I understand the bitterness that exists between us and the supporters of GM. This is my attempt to explain our positions and goals to those who lost in the election or others. I will try to have an open mind and to respect the boundaries of a civil discussion. I am willing to change my position if proved wrong, but nevertheless, will give your arguement my full attention. However, certain principles should be respected in this thread if you wish to participate in this discussion.
1- Iran's integrity and sovereignty is not up for discussion.
2- Islam and religion should be respected in this discussion
Everything else is fair game. Lets start by a series of short answers and questions and see where that leads us. Anyone can join the discussion at anytime whether pro or against.
Please be civil in your discussion.
Recently by No Fear | Comments | Date |
---|---|---|
«وارونهفهمی» | 23 | Apr 30, 2011 |
انقلاب ما، انفجار نور بود | 18 | Feb 19, 2011 |
۲۲ بهمن یا ۲۵ بهمن یا هیچ کدام ؟ | 5 | Feb 10, 2011 |
Person | About | Day |
---|---|---|
نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sun May 02, 2010 11:49 AM PDTHow do you assess the relationship between Khamenei, and Ahmadinezhad?
As a president who has swore to uphold the constitution, Ahmadinejad HAS to defend every aspect of our constitution including the concept of VF. However, as you rightly claimed, there has been quite a few disagreement with Khameneie and Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad has been loyal to the constitution and has NOT backed down of his rights assigned to him within this constitution. Also, Khameneie is far from being a classic dictatorial figure whose rights are defined in the VF doctorine. When Khameneie was the president of Iran, he was in disagreement with many aspects of VF. Read my " Az Koja Maloom " post.
How do you explain Ahmadinezhad's inclination towards Hojjatieh?
I have followed Ahmadinejad since he founded the " Tunneling association of Iran" with a few others ( Before he even became Tehran Mayor ) and have yet to find any inclination towards hojatiyeh. I would be very interested if you can provide me with material to read about this claim. How would anyone know who is a member of this highly secretive and banned religious entity? Ahmadinejad's actions also does not indicate any relationship or associations.
How do you assess the
by comrade on Sun May 02, 2010 10:20 AM PDTHow do you assess the relationship between Khamenei, and Ahmadinezhad? I don't see them totally aligned. How do you explain Ahmadinezhad's inclination towards Hojjatieh?
Ahmadinejad Airplane
by capealava on Sun May 02, 2010 09:50 AM PDTWhat make is the Presidential airplane. Airbus? Boeing?
Does Ahmadinejad fear flying Iranian Airlines, since Iran cannot buy new planes or spare parts due to Sanctions ?
No Fear, more copouts- YOU stop the mumbo jumbo
by Fair on Sun Nov 29, 2009 08:34 PM PSTNo twisting at all, and stop running away. According to my claim, anytime we were close to a rapproachment, the Islamic Fuehrer would stop it. Well, in the case you brought, obviously we were NOT close to a rapproachment, so the Islamic Fuehrer didn't say anything.
Where is the contradiction?
No Fear, if you don't have an answer, then just say you don't have an answer.
If you don't want to answer questions, then don't ask people for questions.
So far you have been the prime source of mumbo jumbo, so good riddance if you stop spewing it out.
-Fair
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sun Nov 29, 2009 08:11 PM PSTFair, Stop the mumbo jumbo, this was your quote :
"Under Khatami, anytime we were close to a rapproachment with the US, the Islamic Fuehrer would step in and say no. "
Which i replied to it. Now you are twisting it with your latest reply. As i said, I'm losing interest.
Yes it is
by Fair on Sun Nov 29, 2009 05:23 PM PSTThe episode you are talking about was after 8 years of public
rejection of dialog between the US and Iran by the Islamic Fuehrer. You are referring to the END of Khatami's term in 2005 when Bush was in power and after 9/11 and when the US was at war in Iraq and Afghanistan. What about the 8 YEARS preceding that?? What about the Clinton years? Just google the news reports for Iran during that entire period and see what the Islamic Fuehrer said about relations with the US. The US offered to open just a visa office in Tehran to make it easier for all those poor Iranian citizens who had to travel abroad many times just to apply for a visa, and the Islamic Fuehrer said no. Many many episodes like this happened from 1997-2005 (which you like to ignore for some reason)
Of course in this 30 years history of animosity between the US and Iran, both sides missed opportunities. I never claimed otherwise, and I distorted nothing, if you have no ground to stand on, then TOUGH. Don't blame me for the facts not cooperating with your attempts to rewrite history.
As far as respecting certain values, maybe you can start by actually standing behind what you say. You said in the very beginning of this charade that you are a supporter of Ahmadinejad, and we can ask you anything. Then you conveniently threw out most of the questions I asked and picked and chose which questions you would answer. So which is it?
Respect people's time, respect people's intelligence, respect the truth, and you will have a good experience. Otherwise don't be surprised by my or anyone's reaction.
-FAIR
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sun Nov 29, 2009 04:03 PM PSTUnder Khatami, anytime we were close to a rapproachment with the US, the Islamic Fuehrer would step in and say no.
This is NOT true. Then how do you explain a comprehensive offer from Iran to US at the end of Khatami terms which offered talks on a variety of important issues from terrorism to nuclear enrichment? The US administration just flately ignored it. This has been covered extensively from media outlets outside and inside Iran. I don't understand why you ignored this fact. Its not worth it to continue a discussion if you are hell bent on defending your position at all cost even if its distorting historical facts. I like to continue this discussion with you, please respect certain values. Sincerely.
delete
by sag koochooloo on Thu Dec 03, 2009 01:52 AM PSTdelete
Not True
by Fair on Sun Nov 29, 2009 10:23 AM PSTUnder Khatami, anytime we were close to a rapproachment with the US, the Islamic Fuehrer would step in and say no.
And nobody is calling for Iran's school lunch. All that is being asked of Iran is to come clean and be transparent on its lack of military nuclear program, which it has not done. The IAEA has openly stated this, unlike what it had said for Iraq, and IR has consistently shown deception and lies in this regard, so many times undeclared secret nuclear research sites have suddenly popped up. So don't twist the truth.
As far as support for Hezbollah, you haven't answered the question- you think it is $150 million a year. Why is this not more transparent? The Iranian people have a right to know how much of their money is being sent to foreign organizations while they themselves live under the poverty line. It is interesting you and others like unilaterally decide how much should be sent to Hezbollah. Is there a national debate on this? Are there any polls showing what the will of the Iranian people is on this issue? Furthermore, it is Iran who picks a fight with Israel, not the other way around. In Iran everyday for the last 30 years we hear "Death to Israel" and today "the Holocaust never happened" by our leaders. How many Israeli leaders have been saying death to Iran and we should destroy Iran for the last 30 years? If we leave Israel alone, they will leave us alone (which is more than I can say for our "brother" muslim neighbors). So here is the problem. You and I can disagree on this here. But in Iran, I can go to jail for even making public my thoughts on this, so there is no debate, and my people's scarce resources are being sent to other people without my people's consent.
This is robbery.
-Fair
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sun Nov 29, 2009 02:58 AM PSTThe US has publically stated it is ready to talk with Iran directly. Why does AN oppose direct talks and diplomatic and economic relations with the US, even though the majority of Iranians and the US are in favor of it? How does animosity towards the US benefit Iranian people- especially economically?
To the best of my knowledge, I think every administration in Iran wanted and tried to open dialogue with US administration and we were ready to even sacrifice some of our rights ( Nuclear right ) just to be able to get there. I felt so humiliated after the presidency of Khatami and how he handled this issue.
Regardless, some now argue that Obama's admin. is different and we should bargain with them now. I do favor a dialogue as well, if Iran's interests are at stake. But if what they are asking is against our national interests, then what? What would you do if the bully ask for your school lunch if you want to be his friend? What would a true Iranian do? Obama allowed the sales of aircraft parts to Iran, but wanted us to lose certain nuclear rights. To me this is still " the carrot and stick " policy and nothing has really changed. We will stand firm for our rights.
No Fear
by Sargord Pirouz on Sun Nov 29, 2009 02:15 AM PSTI salute you, baruder. I'm in awe at your patience and self-control.
I stepped into this thread too late, and there's just too much shouting going on.
Hopefully you'll have a future post that I'll be able to join into from get-go.
Pâyande bâd khâk-e Irân-e mâ, -Sargord Pirouz
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sun Nov 29, 2009 01:35 AM PSTHow much money and weapons has AN sent to Hamas and Hezbollah, and what benefit does support of Hamas and Hezbollah have for the people of Iran?
Not enough. To some estimates, its a mere 150 million a year goes to Hezbollah and it should be increased in my opinion. I believe Iran has an obligation to protect the interests of all shia islam followers around the world. They look up to us for guidance and support. Many shias around the world ( even with different nationalities ) have been loyal to Iran. Some of them like the Lebanese Hezbollah are strategically placed and we should continue to support them both financially and militarily and increase our effort to strengthen them specially now that Israel is governed by ultra right wing zionist. This is just common sense.
An attack on Iran could cost our country billions and billions of dollars. Spending a few hundred millions a year is not a lot of money for Iran for taking an insurance policy against the zionists. However, Hezbollah is more than a proxy and our relationship with southern lebanon goes back to even pre revolution Iran. They are a trustworthy and dedicated para military organization which is also very involved in social programs and politics. They are our best friends.
PS; I will respond to your questions in time. I promise.
Lets just focus to the
by Fair on Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:38 AM PSTLets just focus to the point of original topic.
The original topic was "I am a supporter of AN- ask me anything". Have you changed your mind?
Add this to your list (they have nothing to do with the judiciary:
14: The US has publically stated it is ready to talk with Iran directly. Why does AN oppose direct talks and diplomatic and economic relations with the US, even though the majority of Iranians and the US are in favor of it? How does animosity towards the US benefit Iranian people- especially economically?
15: What benefit does nuclear energy and bomb making capability have for the Iranian people, and why does AN insist on pursuing this, at the cost of isolating Iran politically and economically, choking everyday Iranian's ability to make a living, and risking another devastating war, not to mention paying tons of money to Russia and getting nothing in return? For its energy needs, Iran has natural gas which is much cheaper and cleaner and safer and is currently wasting away while Russia makes a killing selling the stuff.
16: How much money and weapons has AN sent to Hamas and Hezbollah, and what benefit does support of Hamas and Hezbollah have for the people of Iran?
17- What has AN's administration done to make transportation in Iran safer? Iran is today 85th out of 88th in the world for air safety, and has one of the worst fatality rates for both flying and driving public. Note that all the planes that have crashed are Russian made, so sanctions is not the problem here. Same goes for safety on the roads. If a regime can police every woman's hair, it can also police the roads and keep them safe.
-Fair
Bijan Jan,
by Midwesty on Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:09 AM PSTA debate is not to defeat someone, rather it's a fact finding mission. I am not debating him/her to win I am trying to find the truth. Always always watch for the mass silent readers on this website who are independent and watching this to decide which way they want to go. They look for reasons and facts and for sure they see who is lying. I am not the judge of this debate let people be the judge of it.
Don't think you are alone in this frustration, I am and I am sure thousands of Iranians are the same way. Just keep your cool and if you have to repeat yourself thousands of time do it, do it for the love of your country.
Cheers!
"Open end questions" will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by NOT_AK69 on Sat Nov 28, 2009 08:49 AM PSTOpen-ended questions are questions that encourage people to talk about whatever is important to them. They help to establish rapport, gather information, and increase understanding. They are the opposite of closed-ended questions that typically require a simple brief response such “yes” or “no.”
Open-ended questions invite others to “tell their story” in their own words. They do not lead people in a specific direction. Open-ended questions should be used frequently, though not exclusively, in conversation.
When asking open-ended questions one must be ready and willing to listen to the response.
MARG BAR JOMHURIYE ESLAMI
(simplified does not equal simple, simpleton)
AK69
To All:
by Ali9 Akbar on Sat Nov 28, 2009 06:05 AM PSTAny civil discussion with any representative of the IRI is as useless as trying to have a civil discussion with a dog infected with the Rabies virus in it's secondary phase....
the only safe alternative is to SOCIALLY ISOLATE the infected animal and let it die....And the humane treatment is to give the dog a lethal injection of Sodium Pentothal , Pancuronium bromide & Potassium chloride
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sat Nov 28, 2009 04:05 AM PSTDialogue is always a good thing. But let's be clear that there is 'us' and 'them'. They have no part in democratic discussions among 'us'... unless they intend to join 'us'.
Is this simplified enough for you?
Dear Videmose
by darius on Sat Nov 28, 2009 03:15 AM PSTWhy keep asking him the same childish question over and over?No one stops and
participate in a discussion unless it helps his /her cause.
He may not be the only one who is getting paid (at least, he is being honest and reveal his affiliation) , there are others who get paid or pay themselves from their own pocket.There are plenty vatan forosh ranging from IRI supporters to people who I call them "hamvatan meaning born in Iran" but they are all vatan forosh.
Dear Midwesty
by benross on Sat Nov 28, 2009 03:12 AM PSTI agree 100%, so tell me who is going to be the judge of it to tell us who is the enemy and who is the freind?
Trust the obvious my friend. This is a regime that killed, tortured and imprisoned -without interruption- all who expressed or believed in different ideas. We might not know which one of those different ideas were actually respectful of freedom of speech. We may reasonably have some doubts about some. But this is not the point. The point is that the guilty one is the Islamic regime that didn't allow the society to evolve, to mature and to distinguish democratic ideas from undemocratic ideas. Because it imposed its dictatorship over everybody else.
A 'civil' debate can not be engaged with those who not only ignore this fact, but actively support the regime. It just can't be done.
We all have to stay away from accusing anybody of treason or being anti Iranian. Any Iranian is pro-Iran. We are all patriots. This is a given. It's not the challenge of our time. Our challenge is establishing secular DEMOCRACY. IRI apologists and defenders are not any part of that.
Yes, there is a time that even enemies talk to each-other. But as long as secular democracy has not yet established a well defined social and political entity, these exchanges are diverting our focus on what needs to be done.
Dialogue is always a good thing. But let's be clear that there is 'us' and 'them'. They have no part in democratic discussions among 'us'... unless they intend to join 'us'.
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sat Nov 28, 2009 02:02 AM PSTI am sorry. Anyone may ask any questions they have. Lets just focus to the point of original topic. Just imagine a funnel with a wide opening and a narrow ending. I like to keep the discussions wide at the begining and narrow it down at the end while sticking to the main body. Lets settle some old scores. I will prioratize those who have been engaging in this thread the most. Please dont give me 20 questionaires anymore. Lets just pick ONE old question and give it one more shot. Sincerely.
Open end questions will be ignored, try to be specific please.
by No Fear on Sat Nov 28, 2009 01:30 AM PST"you converged from a definition of IRI as a segmented organization to indirectly admitting that it is a unified body"
I never even remotely could have come close to admitting IR is a unified body. How do you come up with these conclusions? I am the only one here who is explaining the different factions within IR , they can't be unified if theres a power struggle going on , could they?
How could you jump to a completely different topic from the one we started earlier without coming to a conclusion to a new one? Did you see the video that i had to search for you to see? Am i wasting my time here? I can't be jumping all over the places you know. Please do not start another topic since about 30 important questions have been covered and we should go back and try to resolve those which are outstanding. Please read my previous replies and you could continue the topic where another poster dropped the ball or fell into the horrific habit of repeatition. I like to be engaging and exchange views. Sincerely
Timsar Pirouz says:
by Bijan A M on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:30 PM PST“Anyone still interested in discussing executive branch policy direction within the framework of the IRI system, I'm still open to it.
With all due respect, sir, what the hell does that mean? You are ready to discuss the executive branch of a theocractic dictatorship? What is to discuss? Do you want to discuss people’s right to express their opinion without being raped? Is this part of executive branch within framework of IRI? Sir, why don’t you take a stab at answering Fair’s questions 1 thru 9. I’ll be glad to re-post it if you don’t know what they are.Sir, demise of IRI has nothing to do with integrity , independence and sovereignty of Iran. If anything it will strengthen national security.
Welcome Jenab Sargord
by Fair on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:26 PM PSTYou claim "vocal minority" without any evidence. If you are so sure of this, your IRI system can allow a free, fair, transparent poll of people to gauge their opinion. But they don't. I wonder why.
On June 12, 2009, the IRI system declared war on its people and lost any and all claim to be reformable, and does not provide a framework for any discussion. The IRI system is now a military dictatorship, run by the IRGC. So I see no point in discussing the executive or any other branch of a system that has declared war on and besieged its own people.
If you are a soldier of Iran, you will not side with this dictatorship, and will support the Iranian people. If you are a soldier of the Islamic Fuehrer, that is different. Decide what kind of soldier you are.
-Fair
Dear Bijan
by Fair on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:17 PM PSTThank you for your support, you are right. A person who supports a murderer and a tyrant who has no ground to stand on cannot be reasoned with. He has shown beyond any doubt how indefensible AN is.
All such attempts to whitewash AN's crimes are doomed to fail. As you correctly stated, the people have started and are unstoppable. AN and his fellow criminals and rapists will be held accountable.
No Fear can choose to stand behind and support his people instead of their oppressor and I would commend him for that. But only time will tell.
Iran for ALL Iranians.
-Fair
I'm new
by Sargord Pirouz on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:11 PM PSTI just registered an account yesterday, so I'm new here.
Are folks here always so paranoid and extreme? Why is it because I fit into the IRI mainstream, I'm the one who is declared "on-the-borderline"? Just because my views are not subversive, or are not shared by a vocal minority that is overrepresented within an opportunist element outside of Iran? That’s being very unrealistic.
Anyway, now I'm guilty of diverging away from the post's intended topic.
Anyone still interested in discussing executive branch policy direction within the framework of the IRI system, I'm still open to it.
Sargord Pirouz
by Fair on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:11 PM PSTThat's really unfortunate. I believe it was the author's intent
to engage in a civil discussion over Ahmadinejad's policy direction as
head of the IRI executive branch.
Jenab Sargord, I can see your point, and indeed that would be a legitimate discussion to have. If No Fear indeed had this intention, he could have stated this in the beginning- that the discussion should be limited to the executive branch. But I call your attention to his initial statement:
I am willing to change my position if proved wrong, but
nevertheless, will give your arguement my full attention. However,
certain principles should be respected in this thread if you wish to
participate in this discussion.
1- Iran's integrity and sovereignty is not up for discussion.
2- Islam and religion should be respected in this discussion
Everything else is fair game.
So far, he has taken any question that is difficult to answer and just threw it out. Or gave a runaround by avoiding central issues. Therefore, everything is NOT fair game, and he will be highly selective as to which argument he shall give his full attention to.
Not keeping his promises. Sounds like the person he supports.
-Fair
Dear Midwesty
by Bijan A M on Fri Nov 27, 2009 08:02 PM PSTI can tell you are a graduate of school of logic and reasoning. No use, debating with a brainwashed basiji (or Pasdar). You can’t talk sense to this guy, I tried endlessly in another blog. He is dead-set on his “melli-Mazhabi” ideals and will give you all sorts of songs-and-dances to defend status quo in Iran. Murder of peaceful demonstrators are justified to protect national security, show trials demonstrate IRR’s progress towards democracy (they did not execute the accuseds). According to him, just give a few more generation to this regime and you will have a reformed theocracy. Just give AN a little more time.
Fair, Sir,
by Bijan A M on Fri Nov 27, 2009 07:43 PM PSTPlease don’t get upset. This “No Fear” guy is not worthy of your debate because he has no ground to stand on. He proudly claims to be a “melli-mazhabi” which would tell you what he is all about. He is proud to stab the peaceful demonstrator to protect the Sharia law. Yet he is dangerous enough because he has been educated by the same democratic system that he now stands to destroy. The same fanatic Islamist of Bin Laaden type. Now, they have penetrated the cyber space along with the other IRGC officer (I doubt if they are not the same) to possibly influence some “on-the-borderline” views. Simply a futile effort. This opposition movement is beyond control. IRR’s days are numbered.
Replies = Copouts
by Fair on Fri Nov 27, 2009 07:25 PM PSTI have answered Fairs question on NOV 26. Please read my replies.
You mean read your copouts. You chose to reject them because they were uncomfortable for you. That's right, blame the judiciary for what you can, and run away from anything you can't blame on the judiciary. The only one of my 13 questions that you answered involved your support for denying the Holocaust. You left the other ones alone.
Stop supporting a murderer of Iranians.
-Fair
No Fear,
by Midwesty on Fri Nov 27, 2009 07:25 PM PSTRead my comments and your response carefully, We've seen the movies like those for years, it is worn out cliche. But what is important is that you converged from a definition of IRI as a segmented organization to indirectly admitting that it is a unified body...but most importantly you contradicted your first answer when I asked if it is legitimate to shut people down because of what they believe but you went on and eventually admitted that it is legitimate to shut people down for what they believe however you justified it by the phony national security law. I don't care under what law you shut people off what I care is the nature of how is being justified to shut them off.