing - whatever you call it - the IRI. I agree that the IRI must be confronted. Aside from 15% or so of the population of Iran which is diehard IRI supporter, the rest want to confront the IRI. That is not the issue.

The issue is: How do you confront the IRI that brings peaceful and DEEP changes, without bloodshed, without endangering Iran's national security and territorial integrity, and without hurting the ordinary people, but the leaders.

Enlighten us with your solution.

EDS

Soraya is absolutely correct when she says that Iran has not violated the NPT.

First, there is a difference between violating the NPT and breaching the Safeguards Agreement. The only way to violate the NPT are,

(1) Secretly making a nuclear bomb;

(2) helping another country to make a nuclear bomb, and

(3) transferring nuclear technology to a NPT non-member state.

Iran has not commtted any of these, and the IAEA has certified that time and again. The US, on the other hand, is violating the NPT by agreeing to transfer its nuclear technology to India, a non-member state.

The matter of reporting the development of the Natanz and Arak facilities are dealt with by the Safeguards Agreement, not by the NPT itself. The SG agreement commits a member state to saefgaurds so that nuclear materials are not diverted for non-peaceful purposes. The SG Agreement has a section called the Subsidiary Arrangements. The SA governs how a member state should behave and how it should report to the IAEA its nuclear activities. According to Iran's SA with the IAEA, Iran was obligated to report the construction of the Natanz and Arak facilities to the IAEA ONLY SIX MONTHS BEFORE INTRODUCING ANY NUCLEAR MATERIALS INTO THEM, not at the beginning of construction. Iran did that. The IAEA has never ever said that not reporting earlier was a breach of the Safeguards Agreement by Iran, and I challenge everybody who believes otherwise to bring out the document.

Iran was found only in six minor breaches of the Safeguards Agreement. Those breaches were, however, not intended to "further a military purpose," in the language of the Safeguards Agreement. This was certified by the IAEA in its February 2008 report.

As of this moment, Iran's only dispute with the IAEA is about the documents that were supposedly obtained from a stolen laptop. The authenticity of the documents is, at least at this point, in doubt.

Gilda wrote: "People:

Gilda wrote:

"People: hyphanted means Iranian-American, French-American,
German-American. Get educated! Anyone of you who is an American citizen
is hyphenated. Get it?"

That would be hyphenated.

Thanks, but all the same. Soraya is hyphenated herself. So why use hyphenated to refer to these women? Of course the explanation is in the article. She is trying to emphasize that the loyalty of these women lie elsewhere and not with the United States. Yet Soraya's article is just the same in this respect. The article addresses why IR is not as bad as it seems and what Iranian people want. Even if the content of the article is accurate, and they are not, by the standards by which this article accuses the other hyphenated woman, Obama should also ignore this article. In what way are these relevant to the interests of USA?

You know what I really wish, Soraya?

You know I came to this blogging scene back in November because as a Columbia alumna and what a friend of mine calls "soft leftist" I was appalled by what happened with Bollinger. And I just wanted to read everything I could about it here, and it was actually YOUR article which pushed me to blog (because as a non-Iranian I didn't feel comfortable about doing so) but I was so disturbed by the vicious invectives against you, not least of all because you seemd to have pretty much the same politics as me, that I jumped in to try to UNDERSTAND this hatred and perhaps try to HELP to establish a DIALOG if I possibly could..I'd never even HEARD the words "IRI apologist" or "stooge"..

and then my postings went beyond your article to the website in general and it's been a very long hard road for me, harder than most people know, and it has taken me to places I could not have imagined...and some of them deeply disturbing...and when I was active as a moderator I monitored your blogs carefully all the time, every one, to delete the misogynistic threats and the venom and so forth..and at the same time I was starting to have very meaningful dialogs with people on opposite ends of the political spectrum...and then I started monitoring Medadi and Rashidian too...that was all several months ago....

and while nothing can compare to the viciousness of those early attacks, your articles are so highly visible and still so contentious and controversial for this community that...you know what I really wish Soraya? Now that most people are doing their best to try to be "civil"...I wish you would RESPOND to them on these threads sometimes. I really wish you would. Otherwise it's like you're aloof on Mount Parnassus somewhere and it doesn't HELP things, it just doesn't HELP.

Isn't that where the Shah was..on Mount Parnassus somewhere? With his pillars of Persepolis and his Peacock Throne? Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

Peace,

Robin

HYPHANATED

People: hyphanted means Iranian-American, French-American, German-American. Get educated! Anyone of you who is an American citizen is hyphenated. Get it?

Off on the issues

While it may be true that the "hyphenated women" are wrong in their objective, to dissuade Obama, should he get elected, from having a dialog with the Islamic Republic, and they may have put up wrong arguments for it, but the article by Soraya also includes a large number of errors for such a short article.

For example, it is not true that Iran has not violated NPT. It most certainly has and it is documented. For example, Iran had not notified the agency of its nuclear activities before Mujahedin Khalgh provided evidence of the activity. What is true, is that United States itself has openly violated NPT in declaring development of new nuclear bombs for example.

Or Soraya's arguments regarding gender aparthaid is so off that it hardly needs an analysis. Sure the suggestion by the hyphenated women is only meant to inflame but the response is equally off.

And the list goes on and on.

Finally, Soraya why use the term hyphenated women to put down these woman when your own name is hyphenated? I mean it is like walking into the wall head first.

Of course you explain that by hyphenated you mean to suggest that the loyalty of these woman do no lie with the US in their advice to Obama. Yet you do the exact same in your article. Your article hardly addresses why or why not it is in the interest of the united States to negotiate with Iran, which is the point. Instead it goes on and on about how IR is better than people think and what Iranian people want. How is this relevant to the interests of the United States? Isn't Obama applying for a job to serve the interests of United States?

You know it is fine to have your own interests and the interests of Iran or world or whatever in mind. There is in fact nothing wrong with that. But to be effective, at least know that to serve them, it is better to concentrate on showing the other, Obama in this case, how these interests serves him and his goals.

If it's hopeless you have nothing to worry about!

When it comes to American foreign policy all the candidates and politicians are in a race to determine who could kiss Israel's ass fastest, hardest and longest. Don't blame only the Neocons for what's going on in this country.

Zendebad Parthian!

100% on the money on all the issues. Could not agree with you more.

I am amazed at the way Ms. Ulrich plays with facts, minimizes IRI crimes, Insults woman and Iranians, calls people traitors and fails to see how the IRI is an aparthid system when it come to the treatment of woman and minorities. When I say minoritis Ms. Ulric, we are talking about MILLIONS OF IRANIANS (Iranian Arabs, Kurds, Azaris, Baluchis, Zaroastarians, Bahi & Jews) that are systematically terrorized by these Mullahs.

We are supposed to believe that Change will come from within? Are you people nuts? Can you explain to us how change will come within from this Faqih system we got?

Can you name one positive change by the reformist since Mr. Ahmadinejad has come to power? Please tell us of these changes from within. Is there a Gorbacheve like character who will rise from this system and admit defeat and disband the IRI? Is such thing possible in this faqih system? Stop insulting us. I must repeat what Parthian has said to reduce my ANGER JJ. If you must delete DELETE!!!!!!!

"Soraya, you are an extremely immoral person. Put yourself in the shoes
of those people whose children are getting hanged. You are a pathetic
hyphenated Iranian who has lost your moral, as well as identity compass."

The Pot Calling The Kettle Black

I have to wonder if these hyphenated women and others like them who so loosely use the term ‘appeasement’ are sufficiently familiar with history, or is this a mindless repetition of a word ill-understood? Perhaps these two ought to seek education and reject propaganda.

Excuse me, but based upon your name, that would make you a hyphenated woman as well.

Comments that concentrate attacks on the author rather than replying to the points in the article itself will be deleted.

I guess the same rules do not apply for comments in a post that concentrate attacks on individuals where not only do they not share similar ideologies, but where the target of the attack is not readily in a position to defend themselves or their point of view (i.e.; they're not here online).

Say NO to Neocons!

They will only bring more misery to Americans and to the world. Haven't we suffered enough under the BIG liar Mr. Bush?

John McCain is a "war monger". He will do nothing constructive. For him, its all about the war machine...

If any of you guys like to see a "free" Iran, then take action. Go back home and make a difference. DO NOT hide behind the big bully and expect him to get the  job done for you.  Don't be a coward like MKO.

We had enough of this backward Republicans!

It's Obama all the way, like it or not!

Who said anything about invasion of Iran?

Ok, before Islamists confuse the issue, and muddy the water as they are expert to do, let's clarify it for them. I have not seen anyone on this thread supporting or desiring a military invasion of Iran.

Here is the issue: "SHOULD U.S. GOVERNMENT ENGAGE IR, AND LIFT SANCTIONS?". That is very different than asking for a U.S invasion.

One more thing Islamists: THIS IS NOT ABOUT PALESTINE , OR EVIL ZIONISTS. Stick to the topic.

I am sure thousands and thousands of families who have lost loved ones don't think that IR's crimes are on the "light" side, whatever that means! I am sure if someone killed Soraya's children, and they were the only victims, she would not be talking about exaggerations.

WOW!

After having spend the month of February at a university dormitory in Iran trying to understand what the average Iranian wants I can tell you what Manda Zand-Ervin & Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi have written is utterly wrong and far from the truth. The average Iranian excluding the conservative minority wants change brought from within. con after the successful invasion of Iraq it is plainly ignorant to believe that the United States can engage war with a country with roughly 3 times the population of Iraq. The common propaganda is that Iranian dissatisfied with this regime will simply welcome an American invasion; Iran is not Iraq and Iranian as oppressed as they are proud people and will stand by their country. Senator McCain seems to forget these very details and another decade of failed republican policies will only make things worst both here and abroad.

Obama's Response to Ms. Ulrich

Ms. Sorayya Ulrich:

Here is the latest response of Senator Obama to you: It seemd as if he has really "listened" to your "rozeh-e zeynab"!! Enjoy it:

هر وسيله ای استفاده خواهم کرد

04/06/2008

باراک اوباما، کانديدای حزب دمکرات برای احراز رياست جمهوری آمريکا، امروز (چهارشنبه) در جمع اعضای آيپاک - يک گروه لابی طرفدار اسراييل - در واشنگتن گفت اگر انتخاب شود، آنچه را در توان دارد برای بازداشتن جمهوری اسلامی ايران از دست يابی به اسلحه اتمی بکار خواهد برد.

سناتور ايالت ايلينويز در نخستين سخنرانی عمده خود در پی کسب نامزدی حزب، جمهوری اسلامی را «بزرگترين تهديد» برای صلح و ثبات اسراييل ناميد و گفت او در صورت شکست ديپلماسی، عمليات نظامی عليه ايران را بررسی خواهد کرد.

سناتور هيلاری کلينتون، رقيب اوباما، نيز در کنفرانس سخن گفت و اظهار داشت او از تقويت ارتش اسراييل برای دفاع از کشور در برابر تهديدات فزاينده پشتيبانی می کند.

و جان مک کين، نامزد احتمالی حزب جمهوريخواه، که روز دوشنبه در کنفرانس آيپاک سخن گفت، اوباما را متهم کرده است که با پيشنهاد گفت و شنود بيشتر با رهبران ايران، بيش از اندازه نسبت به جمهوری اسلامی نرمش نشان می دهد.

مک کين همچنين از اوباما بدليل خودداری از رای دادن به لايحه تعيين سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی ايران به عنوان يک سازمان تروريستی انتقاد کرد.

هری ريد، رهبر اکثريت سنا، پيشتر به اعضای آيپاک گفته بود تعهد آمريکا به اسراييل از گرايش های حزبی در سياست های آمريکا فراتر می رود.

جان بوهنر، رهبر اقليت سنا، بر اهميت درگيری نظامی آمريکا در خاورميانه تاکيد گذاشت و گفت دشمنان آمريکا و اسراييل يکسان هستند.

اين مطلب را برای يکی از دوستان خود ايميل کنيد

Bending the facts to prove a point

Dear Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich,

You mention:

"While they like to grossly exaggerate the crimes against the Iranians by the regime, they neglect to mention that the 8-year Iran-Iraq war was provoked, and Iran was the victim. No doubt there is oppression in Iran, but given that the country is under constant threat and it is facing treachery so blatant as witnessed by the letter addressed to you by these two, is it any wonder that those who truly seek to reform the system fall victim to suspicion? "

The crimes are not exaggerated. Apparently, YOU need to get your info from better sources. As an example, in the next few weeks two minors will be executed in Iran. There are many people being executed in IRI just for having "dangerous" or "different" opinions and lifestyles. Read it in Iranian.com!

The "reformists" in Iran know the price they might have to pay to achieve what they want. They don't need people like you and me to sit here and pray for them. They're not just "unhappy" and "nagging". The people who are not leaving Iran and yet actively and publicly oppose IRI know exactly what's at stake and are not scared of us getting them in more trouble. Perhaps they'd like us to make their struggle easier but they're not "expecting" us to do anything.  

If you think people are in Iran are waiting for our next move to change their lives you need to take a few weeks off and go to Iran and see that you are dead wrong. 

Viva survival

My last comment having survived the delete button of the site’s moderator for a whole hour is encouragement enough to post a somewhat more robust comment. The author of this write up is no stranger to those who like to keep a running tally of pro Islamist regime writings.  There is a long practiced tactic by her like minded friends to downplay and even glorify the regimes crimes while begrudgingly accepting some transgressions. For the sake of survival of this comment examples are sited, take a look at this: “While they like to grossly exaggerate the crimes against the Iranians by the regime…” or “While during the Shah’s regime the chador was a hindrance to a woman’s progress, in today’s Iran those same women enter universities.”  In another word the Islamist practice of forced dress code has been a good, liberating bonanza for the Iranian women.  Before the dreaded delete button come-a- visiting again, hoping to not anger the site’s powers any further and survive to post dissenting comments in the future full stop here.

Nothing is sacred ?

 Except IRI and IRINIAN.com !

 Long way to go before we realize what freedom of speech and censorship ( delete posts ) just because one person is not happy with it.

live and learn in USA

Bund, Jimz Bund

Please don't downplay IRI crimes to make a point

First of all: I can't figure out why Ms Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is calling these ladies "Hyphenated women" repeatedly throughout the article as if it's a bad thing to be hyphenated... then again maybe she knows something about hyphenated names that I don't!

I usually agree with Ms Sepahpour's points and I am anti-IRI and anti-neocons. I certainly don't want my motherland to be destroyed by US' military attacks and/or occupation, but I can't imagine why she would downplay the crimes of the IRI regime. For example: yes the 8 yr long war was provoked by Saddam, but it could have lasted only 2 years instead of 8 if Khomeini had not wanted to use the situation to his advantage.

No! We should not defend IRI which is a criminal and anti-human rights regime, but we should also remember that as bad as the regime is, we still don't want our country attacked. That's why we should advocate talks between the two countries.

We're not going to achieve a strong IRI opposition if we resort to exaggerations from either side.

IRANdokht

Then logic will take you by the throat... .

I found this quote very interesting and revealing. Just take a look:
`These hyphenated women... have the impudence to suggest that even though they think these policies are what Americans want, should be changed to please Iranians and Iranians in exile.`

Don`t you find this interesting? The rest of the article is a defence of Islamic republic of Iran. It can`t be just `Iran` because defending Iran is logically the same as suggesting that Amercan policy should be decided in a way to please the Iranians, which she finds outrageous and despicably wrong.

So she must be defending the Islamic Republic officials only (not the people, god forbid!), that is what she must logically be meaning when she mentions `Iran` in the rest of her article. Those who support her and thank her therefore must also agree with her.

This testimony really clarifies everything by her own admission.

Simple Logic.
Elementary. :-)

Why on earth

Why on earth can't you people understand that different human beings simply have different opinions, without immediately branding your opponents as "traitors" or "neocons"?! In doing so, Soraya, you are no better than those who call you an "agent" of the islamic republic.

Grossly Exaggerate

The author writes, "While they like to grossly exaggerate the crimes against the Iranians by the regime".

My first reaction was "huhhhh, did this person actually said that moslem clerics in Iran commit little itsy bitsy crimes against the Iranians which are so small that no one should even be concern about them??!!"

Author's request to Obama should have been a simple request for dialog instead of GROSSLY EXAGGERATING how wonderful, kind, merciful, beautiful moslem clerics are ... BECAUSE moslem clerics are NOT ... they will not quit unless they complete their mission of destroying Iran as we used to know it.

Thank you Mrs. Ulrich

Mrs. Ulrich thank you for the hard work you do to keep Iran, Iranians and the world safe.

I believe one doesn't have to be a Jewish or christian to be a zionist, Neocon, prejudice or racist. That is why we can find individuals from different nationality and race in these groups and Iranians are not an exception.

These zionists / Neocons are part of the propaganda machine to create the ONE WORLD OREDER RULED BY ZIONISTS AND SLAVERY FOR THE REST.

There is no question that we do need changes for better in Iran, but the United States, England, Israel and a few others neither have the moral and nor legal rights for this job. They should first clean their own backyard.

As per why we have so many traitors? It is the lack of values and about the piece of pie in some form or shape. It is amazing what a piece of pie can do.

Poorly written letter by the Zands

I don't know of their background. Are they writers, lawyers? Their case is poorly argued. The "mullahs are not rational" and "you can't trust them" line is a common attack against anyone who has anything but a hostile line against the IRI but their backing up logic is poor. For instance they mention that Reagan sent Khomeini a cake and he fed it to the dogs. This was during the Iran-Iraq war when the US was squarely behind the aggressor, Iraq, passing intelligence reports to Iraqi army, ignoring the use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and Iraqi Kurds. I have no love lost for Khomeini but I would feed that hypocrite Reagan's cake to dogs too (let’s not forget that this happened in context of arms for money for Contras affair) The Zands ignore Iran's preludes to the Bush administration during and after invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. The initiative came clearly from "Mullah president Khatami's" government's intermediaries and half-heartedly endorsed by Khamenei. Instead Bush hardened his position. No mention of that. Now the big gender apartheid issue. Sure, with modern standards IRI's policy towards women is repressive (and should be confronted and is by Iranian women on a daily basis) but women in Iran can go to school, become professionals, teach in university, act in and direct movies, write and publish novels, be elected to the parliament,... Compare that to Saudi Arabia or the Gulf states, (even to other Arab countries such as Egypt) the US allies in the region. Really, it's the height of ideological deception to want the US, "the moral authority" of the world and the UN to declare Iran a gender apartheid regime analogous to South Africa during apartheid when those stalwarts of freedom and equality (!) in the region are getting a free ride. The letter is full of other poorly argued examples. If anything, the Zands hurt their own cause by writing such nonsense. By the way, Obama has never claimed that he would negotiate without condition with Iran. He has said that he will not follow the same obstructionist approach as that of Bush's policy whose only logical end game is a war with the IRI. Obama was asked that question in the debate at Philadelphia and responded clearly. The debate is available on YouTube for all to see and judge but his opponents keep hammering this nonsense in time-honored tradition of all demagogues. The Zands come across as third rate pawns in the neo-cons game.

The point of the article

We should understand the writer is simply asking Obama to hold to his promise of a dialogue with Iran. Those who have commented that there is personal attack here, don't understand the meaning of the word hyphenated - it means Iranian-American. Get it? This is what the writer is emphasizing all the time. The Zands who are distant relatives of teh shah and are hiding behind "Alliance for Women", are trying to manipulate Obama with their gender. Women are not the weaker sex. We are much stronger than men. Who brought down the Shah? Not one of you bache-nanes knows what you are up against. Women will always be stronger than men and the IRI and everybody else knows it. So if anybody drags women down, it is the likes of Zands. Real women fight on equal grounds. They don't sell out.

Third time the charm?

I’ve posted two comments to this write up, both of which were promptly deleted. Not seeing any discernable  differences between what I had to say, neither in accusatory tone or substance, from what this article does-I am posting this third comment just to test the water and see if it is my name or what I have to say that is causing the deletions.  Should it be the first case, I am willing to change and if it is the second that is one side is given a freehand while the opposing side’s hands are tied, then there is nothing that I can do to alleviate the comment envytitus .  Should this comment too be deleted then I just have to pray for either enlightenment on my part or a more evenhanded application of editorial privileges on the site’s part.