Misc

We're Not Indians, we're the warriors

Gandhi promoted peaceful treatment of enemy.

That's wrong. You can't treat wolves with love and respect. They chew your neck and leave you rolling in blood. They're animals.

Fight animals with teeth, fight guns with guns, and fight the British occupiers with a kick in the ass.

Mullahs, Basijis and Pasdars will not let go of the once-in-a-lifetime luxury and wealth. they rather kill 90% of Iranian population but stay in power. They only way to get them down is to hang them with their turbans before they destroy more of Iran and Iranian lives.

re:Poozesh

No sweat JJ john!

Non violence is good but ...

Non Violence is the best course of action for any political reform, anywhere, anytime. But whether it is applicable to IRI. I doubt very much. 30 years history of IRI is full of bloodshed and brutality. I beleive that the only way to end in a bloodless reform is refrom from within the Power Source of IRI. If they coup d'etat the Regime from within and set a temperory governing body that would guide and perform a general election then it seems a non violence change over. But if they would continue their Day-Dreaming as they have doing since laat 30 years then unfortunately there would be NO Choice other than the bloodshed and this going to be worse than what happened in 1979. This would show all the globe the Iranian mentality and way of doing politics.

Maybe with the power of telepathy we can melt the batons

like butter and schwang of the basij idle.

As usual, in this part of the world we are telling those who live in Iran what to do.

jj, perhaps we are talking past each other

Picking & choosing points of my response lessens the overall quality of the conversation as well. You raise blood, killing and isolated examples to support Ghandi style pacifism and suggest it is the most effective method. Then you suggest violent responses do not produce good results and that we should follow the peaceful models. Ok great but I don't recall invoking any of them. The conversation is not about whether killing is good or whether the movement should become violent. Nor is it about whether Ghandi's style is good. It is about whether Ghandian uprising will work. obviously you think it does. However, while I hope it does, I'm not so sure as you seem to be. Everyone wants a bloodless change but is that not what Iranians have been working on for past 30 years? Did it work? No. That's why people are on the street and by all indications it is not working in the sense that IRR won't give in, reform, back down or compromise. Hence, the body language of the movement is changing. Does that mean violence? maybe, maybe not. We do not yet know. I, as many, project that it will turn violent & bloody. Not because people want it but because the regime wants it and will do whatever to incite it. This is the same regime that Burned Cinema Rex. remember. will they succeed again? we don't know. is IRR willing to burn the country or engage a war? For sure. Will it succeed? we don't yet know. My previous comments were in this vein while you keep focusing on whether I think killing is the solution.

As for examples, I have covered them in my previous comments but lets pick Kosovo which you conveniently dismiss as a violent response with bad outcome. Did the Kosovars have a choice? They were being murdered and raped and burned or buried alive and they took it for years. Their armed resistance came at the tail end when everyone saw it as hopeless and even then it could not match the Serbian army. It took U.S. and some EU airforce and army to stop the bloodshed. Even Montenegro then separated from Serbia despite all commonality of culture & religion. Is there any reason to assume that some similar scenario will not happen in Iran? At what point do you separate strategy and tactics necessary to win a cultural/national war from generic concepts of peace and violence?

It is not about whether peaceful means are good and I dearly hope that this regime is brought to its knees by economic and general strike measures, and there is an outside chance. But at what point do you differentiate defending self & country from 'violence'? Or you think that pacifism means Iranians must grin and bear it and unless they can take the country by passive resistance they should not attempt it, while all the 'opposition' is destroyed, murdered, put away and a N. Korea style military control is in place when resistance is no longer an option?

Poozesh

Benross, I apologize for my sarcasm. I see your point too.

NO WE ARE NOT

jj but the mullahs are not us ; they are .............

down with IRR.                  Maziar

benross, sure... you're a

benross, sure... you're a real revolutionary, hiding behind an avatar, a fake name, far away from Iran. The Islamic Republic is reallllly scared of you. You can kill ten basijis with a couple of chop chop moves :o)))

You didn't get my question JJ. Non-violence may be interpreted as there shouldn't be any ARREST to begin with. So your question negates your supposition.

I know those who cry for blood don't know what it takes to kill. If they knew, they weren't writing here. They were somewhere else, doing something else.

I'm not for violence. I support fighting for freedom. And fighting for freedom does contain violence. Not necessarily killing, but violence. All those videos which are posted in your IC show how it is. This is what it is fighting for freedom.

Now I asked why 'arresting' to begin with? You got my question wrong. I didn't imply that the goal of arresting is surely killing. I meant the act of 'arresting', in itself, is an act of violence. Totally legitimate in self defense... and it doesn't mean to kill.

We are not there at the heat of the confrontations on the streets, we don't know the dynamics of a demonstration in the heat of the moment. I do agree that the movement is not out there to kill anybody but it has every right for self defense. But self defense for a movement that is going forward, is by definition an 'offense' viewed by the other side. So it all depends how 'non-violence' is interpreted. But certainly I'm not for bloodshed. If this is what it's all about, sure, I'm all for 'non-violence'.

One thing in this whole subject is insulting to people who actually do the fighting on the ground. Either we consider them stupid to inflate the violence which would have no use for themselves to begin with, or for the movement in general, or we consider them inherently violent and murderers, not trustworthy of acting responsibly. This is what bothers me the most. They don't need our advice on how to fight. Some students are already frustrated and call for arms. But this is more emotional reaction than a strategic thinking. But I do fear that 'non-violence' become a tool to kill the movement altogether and perhaps those students also are afraid of the same thing.

Let's discuss the avatar story another time! But if this is really something that matters, then why IC doesn't make it mandatory to use real names and real pictures? I have no problem with that. I don't think it should be used as an argument for challenging a different idea.

Stop daydreaming

ساده لوحانه است اگر تصور کنیم این رژیم را میشود با روشهای مسالمت
آمیز اصلاح  کرد. هر چه زمان می‌گذرد این احساس آشتی
ناپذیری در دو طرف ( رژیم و ملت) دارد شدید تر میشود . درست مثل زمان شاه.

Right and wrong

Hovakhshatare, you say "I will not be abusing or beating up that basiji unless I have witnessed something beyond tolerance. However, your question puts the cart before the horse. the current situation is that basiji's are killing, beating, arresting, raping people. Let me answer that too in advance of your asking. No SOB will be taking me from the street to torture and rape me. Either the criminals or I will go down. Forever. But that's just me in a specific situation protecting my life."

Well, the people who have been in the frontlines of the struggle inside Iran, the people who have actually been beaten and abused by basijis and riot police, have so far chosen NOT to kill their abusers. I'm sure you have seen many videos where basijis have been surrounded and captured by the people, but they have not been killed or seriously harmed. Why? Because our people have shown an admirable sense of decency and respect for human life even for the oppressors. We, sitting comfortably away from Iran, can at least give this humanitarian gesture some credit and support.

You say, "let's look at Fidel and Che, all the former banana republic movements, Kosovo, North Korea, Tibet, Zimbabwe, a slew of rifrafs in Central Asia that are now called countries like Kazakistan, Ozbakistan...and how all of that works in global scene, and not just Czech/slovak and India/Ghandi which themselves had specific contexts and point of time reference. You throw around a lot of great ideals which I doubt if most don't share but that is not real world."

You mention Cuba, Kosovo, North Korea, Zimbabwe and examples in Central Asia. Fine. In most of these cases the opposition resorted to violence and retaliatory killings. And what were the results? Revolutionary governments that were less tolerant and far from democratic. Is that what we want? Are those "real world" examples, but more or less peaceful transformations in South Africa and Eastern Europe are unrealistic for our purposes?

Seems to me that you consider violence and killing as natural and inevitable and build your arguments to justify them. I'm not blind to the fact that violence will be hard to avoid whenever you are faced with a ruthless regime. But as individuals we must make a judgment, a choice, and decide whether violent retaliation and vengeance are right or wrong and whether they help the cause of freedom, tolerance and democracy or...

...

جهانشاه جان عزیز، به طور حتم آن تظاهرات اثر داشته است ولی‌ اگر اندکی‌ دقت فرمائید،خواهید دید که تنها نیروی نظامی وقت در آن زمان،مردم را همراهی کرد ! آیا این جریان عجیب به نظر نمیرسد ؟!

تمامی پلیس‌ها از زهر روز دوم یاا به سر کار نرفته بودند و یاا بی‌ اسلحه شاهد و نظاره غار مردم در خیابان بودند.

بنده اصرار در این مطالب دارم به این خاطر که خود شاهد گذشت این جریانات بوده‌ام ! بنابرین فلان به امروز بی‌ اندیشیم،به فکر این باشیم که چطور این رژیم را سرنگون کنیم،فردا خدا بزرگ است !

آقای جاوید گرامی‌ (که همیشه جاوید باشید)، تصدقتان شوم،بنده خوش بین نیستم که مردم ایران بتوانند با صلح و آرامش رژیم را عوض کنند ! مطمئن هستم که در روز‌های آینده شاهد حرکت‌های بسیار جنگویانه خواهیم بود و قطعا مردم ایران در برابر این همه خونریزی ساکت نخواهند نشست !

سرافراز باشید.

Speaking of Gandhi

Here's a fun Indian story:

Fearful of a Cobra that lived near their village, the peasants asked their guru to forbid the snake to bite anyone. A year after the Cobra made his promise of peaceful coexistence, the guru found him on the roadside badly beaten. "You told me not to bite, and now you have seen what people do," the animal complained. The guru replied, "Idiot, I said don't bite, I didn't say don't hiss!"

Non-violence Ghandi style isn't the Jesus Christ sort of non-violence. MLK brought upwards of a quarter million people to his "I have a dream" speech. With those kind of numbers behind him, the oppressor heard his message clearly: "Allow us our dream or yours will be a nightmare."

JJ is right. We should continue to work on numbers so that we can hiss credibly. Despite the saintly wording, non-violent strategy is harsh and real to the oppressor. And it gets us what we want without staining our new path with blood.

از نمونه‌های کم‌ خشونت درس بگیریم

رّد واین جان،

پس حاضرید یک بسیجی‌ را کتک بزنید، ولی‌ دست به قتل نمیزنید. همین خودش جای شکر دارد.

تعجب می‌کنم که انقلابات بدون خشونت لهستان، چکسلواکی و دیگر کشورهای بلوک شرق را غیر مردمی و توطئه آمیز معرفی‌ کردید. یعنی‌ آن همه تظاهرات و مبارزه و فشار مستقیم مردم به اندازهٔ زد و بند چند قدرتمند در واشنگتن و واتیکان موثر نبودند. این گونه تفکّر یعنی‌ من و شما و بقیه مردم باید بنشینند سر جایشان و مراکز قدرت و سازمانهای جاسوسی برایمان تعیین تکلیف کنند و آیندهٔ ما را رقم بزنند.

اشاره کردید همانگونه که در هایتی، اوگاندا و صربستان با خونریزی انقلاب شد، ایرانیان هم باید با کشتار متقابل حکومت ظلم را سرنگون کنند. به گفتهٔ شما، جواب خون، خون است.

ولی‌ نظر من این است که به جای الگو قرار دادن خشنترین انقلابات، باید از نمونه‌های کم‌ خشونت (در اروپای شرقی‌، آفریقای جنوبی...) درس بگیریم. نتیجهٔ انقلابات پر‌خشونت روی کار آمدن حکومتهای خشن و غیر دمکراتیک بوده (ایران، چین، کوبا، هایتی...). چرا باید این اشتباهات پر هزینه را تکرار کنیم؟

اصرار بر خونریزی در جواب خون برخوردی احساسی‌ است که با هیچ تفکر انسانی‌ سازگار نیست. آیا در ۲۰۱۰ هنوز باید به روشهای مقابله به مثلی متوسل شویم؟ اگر افکار و اعمال ما به عنوان شهروند انسان دوستانه نشوند، از دولت آینده ایران چه انتظاری داریم؟

Hard to hear thewords

   The music put on this video makes it hard to hear the actual words spoken . This music was not necessary at all . I defintely doubt this music was on the original movie . It is a distraction .

     As far as "non violence " , will it work ? when fighting a brutal dictatorship like the status quo ?  They are determined to hang on to power . They are inebriated with wealth and power . They are not civil by nature and have no respect for civil society .

jj, now u got me going. I answer the question for myself as

posed by you. I will not be abusing or beating up that basiji unless I have witnessed something beyond tolerance. However, your question puts the cart before the horse. the current situation is that basiji's are killing, beating, arresting, raping people. Let me answer that too in advance of your asking. No SOB will be taking me from the street to torture and rape me. Either the criminals or I will go down. Forever. But that's just me in a specific situation protecting my life.

You have a funny way of oversimplifying complex things, to prove a point you insist on. My comments were extremely clear in tone and intent.  This is not about individual actions but dynamics and trends. In social movements, specifically, the modern movements, there are strategies and there are tactics. Both change overtime as pieces and positions on a chess board. The movement is peaceful and that's great and hope upon hope that it will remain so and follow all the Ghandi, MLK etc great examples. But when looking at socio political movements we need to account for history, context and dynamics including islam that has been on discussion on several threads including your last one.

 So lets look at Fidel and Che, all the former banana republic movements, Kosovo, North Korea, Tibet, Zimbabwe, a slew of rifrafs in Central Asia that are now called countries like Kazakistan, Ozbakistan...and how all of that works in global scene, and not just Czech/slovak and India/Ghandi which themselves had specific contexts and point of time reference. You throw around a lot of great ideals which I doubt if most don't share but that is not real world. It is certainly neither a strategy nor a calculated approach to put IRR out of business because it is simplistic. It basically suggests the following: the Iranian people take abuse, rape and murder while the noose tightens remain peaceful. Then IRR just gives up or the world will see the attrocities, feel sorry and come to our help. There is not an iota of evidence, material or circumstantial that will happen until ice freezes in hell. I for one don't think we are going to win this WAR with a lottery ticket.

When Khumaieni came to power,

I thought he had the opportunity to be an Iranian Ghandi. But he squandered this golden opportunity. All those ayatullahs after have equally squandered their golden opportunities.

Life, sometime offers us such a golden opportunity, sadly fear and greed clouds our reasoning.

It is time they move aside and let other Iranians take the stage. Those who do not confuse human dignity with outmoded religious beliefs.

Ahmed from Bahrain

...

بنده آن بسیجی‌ را آن چنان کتک میزدم که صدای سگ کند و آنرا کف بسته به خدمت آن مادرانی می‌بردم که فرزندانشان را در این راه از دست داده اند .

آن مثال هائی که حضرت عالی‌ آوردید اصلا به بحث ما مربوط نیست چرا که آنان از بطن دولت خود جوشیدند و سپس مردم حمایت کردند !

لهستان و جمهوری چک و اسلواکی را مثال زدید :

عجب مثالی!!!

در لهستان لخ والسا قبلان با دست اندر کاران دولتی (با کمک امریکا و با سفارش پاپ جان پل دوم !!) به توافق رسیده بود و با چند تظاهرات از قبل برنامه ریزی شده، کار را تمام کردند.

در جمهوری چک و اسلواکی بنده سفارش می‌کنم که سری مقالات آقای ولادیمیر مچیار را بخوانید تا ببینید چطور همان برنامه که بالا ذکر شد،در این کشور هم به مورد انجام رسید !

به هر حال بنده تصور نمیکنم که بی‌ خشونت این انقلاب پایان خوبی داشته باشد.

باید منتظر بود و دید.

سپاسگزارم.

Jahanshah

That question shouldn't be posed to me!  Ask the close relatives of the innocent victims what should be done to the Basijis.  I believe our perspectives change rather quickly when we put ourselves in place of people who lose loved ones to the IRI every day.

Chand mesaal

Reza Wine jan,

Bandeh chand messal avardam:

The mainstream Black movement for civil liberties in the US was peaceful. Mandela brought Apartheid to its knees through negotiations. The Solidarity movement in Poland was non-violent. The Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia was bloodless. The Soviet Empire crumbled without an armed struggle.

Vali javaab mano nadaadeed. Shoma keh khoshoonat tajviz mikonid, ayaa haazerid baa dast khod jaane yek basiji raa keh dar tazaahoraat gereftaar mishavad begeereed? Ayaa an dasteh az motarezaan keh az koshteh shodan basijihaa va maamooraan regime jelogiri kardanad baayad sarzanesh shavand?

Pahlevoon Panbeh takes no prisoners

benross, sure... you're a real revolutionary, hiding behind an avatar, a fake name, far away from Iran. The Islamic Republic is reallllly scared of you. You can kill ten basijis with a couple of chop chop moves :o)))

...

دوست عزیز و بزرگوار،جناب آقای جاوید عزیز.

در پاسخ باید به خدمت سبزتان عرض کنم که بنده جواب خشونت را خشونت دانم و بس ! اگر حضرت عالی‌ کم به عقب باز گردید،بینید که در مملکت پاینده ما هیچ انقلابی‌ بی‌ خون به عاقبتی درست نرسیده است ! کجای دنیا کسی‌ با گاندی بازی مملکت را از دست کفتاران خون آشام نجات داده است ؟! هائتیی ؟ اوگاندا ؟ صربستان ؟ آخر مثال زنید تا بنده از افکار شما روشن شوم !

بنده شاهد انقلاب این کشور‌ها بوده ام، ایران و مردمانش از این قاعده مستثنی نیستند و خون جواب خون است ! نباید غیر گفت و به غیر خود گول زد ! بس است که یکبار انقلاب ۵۷ را دزدیدند و این بار بر گونه دیگر باید انجام شود !

خوش کام باشید.

Are you saying that if you

Are you saying that if you were among protesters in Iran and arrested a basiji, you would kill him?

Why would you ARREST him to begin with?! 

Question

Bavafa, aaminian, Hovakhshatare, Red Wine,

Are you saying that if you were among protesters in Iran and arrested a basiji, you would kill him?

...

اصلا و ابدا قابل مقایسه نیست آنچه که در هند بود و آنچه که در ایران کنونی اتفاق افتد !

در آن زمان دولت بریتانیا کبیر از اجبار از هند رفت و ربطی‌ به گاندی نداشت هر چند که خیلی‌ از هندوستانیها گاندی را وطن فروش خوانند چونکه باعث ایجاد پاکستان شد ! اگر به هند رفته باشید و با گروه اکثریت صحبت کرده باشید، حرف بنده را میفهمید !

آخوند ها،سپاهی‌ها از ایران به سادگی‌ نخواهند رفت و حرف از زدن این چیز‌ها مضحک است ! باید کمی‌ جدیت به خرج داد و کمتر کلماتی را بلغور کرد که به هیچ کار ما ایرانی‌‌ها نیاید !

Peace, the single most important asset of green movement

The single most important asset of green movement has become its peaceful nature.  It cannot succeed in any other way, nor should it try to.  In fact the Islamic Republic would love nothing more than to provoke the unarmed protesters into violent reactions and riots in order to use this against the movement and to confront people even more brutally.  I won't be surprised if they arm some people themselves or if they plan violent attacks which they will attribute to the protesters. 

The stark contrast of peaceful protests and the thuggery, the tanks, the guns, and the torture is a clear sign that this movement is real and it is determined and it will prevail.  The world already has a good idea of this and it is only a matter of time before this movement will win. 

"The difference between you and me:"

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPckv4kHGHk

Are we violent by nature?

aaminian, what is happening in Iran is essentially no different than the struggle for freedom in other countries.

The mainstream Black movement for civil liberties in the US was peaceful. Mandela brought Apartheid to its knees through negotiations. The Solidarity movement in Poland was non-violent. The Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia was bloodless. The Soviet Empire crumbled without an armed struggle.

Why should Iranians kill for freedom? Are we violent by nature? Are we incapable of peaceful change? I don't think so. We can and should stick to humanitarian principles.

Green cannot remain redless even if it wants to

However, that is not suggesting armed revolution. jj, your point is well taken in the context of violent movements generating bad outcomes. aaminian's point is also valid that Iran is not India and our history & context are very different.

What I was suggesting is not an armed struggle but that this movement has been and continues to be peaceful. However, it has evolved and has started to fight back in defense. Even in Ghandi's India there were violent if sporatically so examples because people's anger and emotions in heat of the kind of chaos we have witnnessed in Iran cannot always be contained or controlled. And there are elements, including IRR, that want to incite and show the crowds as lawless. They have failed and will continue to fail in that attempt but it will have some consequences in human lives.

Lastly, IRR's very ideology (12er shi't with martyrdom, death & suffering at its core) is radically different than Brits. IRR sees killing people as a way of enforcing/using shi't doctrine, and also knows there is nowhere else to turn but N.Korea style police state. In that context the movement will need to do what it needs to do, peacefully, selective engagement of hand/street battles and further steps as dynamics of the situation and actions of IRR necessitate. The Ghandi/MLK/Mandella approach is fine as long as it 'makes sense' and does not serve IRR's objective of stretching this while creating the full-control infrastructure and developing nuclear warheads. Lets learn from history but also be mindful of uniqueness of our situation, history and culture.

Iran Is Not India,

Iranians are so dis-simillar to Indians and Iran doesn't have leaders of Ghandi's caliber.  Aside from that, the British Empire had several other colonies to fall back on that losing India would not be detrimental to its hegemony. The IRI, on the other hand, KNOWS that Iran is the only place it has!  Losing Iran MEANS the end for the IRI.

The pacifist ideas of Ghandi worked because the British were the foreigners in a geographically-hostile land! The IRI are right at home here; the only way to get rid of them (and I hate to say this) is by people starting a armed struggle. Somehow, somewhere people need to get fire arms and fight back.  Otherwise, we'll see more frequent pictures of pick-up trucks running over innocent people.

I don't think it is a

I don't think it is a matter of whether Gandhi strategy (non-violence resistance) will work with IRI or not, it sure will work but it will take a whole lot longer and far more people will hurt in the process then responding in kinds to the thugs from IRI.

The same idea is true in Palestine as Zionist just like IRI will not have shame to see the pain they are inflicting on others as long as they are prospering.

Mehrdad

P.S. what is the annoying music in the back ground

Green is not Red

One of the most beautiful, hopeful, humanitarian aspects of the Green Movement -- so far, and hopefully in the future -- is that it has not taken the life of any of its enemies, no matter how brutal.

We have seen that angry protesters have had numerous opportunities to rip apart and kill those who have shot, killed, maimed, or savagely beaten defenseless people. But each time, the protesters have courageously and rightly shielded trapped basiji agents and prevented bloodshed.

This humanitarian attitude deserves praise and should be encouraged over those who are unable or unwilling to control their rage. The Green Movement, the people who want this brutal Islamic Republic to end, are setting an example for all of us that human life is precious -- even your enemy's.

Those who want to kill and and resort to physical violence to bring about a new regime are no better than those in charge of the Islamic Republic.

And that's why we should look up to the Gandhis, Martin Luther King Jrs and Mandalas of this world to build a more tolerant and humane society.