Iran - Sanctions - Blockades - War - Treaties - to name a few possibilities
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Iran hasn't been causing any problem, if the US had no objection when Iran applied for the power stations, crying over spilled milk is all they are presently doing.
Indai and Pak still allowed inspection, only Israel has been inspection free, that means the law on the US books is being broken, nobody cares about that but all hot and bothered over a Nation 'that got away' and is living within the agreements she signed, that does not include the (spy ridden() IAEA to wander around Military bases when she is threaten with pre-emptive war by the two powers that the IAEA is know to be sub-servant to. Wher is all their bitching and complaining about being denied acces to Israels N sites.
"Bahrain, linked to Saudi Arabia by the King Fahd Causeway, plays an important role in the Saudi political—and moral— economy. In essence, it functions as a playground for well-off residents of the kingdom, a place where people can engage in activities proscribed at home."
The same Bahrain that saw Saudi tanks come in to kill protesters? Sounds like Cuba before Castro cleaned the place up, illegal at home so a quick trip and all your vices become legal, how convient for the rich and how sad for the natives of Bahrain, more a naval base for the US that a Nation separate from all other nations in the area. Looks like it is a thing that allows the Saudi Govt to fully support the West's military machine while making it appear that they are 'outside' that sort of influence. The only ones being fooled are the citizens of Saudi and I doubt many of them are as deceived as most people in the West.
"Such claims were pushed hard in 1906 and again in 1927, and were temporarily reactivated after the Islamic Revolution of 1979."
3 mentions in more than 100 years, not what you would call 'relentless aggression'. Not one shot fired in all that time either, what an epic fail that article is as far as making point for you accusations.
The Brits did **** like that whenever they left an area, it was designed to create hostilities, same as the 'disputed' area between India and Pakistan. Perhaps you should lay the blame at the right place, Britain and the way she divided the area up. Better yet, perhaps the 4 Nations mentioned shoud realize the facts and shun any dealings with Britain or her friends in that it was intentional rather than accidental.
On the sidelines of Iran's election - By Geneive Abdo | The Middle East Channel
Former President Mohammad Khatami made a statement last December about the upcoming parliamentary elections in Iran, "When all the signs indicate that we should not participate in the elections, participation will be meaningless."
Now, just hours before the polls open on March 2, Khatami and many other Iranians for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution will stage a boycott. This is the only election in which a major political faction will remain on the sidelines. All the "signs," as Khatami put it, are there -- the only candidates allowed to compete are largely from three conservative factions among the regime's shrinking cast of political elites. All others were banned from running candidates.
But what is more significant than the rigged vetting process is what the election sadly reveals for many -- a changed Iran. Gone is the euphoria that energized millions of Iranians before past presidential elections in 1997 and 2009 and parliamentary elections in 2000. Instead, this week's elections will take place under the watchful eyes of 50,000 election "monitors" nationwide, thousands of basij fighters designated just for Tehran, and the heaviest police presence since after the disputed presidential election of 2009.
The regime is taking no chances the election will turn into a standoff between the opposition and the security forces or become a national expression of all the pressures Iranians face from the state's economic mismanagement to sanctions and the looming threat of war with Israel. Security officials have repeatedly warned the population ahead of the election that no protests will be tolerated.
The scripted election also illustrates a political realignment that has occurred since 2009 and the consolidation of power around Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In addition to ensuring the reformists' -- and even quasi-reformists, such as Hashemi Rafsanjani -- departure from politics, Khamenei's loyalists have also paved the way for the demise of the "deviant" faction, as it is called, which represents President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Khamenei wants to cleanse the next parliament of Ahmadinejad supporters who have fought on the president's behalf over the last two years in a fierce battle between Ahmadinejad and Khamenei -- one in which the president lost out. Ending this faction's political career will also guarantee that no Ahmadinejad loyalist will have enough support inside the regime to run in the next presidential election in 2013.
After this election, assuming Khamenei will succeed in eliminating Ahmadinejad's faction, only two political trends will remain relevant inside the political system. One is the conservative traditionalists who are members of the old guard, such as Parliamentary Speaker Ali Larijani. The other is the far right, comprised of hardliners, grouped around Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, an aging revolutionary figure who proclaims to be committed to the ideological purity of the Islamic republic, at last as he interprets it.
In order to achieve a complete electoral victory, the regime faces a significant challenge the morning after. There is likely to be a low voter turnout, particularly in large cities such as Tehran. And even if the voter turnout is significantly higher in rural areas, as is often the case, it is urban public opinion that gives the regime a seal of approval in the eyes of the West. Historically, the regime has tried to convince the world and its domestic audience at home that large participation in elections demonstrates Iranians' belief in the system and the legitimacy of the regime. Proving the worthiness to govern is more important to Khamenei now than ever as Western nations continue to impose sanctions on Iran and place it in the category of a rogue state.
With the reformists' boycotting and a general malaise hovering over the country, it appears likely the regime will have to figure out how to deal with a poor showing at the polls. If officials try to inflate the voter turnout, they could face humiliation. No doubt the untruths will be played out on opposition websites and social networking sites.
Former President Mohammad Khatami made a statement last December about the upcoming parliamentary elections in Iran, "When all the signs indicate that we should not participate in the elections, participation will be meaningless."
Now, just hours before the polls open on March 2, Khatami and many other Iranians for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution will stage a boycott. This is the only election in which a major political faction will remain on the sidelines. All the "signs," as Khatami put it, are there -- the only candidates allowed to compete are largely from three conservative factions among the regime's shrinking cast of political elites. All others were banned from running candidates.
But what is more significant than the rigged vetting process is what the election sadly reveals for many -- a changed Iran. Gone is the euphoria that energized millions of Iranians before past presidential elections in 1997 and 2009 and parliamentary elections in 2000. Instead, this week's elections will take place under the watchful eyes of 50,000 election "monitors" nationwide, thousands of basij fighters designated just for Tehran, and the heaviest police presence since after the disputed presidential election of 2009.
The regime is taking no chances the election will turn into a standoff between the opposition and the security forces or become a national expression of all the pressures Iranians face from the state's economic mismanagement to sanctions and the looming threat of war with Israel. Security officials have repeatedly warned the population ahead of the election that no protests will be tolerated.
The scripted election also illustrates a political realignment that has occurred since 2009 and the consolidation of power around Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In addition to ensuring the reformists' -- and even quasi-reformists, such as Hashemi Rafsanjani -- departure from politics, Khamenei's loyalists have also paved the way for the demise of the "deviant" faction, as it is called, which represents President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Khamenei wants to cleanse the next parliament of Ahmadinejad supporters who have fought on the president's behalf over the last two years in a fierce battle between Ahmadinejad and Khamenei -- one in which the president lost out. Ending this faction's political career will also guarantee that no Ahmadinejad loyalist will have enough support inside the regime to run in the next presidential election in 2013.
After this election, assuming Khamenei will succeed in eliminating Ahmadinejad's faction, only two political trends will remain relevant inside the political system. One is the conservative traditionalists who are members of the old guard, such as Parliamentary Speaker Ali Larijani. The other is the far right, comprised of hardliners, grouped around Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, an aging revolutionary figure who proclaims to be committed to the ideological purity of the Islamic republic, at last as he interprets it.
In order to achieve a complete electoral victory, the regime faces a significant challenge the morning after. There is likely to be a low voter turnout, particularly in large cities such as Tehran. And even if the voter turnout is significantly higher in rural areas, as is often the case, it is urban public opinion that gives the regime a seal of approval in the eyes of the West. Historically, the regime has tried to convince the world and its domestic audience at home that large participation in elections demonstrates Iranians' belief in the system and the legitimacy of the regime. Proving the worthiness to govern is more important to Khamenei now than ever as Western nations continue to impose sanctions on Iran and place it in the category of a rogue state.
With the reformists' boycotting and a general malaise hovering over the country, it appears likely the regime will have to figure out how to deal with a poor showing at the polls. If officials try to inflate the voter turnout, they could face humiliation. No doubt the untruths will be played out on opposition websites and social networking sites.
"Former President Mohammad Khatami made a statement last December about the upcoming parliamentary elections in Iran, "When all the signs indicate that we should not participate in the elections, participation will be meaningless."
Now, just hours before the polls open on March 2, Khatami and many other Iranians for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution will stage a boycott. This is the only election in which a major political faction will remain on the sidelines. All the "signs," as Khatami put it, are there -- the only candidates allowed to compete are largely from three conservative factions among the regime's shrinking cast of political elites. All others were banned from running candidates."
What better person to interview for an unbiased opinion that 'the loser' in the last election. No complaints in 30 years and suddenly now the US and Israel need one whop better to approach than a loser with an axe to grind. lol talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Now, just hours before the polls open on March 2, Khatami and many other Iranians for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution will stage a boycott. This is the only election in which a major political faction will remain on the sidelines. All the "signs," as Khatami put it, are there -- the only candidates allowed to compete are largely from three conservative factions among the regime's shrinking cast of political elites. All others were banned from running candidates."
What better person to interview for an unbiased opinion that 'the loser' in the last election. No complaints in 30 years and suddenly now the US and Israel need one whop better to approach than a loser with an axe to grind. lol talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Don't you mean similar to the death squads the US trained to '[help the Government' in South America? That is the very same way the US ran the place, got any complaints from that era or is this just a new thing with no history tied to it, as usual. How many in Iran would remember those days, some of the same people could be viewing to take back that power they lost 3 decades ago, after all, who else could stomach being in cahoots with the US in particular and the West in general.
I believe everything I write, I am also quite capable of updating my knowledge base as more info becomes available, too bad you can't say the same thing and mean it.
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/02/29/nasty-surprises-await-warmongers-persian-gulf-87912/
I believe everything I write, I am also quite capable of updating my knowledge base as more info becomes available, too bad you can't say the same thing and mean it.
http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/02/29/nasty-surprises-await-warmongers-persian-gulf-87912/
Last edited:
Asia Times Online :: What's at stake in Iran's elections
Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies.
In Iran, this time the problem is there's no opposition; it's cons (conservatives) against neo-cons.
The Green Movement leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi and his wife, Dr Zahra Rahnavard, as well as Mehdi Karroubi, have been under house arrest for over a year now; echoing Myanmar's Aung Suu Kyi, but more vocally, they have repeatedly stressed they will not "repent".
Virtually all key opposition leaders, including university activists, almost 1,000 people, are in jail; not because they're criminals but THE ROVING EYE
Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies.
In Iran, this time the problem is there's no opposition; it's cons (conservatives) against neo-cons.
The Green Movement leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi and his wife, Dr Zahra Rahnavard, as well as Mehdi Karroubi, have been under house arrest for over a year now; echoing Myanmar's Aung Suu Kyi, but more vocally, they have repeatedly stressed they will not "repent".
Virtually all key opposition leaders, including university activists, almost 1,000 people, are in jail; not because they're criminals but because they're very canny organizers of popular anger.
The most influential opposition groups have in fact been outlawed - and that even includes groups of clerics and the Islamically correct Association of Teachers and Scholars in the holy city of Qom. No fewer than 42 influential journalists are also in jail.
The absolute majority of the reformist press has been shut down. Non-government organizations such as the Center for the Defense of Human Rights, founded by Nobel Prize winner Shirin Ebadi, have been outlawed.
A short definition of these elections would be something like this; a byzantine scheme of power sharing between political groups representing a very small elite, while large swathes of the population - and their representatives - are totally sidelined.
Essentially, this will be a fierce battle between Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. So why do these elections matter so much?
Welcome to the Islamic UFC
Khamenei-Ahmadinejad is now a cage match. Stripped to the bone, it's the fight between the ayatollah and the man with a halo over his head that will set the stage for the next presidential election, in June 2013 - when in the best of possible worlds there will be an Obama II, and the specter of war might have been averted.
Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies.
In Iran, this time the problem is there's no opposition; it's cons (conservatives) against neo-cons.
The Green Movement leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi and his wife, Dr Zahra Rahnavard, as well as Mehdi Karroubi, have been under house arrest for over a year now; echoing Myanmar's Aung Suu Kyi, but more vocally, they have repeatedly stressed they will not "repent".
Virtually all key opposition leaders, including university activists, almost 1,000 people, are in jail; not because they're criminals but THE ROVING EYE
Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies.
In Iran, this time the problem is there's no opposition; it's cons (conservatives) against neo-cons.
The Green Movement leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi and his wife, Dr Zahra Rahnavard, as well as Mehdi Karroubi, have been under house arrest for over a year now; echoing Myanmar's Aung Suu Kyi, but more vocally, they have repeatedly stressed they will not "repent".
Virtually all key opposition leaders, including university activists, almost 1,000 people, are in jail; not because they're criminals but because they're very canny organizers of popular anger.
The most influential opposition groups have in fact been outlawed - and that even includes groups of clerics and the Islamically correct Association of Teachers and Scholars in the holy city of Qom. No fewer than 42 influential journalists are also in jail.
The absolute majority of the reformist press has been shut down. Non-government organizations such as the Center for the Defense of Human Rights, founded by Nobel Prize winner Shirin Ebadi, have been outlawed.
A short definition of these elections would be something like this; a byzantine scheme of power sharing between political groups representing a very small elite, while large swathes of the population - and their representatives - are totally sidelined.
Essentially, this will be a fierce battle between Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. So why do these elections matter so much?
Welcome to the Islamic UFC
Khamenei-Ahmadinejad is now a cage match. Stripped to the bone, it's the fight between the ayatollah and the man with a halo over his head that will set the stage for the next presidential election, in June 2013 - when in the best of possible worlds there will be an Obama II, and the specter of war might have been averted.
You hit you own head recently doing a face-palm thing, if so you may have hurt something. Look at the quote below, the bolded words would describe Iran during the time the US was running the show in the 25 years preceding 1979.
Do you even acknowledge the horror the citizens experiences under the installed regime?
"Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies."
I pointed out to you not long ago that the present Government of Iran is more democratic on a local and international level than the 'real hardliners' that actually get funding from covert operation done by both the CIA and MOSSAD. (It's going to come as a real shock to those partners to know their lives are only useful until a certain point, there will be no new Shaw of Iran, there will be international corporation and the citizens will be no better off than the worst of the worst in Saudi Arabia. No wonder the people shudder when the West comers calling.
BTW you should read what you link to, if you did read it you editing is far worse than anything I have ever posted. Re-raed the 6 paragraphs after my quoted portion. A stutter perhaps
Do you even acknowledge the horror the citizens experiences under the installed regime?
"Parliamentary elections this Friday in Iran are far from being free and fair. Well, at least that's a step beyond those paragons of democracy - the election-free Persian Gulf monarchies."
I pointed out to you not long ago that the present Government of Iran is more democratic on a local and international level than the 'real hardliners' that actually get funding from covert operation done by both the CIA and MOSSAD. (It's going to come as a real shock to those partners to know their lives are only useful until a certain point, there will be no new Shaw of Iran, there will be international corporation and the citizens will be no better off than the worst of the worst in Saudi Arabia. No wonder the people shudder when the West comers calling.
BTW you should read what you link to, if you did read it you editing is far worse than anything I have ever posted. Re-raed the 6 paragraphs after my quoted portion. A stutter perhaps
I read the complete article - I saw that - are you into deflection or what?
I post a link - Poeple read the link - No cherry picking -
Meet the players
So on one side, we have the so-called "principlists" - let's call them the Khamenei party. They are - in theory - led by Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Kani, the chairman of the Council of Experts. But in practice, whatever powerful, former IRGC commanders say, goes.
A key candidate in their list is Gholam Haddad Adel, the father-in-law of Khamenei's second son, Mojtaba. He's running for a Tehran seat. This means, crucially, that the IRGC positioned the election in Tehran as a de facto referendum on Khamenei. That's something to watch closely.
The principlists boast a "United Front" that actually became seriously disunited (scattered in at least four groups). They fear the Ahmadinejad faction will manipulate the vote - via the Interior Ministry; it's an open secret in Tehran that the Ahmadinejad people have been furiously bribing blue-collar workers and peasants. The principlists know if Ahmadinejad controls the Majlis, he can't be impeached, and will confront Khamenei even more forcefully.
On the other side, we have an outfit called the Durable Front of the Islamic Revolution. Let's call them the Ahmadinejad faction. They claim to be the real principlists - and essentially are disciples of the mega-reactionary Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi. Now that's a tough cookie; many times I visited his hawza in Qom, but Mesbah Yazdi refuses to talk to foreign journalists.
Ahmadinejad used to be an adoring Mesbah Yazdi worshipper. But then a theological bomb exploded; Ahmadinejad started to publicly boast that he was directly linked to the hidden Imam Mahdi - and not to the Supreme Leader, in thesis the Mahdi's representative on earth. Mesbah Yazdi was mildly horrified. He then started saying he is not the party's leader - but people hardly believe it. If they capture a lot of seats, Mesbah Yazdi will be even stronger among the neo-cons.
A third faction is led Mohsen Rezaei, a former head of the IRGC between 1981 and 1997, and the current secretary-general of the Expediency Council, the body that mediates between the Majlis and the Council of Guardians and also advises Khamenei. Among conservatives and neo-cons, this faction is not exactly very popular, even though Rezaei's game is to position himself as a viable third way.
And then there are the conservatives and neo-cons who are not aligned with anyone, with a major group led by two fierce Ahmadinejad critics, and at least 200 smaller groups.
To give an idea about the tortuous nature of the system, the major group presented a lot of current Majlis representatives, as well as other regime figures, as candidates. In the initial screening, run by the Ahmadinejad-controlled Ministry of Interior, they were rejected; but then the Guardian Council said they were OK ...
So no one should expect a Kim Jong-ilesque turn out this Friday. Expectations for Tehran are a paltry 15% - and that may be even less. A crushing majority of university students will definitely follow the boycott.
Anyone interested in examining the extraordinary impact of the aftermath of the 2009 elections in Tehran should read Death to the Dictator: A Young Man Casts a Vote in Iran's 2009 Election and Pays a Devastating Price, by Afsaneh Moqadam (Sarah Crichton Books, Farrar, Straus and Giroux).
In small town Iran and faraway provinces, the Leader - as well as the "man of the people" with a halo over his head - may still be popular. But no one, anywhere, really knows for sure whether the absolute majority of Iranians would do anything to support them.
I put it at the very end of the post with a BTW before it. Obviously the answer is no, you put it at the top of your post so you are heavily into deflection. Go figure. You pay to take special training, if so you should get a refund. lol
Who is the MEK representing?
(in part)
In recent months, though, a series of heavyweight political and military figures in the US have spoken out in favour of the MEK, calling explicitly for the group to be taken off the list of banned organisations.
They include high-profile former US government officials, politicians and retired military officers, often hired to speak for fees beginning at $20,000 a time.
The sources of funding for the pro-MEK campaign remain unclear, although paying former officials for public advocacy is commonplace in the US.
However, one US government official told the BBC that the MEK "trawls the halls of Congress" for support, something he described as "highly unusual" for a banned organisation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14533756
To get the true scope wouldn't you have to eliminate all the various **** the US has pulled since then, like using Iraq in an 8 yr proxy war. It's like Cuba made strides despte the US, Iran is no different.
Here is a bit from before, don't run away I'll find more.
(in part) The Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, formed under the guidance of CIA (the United States Central Intelligence Agency) in 1957 and personnel trained by Mossad (Israel's secret service), to directly control all facets of political life in Iran. Its main task was to suppress opposition to the Shah's government and keep the people's political and social knowledge as minimal as possible. Savak was notorious throughout Iran for its brutal methods.
The interrogation office was established with no limit of using horrific torture tools and techniques to break the arrested dissenters to talk in a matter of hours.
The censorship office was established to monitor journalists, literary figures and academics throughout the country. It took appropriate measures against those who fell out of the regime's line.
Universities, labor unions and peasant organizations, amongst others, were all subjected to intense surveillance by the Savak agents and paid informants. The agency was also active abroad, especially in monitoring Iranian students who publicly opposed the Shah's government.
Interrogation, torture and long term imprisonment by Savak for reading or possessing any forbidden books. The prohibited books were removed from the book-stores and libraries; even the Tozih-ol-Masael written by Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini was forbidden.
Over the years, Savak became a law unto itself, having legal authority to arrest, detain, brutally interrogate and torture suspected people indefinitely. Savak operated its own prisons in Tehran, such as Qezel-Qalaeh and Evin facilities and many suspected places throughout the country as well. Many of those activities were carried out without any institutional checks.
Savak/Savama, the symbol of censorship and torture in Iran
(in part)
SAVAK was closed down shortly before the overthrow of the monarchy and the coming to power of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the February 1979 Iranian Revolution. Following the departure of the Shah in January 1979, SAVAK's 3,000+ central staff and its agents were targeted for reprisals; almost all of them that were in Iran at the time of the Iranian Revolution were hunted down and executed, only a few who were on missions outside of Iran managed to survive.[citation needed]
SAVAK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here is a bit from before, don't run away I'll find more.
(in part) The Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, formed under the guidance of CIA (the United States Central Intelligence Agency) in 1957 and personnel trained by Mossad (Israel's secret service), to directly control all facets of political life in Iran. Its main task was to suppress opposition to the Shah's government and keep the people's political and social knowledge as minimal as possible. Savak was notorious throughout Iran for its brutal methods.
The interrogation office was established with no limit of using horrific torture tools and techniques to break the arrested dissenters to talk in a matter of hours.
The censorship office was established to monitor journalists, literary figures and academics throughout the country. It took appropriate measures against those who fell out of the regime's line.
Universities, labor unions and peasant organizations, amongst others, were all subjected to intense surveillance by the Savak agents and paid informants. The agency was also active abroad, especially in monitoring Iranian students who publicly opposed the Shah's government.
Interrogation, torture and long term imprisonment by Savak for reading or possessing any forbidden books. The prohibited books were removed from the book-stores and libraries; even the Tozih-ol-Masael written by Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini was forbidden.
Over the years, Savak became a law unto itself, having legal authority to arrest, detain, brutally interrogate and torture suspected people indefinitely. Savak operated its own prisons in Tehran, such as Qezel-Qalaeh and Evin facilities and many suspected places throughout the country as well. Many of those activities were carried out without any institutional checks.
Savak/Savama, the symbol of censorship and torture in Iran
(in part)
SAVAK was closed down shortly before the overthrow of the monarchy and the coming to power of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the February 1979 Iranian Revolution. Following the departure of the Shah in January 1979, SAVAK's 3,000+ central staff and its agents were targeted for reprisals; almost all of them that were in Iran at the time of the Iranian Revolution were hunted down and executed, only a few who were on missions outside of Iran managed to survive.[citation needed]
SAVAK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lets cover what I already posted about Iran and the differences, you have to acknowledge the old regime did act according to the bit posted so far. Then the next step is to run the South American death squads that roamed South America by you , were they trained (by x Nazis working for the CIA btw) by the same 'book' that Iran's secret police was operating under during the reign of the US installed Dictator, a brutal one at that yet you 'demand Syria' get rid of one that is more moderate than the Shaw. Your colors are really showing on this issue, I'm not impressed, being part of the majority does not make you part of the moral majority even though would like to think so.
Come on, do your part, a conversation requires input from both sides. Agree with the condition posted about Iran and start on the death squad issue.
Come on, do your part, a conversation requires input from both sides. Agree with the condition posted about Iran and start on the death squad issue.
No -This was about Iran
Here is what I posted.Now you want to change the agreement. Again - No - So if you cannot fulfill what was agreed upon just tell me.
As you are up on things can you tell me the big difference in Iran under the Shah and then under the Theocracy.
I am interested to see what these massive differences are.
How many elections under the Shaw? Big fat ZERO
How many this year, 1, case closed.
"The Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, formed under the guidance of CIA (the United States Central Intelligence Agency) in 1957 and personnel trained by Mossad (Israel's secret service), to directly control all facets of political life in Iran. Its main task was to suppress opposition to the Shah's government and keep the people's political and social knowledge as minimal as possible. Savak was notorious throughout Iran for its brutal methods.
The interrogation office was established with no limit of using horrific torture tools and techniques to break the arrested dissenters to talk in a matter of hours.
The censorship office was established to monitor journalists, literary figures and academics throughout the country. It took appropriate measures against those who fell out of the regime's line.
Universities, labor unions and peasant organizations, amongst others, were all subjected to intense surveillance by the Savak agents and paid informants. The agency was also active abroad, especially in monitoring Iranian students who publicly opposed the Shah's government.
Interrogation, torture and long term imprisonment by Savak for reading or possessing any forbidden books. The prohibited books were removed from the book-stores and libraries; even the Tozih-ol-Masael written by Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini was forbidden."
Fact or not???
How many this year, 1, case closed.
"The Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, formed under the guidance of CIA (the United States Central Intelligence Agency) in 1957 and personnel trained by Mossad (Israel's secret service), to directly control all facets of political life in Iran. Its main task was to suppress opposition to the Shah's government and keep the people's political and social knowledge as minimal as possible. Savak was notorious throughout Iran for its brutal methods.
The interrogation office was established with no limit of using horrific torture tools and techniques to break the arrested dissenters to talk in a matter of hours.
The censorship office was established to monitor journalists, literary figures and academics throughout the country. It took appropriate measures against those who fell out of the regime's line.
Universities, labor unions and peasant organizations, amongst others, were all subjected to intense surveillance by the Savak agents and paid informants. The agency was also active abroad, especially in monitoring Iranian students who publicly opposed the Shah's government.
Interrogation, torture and long term imprisonment by Savak for reading or possessing any forbidden books. The prohibited books were removed from the book-stores and libraries; even the Tozih-ol-Masael written by Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini was forbidden."
Fact or not???