No Fear

rosie

am trying to avoid calling him a liar!

no fear is probably also writing a thesis on something like the socio-psychological characteristics of iranian expats!

onlyiran

i would say that voa is lying. they often do.

And then again on the other hand,

why NOT talk about sanctions on this thread?

No Fear finished his moonlighting shift at the gas station a few hours ago, and he is now at his other part-time job as busboy at IHOP. So we won't be able to resolve this revolution/evolution issue until he finishes cleaning all the tables.

So, in the meantime, Niloufar, what do you think about what OnlyIran just said? Are you lying to us or just to yourself? Or not lying at all? Or all of the above?

And what about him?

For God's Sake Niloufar, STOP LYING!!!!!

How many times are you going to repeat this lie:

 in fact, iran is a highly respected country particularly in her foreign relations. some of the issues that you wish to hold up as your winning cards - such as the nuclear 'threat' issue - are in fact iran's winning card. iran has widespread support across the world for her nuclear programme, not just in the middle east and not just in muslim countries. the sanctions that are imposed on iran are deeply unpopular everywhere. comparing this situation to south africa is wishful thinking. you would have a much greater chance of success in organising sanctions against israel. i mean of the globally popular south african type.

and how many times do I have to re-post the result of this independent survey to prove that you're lying:

 //www1.voanews.com/persian/news/iran/Obama_Ahmadinejad-2010-06-19-96713694.html

Repeating a lie doesn't make it true.  The only place that the IRI and its nuclear program have support is in your head. 

Oh, one more thing about the sanctions I guess I should clarify,

since it came up.

Who is really out of touch

re. being out of touch: we saw how so many of us have been so wrong
since last year. the anti-climax was 22 bahman when reality bit all of
us. also, to me, insisting on 'fraud' in last year's elections is out of
touch.

What the heck are you talking about?  Anticlimax?  I will tell you which "reality" bit us all- it was the sheer terror of the IRR!  They prepared one of the most widespread, elaborate security crackdowns in their history, and you couldn't get even a few people begin to show any symbol of support for the opposition.

Whenever you show me a day when that fascist government gives permission for the opposition to peacefully show its colors and they don't show up in huge numbers, you can make such a claim.  Until then, it is complete BS to say lack of people on the street is reason to not claim fraud in the election.

The biggest, stinking proof that there was widespread fraud in that election is that there was never any recount with independent verification and observers from all sides, with transparency such that anyone with any doubt could have access to such a recount with all the details.

This could have saved massive life and injury and damage, but it was not done.

Why?

And now who is out of touch?

NP

re. some of your comments not tallying: even in your latest comment to
me some contradictions are clear. comments like 'rapist pedophile
stone age mullahs', followed by 'Our goal is not brainwash people
and coerce consent (the goal of propaganda) but rather to encourage
independent thought and diversity of
ideas.'

And where does this suggest that I think Iranians abroad should lead?  This is just facilitating debate, it is a support function.  So I think you failed this challenge unfortunately- you have yet to show one place where I suggest Iranians abroad should lead and Iranians at home should follow.

As far as pedophile rapist mullahs, I am referring to exactly that- the mullahs who are pedophile and rapist, i.e. the ones in charge.  Not the ones who are not in charge.  By the way, I have yet to see the other shia maraje taghild come out and unequivocally condemn Khamenei and his gang for their crimes.  Even though they have the religious authority to do so.  As far as any mullah who does come out and unequivocally condemn this behavior and denounce Khamenei personally (like Dr Kadivar and Yousefi Eshkevari and the late Montazeri), I am very respectful of them, and sincerely wish more (many more) would do so.  Perhaps you could list for the readers here how many have done so.

in fact, iran is a highly respected country particularly in her foreign
relations. some of the issues that you wish to hold up as your winning
cards - such as the nuclear 'threat' issue - are in fact iran's winning
card. 

Hardly- Iran is just as much as a pariah state as South Africa was, more so because of its treatment of its own people than for its nuclear dilemna.  

you would have a much greater chance of success in organising sanctions
against israel. i mean of the globally popular south african type. 

Not if you campaign for it based on the IRR's human rights record, which has not been the case so far.  As long as Iranians do not keep this issue alive, the rest of the world doesn't feel the obligation to do anything about it.

my comment regarding 'alternative propaganda' was not meant lightly. 

Neither was my comment against your comment.  Please read my explanation, again - debate and multiple sides speaking and finding common ground are different than propaganda, and much more helpful I might add.

 one of the strongest determinants of success in a political struggle is
legitimacy. there is no legitimacy in teaming up with foreign powers to
overthrow your own country's government.

Depends how it is done.  Was Nelson Mandela or Desmond Tutu or Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel illegitimate?  I don't think so.

ISK: Was this when AN felt the halo above his head at the UN?

that is why AN goes to the UN and spends 10 minutes talking about Iran, 30 minutes about concepts like Mahdi and justice and peace and 1.5 hours about how he wishes death and destruction for US and Israel.  

And prevented the audience from blinking their eyes for 27 or 28 minutes. Or was this on another occasion?

IR version 2.0 is less ideological and is more nationalistic.

that is why AN goes to the UN and spends 10 minutes talking about Iran, 30 minutes about concepts like Mahdi and justice and peace and 1.5 hours about how he wishes death and destruction for US and Israel.

Which proves my point exactly, Amir...

which is that I don't usually get involved in discussions about the sanctions. I commented on IMGollem's news item because I know a lot about how the news works from having posted tons of news items. It doesn't mean I understand the nuances of politics all that well (there is a difference), much less economics, which I really don't. In any case, here is the original news item with my comment:

//iranian.com/main/news/2010/07/20/iran-says-sanctions-strengthen-irgc-mp

Now that you have posted about it here, some holes in my reasoning in my comment on that thread do occur to me, and if you want to talk about it, I would be happy to move the discussion over there (I'm sure Shah Forum would be thrilled, he loves me so...). But I don't think we should talk about it here. There are already several subthreads going on, and this one is really tangential, if relevant at all to the main topic.

... granpa Efraim!? (to NP & Rosie)

"i believe you may well be an armenian esfehani humanist who is often
mistaken for a jewish islamist. have i sussed you out right?!"

NP, we have (or had) an Armenian community in Esfahan, but based on my understanding Jewish community was very strong at some point, unfortunately it has been shrinking.... so I never got a chance to ask Efarim the bazaaz if my granma (Roghi-ieh Beigam Baano) got more than kherto pert from him when she was shopping in his store beginning of last century!

Rosie jaan, I respect your views on sanctions (you are more fair to Iran than many "Iranians"), know that you don't call people agents..

Rosie,

The other day Shah Forum posted a news item lifted by Xinhua from Press TV saying the sanctions would strengthen the Regime and Cyclic Forward said he always posts from unknown or spurious sources. I told him Xinhua is the third largest news site in the world, it's the Chinese news agency, and if they picked it up it's because they think it might be true.

According to Wikipedia: "The Xinhua News Agency (simplified Chinese: 新华通讯社; traditional Chinese: 新華通訊社; pinyin: Xīnhuá tōngxùnshè) is the official press agency of the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the biggest center for collecting information and press conferences in the PRC. It is one of the two news agencies in the PRC, the other being the China News Service. Xinhua is an institution of the State Council of China. Xinhua reports directly to the Communist Party of China's Publicity Department and Public Information Department." In other words, it is the official mouthpiece of the Chinese government, an entity responsible for more deaths than Stalnist Russia. The reason its the "3rd largest" is that China has 1.3 billion people (if anything, it might be surprising that it is not the largest in the world). If you see overt IRI supporters like IMF (not to be mistaken for the less overt ones on this blog) saying that sanctions will strengthen the regime then a lot of scepticism is surely in order. It's funny that people didn't make that argument with the sanctions against South Africa, i.e. that they would strengthen the regime.

Niloufar,

I pretty much know what he meant by it but I want him to take a look at it and clarify it himself before I make a point about it.

Btw, Jewish Islamist, I like it!

Gas, I don't participate in the discussions about sanctions

because I can't back up my feelings with anything solid but I have a gut instinct against them since we don't really know what the outcomes will be--both in harm done to populace and whether it will even damage the Regime. Also will foreign intervention be appreciated by ordinary people in the long run? The other day Shah Forum posted a news item lifted by Xinhua from Press TV saying the sanctions would strengthen the Regime and Cyclic Forward said he always posts from unknown or spurious sources. I told him Xinhua is the third largest news site in the world, it's the Chinese news agency, and if they picked it up it's because they think it might be true.

I'm against calling anyone here an agent, non-Iranian, etc. At the very beginning people used to call me both IRI and Zionist agent. Now no one calls me anything political, just intrusive, crazy, and drama queen. 

Are you Jewish? If so, no wonder we didn't get along at first.

lol 

agent OOmarhoum

i believe you may well be an armenian esfehani humanist who is often mistaken for a jewish islamist. have i sussed you out right?!

rosie

let me hazard a guess (about your 'for/by the government' question to no fear): he is making a distinction between 'the government' and 'parliament'. executive versus the legislative. does that at all answer it?

good one Rosie jaan!

Rosie, not that I think the word "agent" should be used frequently, but it was refreshing to see a funny (and short!) comment from you. BTW, to all those sycophants who have called me agent, if Rosie calls me agent I don't care, and I don't get mad at her (*), plus these days I have grown a thick skin, I have been called a self hating Communist Jew (By Bijan A M- a Jewish Iranian), I have also been called "Islamist", SAVAKi, Khalifa supporter  (never mind that Shites (IRI or not) are not into Khalifeh and Khalafat). ---

Rosie, one more thing, although I enjoyed reading your comment I am against any kind of sanction against Iran, by Iranians, you I don't mind (if you are for it). 

(*) she can even call me kharmangas and I don't get mad at her

fair

this is quite a good way to get to understand each other. our differences are big, but at least we are getting to know why.

let me give short comments before opening up a new apparoach.

re. being out of touch: we saw how so many of us have been so wrong since last year. the anti-climax was 22 bahman when reality bit all of us. also, to me, insisting on 'fraud' in last year's elections is out of touch.

re. some of your comments not tallying: even in your latest comment to me some contradictions are clear. comments like 'rapist pedophile stone age mullahs', followed by 'Our goal is not brainwash people and coerce consent (the goal of propaganda) but rather to encourage independent thought and diversity of
ideas.' do not tally. mullahs can be good people too. earlier you had mentioned working with khatami etc. i think even stone age mullahs would recognise that you may not be totally genuine in working with them if you hate them so much.

which brings me to the core issue that i have with your approach: you demonise mullahs so much that you are almost incapable of treating them like human beings. and you refuse to acknowledge deep divisions and diversity of views within the current system in iran. this leads you to exaggerate (in my view) the level of opposition to iran internally and globally.

in fact, iran is a highly respected country particularly in her foreign relations. some of the issues that you wish to hold up as your winning cards - such as the nuclear 'threat' issue - are in fact iran's winning card. iran has widespread support across the world for her nuclear programme, not just in the middle east and not just in muslim countries. the sanctions that are imposed on iran are deeply unpopular everywhere. comparing this situation to south africa is wishful thinking. you would have a much greater chance of success in organising sanctions against israel. i mean of the globally popular south african type.

my comment regarding 'alternative propaganda' was not meant lightly. every side has their own propaganda. every side has a story, legitimate concerns, own worldview. yes money talks and power corrupts. and this mixture becomes propaganda, but no side is innocent in this game.

so it comes to the crunch: there is absolutely no disagreement between us on the dire state of human rights in iran. some of it is just barbaric. but to me, pushing iran to the point of collapse with international support is not the answer. what is going on right now is designed to harm iran. and the more pressure is built up by foreign powers, the more entrenched and nonresponsive becomes the regime.

one of the strongest determinants of success in a political struggle is legitimacy. there is no legitimacy in teaming up with foreign powers to overthrow your own country's government. no matter what the colour of the lipstick, it's still a pig.

this is not some simple minded nationalism. in the history of nations, there are no friends, but simple alliances based on narrowly defined national interests. they do not take the national interest of their foes into account. quite the opposite. a concerted international effort against iran is not meant to support some 'democratic movement'. it is designed to check the power of the country for the sake of other countries' benefit. there is nothing to be gained for iranians in this game.

Peace

I think No Fear got put on part-time

on his propagandist job and is now moonlighting at a gas station. And probably Sargord is not around because he got laid off. It must be because the sanctions lowered the agent budget.

It will be lonely here with less agents.

Revolution is not a solution is stating the obvious!

Bombing mullahs and company is a solution though!

Revolution

is indeed a bad option. I am all for an orderly transition to a secular democracy. The problem is to get VF to step down and allow a secular constitution. If you are able to get Khamenei and Ahmadinejad to step down then we are all set.

But you know as well as I they will not. In fact they were not even willing to allow Mousavi to take office. This is *after* the guy won the election! Not even their own hand picked and vetted candidate! How do you propose we get reform?

If Khomeini has not picked the biggest jerk for VF reform may already have happened. But before going Khomeini wanted to show his true hate for Iran. So he picked the most inflexible bastard he could find. The guy who will not allow reform.

Sure we could wait til a sane leader takes his place. But that may take decades. It is not up to us in the West to tell Iranina youth to wait. They may not be willing to put up with this shit for decades.

No Fear,

thanks for the reply. Could you please give me a brief, clear reply to my third point (your statement, my question):

3- Our parliament is another power centre headed by Larijani. The parliament can be a real pain in the ass for the government for refusing to pass bills or budget introduced by the government to become law. And this is exactly what they are doing now.

What do you mean by '"for/by 'the government'" here? This is a crucial question.

______________

About the avatar, it is an expression of a process that I am going through right now of internal and external changes. But yes I would say I do look like her athough 'she' is a Japanese kabuki mask. The only reason I don't have my photo as my avatar is because I have none to upload now for several rerasons. But there are a couple onsite which I could show you if you have 'no fear' of showing us your real photo too. (Unless you really are Mahmood, which btw would help to explain a lot  ;oP  )

p.s. If I am trying to be naughty? I didn't know I have to try.

Introspective

I meant to say Introspective instead of retrospective.

No fear

Well, I respect your debating style and tactic, but they bear a strong resemblance to diversionary manuvers, at best.

It might seem to you that those who debate opposing your position are holding firm to a certain belief and are steadfastly going in one direction, but one retrospective look at your own way of so-called multi-angeled analyses and it will reveal your own fervent following of such methodology. As is demonstrated by your insistence that theatrical changing of alliances which there is evidence for, necessarily represent a propensity for reform. I mean. How can one argue any further with anyone who holds such opinion?

Another demonstration of it is when you say we HAVE to obey the majority, No we certainly do not. The normal democratic way of going about it is that the will of majority is put to a reasonable and long debate and then decisions are made.  Unelected positions might be a fair target to change, But it certainly is the most undemocratic thing to say, don't underestimate the power of majority to impose!!! changes when they feel there is a need!!! say what??? That statement right there stinks of dictatorship to the highest heavens. You want to Impose and exert Power when your majority feels like it and then call the system REFORMABLE?

The "muslim majority" has already acquired the wisdom to make such a distinction, as we hear story after story that moderation in implementing religious doctrine is what the entire society wants. So no one can whine about that anymore.

You can not expect people to align their style of activism based on what you and those like you have their hearts set on.  for instance You can not reform Prostitution industry within  a legal framework, when you don't even believe in it, and say well since it is okay by the majority i will just swallow my pride and work towards reform or i will just advocate for a various interpretation of it. that would be absolutely rediculous.

It is not the same thing that is being opposed. far from it:) you are saying cigarretts are good and we should smoke one a week and enjoy it, everybody else is saying boycott smoking altogether, and then the followers of former threaten those of the latter group to either go along with it or else.

undemocratic approaches

are indeed bad.  It would be nice if a democratic approach to challenging the government existed.  Unfortunately, when you challenge or criticize the government, you get raped in front of judiciary officials:

//www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2010/07/100724_l...

No Fear, you need to stop pretending that in Iran the majority matters as you do below:

The majority of the votes will elect mayors, parliament members, the
president, three judges on the Guardian Council ( A senate can have both
elected or non elected members, Guardian council has both type of
members ). The beauty of it is the process itself since in order to
decide what the wish of the majority is, elections are needed. 

The majority will do no such thing.  They will be allowed to vote for preselected candidates, preselected by the GC all of whose members are either directly or indirectly controlled by the leader.  The leader can override the vote of the people, and control who gets to even run, let alone get selected.

Furthermore, since when does a senate get to have unelected members.  That is a joke.  The senate is to be entirely elected.  

Read the constitution, it is all clearly spelled out.  Dictatorship is built into the system.  That is why Iran is the largest prison for journalists on this planet, even worse than China which has almost 20 times Iran's population and is already a totalitarian state.

Furthermore what do you mean by an internal rival?  Since when is a rival internal or external?  Isn't this exactly "us" and "them" that you complain about?  Iran is for all Iranians, regardless of their personal beliefs.  The only time you have "internal" and "external" rivals is when you have a totalitarian or apartheid state, which is indeed the case in Iran.

Doctor X,

This is how i debate. I present  " numerous attempts" and possibly from different angles to validate my point. I hate a repititive arguement.

To put this thread back in to perspective, the issue here is about the feasibility of a " revolution" and its aftermath effect on our political future.

Me and Niloufar are defending our shared view against this non tolerable approach and its unpredictable results. On the other hand, people like Fair support the notion of " revolution" is needed when dealing with an undemocratic entity. He is saying, if its not fixable, then break it. ( My debate with him is at a stalemate and i will try to open it up next week after giving it more thought over the weekend ). Its hard to continue a debate when people are holding steadfast opinions. I mean, whatelse is there  to say to someone when he says the system is not reformable despite all the evidences that the system is constantly changing and alliances are constantly made and broken.

Ofcourse we have to obey and respect the majority. Majority will form the government. The majority in the parliament will change and make laws. The majority of the juries will determine the fate of an accused in a court of law. The majority of Iranians will decide where to draw social freedoms. The majority of the votes will elect mayors, parliament members, the president, three judges on the Guardian Council ( A senate can have both elected or non elected members, Guardian council has both type of members ). The beauty of it is the process itself since in order to decide what the wish of the majority is, elections are needed.

Unelected positions must be challenged. Specially when they hold two of the most important positions in IR.  But never underestimate the power of the majority to impose change on the system when it feels the need to do so.

My activism is within the " muslim majority " of Iranians who are the backbone of IR. If this majority understands the benefit of a lesser political Islam, this would be a right step in the right direction to eventually seperate these two from one another. This idea has a strongholds in the religious seminaries and we must advocate this version ( Interpretation ) among our majority. Who are the religious taboo breakers ? Who is interpreting the Quran in a more democratic way? Would you support an Ayatollah who says the validity of VF relies with the people ( Majority ). Note that he is not say the validity of VF is written in Quran and therefore is a word of God and unrevokable.

While one approach is steadfast and stuborn with no compromisation, the other interpretation is open for discussion and could changed based on the will of the people.  This is where people like me jump in. We start supporting these voices. Its legal and it has huge ramifications for our country. I see this sort of activism a lot more effective than standing in the middle of the street and shouting death to dictator! or " daneshjo mimirad, zelat nimipazirad ".

All these slogans and actions are pointing to a non compromise non tolerable approach when dealing with an internal rival. Its the very same thing that they are opposing but they have adopted the same means as their enemy to achieve it. You must see my point now, don't you?

Rosie,

I thought i addressed those points in another post here but i would repeat, no problem.

I really don't care what a politician says. To me his actions are more valuable than rhetorics. However, for someone like him who just won the election and seeing the opposition in full force out there setting the city on fire, he lost his cool. The reference to " dirt and dust" in his speech was intended to mean " unimportant". I seriously doubt Ahmadinejad meant that as an insult. Look at him now, despite being under fire from anyone and everyone, generally he is politie toward the internal rivals, except for those with corruption files.

But you have a point and both me and Ahmadinejad seem to forget the importance of the minority opinions in Iran. The reference to dust and dirt was wrong and this is not the first time Ahmadinejad has raised eyebrows by his firebrand remarks. Thats his style which many people hate to see. No one is perfect.

In regards to your power house question and whether the IRGC is a power house or not, the answer is yes, IRGC is a militaristic power house. But this is not a body that can be effective for policy making. I would rather have the support of the parliament for the administration. When the parliament and the administration are at odds, progress seems to be slower. While one blocks the bill the other one refuses to introduce them.

So in this regard, IRGC is a useless power house. All they do for now is to parade once in a while. The extend of their political involvement is to threaten external forces with retaliations.

PS; Noticed the change of avatar. Did you choose it because you look like her ( or is it you? ), or did you choose it because you want to look like her? Are you trying to be naughty?

No fear

Are you upset about the fact that "there is no middle ground" approach is the absolute wrong method? You have made numerous  attempts,One more unconvincing than the other i may add, to justify and glorify theatric alliances and collaborations within the system, to show that there actually is a proclivity towards adopting a middle ground and compromise , and then use that failed premise as your argument to put others on the pedestal and accuse them of possessing a primitive outlook? You so adamantly dismiss all arguments against your point based on "well, it is the will of majority" It is getting so hilariously unrealistic.

Nobody has chosen the Us vs Them motto out of their own volition, It is the mechanism of implementing policies that has created a situation as such.

 It is Unite time for THEM? them, who? Why are you so terrified? What is the big deal? Are we doomed to be dominated by one single majority for the rest of our lives? Since you are dying to see a "democratic" solution why don't you give others a chance as well to make their voices heard?

I have the utmost respect for the abovementioned author of that particular comment, but will all due respect that is just a simple game of playing around with words. Where in the world would be a pragmatic thing to give the majority, the already dominating majority small and concentrated" right, through activism?? more practical than what? more effective than what?

How else were those people supoosed toask for a recount? Were their initial requests heeded to? what were the options? They were forced to choose an undemocratic path and you use that to put them on the spot and against them? How clever of you sir. Ordinary people who want simple things are not obligated to have their political and economical agendas straight before going out. The entire world knows by now that this gradually morphed into and becamesomething else.

It is obvious to me that you are looking for an excuse to pin the "you are a revolutionary" blame on everybody by choosing a simple "their leaders are hypocrite enough" as a criteria for being one.

power houses / dirt and dust?

my two posts below....????????????

Paraphrasing your words? (to No Fear)

"Their leaders are hypocrites beyond belief. That sounds revolutionary enough to me"

No Fear, you may want to replace the word 'revolutionary' with 'sanctionary' if you want to be more contemporary.  You see, they "won" and there is no doubt about it, so it is fine for them to go to any extent to capture the power, sabotage of Iranian economy through external/internal means or whatever. Hope your faction is not as tozard!