I agree, you've been very wrong about him... It's understandable , the U.S propaganda system is proven to be the most effective in history.
Enough farting around on Iran & Nukes
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
I agree, you've been very wrong about him... It's understandable , the U.S propaganda system is proven to be the most effective in history.
So where do you get your propaganda?
Oh ya, wikiality and web pages that have been dispatched with great ease.
Sorry you wasted your time again.
Why are you pretending to care about the Iranian people? You don't care if an Iranian criminal gets stoned.. Just like you wouldn't care if someone who hurt one of your family members was stoned to death here in the west, it's all hypocrisy..
I guess it's the result of the disease Nationalism, we're always right, they're always wrong, regardless!
I care if an Iranian "criminal" gets stoned. I don't like seeing people hung from cranes because they had pre-marital sex. Nor do I think hanging children is acceptable either.
Or in your case moral bankruptcy and relativism.
Unlike your disease, blind ideology.
Then you should care about the Palestinian citizens, including children, being bombed to death every day. Your vehement support for Zionism though doesn't correlate with this though.
Palestine Monitor
I don't know if an Israeli supporter should be talking about morals
It's not blind but inspired by actual facts... reality. Not propaganda.
Sorry, CuBert, you are absolutely correct!
Not only would I not care if my family members were stoned, I would actually support it, love it, take part in it and enjoy it.
We do it about every second weekend or at least once a month.
Maybe you should try, it would improve your warped view of the world.
I actually do.
The fact that you think I support Zionism, only confirms the many posts I've made, explaining how you are incapable of the most simplistic comprehension and research skill.
I'll see your Palestine Monitor and raise you, Palestine Watch and CAMERA.
http://www.palwatch.org/
CAMERA: Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
Your point?
I don't think a morally bankrupt ideologue, with such limited research and comprehension skills should be passing such judgments.
I'm not surprised you can't differentiate between the two. Even though I have exposed the propaganda in several, if not all your cited links.
Last edited:
I said you wouldn't care if it happened to someone who hurt one of your family members and I stand by that statement. I truly believe you wouldn't and you wouldn't consider it a brutal and primitive practice in such a case but justice. But when the Iranians do it, you say it's barbaric and violates human rights. Hypocrisy.
Can you please cite the source of this opinion.
Or is this just more of your imagination at play?
Talk about mantras. He would probably prefer to have the two biggest nuclear powers not collaborating to take over the country, round two for the US.
If you hadn't been reading with that slanted eye again you should have gotten the sentence as reading 'this is the first article that came up in my search, the headline links the two together. The link I was looking for was about #10 so that is the one I followed and that is the one I commented on. Obviously I did not follow the first link, my mistake for 'assuming' since he is from Iran he is also a target for the "T" label. Same thing happened a few weeks back with Colpy. The wound has healed and I try to be a little more through when replying to his posts. That will most likely happen in my replies to you. If I could accomplish it I would feed you only short quotes.
How do you tell who is who?
If they agree with you does that make you view them in the green light and if they dispute your belief then they are under the red-light?
The fact that this subject is how many years old and you are pushing it as an excuse for (a currently planned) invasion with nuclear weapons today. With Israel already having those weapons and still having to pre-empt whoever they think is a threat means the N-weapons do not work and they should give them up.
The document we signed says they never should have been uprooted in the first place. That dates to Nov/47. The document Israel signed in May /48 says they will not be uprooting people. If the locals have not given up then the same is going to hold true for all the other territory that is being seeked these days Iraq, Afghanistan and might as well include Yemen.
UN 181 says they have to be a nation within 1 year of UN 181 being signed. That same doc outlines the 'peaceful' way to settle any disputes. How many of the 650 have had their day in court? (at our expense). Somebody is stalling and they would have no reason to delay matters.
By the US who has their own reasons for keeping nations in the dark about the way things actually work behind those closed door meetings.
The ones that get whitewashed so the sheeple don't even remember any such list was ever needed.
That is the body that was assigned the chore of being the peaceful solution. If the UN has docs for piracy at sea then perhaps they have some that explain what a person can legally do as a form of 'resistance' when a homeland is invaded by people with clubs and guns. Far as I know 'take them to court' is the Western way wher they even have a chance of winning.
The UN observers called it fair. We should not have the 'option' of recognizing that fact.
Hamas existed (1988)before they were elected (2006).
Yes what /who is stopping those 5 million from starting a class action?
While I did mess up on not checking that link a little reading shows theAuthor is not without ties to the West and if he was in 'exile' he was fighting against the revolution that ended US occupation of Iran.
(in part)
Mahdavi grew up in the city of Tehran. His last high school year coincided with the Iranian revolution of 1979. Mahdavi witnessed the city change before his eyes, de-territorialized, liberated, and again demarcated and re-territorialized. For the next 11 years he lived in the USA, where he grappled with the political realities of exile, under the wings of the Empire. When he returned to Tehran, the city was not the one which he had left.
dropping knowledge :: Sohrab Mahdavi - Founder of Teheran Avenue :: biography, links
Nor does there seem to be anything in his background that would qualify him for being an expert in what Iran's prez said, in context.
(in part)
Mahdavi grew up in the city of Tehran. His last high school year coincided with the Iranian revolution of 1979. Mahdavi witnessed the city change before his eyes, de-territorialized, liberated, and again demarcated and re-territorialized. For the next 11 years he lived in the USA, where he grappled with the political realities of exile, under the wings of the Empire. When he returned to Tehran, the city was not the one which he had left.
dropping knowledge :: Sohrab Mahdavi - Founder of Teheran Avenue :: biography, links
Nor does there seem to be anything in his background that would qualify him for being an expert in what Iran's prez said, in context.
Slanted eye? BS, you said I was quoting a terrorist, because you're so inept, you couldn't figure out that the author had penned a story called "Terrorist".
Try reading, when that fails you, head off and get a remedial reading comprehension course.
Depends of how they support their opinion.
Actually, I've said since the beginning that Iran should be allowed to have a peaceful civilian nuclear energy program. Not once, and I challenge you to prove otherwise, have I advocated or as you say "pushed" for an invasion.
True, so the ones that Israel did up root, should be allowed to return. The ones that left on their own should be exempt.
They called the"election" fair. Not the campaign.
The fact that 5million people weren't pushed or fled in the first place.
So? You can focus on one of my sources all you want, but he was also backed up by another, a Gov't employee no less.
But he lives there and speaks Persion fluently. Running the magazine Tehran Avenue. Go figure.
He speaks Persian he's Iranian, he lives in Tehran and he's in the middle of it all moron. He's not some agenda driven liberal arts hack that legitimizes hate conferences. Who has a cursory knowledge of Persian, living in Nova Scotia.
You see, this is what separates you from being simply a critic. You throw out commonsense, logic, critical thought and intellect, just to maintain the wrong thought, so long as it suits your agenda. If I followed you line of thinking, I would disqualify Mahdavi because he's Iranian. And according to you, I have a problem with Iran.
You really should learn to read.
Having a slanted eye means you have decided which 'opinion' piece is correct even after reading words from the person who spoke the sentence that says what the correct context was. In this case opposite of the viewpoint you have partly based on a person you referenced.
You like to bring up background, or lack of one in my case. This person was said to have been in exile in the US after being in Iran to see 1979 unfold as a high-school student. Doing a Sherlock on this guy means his older relatives may/may not have been part of the revolution and that is more than possible as not everybody from Iran was 'supported' by the US Gov. after the revolt.
I don't see how that makes his 'opinion' have more weight than any other translator and certainly no more weight that a comment from the person who said the words in a speech that he wrote. Are there any translators in Iran that were in Iran for that same time and learned English that say the context is the same as the speaker claims. You have him as being a liar when he said the words had to do with regime change, same as Israel and the US openly say needs to happen in Iran, ..... and a host of other places.
Perhaps it is your references to 'loon' that makes it appear to me that Iran may have right to have power but not under the current leadership. The US has always been involved in Iran's politics, 1979 didn't change that aspect, just the methods. Didn't their paraliment building collapse and kill everybody shortly after the hostages were released?
So what is it in 'his speeches' that are making you call him a loon with the context being 'a person who would wipe Israel off the map with a nuclear weapon which is being chased will all speed? It is only with the 20/20 foresight of Israeli and American spies that action in the UN has stalled this from having already happened.
A 'loon' would be thinking along those lines, Iran wants to use something else to produce electricity than the product it also exports. That isn't very complicated so why the 10 years fight to make sure they don't even get that far solely because of the objections of two nations that are known to be heavy handed when behind closed doors?
That would mean the 'current owners' kept a bill of sale then. Just because I go south to escape the worst of winter doesn't mean you can sell my house or move in and claim it was 'abandoned'.
How many of the 12 Tribes were alive when they got removed in the past? They would also still own the mineral rights if that was the intention of UN 181. All you have to do is ask them if UN181 had anything to do with them leaving, pretty much meaning did fear (from any quarter) influence their decision to abandon property, rather than sell it at a auction or private sale.
Did Hamas deliver on their promises and if they were accusing the 'other side' of being corrupt did that turn out to be a fact?
Their children would have also settled in the same area (without dividing up the parents land).
That was the first one on your list of two. What I was checking was that he said what you claimed he said, that was the NY Times link. Slanted view means those two have correct in their view and the speaker is wrong in his explanation of the context. The explanation was several years ago and it still eludes you accepting that as being the most authoritative answer on the question of what those words mean.
So does the speaker minus the US training. What do the strictly local translators say? What was the context of the original quote as the Prez was only referencing a previous statement?
Are you suggesting he wrote the speech that is the key to the whole dispute??? If not, then the one in the 'middle of it' is the Prez himself. His view of the context has already been posted. Why would you continue to even debate it past that point, let alone years later??
Goes to show what the lack of coffee does some mornings, ...... so what, it isn't like I'm to trying to weasel out of 'jumping to the wrong assumption'. That doesn't mean I should reject the speakers explanation of what those few words meant.
How about I double check my facts if I want to avoid being corrected? As embarrassing as being in error is with that 'hot flash' across the cheeks and the "%&^^&#^*" that follows the 'up-side' is I have learned several thing rather than just one new thing. The hot flash is the being 'burned in' which means I will be trying not to do a repeat anytime soon. One of those things that may/may not turn out to be factual is this probably sets the tone of our conversation for the next 5 years or so.
Since we are stating positions you are under the assumption that I hate Jews and that means I love Hamas and all that they stand for. I don't see the ICC bending over backwards to mediate any/all disputes that arise over UN 181 being 'made law'. That isn't even the start of the 'events surrounding today's issues'.
Canada seems to be supporting the same actions that happened after Rez's were established over here. How events were handled after the shooting stopped was counter-productive in the long run as far as most people would say when compared to current UN human rights documents. For the elite/surf mentality that method is one of several that solve 'resistance'. One other method is exile followed by extermination, both of which is against the 'rights of children' that we say we endorse. Apparently the fine print says our children have more rights than other children of the same age. In the long run that may come back to haunt you if the other choice was give a little so they can have more without causing yourself harm.
If 90% of the world has the vision that all Americans have a wealthy lifestyle when the fact is that only 5% are considered to be the 'elite' they are not going to stop for an education class if America (the 95%) finds itself going through financial collapse the rest of the world won't care very much and the 5% will have gotten away with the loot. It is one thing to go through a disaster that causes grief for some, quite another to have a disaster manufactured for a specific group. If you don't think that 'Jews' have that same sort of division then you need to do some more reading. Most times in the past the majority of the Jews who came under exile/persecution/death was because of the actions of their 'elite'. When we Christians were taking over the new world we kept the locals alive long enough to help us rob the land, then they were disposed of by killing them. The goal of 'advancing socially' means leaving the 'bad practices' in the past.
If Canada was invaded by any military power would we be expected to not resist for 60 years or if put into exile not have the hopes that justice would give you back your lost possessions and restitution to the 'homeless children that exile created'. A refugee comes to the ICC for retribution by the courts, they handle war crimes, any refugee that became one because they were in danger of physical abuse comes under that protection, ...... supposedly, the US Constitution says that when legal action is taken away as a course of settling a dispute the resistance can become volatile if the Gov does not willingly step down. Invasion from a foreign army would seem to also authorize physical resistance being possible if the fight is taken to the 'invaders' in a way that does not also cause incidents that are considered to be a war crime which means taking it to the proper court.
I see that as being a better long-term solution than the US and Israel being the sole military/economic power in the region. That also eventually those two will have to put their weapons away if they truly want peace in the land for everybody, the current trend is a 90/10 split with the 90% being about as poor as people can be and still be considered to be alive.
Iran could easily fight a 100 year war if they stayed on the defensive. That method also cuts war related costs down by large margins. Lazar guided/heat seeking projectiles are as small as some fireworks today, firing them over the horizon is not what they are made for, line-of-sight is 1000% accurate. Anybody with a nuclear plant should have those sorts of defenses 'just because'.
From an economic standpoint Canada could buy how may S-400 systems from Russia compared to the aircraft that can be 'requested' to go anyplace in the world they are 'needed' with no 'vote' allowed. Not only is Iran bitched at for 'maybe' having a desire to export war no she cannot even buy defensive only hardware without still being labeled war-monger by ....... wait for it ...... the US and Israel.
If the had n-power plants on-line they could sell their oil cheaper and that should mean cheaper prices at the pumps rather than bigger profits for big oil.
Guess which it would turn out to be??
So in other words, you were projecting, because you used a slanted eye, not me.
Good to know you admit it.
No I like fact. If someone bases their opinion on it, then they have an educated opinion. Even when contrary to mine, so long as it's based on fact, I like it.
You see Mhz, opinions are heavily dictated by experience, knowledge and perception.
So?
His opinion holds more weight Mhz, because he's Persian, not Canadian.
I didn't anything of the sort, I challenge you to prove that I did.
He's stated "death to Israel" on so many occasions, how can anyone take him seriously?
Did you miss the point I made about the fact that I think they should have a peaceful nuclear program?
Are you really equating a vacation to abandoning your home because you hope the new neighbours get murdered?
I noticed you missed the point and ignored the fact that 5 million people were not there at the time.
That bears no weight in the present course of conversation. That is you failed attempt to divert the conversation, because you can't offer a rebuttal to the fact that Hamas murdered it's way into power.
In no way have I ever made a single claim that Fatah was any better. So please do try and stay in the realm of reality.
I didn't settle in the same area. You can't make that claim legitimately.
This statement only re-enforces my assertion that you have severe reading and comprehension issues. Not only have Iranian translators made the claim, and stood by it. I have even stated repeatedly no less, that even if I were so gracious as to concede due to the contentious nature of the translation. It still makes no difference, he's on record, on video, stating, death to Israel.
Why is that so hard to grasp?
Back to the great satan again are we?
Nope, but if I quote mein kampf, extolling its virtues. I would expect to be called a Joo hater too. So he quote a cleric, big woop. He expouses the same mentality as exampled in his anti holocaust convention and his statement of death to Israel.
Again, an excellent example of your limited reading and comprehension skills. Not that he's all that great a source himself.
I think you could drimk 20 gallons of coffee, and still not be awake enough to have a coherent conversation.
You reject anything that doesn't suit your agenda.
First you'd have to learn to identify a fact.
You set the tone the day you told me the Talmud was based on the bible. Everyday since, you've been merely a source of entertainment, not conversation in the constructive sense.
It's not an assumption.
They aren't.
That was a first impression, formulating something to specifically to be taken to promote some point is being slanted. My problem would be more like a beam or a log being in the way of having perfect vision.
The way of getting rid of that is to lean more about that particular person. So far it is known that he came to America when he was high school age in what was called an exile from Iran which would seem to make them some of the Shaw's supporters. In the 11 years that are mentioned he studied art and English, or at least art.
Was he quoted in both Iranian and Western Media? The only reference I found was the NYT, not exactly an unbiased place as far as American/Iranian issues. I doubt he would have even been published if he had the 'other viewpoint'.
I don't want to keep jumping back to the one instance I have mentioned before already but I don't find that to be the case at all. It seems the 'official version' even over-rides what you should known to be false as part of your work skills.
If words from the authors own mouth don't change the view for you then you are not accepting his words as being a fact in that instance alone, but they are facts when holding to your current view, as explained to you by a 3rd party. I try to avoid that method in my own 'evaluation' of reading material.
In some cases my views are formed by certain publications being taken as being factual. In the translation issue there are people on both sides of the 'debate'. The debate should have ended when he cleared up the question himself when asked point-blank what the comment meant.
So maybe he knew he would get published if his opinion blended with the official version that the US was promoting. Would you like a free example? Saddam, Kuwait, Bush Sr, incubator fabricated story.
So was the Shaw, not everything he did was on the up-n-up. If he can read and write the language and was familiar with the context of the history of that reference his opinion can be added to a poll.
Didn't you just say your source had more 'authority' on what was meant by those few words that the speaker himself??
We are talking about this one time, I have yet to see your other alleged 'proof'.
How many years back?
You mean going on vacation to avoid being murdered. The Arab Nations were just naive enough to believe anything the Nations that votes yes to UN 181 would actually live up to an agreement they had signed. For 1/2 year they (the 11 that said no) watched 650,000 'protected Arabs' get chased from their homes into exile. A war crime. Some 400 villages later they yell 'peace' and declare themselves a nation with some new borders and a great deal of the 'voters' removed from the citizenship list. The 33 that said that would not happen showed themselves to be flat out liars when the endorsed the creation of Israel using different borders. Any body with a definition for 'treaty' would agree that the words and signatures really mean nothing at all.
The only reason is they were chased away or fled. How many Jews became citizens to a place they had never been to?
The PLO had sold out and that is why there was a demand for a replacement in the first place. Treason is often a charge that comes with a regime change. In America Prescott went on to be elected to the Senate even after charges and conviction of 'trading with the enemy'. If another Nation chooses to throw a few off the roof as a sign of what happens to traitors then why is it an issue to you? Our system isn't fool-proof and it may actually promote bad government, for the people, when treason charges have no bite..
60 years of human rights abuses and not one Lawyer has filed any motions, ........ who needs the wake up as to something not being right?
The world does run on your standards and experiences.
So you keep saying. Having people shout something is how things get changed. A good PR firm might have them change that slogan to to 'Repeal UN 273' for the sake of the politically sensitive.
I'm not sure how their version of prophecy goes but America and Britain are not Satan, they are part of the deceived Nations.
In the war that goes on behind the scenes the US, Britain, and Israel are more involved in Iran than any other 3 Nations, yet they do not seem to have the right to close the doors without some sort of repercussions making the break more of a 'burden' than it should be.
Satan in the NT is somewhat greater than any combination of Nations. Our 'defenders' become our 'persecutors' in a single hour of being given the choice of join or fight a war. Almost ironic in that they do support war but against the unarmed rather than the armed ones.
You mean his statement about their being rallies where that is the common shout in South America and Asia. How do you manifest that into calling for people to be thrown off buildings??
None better when the 'virtues' of the one in question is himself.
Not too many threads on DIY shop projects, besides my 'shop' would fall over in a strong wind so that would be in theory and not nearly as much fun as the 'hands on' part.
You mean after I have established an agenda right? Even an opinion needs to have some sort of base wisdom.
Usually based on the honesty of a 3rd party to be passing on the absolute truth rather than the truth as he knows it.
Okey dokey. You should be more concerned with the contents are assembled than how the words were assembled. Re:12 still references events that are from Ge:3, that would seem to cover the chicken and the eggs part of God's wisdom.
In your opinion, do you have a quote from me as 'back-up'? Perhaps another member that agrees with your opinion would suffice barring a lack of direct quotes.
They are certainly trying to be. If their economies are gaining more debt then the return is not worth the cost. Without the war machine the oil could be purchased for less, everybody knows that except for the ones throwing the most money into war.
Anyway that about brings us up to date and this topic doesn't seem to have my full interest so I'm off to the few threads that do. Bye
"60 years of human rights abuses and not one Lawyer has filed any motions, ........ who needs the wake up as to something not being right?"
Maybe there were no human rights abuses worth bringing to court.
Maybe there were no human rights abuses worth bringing to court.
I agree, your bias and comprehension issues, must be like trying to see through a log.
I agree, so why is it when I do it, it's wrong, but when you do it, it's right?
Oh ya, your sources are above reproach...
No proof, then that's a false statement. He now lives in Tehran, which makes him a better source then some hack Prof in Nova Scotia, period.
More proof of your ignorance. Western media was inundated with "professionals" saying he didn't threaten to wipe Israel off the map.
According to you. I have yet to meet a licensed welder/fabricator or structural steel worker, that thinks steel won't be affected by heat at those temps. Since I've never been unemployed as a result of my skills, and have now built two businesses in the field of welding, both architectural and structural, my welding work skills, are obviously superior to yours.
Ya, I saw a man on the witness stand once tell the court he didn't threaten to burn down someones house, and three third party witnesses contradicted him...
Go figure.
You avoid logic at every chance, we already knew that.
So long as they support your agenda, ideology and bias.
See courtroom analogy.
See courtroom analogy.
Because he supports your agenda. It doesn't matter that there is actual evidence and commentary on the man that makes him to be an asshat. But hey, some prof from Nova Scotia says it's so, he must be more believable then a Persian in Iran and a Gov't employee in Iran.
I was referring to your reference to Israel and the US.
I posted two names, you only chose to attack the one, because you thought he was a terrorist. Go back and see the other yourself. And you can talk about this one time all you want. That kind of idiotic thinking is why the bulk of your posts are insipid shyte. Over all, the man's opinion is to eradicate Israel. Full stop.
How many weeks back. I posted in EAO's thread on the subject that Iran should be allowed to have a nuclear program. As well as several times in this very thread. But that won't register with you, because you haven't the ability to see anyone without an ideology attached. That's an excellent example of projection and simply reaffirms my assertions about you.
Revisionist history is your bread and butter isn't?
Still missing the point eh?
Still can't formulate a reasoned rebuttal eh?
Nice diversion. Still bears no weight on the conversation.
No it doesn't, but you seem to think your standards, and higher should be used against Israel.
Go figure.
Well ya, my point exactly. Like the death of Israel. Good to see you agree with him. Confirming you to be a Joo hater of course.
Still to hard to grasp eh.
More semi religious baffle gab? Really? Are you that daft that you don't understand the context in which "great satan" is being here?
I don't, that's a manifestation of your severe comprhension issues and inability to follow the conversation.
Oh now you want to talk about Ahmadinejad's virtues?
Really?
Yours was exposed long ago Mhz.
We're still waiting to some wisdom in your posts.
Glad you admit that. That should start you on rethinking the tripe you believe from agenda driven morons, on topics like the Middle East and 9/11.
Although I doubt it will. You only parrot wistful thoughts of insight. You don't actually understand them.
And still irrelevant.
Colpy, Goober, Ironsides, top name just three.
The typical course of action, when one is having their ass handed to them.
Iran is another country that is a tinderbox for revolution - A well educated, highly intelligent population, significant population of youth. Iran also has high unemployment, inflation, corruption and no freedoms, not even the basics of Human rights. The power structure is terrified of revolution from within this base of the population. That is why they tolerate no dissent - have show trials, arrests based upon trumped up charges and lengthy prison terms or execution.
How many protesters from the corrupt elections have been imprisoned, tortured, killed or executed.
BBC News - Iranian opposition activists hanged for protest footage
Iranian authorities have hanged two men convicted of taking part in protests following the disputed presidential election in 2009.
Iranian prosecutors said Jafar Kazemi and Mohammad Ali Hajaghaei had taken photos and footage of the protests and distributed them on the internet.
They were also found guilty of chanting slogans promoting the exiled People's Mujahideen of Iran (PMOI).
Iran is on the verge of destroying itself, to many Iranians are fed up with this all controlling government.
