Shooting at close range

Israeli soldier fires at Palestinian detainee

BBC: Israel's defence minister has condemned an incident caught on film in which a soldier seems to shoot a rubber bullet at a bound and blindfolded Palestinian. Ehud Barak said the case was "grave and wrong" and that the military would exact the full extent of the law. Footage released by human rights group B'Tselem on Sunday shows the detainee being held by one soldier as another fires at his legs at close range. The Palestinian man has said the rubber bullet hit his left big toe. The Israeli military originally said that the lieutenant colonel had been unaware of the incident and that the door of his patrol vehicle had blocked his line of sight. However, the footage appears to show him holding the Palestinian detainee's arm when the shot is fired. The Jerusalem Post also reports that the commander told the soldier: "Shoot him, shoot him." >>>




by Zion on



Why not?

by Anonymous-yo (not verified) on

The Mafia inner structure is exactly as you said it, the way naked state power operates looked at through the looking glass. All states, legitimate or otherwise, carry within them the insturments of oppresion. I don't know what a Zio-Nazi is. My point is this: The Nazis's archeological project was highly ideological. It contained an a priori narrative, the brave Arian race having left its trace on many lands. So their expansionism was an inverse of Jewish dream of returning to a homeland. They were fulfilling their destiny just as the Zionist destiny is to return to the homeland.



by Zion on

`I`ve always thought the Nazis ideological excuse for conquering other lands, that anywhere there are evidence that Aryan people once lived is fair game, was a perverted version of the Jewish dream for a homeland.`

Is this your supposedly `polite` version of the Zio-Nazi libel? Do you expect me to take anything you say seriously from now on?

[In any case, the Mafia inner structure may also be seen as a perverted version of legitimate government bodies. Your point being...?]

Kaveh Nouraee


by Kaveh Nouraee on

Glad to know you like deli food.

I don't recall you insulting a Jewish person either, so I don't know why you brought that up, but by the same token, I haven't called you an Arab either. So long as we're clear on both sides of that issue, so far, so good.

You've drawn up quite the conclusion concerning South Vietnam and even more so by comparing it with the Iranian monarchy. I am curious to know how you define fascism, whether it has to do with either government's reliance upon the CIA or some other factor. The two entities parallelled each other here and there, with respect to the socio-economic chasm between the educated classes and the uneducated classes. But based upon your comments, I'm led to believe that you think that communism/socialism is the ideal. If that's the case, we strongly disagree.

If I am incorrect in my assertion that communism was spread by force in Vietnam, then I guess we were all wrong about the Viet Cong and the NVA forces.

South Vietnam refused to hold elections where Communism would be one of the possible outcomes. Given what history has proven where Communism is concerned, can you blame them? Would you willingly elect a dictatorship? Open elections are completely contrary to communism to begin with.

I'm not calling South Vietnam ideal. On the contrary. Their flaws were their downfall. But the flaws were theirs and not those of the CIA.

In order to get good pastrami and rye, I have to order it in from New York. Delis in California leave a lot to be desired. :) 


Here we are at an impasse

by Anonymous-yo (not verified) on

There lies in your arguments the essential Zionist article of faith, that because our forefathers occupied this land 3000 years ago and were driven out of it, therefore we are entitled to establish a state there. You and I might as well discuss the existance of god. If this was in fact an argument that could be extnded to other parts of the world, you and I (I'm guessing you're a resident of North America) as I said in my last response should be kicked out of this continent by a future native American movement. But I guess the "reality on the ground" is that that ain't gonna happen because the natives can't force us off this land. It seems to me you accept one reality on the ground (the 1948 partition and subsequent occupations) and not the other, that other people have come to live on the land once occupied by the Israelites. I've always thought the Nazis ideological excuse for conquering other lands, that anywhere there are evidence that Aryan people once lived is fair game, was a perverted version of the Jewish dream for a homeland.



by Zion on

`Iranian identity... has absorbed and changed its many invaders and in turn has changed itself.`

This is different from my analogy, where the Iranian culture was reduced to only a small minority amidst alien newcomer cultures that have become dominant.

`So the idea that Jewish people have to re-claim Palestine because it was once their homeland is rather absurd in my opinion.`

I do not share your opinion.

`So you see how religion has to enter the discussion to make a strong case for the Jews to come back to the land promised to them by Jehovah. `

No I don`t see this. I have already explained the secular nature of the movement and why it is justified on moral grounds.

`Note also that the Arabs are not exactly
new comers to Palestine. They`ve been around for a few millennia themselves.`

Not so. The closest group to Arabs in that part of the world were the Nabateans and they were only a small community among many others. Not that it has any relevance to this discussion anyway.

`I have no problem with the existence of state of Israel so long as there`s a fair settlement...`

That is very generous of you. How can we ever thank you for this?

`an amicable settlement of refugees issues`

If they are going to get an independent state, what refugee issue can there possibly be?

`...e.g. restoring of territories prior to `67 war...Note that this doesn`t ask for an iota of compromise from Israel as per 1948 borders, not an inch.`

The 1948 borders are history. Arabs have waged three wars of annihilation since that time and Jews have died defending their land and their people. Arabs have lost any claims to the 1948 borders. The situation now is the reality on the ground and the basis for any peace talks, and every piece of land handed to Arabs is nothing but a complete compromise in part of Israel for the sake of peace.

`All compromises are made by Palestinians`

How can a non existing nation state make compromises? Even as a community, they did not exist with a separate identity prior to 1967.

I hope this further clarifies the situation.



by Anonymous-yo (not verified) on

Iranian identity has mutated and evolved over centuries. It has absorbed and changed its many invaders and in turn has changed itself. We have Arab and Mongol elements in out culture and in turn the Tajiks and other central Asian people have adopted Iran’s language and culture. In fact that can be said about any nation in the world. The Turks for instance didn't even inhabit Anatolia until middle of the first Christian millennium. If you started remapping the world based on what tribe occupied what piece of land millennia ago and start wars to re-claim it, there wouldn’t be any peace. The Native Americans for instance should by all rights kick us all off this continent; the non-natives appeared here only a few centuries ago. So the idea that Jewish people have to re-claim Palestine because it was once their homeland is rather absurd in my opinion. So you see how religion has to enter the discussion to make a strong case for the Jews to come back to the land promised to them by Jehovah. The Jews’ case I agree is somewhat different because they have been victims of anti-Semitism for centuries by the Gentiles (mostly). The state of Israel stands today because of failures of assimilation of European Jewry; mostly no fault of theirs but the Gentiles, as they were first accused of tribalism then accused of Cosmopolitanism. You should know that there was a strong resistance by the European Jews to the idea of a Jewish homeland (just read Freud’s Moses and Monotheism). It took the holocaust to truly drive the point home. A portion of European Jewry has always pined for Jerusalem but I think mostly because they suffered from cruelties of their Christian neigbours. Note also that the Arabs are not exactly new comers to Palestine. They’ve been around for a few millennia themselves. All said and this is the last I write here, I have no problem with the existence of state of Israel so long as there’s a fair settlement, e.g. restoring of territories prior to ’67 war, an amicable settlement of refugees issues and the sharing of Jerusalem. Note that this doesn’t ask for an iota of compromise from Israel as per 1948 borders, not an inch. All compromises are made by Palestinians, that is if you take a secular view not a religious one.



by Zion on

I do not agree. The policies of modern secular nation states are not determined by such fantasies. There are much more down to earth reasons for their actions. The particular Christian eschatology you mention regarding Israel is rather new. The traditional Christian view of end times has no place for a Jewish land. Usually it has been the opposite, the downfall of Jewish sovereignty over the land was seen as the fulfillment of Jesus prophecy about Jerusalem and a proof that after Jesus the Christians and not the Jews are the chosen people and the Church is the new Israel. It is mostly after the formation of the state of Israel that this new brand you mention has been adopted by zealous mostly born again evangelical Christians. Anything that can be used to convince people that the end of the world is near in any era will become popular. Just look at the crusades, or any other millennialist movement in different periods of history.

I`d be very happy to answer your question. It is actually a very good one. It is true, I think I mentioned this once before in my comments. The term Palestine was adopted by Arabs after it was made popular by Jews and the French and British. Here is the story. The Romans killed hundreds of thousands of Jews who had rebelled against their rule over Judea. They exiled the survivors first from Jerusalem and then from the entire land back around the first century CE. Then they renamed judea (or Judah) to the province of Palaestina, named after the old and extinct philistines who were a sea-faring people most probably of Greek origins who had entered the land from the sea around the same time as Jews who entered it from the East from Egypt. Since then in all European languages, the land (Judea or Canaan) is known as Palestine. The Jews in the Zionist movement also used the same name and ironically Palestine was regarded as a Zionist terminology at the time. The Arabs and the Islamic world did not refer to the land as Palestine. As far as I know the entire Levant (including modern day Syria) was known as `al-Shaam`. Arabs adopted the name from the Europeans and even more so from Zionists.
None of this of course means that an modern independent state of Palestine ever existed, or that the `Palestinian` arabs were in any way distinguishable from other Arabs of the Levant. This whole so called `Palestinian` identity goes back to after the 1967 war when it became clear that the pan-arab campaigns were a failure.

Todah v`shalom.


Honestly Zion

by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

Shalom Zion:-)

I don't believe I'm being silly on this. As secular as they are they still hold on to the fact that their Messiah will only return once there is an Israel and there is 7 years of peace or something like that and this peace will be caused by the anti-christ. I'm not too well versed in the Christian faith unfortunately. I've never actually thought of 1 + 1 + 1 = 1??

Anyway, from this they being secular yet Christian nations, they do see an advantage of forming an Israel.

I do however have a couple of questions for you that I'd like you to answer me if you have the time and as many times as I've seen you post I believe you do :-)

In 1932, I believe a newspaper was founded called the Palestine Post...It was called this until 1948 when it was renamed the Jerusalem Post...

Why would Palestine even be in it if Zionists deny any existance of a Palestine??

Next the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra was originally known as the Palestine Philharmonic...why would it be called that??

I believe one of the major banks there was the Anglo-Palestine Company now called Bank Leumi??

I've got more but I really don't have time to list them right now...

Waiting for your reply :-). Kol Tuv!!




by Zion on

Now you are being silly. America and Britain are both secular democracies and do not act as if they are God`s agents. Not in the childish archaic sense you are implying here. I already explained the national and cultural heritage of Jews that binds them to their land and which provides a foolproof sound moral basis for their claim, a modern secular educated moral basis. Part of this cultural legacy is in the form of archaic metaphorical metaphysics, that is all.

Use of force? Well, the Torah has actually many passages in defense of use of force to take the land in ancient times. God`s command was its religious and moral justification of its time, ancient archaic time. Modern Israel does not function according to such archaic decrees or justifications. Torah, the Tanach, is our greatest cultural historical myhological religious poetic literary legacy, but this is not the ancien times.
In modern Israel land was not taken by use of force. There was a mandate. There was a vote in League of Nations. There was a vote in the United Nations. There would have been no need for force if the Arabs hadn`t invaded Israel to wipe it out and throw all Jews to the sea. They did not declare a separate state, but engaged in war. We had to give lives to defend ourselves. Part of the extra land that Israel controls as a result of surviving the waves of genocidal attacks are disputed territories. They did not belong to any specific state. Egypt had a claim. Jordan had a claim, Syria had a claim, but there was no Palestinian state to own any of those parts, simply because they chose to kill Jews rather than declare their own independent state. Disputed lands are open for negotiation for peace.
Don`t throw in childish remarks, loaded words or metaphysical irrelevancies. Show mature ethical attitude, respect facts and stick to relevant modern arguments when you discuss an issue my friend, if you want to be taken seriously that is.



by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

Actually the Jewish delis are delicious..ever had Kosher Pastrami on Jewish Rye??...I love Kosher food...why in the world would you think that would piss me off?? You are rather silly if you think I'd get pissed off having a party at a Jewish restaurant....That is like what a 5 year old would say...I honestly don't think I ever insulted a Jewish person on here for you to assume anything about me

Ahh typical reply of "you are Arab" because I see something wrong of a shooting whether it be by a rubber bullet or a regular bullet.

The supposed Democratic government of Vietnam was much worse than the Communist government. South Vietnam was only a creation of the CIA as was the Shah of Iran. Both governments were fascist regimes.

You are also mistaken about the use of force in Vietnam to spread Communism.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 were signed by North Vietnam and France to reunite the goverments. South Vietnam disagreed to this...WHY?? If they were democratic. They knew that they would lose as the Ho Chi Minh was very popular there.

If I remember correctly the leader of south vietnam was more or less a dictator saying slogans such as "Christ has gone South" etc etc.

The democratic government you speak about in south vietnam was autocratic and nepotistic.

And as Iran had SAVAK...vietnam had its own secret police to terrorize people.

Yet you still speak of this democracy?? Now I'm asking you where was this democracy??

Why were elections not permitted??

Let me know when you throw the party so I can come. Make sure you have some Pastrami and Rye ready...yum yum



by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

You don't need to assure me of it is not until the Messiah comes...and that will be sent by God. You totally misunderstood my point. On the otherhand, America and Europe both are acting as if they are agents of God...and that is never the case. Even your own Torah says taking a land by force is not permitted. You must respect the laws of whichever land you are in.

And I don't remember a text from God coming down and lifting the you??

Kaveh Nouraee

Yo, This & That

by Kaveh Nouraee on

YO: The Vietnamese started the war in Vietnam? Yes, Communist Vietnamese wanted to take over the entire country by force. The democratic Vietnamese asked the U.S. for help. The French were already long gone by then, having been defeated by the Communists.

You say "there is no Palestine because the Palestinians in '48 refused to have their land carved out." THEIR land? It belonged to the British, whether you like it or not. They could have incinerated every square centimter of land in their mandate and there wasn't a thing anybody could do about it. The Arabs were given the overwhelming majority of the land held by the British mandate, but most simply wasn't good enough.

You can go ahead and call it Arab hating to your heart's content. Until you reconcile yourself with the fact that the prevailing mentality over there by Arabs is that Iranians are pieces of shit, nothing will really change. The educated Arabs know the difference, but they aren't the ones in charge. The dahaati Arabs are the ones in charge and people like you are the ones kissing their ass.

Anon-That: Why is it that America gets involved in each of these conflicts? WHY IS IT ANY OF THEIR BUSINESS??

Let's see: Vietnam and Korea & Operation Desert Storm: They were ASKED to get involved.

World War 2: December 7th 1941. That should be enough of a clue for you.

World War 1: Germany tried to bribe Mexico into declaring war on the U.S. with the idea that If they did, Germany would help Mexico get Texas, Arizona and New Mexico back from the U.S. Germany also kept bombing merchant ships. That should be adequate cause for you.

You say I keep blaming everyone else yet American keeps involving its nose in places where it does not belong. Yeah, and Iran belongs in Iraq and the West Bank and Gaza.

I worship only God and my grandfather.

The only American plane I am waiting for is the one that will take you and your kind back ideally to an Arab country where you will feel oh so welcome. Hell, it doesn't even have to be American, it could be a European made Airbus.

When that day happens, I'm going to throw a party, and have it catered by a Jewish deli.....JUST to piss you off.



by Zion on

Dear Anonymous-that,

God is a human metaphor for all that is transcendent. There never was and never will be any going up or coming down, I assure you.



by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

He's right. There is nothing different from his analogy than what the Jews have done in Palestine.

The Torah even says the Jews are exiled...

"And it will come to pass when all these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have placed before you, and you shall take it to heart among all the nations where the Lord your God has exiled you. And you shall repent to the Lord your God and hear His voice, as I that I command you today, you and your children with all your heart and with all your soul. And the Lord your God will restore your exiles and have mercy on you, and He will come back and gather you from all the nations wherein the Lord your God scattered you."

I don't think God has actually come down and done this...there are nations that believe they are the representatives of God...but until the day God actually comes down to give Jews the land they are still technically exiled from it.

I don't believe I've said that Israel hasn't been promised to the's even written in the Qu'ran...but it's not until God gives it to you. Taking it by force is going against God's Will.


You still have it wrong

by Zion on

My dear Anonymous-yo,

It is not a religious issue, but a cultural and national one. Parsees would not need to have a separate state because Iran and Iranian culture and identity has survived through time, at least partly. Now if this hadn`t been the case, if inside Iran was populated through centuries by mongolians or say arabs with a different language and cultural background, with only a small Iranian speaking minority community with Iranian cultural identity left inside and outside what was once Iran, that would be the right analogy, and yes they would have every right to have an independent reborn Iranian state that wants to live in peace with the rest of the new inhabitants of the geographical region. You would have been opposed to a re-emergent Iran inside parts of her historical borders dominated by later conquerer tribes of mongolian and arab speakers, if that was the case?


American Wife

by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

Well why is it that you don't expect people to be pissed off at what you've done??

America assisted in overthrowing the democratically elected leader, Mossadegh in Iran, yet you want us to get over this?? The American government at the time put in the dictator Shah and now you speak about regime change to us again?? We've had one of your regime changes...


Maybe if you want us to get over this...tell your president to quit getting involved everywhere else and keep his nose in America's business!!



by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

And why is it that America gets involved in each of these conflicts?


You keep blaming everyone else yet American keeps involving its nose in places where it does not belong.

Keep blaming everyone else you American worshipper...It's a shame to have Iranian sellouts such as yourself...

You are probably even one of those that are waiting for the American planes to fly right over Iran...


Zion, you're so predictable

by Anonymous-yo (not verified) on

You Zionists and your bronze-age identity politics make me laugh. Suppose the India's Parsis moved back to Iran and said, well this is the land we were forced out of 1500 years ago. We'd like to re-establish a Zoroastrian state and kick out, say the Baluch in South-east. Now that's the correct analogy. The Parsis are Indians, just as the Jews of Iran are Iranians, not Babylonians, or even so-called Israelites. You reveal your true nature once for all. The Jews can come back to Palestine and kick out the Arabs off their land because they once lived there 3000 years ago? Of course the land was promised to them by Jehovah and they are the chosen people. Got it, Jewish fundamentalism ok, Islamic fundamentalism not ok. Go ahead and kiss Nourai's butt, his comments are rather childish.


A good analogy

by Zion on

` It`s as if the Afghan refugees in Iran came to you and said, we`d like to have Khorasan...`
Only you got the sides backward. See Israel has been the jewish motherland for 3000 years. There has been no palestinian land to be carved out or anything. These were lands of the collapsed ottoman empire. No palestine, no syria, no Lebanon, no Jordan no Iraq.... The original arab palestinian land was supposed to be Trans-Jordan. How come you do not object to the formation of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon as carving out `palestinian` land?
So the analogy is like this. Many Iranians are thrown out of Iran, they travel to India, to Caucasus, to Europe, to Arab lands but retain their Iranian loyalty and memory. Teach their children all the great books of Shahnamah and Avesta, of poets, of the names of all the hills, all the lakes all the valleys of Iran. Then they finally get back to those Iranians still living in Iran , now as a minority and even agree to a smaller piece in North or West as their independent Iranian motherland that retains the original native Iranian culture, and your Afghans or Chinese or Mongolians refuse and instead start to massacre them nonstop. That is how it is.

Kaveh, very good comments.



by Anonymous-yo (not verified) on

The Vietnamese started the war in Vietnam? They wanted to kick out the French. And what did your beloved Americans were doing there as early as early fifties, wheeling and dealing, taking over from their fellow innocents, the French, preventing the dominos from falling? There is no Palestine because the Palestinians in '48 refused to have their land carved out. It's as if the Afghan refugees in Iran came to you and said, we'd like to have Khorasan and you can keep the rest of Iran. And you said no way, I'm not going to accept that I have no right to Khorasan. Then the Afghans with the support of the Americans and the British and the French (and some Iranians’ incompetence), carved out more of Iran and now they have most of Eastern Iran and people like you would scold the Iranians that they should have accepted the deal. Too much Arab hating, too much Zionist loving, too much right-wing American propaganda repeating.

Kaveh Nouraee


by Kaveh Nouraee on

I blame the IRI for all of the trouble they have started since February 1979. That should be of no shock to you.

As far as who started the last wars.....

Gulf War 1: Saddam invading Kuwait

Iran-Iraq: Saddam invading Iran

Grenada: Cuba

Vietnam: Vietnamese

Korea: Koreans

WWII: Germany invading Poland

WWI: A single Bosnian-Serb named Gavrilo Princip

That pretty much covers the last 100 years and with the remotely possible exception of the current Iraq War the U.S. didn't start jack shit.

I said there was no such thing as Palestine. And the reason there is STILL no such thing as Palestine is because of one thing: Palestinians. They had the chance in 1948 to start with SOMETHING. They chose differently. Whether the land was promised by God, the British or RE/MAX doesn't mean anything.



by American Wife (not verified) on

The real question shouldn't be whether this is or isn't an Iranian should be why pretty much for the last 100 years every war has been a result of the US empire??

What a bunch of crap.  I don't deny a LOT of what we've done but this kind of bullshit is getting old.  Get over it. 

Asghar Taragheh


by Asghar Taragheh on

You say the the loonies you cited " are true intellectuals that have shaped the complex socio-economic and political fiber of the US". Can you please provide proof of how someone like Kinzer, Saied, Gore or Mersheimer have changed our socio-economic and political fiber? I will give you Chomsky. But Chomsky has had a very minimal effect. Someone like Reagan or Kennedy, Luther King, Johnson or Rosvelt you can say that about. But please don't say it about these loonies. Saied was in dreamland and had to use many exagurations, lies and historical mistakes (which I don't think were mistakes) to make his Orientalism argument. I am not even going to bother talking about the others as they don't desrve my time.

You serve in the Corps. Good. As a fellow Iranian American- I am honestly impressed. Thank you for serving our country. However, this does not give you a higher moral ground than me (a civilian) or more credible with respect to your political views.  

Can you please show me where I said YOU were Anti American? I did not. 

Here is the problem with you. You tell Keyvan that the Pal problem is a  "catastrophic world problem". Bull Shit. Yes its a problem but to call it catastrophic is just pure Kososher in Marine language. Yougoslavia we can call Catastrophic. Darfur yes. Hutus and Tutsis yes. Not the Pals. Does AIPAC have alot of power? Yes. But so does the NRA. They are not doing anything against the law. And mind you, the US helps the Pals as well with financial support. More support than the Arabs give.

The Pal issue is a sad issue but there are many guilty hands involved. These dirty hands includes the Zionist, the Syrian, Lebanese, Jordanians, Kuwaitis, the Pals themselves and now the IRI. They all have contributed to the Pal problem. Its not exclusivley a Zionist issue. Accordingly, don't just blame the Zionists.

This video is horrible and the soldiers are class A Assholes for doing what they did. But they will get punished. Yes because the camera was there. The camera is also here some times catching the Rodney kings. At least they will get punished.  Who will punish the Basijis and Islamists who are killing the Iranians? 






To Taragheh and Keyvan

by aaminian on


FYI, the people that I've cited here are true intellectuals that have shaped the complex socio-economic and political fiber of the US. The fact that you refer to them as leftists is proof of your lack of knowledge. You just want to argue for the sake of argument.

Additionally, I proudly served in the Marine Corps and will DO IT AGAIN if my country needs me. So, when you go about calling me an anti-American, you are simply FULL OF IT.



As I have made this point before, new comer, the Palestinian problem is a catastrophic world problem. Do you know what is bullshit? The fact that your kind on this blog are either brain-washed or just don't give a shit.

On the problem of IRI oppressing its people, I have to agree with you but this blog is NOT ABOUT IRAN! It is about the Zionist oppression of a bunch of poor and helpless people.


To: AAminian and the likes….

by Anonymoush (not verified) on

Who the f..k do you think you are to brandish this thread with your nonsensical comments based on conspiracy theories? You think by collecting unemployment checks and reading some garbage you have figured it all out? Why don’t you go and read some of Rush Limbaugh’s to balance it out. What the hell did you expect from the US (or for that matter any other nation on earth)?. United State is dedicated enough to her nation and the well being of her citizens and people around the world to have long range plans like FPD and many others to protect humanity. But, people like you who transcribe to conspiracy theory will automatically link their actions to evil. SHAME ON YOU….. (by-the-way, I’m 60 and probably older than you are)
If an administration makes a decision that in hindsight turns out to be miscalculated and did not fit the ultimate objective, it does not and should not condemn the whole system and its foundation.
Whether you, Mr. Chomsky or Mr. Kinzer or the rest of the loonies in that class approve of it or not, stability of the resource reach areas of the middle east and central Asia or any other part of our planet is the key to survival of humanity. So, you better get used to it…..
I’m not here to defend the stupid act of an Israeli soldier and his commander. I am not here to judge his action neither, because I don’t know what has provoked that reaction. I don’t know what the guy in hand-cuff was telling him. Whether he was telling the soldier I’ll rape your daughter, mother and sister,….is irrelevant. It was stupid, un-professional, inhumane,… reaction. But, who can claim to have the smartest and most intellectual, politically savvy as soldiers in their armed forces. If the guy in handcuff was beheaded in front of a camera in cold blood, then I would have called it (regardless of the cause) barbaric and evil (Hint: Daniel Pearl).
It is so sad that some people on this thread blinded by so much prejudice against Jews come out and make such one-sided comments against Israel and pro Palestinians. Iranian or not we have to accept the formation of the Jewish state and its existence as a fact and reality of the modern history and build our judgment and thought process around it. Once this simple reality is acknowledged, accepted, admitted to, the whole conflict will evaporate.
You can’t blame anyone who is threatened with destruction to do anything in his power to protect himself. Again, this is not to defend every action by every Israeli administration. But, it would be unfair (prejudiced) to blindly condemn every action or reaction by every administration. I don’t think Pakistan, Bangladesh, Jordan, Syria,…. are treated with the same standards as Israel. And, I wonder why?


Iranians are so funny

by Anonymous-that (not verified) on

I'm shocked how everyone just blames IRI regime for pretty much anything that happens.

America needs enemies much more than Iranians need enemies. It all started in the early 1900's during the first world war...when the Germans were the went on to the second to help get the USA out of The Great Depression.

After this, Communists became the enemy
1. North Korea/South Korea
2. Vietnam
3. The extinct USSR
4. Cuba

Now, it's "Islamofacists"
1. Taliban--Saudi supported Wahabis
2. Iraq--The US doesn't even know who they are fighting or for what reason....
3. Iran--Nuke this and that...

The real question shouldn't be whether this is or isn't an Iranian should be why pretty much for the last 100 years every war has been a result of the US empire??

To the person that said there was no land called "Palestine"...there was no land called America until 300 years ago...there was no land called Pakistan until some 50 years ago...If you want to get technical about it there was no Lebanon until the 1920's as it was under Ottaman rule prior

Just because the Jews had it once a long time ago because it was "Promised to them by God" doesn't mean they should have it now. If God personally came down and gave it to them in 1948...then that's a different story...but the US/Brit acting as "God's Agent" doesn't work...

Keyvan Talebi

Aminian, What the hell are you talking about?

by Keyvan Talebi on

Under the Shah, the Americans started selling nuclear technology to Iran without any Israeli protest. The Israelis themselves were selling missile technology and aircraft technology to the Shah. The missile technology actually ended up in the IRI's hands.

Moreover, Before 1979, Iran was
the world's biggest buyer of Israeli arms. The Islamic fundamentalist
government which succeeded the Shah militantly damned Zionism up
and down  however, when the Iraq-Iran war began, Iranian representatives
met in Paris with Israel's deputy defense minister and worked out
a "Jews for arms" deal. Iran permitted Jews to emigrate
and Israel sold Iran ammunition and spare parts for Chieftain tanks
and US-made F-4 Phantom aircraft.

Haven't you read about the Flower Project for example?

How could you say: "By the same token I have a problem with the ruthless Zionist regime
that will run over anyone/everyone to accomplish its objectives. What
you need to understand is that even if Iran was not a trouble maker,
had the best human rights record in the world, and didn't seek nukes,
the Zionists would still try to get rid of it! Why is that, you may
ask? Answer: Iran doesn't bow to the bullying of the Zionists and their
masters, namely, the US and GB. They want Iran to be subservient just
like arabs and Iran wouldn't give in."

So why don't the Zionist have the same issue with Turky? Can you explain this?

You are a confused angry person with all your ranting here. 

Palestinians are an Arab problem. This is bullshit. The IRI does not treat its own citizens with respect. First, we, the Iranians, should learn how to give full human rights to our own citizens before we complain about the Israeli treatment of its non citizen Palestinians under occupation. Then, maybe, our complaining would have more validity. 

Give us a break baba with all this AIPAC Zionist blame game. 




Asghar Taragheh

Dear Mr. Aminian

by Asghar Taragheh on

I was specifically responding to the following statement by you:

" By the same token I have a problem with the ruthless Zionist regime
that will run over anyone/everyone to accomplish its objectives. What
you need to understand is that even if Iran was not a trouble maker,
had the best human rights record in the world, and didn't seek nukes,
the Zionists would still try to get rid of it! Why is that, you may
ask? Answer: Iran doesn't bow to the bullying of the Zionists and their
masters, namely, the US and GB. They want Iran to be subservient just
like arabs and Iran wouldn't give in"

Kaveh had explained to you that the relationship between Iran and Israel was very different under the Shah. You had made some incoherent statements about this relationship which were not consistent with the facts on the ground. You are revising history to help your arguments. You are making it sound as if the "Zionist" or AIAPC don't have a valid excuse or reason to go after the IRI today. The IRI has given them all the excuses they need in the past 30 years. Stop making excuses for the IRI and being proud that a bunch of stupid akhoonds "don't bow to bullying". As I explained, the IRI is doing this on purpose to prolong its own life. 

Finally, I am very familiar with the loony, ultra lefty, anti imperialist, anti American trash you have decided to cite as your sources for me to "find out the answers for myself".   Perhaps maybe you should read more open minded sources to open up your mind. You are blaming everyone (America, Israel, AIPAC, Corporations, Zionists.....) but the IRI. Kaveh and I are telling you that there is no one to blame but the IRI. 



To Asghar Taragheh

by aaminian on


You're all over the map and your arguments (whatever they may be) lack coherency. After having read it, I don't know what I am supposed to argue about (if any!).

One of the comments that you made though was true and yet NOT new: the IRI and the Mullahs oppress the Iranian population. But what does this have to do with the price of rice in China, man?! We're talking about how Israeli tanks rampage poor Palestinian homes and masacre them on a daily basis.

You also mention that the IRI needs enemies to survive. Ditto with the Zionists, sir. Take a look at my post on this blog dated

If you need more information on how this global state of affairs truly works take a look at publications of the following elite list of socio-political authors, true think tanks. Hopefully, after reading a little bit of their works you'll see the world the way it really IS not the way you wish it would be:

1. Gore Vidal, Pilitical Activist, Ex-Congressman (Al Gore's uncle). My favoritebook of his: The Decline and Fall of the American Empire.

2. Noam Chomsky, Linguist, Political Activist, Foreign Policy expert (current MIT professor). My favorites: Failed States, and Necessary Illusions.

3. Edward Said, another great political activist. Unfortunately, no longer among us. My favorite: Orientalism.

4. Stephen Kinzer, Journalist. Author of All Shahs Men, a MUST read if you care to know what the US and Shah's regime did to our Beloved Mohammad Mossadegh.

5. John Mearsheimer, International Affairs expert. My favorite: The Israel Lobby.


AT, please do some research and try to find out answers for yourself. Don't regorgitate what the media in this country feeds you. The media here is coporate-sponsored, corporations that steer the current White House administration in its dealings with the world to the corporations' advantage. BTW, most of the lobbying done by these corporations is thru' AIPAC.