VIEW

Kharmagas

Oh man, this was even funnier! Thank you. Let's hope that khoda biyamorz will not be resurrected!! Or, if he did, he will be back as another dude!

Thank you again!

Mammad

Mammad

Even though we have had our disagrrements in the past, I could not agree more with what you say regarding an American attack.

Sleazy tactic, picking the one point that somebody makes that you agree with and praising it rather than discussing the points where you disagree. You imply there's a consensus of opinion where there is none when you do that. You also try to involuntarily co-opt somebody who opposes you into your cause. It'sa  very poor show when you blindly editorialize about your own positions and then just point out the areas where others agree with you. Do that enough and it will make it seem like everyone on this website agrees with you, even though most of them don't.

I would be very

I would be very disappointed if Iranians couldn't do at least as well as Iraq has. And much better than Afghanistan has.

Iraq is doing well??? How??? 

Do you really think the US can afford another war?? Do you think the US needs another war to save itself from bankruptcy?? Is that why you support a war against Iran?

Laleh

Even though we have had our disagrrements in the past, I could not agree more with what you say regarding an American attack. Thank you. I have said the same thing repeatedly.

It is utterly naive to believe that the US wants true democracy in Iran. If it did, why are Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Algeria, Tunesia, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, .... and even Libya that gave up its nuclear program not democratic?

Every US administration is, under the most optimist assumption, after preserving and expanding what it perceives as the US national interests (the reality is otherwise). That is it.

Mammad

Mammad

Mammad, in that case if you have a few minutes to spare, give yourself a break from politics and read:

//iranian.com/main/blog/artificial-intell...

I even wrote some lyrics for Kadivar.

LalehGillani

A true democracy, under such circumstances, is impossible and is only an American lie. A very well polished lie, for that matter…

Well, if its a "lie" it has a remarkable amount of historical evidence supporting it :o

I would agree that a war between US and IRI would not be to install democracy, though it might be marketted as such. But I won't agree with your assertion that post-war democracy would be impossible. Assuming the US didn't install a dictator (which I think is a safe assumption - the US hasn't done that in a long time) then Iranians will end up with whatever kind of government they want and can successfully create for themselves. I would be very disappointed if Iranians couldn't do at least as well as Iraq has. And much better than Afghanistan has.

Kharmagas

Thank you. I laughed a lot after reading the last few lines of your last response to vildemose. Everyone should have a good saturday morning laugh. I had mine.

Please read my article today on antiwar.com, if you have the time and 'hoseleh." 

Thank you again

Mammad

Ayhab

With all due respect...

lol

I too do not see eye to eye with many of Mr. Q's politics. 

That's like when you said you didn't know Ostaad and the rest of that gang, right? And then later you claimed you could produce a couple dozen witnesses on this website who knew you both well enough to testify to the fact you are two different people? And then when he got blocked you launched a whining campaign on his behalf, and presented his side of the story?

But I admire his stances on confronting this many slander and vicious personal attacks.

I think you accidentally said Q was "confronting" slander and vicious personal attacks, when you meant to say he was "committing" them? Am I right?

P/S If you accuse Mr. Kharmagas of being Anti Jew, I suggest that you
ask his faith before doing so. You might be very surprised. 

And now you know Kharmaagas so well you know his faith, do you? I wouldn't care if he claimed to be a Zen Buddhist. His actions and behavior on this website speak for themselves. And considering all the name-calling and false labelling of me that kharmagas did when he had his previous ID, I think it's a bit weird to be complaining people are being unfair about branding kharmagas.Whatever else he is or is not, he is at the least an apologist for the IRI. So are you, by the way. Which makes you vouching for the "fact" that others are not completely pointless.Why the hell don't you guys just own up to your ideology? It's not like you're going to go to prison for it you know? How much would it suck if people who were obviously right wing kept saying over and over again they were leftists? Or if people who were obviously pro-West were claiming to be amongst the West's biggest critics?

How Real is the Threat?

Bijan A M wrote: “But, how do you address the threat of attack? Are you convinced it doesn’t exists? Everything you said is absolutely right if the foreign intervention is not forced on us by IRI.”

The threat of a military attack does exist and is very real. I am convinced that US can attack our homeland under a number of pretensions, one of which is to help our people. However, the reality is and will remain that such an attack will be for one and only one reason: to defend the short and long term interests of US in the region.

If such a military attack occurs, the current political landscape of our country will be altered drastically. Political activists such as you and me must decide what to do and how to position ourselves in such a landscape.

Our people and our future will be placed in the hands of military men and politicians who are willing to sell themselves and their country to the United States of America. For generations, we will never recover from such a domination and dependence.

A true democracy, under such circumstances, is impossible and is only an American lie. A very well polished lie, for that matter…

here is my response to moosirvapiaz!

by vildemose on Thu Nov 19, 2009 05:17 PM PST

moosirvapiaz: I think your argument is beautifully well thought out and brilliant on this and ther other thread about sanctions. I like to hear Fred's response. Thanks.

Kharmagas = Casanova (to vildemose)

Vildemose, you are giving me great honor to compare me with Mammad, however you are doing great injustice to Mammad. Here is why:

1- I am not a Muslim, in fact I was very anti Islam when I was young.

2- I don't consider more democracy in Iran a priority, Mammad does

3- Mammad does not believe Iran should produce nukes, and should compromise. I believe Iran should produce nukes.

4- Mammad respects people such as yourself to read their long comments, and I don't. I only read long comments from very few people, that list includes comments by people such as Mammad, Zion (if she posts any comments), DW Duke, .... you are not in the list.

......

n+1- I am a jerk(inconsequential person), Mammad is not.

BTW Mrs. Vildmouse I can however assure you that: kharmagas=casanova

Ayhab: I don't believe in

Ayhab: I don't believe in air tight sanctions. As moosirvapiaz convinced me the other day and I thanked her for it on this very thread,  If you want to lie about my stance, go right ahead...However, even if I hypothetically, changed my mind and supported air tight sanctions, I should not be subjected to violent, bigotted, verbal assaults by a pack of Islamist hyeanas. Thank god i don't live in iran.

Mrs. vildemose

With all due respect, it appears  from the comments that you are the one with the loudest voice who consistently been attacking everyone who disagrees with your call of the airtight sanctions. Which incidently   makes you sound more and more like Mr. Fred. Even using the same terminologies as the gentleman does!

-YT 

P/S If you accuse Mr. Kharmagas of being Anti Jew, I suggest that you ask his faith before doing so. You might be very surprised.

Kharmagas=Mammad?

Would you please explain this? I did not get it. I stayed out of this discussion because it is repetitive. But, then, I saw you bringing me in. Why? It is beyond me!

By the way, I only write under my own name. I like and respect Kharmagas, even though I do not know who he is. I just like the way he writes, brief, insightful, to the point. I wish I could do that. So, even in this respect, Kharmagas > Mammad, not equality as you put in. I know a little math!

Mammad

Islamic Republic of bigots!

It's interesting to note that bigotry against the jews remains intact among the reformist opponent of the regime even after being practically decimated...I guess hate is a very powerful attachment after all!

Mr. Kharmagas...dame Q indeed garm

I too do not see eye to eye with many of Mr. Q's politics. But I admire his stances on confronting this many slander and vicious personal attacks. Particularly from a crowd that so lovingly[NOT] advocate airtight sanction against already hurt population of Iran.

Sanctions are simply a prelude to all out war, as it was the case of Iraq.

Damesh indeed garm...

-YT

Edited P/S.. There was a time you were accused of being me, now you have become Mr. mammad, I did not know Mr. mammad was of your faith as well[jk].  Khosh shansi ha vaghan ;-o)

pp/s I just saw the comment below, hence the edit.

Kharmagas=Mammad If you

Kharmagas=Mammad

If you really think hard,  you can figure out that "people like you, AIPAC CROWd" refers to them being Jewish. That is a sad state of affairs. Two storeis emerge by studying violent commenters such as Jaleho, Q, and No Fear.  Democratic vs. Violent Order

 People believing in violent order believe that the strong should rule over the weak. And that violence is the solution to all political problems.   Whenever a problem comes up, a solution are imposed by the person who successfully uses violence to persuade others.  

They don't believe in debating and resolving issues through logical debats. In other words, they don't believe in 'politics', which uses argument to persuade instead they believe in  violence, intimidation   to suppress those who don't believe in their world view.

For them, Politics is not an arena of debate, but fear. This is clearly evident because they support the IRR's leaders such as Ahmadinejad and Khamenie and there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that their politics is based on one thing only, violence. 

 Beyond understanding the perspective of   those who lionize Ahamdinejad et al  and those who constitute their  energetic base in IRR's politics, we need to make sense of  unsavory part of IRI  supporters/sympathizers  in diaspora.

Let's call them: Violent, militant propagndist on cyberspace. political action in their worlvies is  the ability to use violence to impose one's will.  This does not mean actual physical violence but verbal assaults, character assissinations of successful dissenters, intimidating and bullying tactics in their comments and so forth.

But what can be done about these particular supporters of Islamic Republic of Rapist on IC?  What should we do when someone responds to our political arguments with threats and racist, bigotted remarks:

First, do not be afraid.

Second, DO, NOT, BE, AFRAID.

Third, describe this kind of language as "violent," and attribute that violence to the person who uses it.

Fourth, remind people that politics based on violence is not what most Iranian believe.

Fifth, connect the violent propagndist  to the political figures they support--in this case IRR and Ahmadinejad and Hojatieh.

Sixth, tell people that the problems in Iran are problems we all face together--we cannot move forward with threats from one group against another.

Seventh, focus on the issue at hand and actual arguments in the debate.

yes dame Q garm (Re: IA)

I don't need to agree, and I have never agreed with Q on all the issues (and he has known that for sometime). I am not even a Muslim, yet I consider Q my patriot hamvatan, and I know that likes of Fred are here for AIPAC and Israel.

... dame Q garm, who has been tolerating all these vicious attacks specially from the AIPAC crowd.

Fozul, you are indeed a fozul...

Who the hell made you judge and jury on what is intelligence and who's educated? By the sound of your comment, you're patently illiterate.

Ditch the partisan clap-trap, pal. If you have a solid criticism of my opinion, make a substantive argument instead of lampooning about my lack of education and intelligence. It says something about you to mock my education and intelligence based on one rather spare comment. It tells me that I have hit a nerve, and that nerve is your blind allegiance to an IRI propagandist, as in Q.

All I did was question Q's motives. Who is this guy that can command you sheepish followers to vouch for him? What's it to you anyway, fozul? My comment was directed to Q, not you!

In this day and age of unabashed IRI brutality, we need to know where bloggers stand. DK is an open monarchist. Where does Q's allegiance lie? I think we all need to know. Does he support the morally bankrupt and depraved IRI? At least DK is an honest man, he tells us openly that he supports Reza Pahlavi and his family. We can disagree with him, but we also have to respect his candor. 

Simply, we can't hide our allegiances under the opportunist banner of patriotism and then call others "vatan foroosh" simply because the other person does not agree with you.

That's tanamount to fascism.

Who is Q -- I just want to know how is he "a writer?" Who is his employer? What magazine does he write for? What books has he written? Who signs his paychecks? Who's his publisher?

Just as we need to know the truth about the role of NIAC and Trita Parsi in the American political arena (so that we can better gauge their positions and motivations), we should know more about Q's allegiances and where he stands (and with whom) so that we can better gauge his positions and his motivations so that we can assess for ourselves whether he stands with the Iranian people and their struggle for freedom or whether he stands with the forces of repression and tyranny, as in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I'm still waiting to hear from someone how this Q character is "a writer" of note and who signs his paychecks???

Even America

Had help from the French in securing its democracy. In fact, you can easily say, and be right by the way, that the American revolution would not have been successful BUT FOR the help that the American revolutionaries received from France.

The "Islamic Revolution" received material and moral support from a host of countries, including UK, US, East Berlin, Cuba, Libya, France, and others (including Palestinians).

Even apartheid in South Africa would not have ended BUT FOR external pressure.

You can have dreams, because dreams are inspiring, but our people need concrete support. They're getting raped and tortured in IRI prisons by the thousands and murdered in cold blood on our streets while we have ourselves herculian "dreams" about ridding the IRI cancer all on our own (and this, while superpowers like Russia and China, not to mention a handful of mercantilist European countries fully support our homegrown enemies).

Get real, folks!

Nobody is advocating war, or percision strikes on our nuclear facilities, but the IRI is too ruthless of a beast for us to fight alone with rocks and fists (it hasn't gained much for Palestinians in 50 years), specially when the regime's coffers are flush with petro-dollars.

We can therefore use any and all kinds of external pressure, and sadly, we're getting none from the appeasing, monumentally inept, pathetically weak and amaturtish Obama administration.

A gasoline blockade would be a good start.

Dear Laleh

I couldn’t agree more with everything you say. But, how do you address the threat of attack? Are you convinced it doesn’t exists? Everything you said is absolutely right if the foreign intervention is not forced on us by IRI.

  I think toppling the

I think toppling the IRI is easier than we think given propagndist  "intellectual powershouses" of the Islamic republic rapisist such as Q, Jaleho and No Fear. No foreign power needed to interfere when the regime will eventually implode from within and that requires Ahamdinejad and NO FEAR's "vision of Islamic Rapists to materilize...lol

With an eye on reality I share the dream

“Successful democracies in the world have been shaped by the convictions of political activists that have defined a set of idealisms from which they have not wavered. On top of such a list is political independence from foreign powers. That principle although still a dream is the secret potion to a successful campaign to bring down the mullahs:  We pay homage to no foreign power!” 

Knowing the cornerstone of any democracy is political independence, your above statement does not negate the idea of foreign help in achieving such democracy which during their struggles with their own tyrannies they all in one form or another received.

With an eye on reality I share the dream and hope it becomes our reality.

Let’s Make History Together!

Fred wrote: “But would I be wrong to say there is not one, just one instance where without any outside help any regime let alone one as barbaric as Islamist Rapists’ has been toppled?”

Your statement is accurate, but that historical fact doesn’t change my position regarding our homeland and its future. I draw a distinction between the help from a foreign regime and help from foreign groups such as human rights organizations.

The interference of foreign governments comes with a price tag. I am not willing to pay that price and repeat the mistakes of the past. Because of the interference of foreign powers, we are where we are today!

Successful democracies in the world have been shaped by the convictions of political activists that have defined a set of idealisms from which they have not wavered. On top of such a list is political independence from foreign powers.

That principle although still a dream is the secret potion to a successful campaign to bring down the mullahs:

We pay homage to no foreign power!

"It has to be done by Iranian hands!!"

"Have never advocated anything but that"!  Of course "airtight sanctions" to strangle and starve Iranian people, don't have hands.  Dorough chera?

Laleh

You say:

“For the sake of our sovereignty and political independence, we must solve this problem on our own.”

I wholeheartedly agree with you that toppling of IRR has to be done by Iranian hands and leadership, have never advocated anything but that for the very same reason you mention.

But would I be wrong to say there is not one, just one instance where without any outside help any regime let alone one as barbaric as Islamist Rapists’ has been toppled?

Parsa?

Why do people feel the need to ruin a beautiful Persian last name by faking it. When people pick that as their user ID on this site, they should at least try to sound educated and intelligent and semi righteous, not just self-righteous, oghdeyi and badkhaah.

Heif as in naame zibaaye Irani

Foreign Hands off of Iran!

Military intervention, economic sanctions, and political interferences are all in the same category: foreign hands determining our future.

Those hands once done “helping” us will be extended for payback. For the sake of our sovereignty and political independence, we must solve this problem on our own. The regime of mullahs must be toppled by the hands of our people under the leadership of heroes rising out of the grassroots movement.

There are no shortcuts, no quick remedies, no peaceful transitions. We must fight the Islamic Republic of Iran until its downfall and then form a secular republic in its place.

Until our political activists recognize the necessity of this independence from foreign hands, we will be ruled by pulpit militants, the offspring of Arab invaders…

We will do it our way, Mister Fred

We will once be free and that thanks to ourselves - People are more powerful than sanctions, believe in them. Look what this Norwegian student says in this clip - touching, simple and the ground truth:

Dear Mr. Kharmagas

Just curious Sir, do yo believe in the below statements made by one of our dear hamvatans?
Please ready each statement and advise if you agree with it and please advise why you agree or disagree.

Thanks. Iraneh Azad.

1) “So we have to admit, there is such a thing as a continuom...... The system as it is designed currently can deliver much better democracy. For example: if the Guardian Council starts vetting candidates less and less. The Supreme Leader could show less and less initiative. The foreign policy council could be dominated more and more by the popularly elected President (That's Ahmadinejad by the way). The system can move very far toward perfect democracy. “

2) "The fact that there is strict eligability requirement is not a reason to call it undemocratic."

3) "Even though I agree the candidate vetting process in Iran is unusually subject to abuse, it is only a few degrees different than other democracies. And in any case continued participation of people in the system also legitimizes it. That's just a fact of life we may not like but it won't go away.
That's just a fact of life we may not like but it won't go away."

4) "I believe the revolution gave us "Esteghlal"."

5) "Since when is having a democracy dependnet on Parties? The US constituion doesn't have any provision for political parties. The definition of what is a "party" is extremely vague anyway. What we have in Iran now could be considered parties"

6) "In Iran, the role of Supreme Leader is closest to a "chief justice" since he has no proper legislative functions."

7) "A referendum is not a bad idea, if the people of Iran want it. A majority would have to demand it. But personally I think if even 30% of Iranians go on record supporting such a referendum it would happen and I would support it."

8) IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING POINT:

"The point is that the IRI and its supporters will not allow such refrundum to take place since they know its results."

THE PERSON WRITES:
"I'm not sure if that's true, but where is the proof that such a referendum is demanded? When a large majority of Iranians come out year after year to vote inside the system, and support its positions (like Nuclear Power, anti-Iran terrorism, etc) in international polls, why should they think that anybody other than Monarchists and the MEK are calling for this referendum?"

9) IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING COMMENT:
"The majority of Iranians want the same things than any other normal human being would want: freedom, progress, prosperity, peace, security, happiness and so on."

PERSON WRITES
"no doubt. But IRI claims to provide these and a lot of people believe them. Contrary to popular belief in California, all those people ren't and really couldn't be on the "IRI payroll". You must face the fact that not everyone interprets these values the same way as you do or you understand them.

In fact since 65%+ of the Iranians routinely participate in elections, we can conclude that they have decided the system is reformable and good enough. They have decided they don't want the kind of chaos that comes with a revolution, especially since there are many foreign wolves waiting to attack. I know you don't accept this, but that's why you are not in charge."

10) "As far as IRI has imposed its ideological supremacy, I fail to understand how a government can do that based on a national constitution that was voted for by 90%+ of Iranians"

11) "IRI has neither occupied ("hegemony" by the definition that is relevant here)nor "forced an ideology through government"

12) "If Iranians want to put their lives on the line, they can remove the government right now"