Iranian of the Day

Amirparviz Jan

The reason is people trust the media. In nations that people do not trust the media it does not work. In USA it has changed. I remember 30 years ago everyone trusted the news. Today most people just watch news they side with.

But even they are realizing news is manipulation. With internet and other stuff MSM news is getting to be obsolete. I bet you more Americans doubt the recent reports than Iranians on IC.

what shocks me is that it works

You say the truth 10 times and a lie 200 times and the lie wins out, thats dangerous for our planets survival.  Then the people say, yes but you're free to say what ever you want, sure but with a system like that what good is talking, just submit to money & power.

That's why idea's are not really debated among candidates, they just give 1 minute blurbs.

Amirparviz

Yes I am well aware of the power of media and how it is abused. Believe me I have been watching it manipulate Americans for 30 years! Whenever we are about to go to war you get about 6-12 months of "preparation".

Drums get beaten. Op-ed pages written in big news papers. Suddenly Amnesty reports show up about human rights abuses. Maybe those reports were there all the time. But they get front page coverage. Public opinion gets riled up for a war.

Then if it happens that they work out a deal all stops. Next thing you know all the news vanishes. Amnesty reports get put back on the shelves. No mention of that nation in the media. Or if there is it is neutral or maybe even good; yes I know!

Re: Worth

Value is a subjective thing. I remember a really interesting line from the movie "Death of Yazdgird". The royal captain asks the miller woman "do you think your son is worth the same as the king?". She replies "no; to me my son is worth more!". 

People do not all have the same value to all others. My friends and family are worth more to me than a strangers. I will do things for my friends that I would not for a stranger. I will listen to the opinion of one I know and respect over a stranger. 

Of course that does not mean the other person is worth less in general. It just means to me my family is worth more than others. To another person their family is worth more. It is the natural order of things. And the reason communism failed.

VpK were you aware of the power of media attention

coverage etc on peoples willing choices and actions and its regulations and uses by institutions?

Superiority is when someone pretends they are worth more

Of course no one is worth more than anyone else, no matter how high their post or how low their ways.

When it comes to knowledge some people do have more knowledge on subjects, or even superior understanding on a subject, so people can be superior in info etc yet this does not mean they are superior in worth. Now If a person says because I know more, I am better than you in terms of worth as a person, that is wrong. 

Tell me one place I said my worth is more than you because I know more on a subject.  There is nothing wrong with saying/implying my knowledge on something is more than another, is that a sin?  The reason I even brought my knowing up and others not knowing is because this is knowledge that is truly coveted and many do not know, so my clear motive was to highlight that this is a subject not many are aware of which is why the massmedia and amnesty can be misused intentionally by governments. A Miscommunication I am sorry if It was received differently.

Re: Amnesty

Dear Anahid and Amirparviz

I also commented on Amnesty so Amirparviz may well be also talking to me. I do not take offense at this. In fact I have found some professors to be far more "superior" in attitude than Amir :-) We are all entitled to our opinions on Amnesty; USA and others. No reason to get personal. I am glad Amir replaced the name with "people"". Now I get to feel included!

However I would request that not all Iranian men be bundled as one. People are different. I would prefer "some men think". Plus at least on IC the superiority complex goes way past "man vs woman". There people who feel they are better than anyone! If you disagree with them it does not matter what gender you are. Or if you even mention your gender. You get attacked in the vilest forms. Regardless of race; gender or past views. Others cheer them on as "cute". Now that is vastly more offensive. 

Anahid please don't mix things up!

Firstly I AM NOT SUPERIOR TO YOU!  Please don't make this a man woman thing as I would take that as a pure cheap shot. And also I feel it is an attack on my character. One person praises me for being polite tonight and you say things about me which I would certainly change and oppose.

Secondly, regarding knowing something better than you, that is not an issue of being superior, some people, do dare I say it, well I will say it because honesty is important, Some people do know more than you, I hate to break it to you, and not because they are superior.  A dentist, a doctor, a media consultant, a politician, a secret servce agent, each have things they know specifically more than others because it is their expertize.  If you have a problem with people knowing more than you, you are going to have a very difficult life.

thirdly I will remove your name from the previous posts and adress it to People so you don't take offense, I'm sorry if you took offense by my words that was not my intention, it is not usually my intention unless I lose control in an argument and that is not what we are doing at all, we are just discussing issues and learning from each other.

fourthly, if you found faults please discuss, I'm here to learn as well as discuss. 

Lastly, the way i wrote is how I speak with all people, man or woman, if you feel someone knowing more than you on a subject is disrespectful I can see how you'd be offended (not a good plan as it will happen often, it does for me at least). Please encourage good behavior, don't punish bad we have enough pain to last all humanity until the end of time, thankyou.

amirparviz, you act as you are superior to me & you are NOT

I started reading your comment. After few paragrahs, I realized that you think you know better than me. Which is not the case. I had already found fault with your arguments. as such, I am not ging to spend my time exchanging comments with someone who acts as if he knows more than me and he does not. One problem in Iran is that men think they are better than women. So I will try not engage with such men if I see it because it would be encouraging bad behavior among men.

People let me know if you have any questions about how

Amnesty, the free media etc are used as weapons.

How it works, the process of taking good people and their willingness, to freely be a force for harm, not good, against their own.

I tried my best to put it into a simple explanation, but if your field is not mass psychology and media it may not make sense to you the different processes, of deceit, manipulation and even coercion when a willing response can not be produced freely. This may help you also see why America is a mess, with the democratic and republican party institutions having the power, whicch they get from the multinationals and corporations as much as they do if not more from the people. 

When you add the fact that politicians lie you now have most of the pieces for the basis of how America and EU are in business and running the world.

People you are not aware how it works thats all. Not your field.

Amnesty is not controlled by even the UK govt, they just have influence inside it through a few key indivduals, when they need it, people that want to do the best they can for the UK's interests.  Otherwise if they were biased they would not be effective in carrying out their stated objectives, which is the reason they have so much support and are horrificly effective in other uses. If the mass knew what is going on it would never work.

How it works is through the concept of controlling eye balls.  Me and you each have 2 eye balls.  Let me explain this one in depth so you know without a shadow of a doubt exactly how Amnesty and media in general is misused for cynical political ends in the free world, something that is totally against human rights.

So the more eye balls a message can reach the more leverage and influence the message has.  What happens is here you have Amnesty doing wonderful innocent work and then from time to time when it is necessary to unite a people against their own best interests, the powers give more advertizing and attention to credible investigators like Amnesty, to get more eye balls behind it to create more unity for a purpose.  This purpose is not human rights it's to create political pressure to create unity against something.  If they cared about students or christians or women or anything you wonder why Amnesty is never able to get any attention or coverage during times when they have no interest to use them.  So those that controll advertizing and eyeballs switch on the spiget of eyeballs at critical times to have impacts on issues of interest to them.  We have had so many christians killed for not denouncing their faith in Iran, but we only mysteriously get news of what is going on regarding religous persecution by this orgaization Amnesty which is just a political tool to achieve the UK govts ends, at a time when the UK and USA are up to something that we don't know what the true agenda is.

This concept is not believable to your average person, that the flow of media and advertizing in each country has controlls on it that go straight to the secret service, nor do people know how much soft power it gives authorities.  Let me elaborate on this so you get the point completely with a real life example of the USA and what a power this is infact.  The USA had decided before GW Bush had left office that it was not going to attack Iran right away and that it wanted to buy time, the poltical powers behind the scene had also decided the person with the message of talking to the regime was going to win, even though the USA had no intention to change its policy or talk at all, it just wanted to buy time.  First they manufactured a NIE report that said Iran had stopped all activities and therefore they shut down the entire AIPAC pressure group and gave Bush a scapegoat for just waiting around and staying quiet on Iran. Second in the primaries at the highest levels, the groups behind Obama were more than those behind hillary.  Then the machinery of eye balls and manufacturing consent was put in to practice, money was dispersed and orders were given at the secret service level, to give Obama 5 times more positive coverage than all the other candidates combined, this can be verified with tools that show the number of impressions of advertzing and uneven coverage. 

Next 4 to 5 times more people started donating to Obama than anyone else, no wonder he was getting an unfair number of impressions and his message was being heard more.  Does it make sense to you how all the people were rigged, thats not democratic I know.  Basically my brother was telling me adamently, NO! Obama won because people like me paid money to his campaign and he got ahead and had more money to advertize and win.  What he didn't understand is the process by which more people donated to obama was controlled.  There's alot you need to know to get this point about what democracy really is in practice, to correctly know about mass psychology and what the USA and UK really are, give people the ability to choose based on manipulation, coercion and deceit.  So let me get to the details, I create one sales page for Hilary "woman for president" and out of a thousand people (2000 eye balls) that come to the site 50 people with no force what so ever leave a $50 donation of support.  I create another sales page for Obama "Race Is no Issue, Hope for America" and out of 1000 people only 40 people willingly without force pay $50 donation (so really he's not as popular) now if I give 2 million peoples traffic which I the US Secret service in the hands of the political powers control to Obama and only 400,000 to hilary it doesn't take rocket science to realize that Obama is going to willingly get more people, more supporters and more donations.  If you study the election coverage and advertizing early on you get the picture and people like my brother and the rest of the people that willingly gave money to Obama's campaign think he's the winner just because its democracy and it was the peoples will.

What happens with Innocent Amnesty is they will start getting lots of coverage, celebrity support, eyeballs etc etc and everyone will be doing it willingly, what no one knows is the real agenda is not human rights but to use good people to destroy Iran even worse than before, its the power of political pressure, which is real and lethal.

At the end of the day, I say if you feel like you are doing a good job and you are saving a few peoples lives (and you really don't know how you are being used to create poverty, enslavement, tyranny, torture cells, hundreds of thousands of dead chlldren on the border with Iraq) then go ahead, it may make you feel alot better, but if you actually understood what I explained and see it at work and understand how this has been going on since the invention of the newspaper, then radio, like me I doubt you would be able to sleep some nights.

So to summarize the priciple this process works on is impressions, if 100 million americans get 5 trillion impressions with one logic, and then get 1 trillion impressions with another logic, surprisingly repitition causes the logic/idea/sale with 5 trillion impressions to get more support.  Goebels the propaganda genius did this, make 3 lies no more and repeat indefinetly. 

At the end of the day People, you should know that the UK and USA murder and torture people all over the world, the uk denies it, the usa does it openly.  On a lighter note, the only thing I can say to you is to Never give up your own common sense even when you do not have all of the truth or any idea how institutions who's role it is to control something are doing it.

Amnesty

There are many nations and people who mistrust Amnesty. In some situations the criticism are not valid but some are. Professor Francis Boyle a former board member claims they act to serve British and US foreign policy.

They have a tendency to focus on nations in "the dog house" with the West. Of course it depends on the chapter in particular.  I have suspicions please see this:

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Amnesty_...

Regarding Amnesty

I have been a member of Amnesty for years, and I have not seen any relation between their focus on human rights in Iran and US government agenda. If people who criticize Amnesty had followed its activities, they would know that Amnesty is not controlled by US government.

OK DK jan

You do have a good sense of humor about it.

amirparviz Jan

I agree with you and share your suspicions of Amnesty; Britain and US. The least harmful being America and the worst Britain. Amnesty being a British organization makes it not trustworthy. 

Regarding your view they do not seem extreme to me. One persons extreme is another persons reasonable. You are one of very few people on IC with an open mind. Plus you are respectful which is a great quality. You obviously love Iran and want the best. 

Please keep up the good work and do not be discouraged. This is not a popularity contest it is an exchange of ideas. The more open people are the better and more ideas we see the better. You are not extreme and I highly value your postings on IC.

I don't Think it's "Shahyad" I know it's "Shahyad" ;0)

The use of the denomination "Azadi" by Amnesty International is not innocent ...

But then neither am i ...  

How YOUR "Green" Color Was Chosen & By WHOME !

FED UP WITH POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: Ahmadinejad is NOT my Prime Minister ! 

PS: Don't take my comment too seriously Anahid Jaan ... I Need to "Kerm Bereezam" From time to time ;0)  

Anahid jaan: Ghorbon on dahanet

"please foucs on the message of e-mail" 

"Shahyad not Azadi"

Well said dear Anahid.

We have a looooooong way to go.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Views and values we should debate and fight over, people never

Please don't take it personally, yours is also a view based on information and I would come to the same conclusion if I focussed on the same information as you, I am very skeptical the way I have seen amnesty focussed on at key times and then focussed away from for most of the time, used as a tool.  Right now I am just seriously convinced US/UK policy is moving to do even greater harm to Iranians.  It's not you, its this whole saudi Quds allegation issue and it is making me very sensitive.

Amir

I respectfully disagree with your assumptions about how amnesty feels about Human Rights of Iranians, and your generally extreme point of view with regards to these matters. I am not here to convince you or anybody but simply to put down my view. Leaving you with respect, and out of this bog.

You must know this has everything to do with human rights

When the issue is so important such as human rights, it's important to ask why in practice the human rights of Iranians doesn't matter a damn to the people behind amnesty or the bbc?  Its important to go beyond the deception that Amnesty/bbc are independent organizations pursuing human rights for Iranians, and their work is intended to benefit them & to remind people that the real motive of these campaigns is not to uphold human rights, if people do not gets these important points I just made, then yes I agree with you 100% and I can see exactly why people might be upset by a person putting amnesty international down.

Many people were upset when some people dared to say that Carter did not  want human rights, democracy and greater development for Iranians.  Many people were upset when some people dared say that George W Bush was not pursuing freedom when he ordered operation Iraqi freedom.  Many people were upset when some people dared say that Nato doesn't give a damn about civilians in Libya. My new philosophy on this subject, I say let people be upset, because this is about human rights, mine yours and everyones and they matter alot.  Amnesty doesn't give a damn about human rights.

My point is not, whether Amnesty is promoting a good cause, I say they are abusing it for political ends of their masters, which if more people genuinely care about human rights they would care more to not be deceived by an organization that is paving the way for a tragic future none of us can even imagine or predict.  How is that losing focus?????????

dear Amir

I do not disagree about some of your points, but there are many blogs that cover those issues, Monarchy and the "good old days". This blog is a campaign against Stoning in Iran and to put Amnesty down while they are promoting a good cause is not justifiable to many people, especially people in Iran and those outside trying to help them. Sometimes with issues that are so important (Human Rights) and campaigns it is sad to see blogs losing focus. 

Regarding the priorities

A few things:

• As long as we have IRI there will be barbarism. Now say we manage to stop this one stoning. How many others will come? It is important to get the message of who promoted IRI and Khomeini.
• The relentless attacks on Shah led to IRI. I was there and watched it happen. From that jack*** Mike Wallace to BBC. They ripped him while canonizing Khomeini. "He will be known as a Saint". Sure Mr. UN Ambassador Andrew Young!

If you want to solve a problem you got to fix the cause. Now the same ***holes want Rajavi to be the new VF. And they got their supporters running around congress. 

So it is important to remind people of what we did have. A nice pleasant relatively free nation. Where no one got stoned. By rehabilitating Shah we have hope. In my opinion if we get RP all of this will be over. No I don't want a "democracy" if that means voting in more of the same. The JM democrats have tuned my stomach so badly I take the Shah any day. Do we want to solve on sympton or the whole problem? The big problem will not go until we admit how well it was. How "democrats" messed it up.

Please know your priorities

Rather than focusing on the name that you think it should be "Shahyad" not Azadi, please foucs on the message of e-mail. When someone does a posting about plight of jailed Iranian students, what help is it to start writing that it should be "shahyad" not Azadi square. Let's work to have a free Iran and then maybe you can get your "darkhastee" names.

Truthseeker9 People will always support a Good Moral Campaign.

And Evil Empires will always use peoples goodness when ever they can to serve their own purposes at the expense of peoples freedom, development and peace.  The Wisdom is recognizing when you are facing an evil empire that diminishes freedom and justice and does everything to support injustice and when you are dealing with a sincere empire, which serves the higher good of all sides concerned.  Plays win-win in the vast majority of cases.

People in the majority sense of the word are good Truthseeker9.  They will support a good moral action, yet the question is after 32 years why are the bbc and amnesty making a case against the regimes barbarity now? Human rights issues regarding christians now?  Why all the highly unlikely spy games, alleging the Barbaric regime is hiring mexico drug cartels to do its own dirty work against a sunni saudi ambassador it is trying to make peace with?  Does everything seem normal?  Well it's not. 

The pity is when peoples moral desires lead to the outcome of bringing to power "The Hezbollahi Party in Iran" using them for awhile and then instead of removing them, in the name of pursuing democracy lol, you are pursuing a policy that changes one group of mullahs for another group, as if Iran does not have a better alternative to "the hezbollahi party in iran".  This is what we call neocolonialism.  And the sad historical record is, the communists and the facists were not worse than this. This is pretty much as low as it gets.  Where Unchained capitalism will take us, god only knows.

How about

If BBC would implicate itself in promoting Khomeini? How about if it exposes itself in calling Shah a "dictator" and all the other names it called him. The Mollahs have got a "Made in Britain" stamped on their backs.

Yes stoning is a totally barbaric thing. But without BBC's relentless attack on Shah and shameless promotion of Khomeini it would not be happening. Why: because Shah did not want to give Britain Iranian oil for nothing. 

The film succeeds in its aim

to expose the cruelty of stoning, deliberately prolonging suffering of the victim by having rules on size of the stones. Some deaths can take up to 2 hours. Lets hope people will support the campaign to get the Iranian authorities to end this practice.

BBC sucks

BBC is one of the absolute worst news agencies in the world. I take the Soviet Pravda over BBC.

• It is Shahyad not Azadi; a very fine name since it will remind us of Shah. And the great times we have when he ran the nation. Plus the great times to come once he restore his dream.
• BBC deliberately refuses to say "Persian Gulf". Are they stupid or deliberately ignorant. Me thinks the latter is true.
• BBC did promote Khomeini and the revolution.
• BBC screamed like a stuck pig when Putin put away Khordakovsky. They made it sound like "Democracy" is the same as Russia letting a robber baron strip their wealth.
• The one thing BBC did right was the Andrew Gilligan report. What happened to him? Blair and his rotting cronies lynched him and anyone involved in it.
• In summary BBC is worse than Pravda. Because we all knew Pravda was a pile of bull. But BBC has a facade of "legitimacy" that is cynically uses to distort the truth. And to promote its vile anti human agenda.

PS: Amnesty is the attack dog for BBC an UK. I rather listen to a real dog barking.

We have so little to be thankful to BBC or Amnesty for

Shame on Amesty, For an Iranian its Shahyad, especially since Azadi was greater in iran when it was created Shahyad.

It's Called Shahyad Not "Azadi" which you already had anyways...

An interview with Hossein Amanat architect of Shahyad Monument (Pars TV)

Mostafa Tajzadeh:Former deputy Interior Minister's speech a month before June 2009 elections ( Arrested Since):

Tajzadeh ( his name means "born with a Crown") speaks about all the social Freedoms which existed prior to the revolution and Khomeiny's desire to change the Constitution.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLD8XkPMFpI

Simorgh5555 Its Down with "the hezbollahi party in iran"

//iranian.com/main/blog/amirparvizforsecularm... To find out why.