Reader Comments:

Posted By: Dan Alba
Date: 2008-08-12 12:35:08

Wonderfully contextual and well-sourced. ("I'm not worthy!")

There is a bit of good news to relate (tentatively, of course)...

It's reported this morning that Russia has decided to cease its military operations. [source]

It looks like peace and actual diplomacy might just break out (not that the neocon-Likudniks and their cronies in corporate media won't have anything to say about that). 

BTW: Just to give readers an idea of just how slimy the MSM's efforts at spinning the situation can be (especially CNN and the BBC), check out the following. [source]

Wow.

Report violation

Posted By: Jean-Christophe Roux
Date: 2008-08-12 13:25:15

I would not say "Bush and Gang" but "US Congress" because it is clear that the whole Washington system agrees on the strategy of using diplomacy to prepare wars. I understand that Bush is leading the field here but it is always sad to meet someone thinking that Obama is pro-peace when the guy  voted to fund the Iraq efforts, thinks the US should murder more human beings in Aghanistan to keep the US safe and is increasing his rethoric against Russia in support of Georgia by the minute. War is bad but the other output of diplomacy is "economic sanctions" and is no better. How many Iraqi children did Bill Clinton kill under his program "Oil for Food"? The US should refrain from  both military and diplomatic action. Let the Georgians and Russians kill each other while the US government brings back every soldier overseas and fire them from this so-called "proud public service". 

Report violation

Posted By: Jean-Christophe Roux
Date: 2008-08-12 13:59:07

To add another trick used by some in the media to peddle war spirit against Russia. Page Six of the NY Post opens with:

"Riviera fed up with Rusians"

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08122008/gossip/pagesix/riviera_fed_up_with_russians_124101.htm

Once the story is put in the context described by the excellent article above, it is quite chilling. 

Report violation

Posted By: Dan Alba
Date: 2008-08-12 14:28:07

Indeed, Mr. Roux.

It's only par for the course, that the Rupert Murdoch-owned NY Post would engage in tabloid war propaganda.

Another note to readers:

Out of all the coverage of the aftermath of destruction, how often do you see the corporate news media reporting on the Ossetian casualties? From South Ossetia, where the first and worst damage was done? I'd say darn near never.

Travesty.

And how often do reporters, anchors, and so-called experts question the hideous illicitness of U.S. and Israeli intervetion in the first place? Or the ongoing military and advisory support for the initial aggressor, Georgia?

Absolutely never.

This is blatantly false war propaganda, from exactly the same folks who stand to benefit from escalation and perpetuation of this tragedy — the same folks who brought us Iraq invasion lies and the current build-up to all-out aggression on Iran. War criminals, the whole lot of them.

Report violation

Posted By: Matt Kough
Date: 2008-08-12 20:00:12

Jake,
I love ya man, but South Ossetia (SO) is and was part of Georgia.  This is nothing short  but Russia reasserting itself in the "Near Abroad" Claiming that (SO) is a sovereign nation is absurd.  This is Kosovo in reverse.  Serbia was justified in fighting for Kosovo and Georgia is justified in pacifying a province that is attempting to break away under arms.  Georgia is on the right in this.  Just becaus there were American troops there training with Georgian troops does not imply a conspiracy.

Since when is supporting a democracy against the tyranny of Russia bad.  Your article sounds just like the apologists in 1956 that justified the Soviets invasion of Hungry.  

Our nation is not the source of all evil in the world.  Russia, Iran, China are authortarian regiemes that make the Patriot Act look tame.  Lets talk about the assinations of Russians by the FSB against dissenters.  Poisoning with PLU 212 and other methods.  

Remember the elections of Ukraine where the pro-West candidate was poisoned by pro-Russian forces.  Lets talk about the journalists that have been murdered inside Russia, the state owned media, the jailing of CEO's that don't give Putin what he wants, etc.

Russia wants to control the West's access oil market.  Russia is pissed that Georgia has a pipe line of its own.  The New Great Game talks about this. This is the first real war about oil.  In contrast, the US allows Iraq to control its oil.

Lets talk about the kooks in Iran that deny the holocaust, eh? Or about Akmadinajad's promise to wipe Israel off the map.  Lets talk about the greatttttt human rights of Iran and the treatment of women.  
Iran's not trying to get nukes...LOL...funny. Even the IAEA backed off the stance that IRan was only trying to develope civilian use nuclear power.
\
This site sites Le Monde (French)
http://swordattheready.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/france-says-nie-report-bogus-has-evidence-iran-seeking-nukes/

Lets talk about China's wonderful treatment of the human fodder that lives there...wonderful for the average man and woman as long as they live in harmony with the state.  


The rebels in S.O. have been for years been agitating and abetted by the Russians. I was talking about this in '99 with my Russian teacher.  

No...the only crime that was committed by Georgia was:
1) they threw the yoke of Russian oppression off
2) they are a democracy that encourages individual responsibility and fights corruption
3) So they sided with two other democracies Israel and the US...horrid. They should have run back into the protective arms of Mother Russia.

Brother,
You are a great guy, but yoou, in your dislike of G W Bush are blinded by the realities of the world.  Iran, China, Russia, ...not nice and they play by no rules of democracy or freedom. Do we have problems?  Of course we do.  I'll not argue that.  But to blame RUSSIAN aggression on our doorstep is wrong and quite frankly dangerous.

Semper Fi,

Matt

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-12 23:25:30

Dear Matt -

Thanks for your input.  I am not a Georgian-Russian political expert although I have been following Iran a bit more.  And actually I would not say I am blinded at all - I constantly search for how I could be wrong, so "groping blindly" and seeking the truth may be more apt :)  In regards to Bush, all I do not hate the guy per say, but let's say the blinders are off.  How would you like to have been shot at in Afghanistan or Iraq in the morning, then flip on the Olympics and see you CiC laughing and patting chicks butts at night?  Not exactly Churchhill-esque.

First Russian and Georgia.  I am not taking either a pro-Georgian or pro-Russian stance.  It is a fact that they are at war.  And in this case, I do not believe there is any much dissent that the Russians were not the aggressors, it was Georgia who launched the attack (see Dan Alba's article at the top).  A case COULD be made that Russia was acting in self-defense - like if Americans at our Panama bases and in the cities got attacked by Guatemala, you bet your buns we would defend!  Also, I disagree with your statement "to blame RUSSIAN aggression on our doorstep is wrong and quite frankly dangerous."  Nowhere in the article did I state that it was our fault that Russia and Georgia had a war.  I merely commented it was a little strange how almost 2,000 Americans finished drills with them a few days earlier before the war was launched by Georgia.  I suppose the 2 possibilities are:

1) Georgia launched the attack without telling us, in fact took advantage of the fact that the olympics were starting and our troops had just left to retain our support.  In which case George W Bush would be working hard to find out what went wrong with our ally.

2) Georgia launched the attack after receiving our permission.  I suppose the other darker possibility is Israel/US told Georgia to attack, but I know of no proof that this was the case, nor what they would hope to gain.

In regards to Georgia being a democracy, I am not so sure about that.  I've read a bit and it seems to me its far more likely their leader launched the attack against SO to keep the mind of the Georgian populace away from the horrendous economy.  Nothing like a war to unite the "patriots!"  It does seem he thought that there was no way Putin would respond so decisively.  Open to more discussion, here but the point is fairly moot.  It doesnt matter whether Georgia is democratic or a dictatorship, there was a war - but if you can prove to me that Georgia is a "democracy" I wouldnt mind taking a look.

I read the swordattheready source (Sword At-The-Ready, a site dedicated to the presentation and discussion of Conservative American Principles in light of the Scriptures, Our True History, Culture and Politics) you sent, and all I have to say is that I think the author exceeds me in his use of invectives and exhortations, but he uses them for war not peace like I prefer.  I could not access lemonde article (damn Chinese firewall) but all it seems to say is that "Teheran continued a military nuclear program after 2003".  It does not say that they believe the program is still underway.  To clear up the NIE report, here is the link.  I suggest rereading it.  Forget about 2003 and 2004 for a sec.  It assesses "with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007"

[link edited for length]

Answer me this - if you thought you were going to be attacked regardless of whether you had WMD or not (cough, Iraq, cough, cough) or whether you gave in or not (cough Taliban wanted to surrender OBL but we rejected this cough cough) why would you NOT try to protect your people by going nuclear since this might be the only thing that could actually halt the attack? 

Try finding a complete (not just CNN cutting and pasting!) translation of the Iranian leaders speeches and send it to me.  Does he really say he wants to kill all Israelis?  Does he really say the holocaust never happened? You might be surprised what you find.  Remember this guy was elected because he had backbone against American oppression (real or perceived, doesnt matter).

Lastly, I know what you mean when you write "Our nation is not the [only] source of all evil in the world."  Good and evil are subjective but c'mon starting wars are evil.  With that as a standard, I wish we weren't A source of evil.

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-12 23:32:27

Matt - a little off topic, but here is a side article alleging that the US supports the MEK, a terrorist organization in Iran.  True or not, I dunno, but worth a read.

[link edited for length]

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-13 02:28:12

A note from another reader:

I agree with Matt -- so here's my satire...

I'm just all upset that Russia didn't formally declare war.. nor did they go before the U.N. and formally ask permission to invade months in advance and get an international coalition together.

Here's a feed from MSNBC.com:
"Georgia sits on a strategic oil pipeline carrying Caspian crude to Western markets and bypassing Russia. The British oil company BP shut down one of three Georgian pipelines, saying it was a precaution."

So that's it man... Russia's doing it for the oil!
NO BLOOD FOR OIL! "Medvedev lied... people died!!"

Sounds like a double standard to me. Now, we were expecting that the U.N. response would be totally impotent, but I think the EU should have responded much stronger. In my opinion the EU or at least NATO should have backed Georgia much more strongly, at least not have let Russia invade as far as they did.

South Ossetia is officially part of Georgia, they had a right to put down an armed rebellion in their own country. It did not warrant this response from Russia. Georgia is a strategic partner for the west and should be supported. Let's hope though that Sarkozy **cough cough** talked some sense into the Russians and cooler heads will be able to prevail.

Another amazing point - is that the Russians, Putin in particular, used almost the exact same argument for going into Georgia as Hitler used to take the Sudetenland. "We were just protecting our Russian Nationals, that want to be part of Russia and not Georgia".

I wonder if Sarkozy will go back to France and say "There will be peace in our time".

I guess we're just doomed to never learn from History.

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-13 03:00:21

Reader: "I'm just all upset that Russia didn't formally declare war.. nor did they go before the U.N. and formally ask permission to invade months in advance and get an international coalition together."

Reply: Things are different when the time span is immediate. and the gov't is more totalitarian like Russia is. Food for thought, if a nuclear attack occurs you can bet whoever it is won't ask for permission - whether its Isreal, Pakistan or the US.  Second, to play on your US satire:  Well, good thing that we put together a nice airtight legal case (ahem rule of law) against Osama Bin Laden and presented it to the world before going into Afghanistan with the coalition.  Nevermind that the Taliban probably would have given up OBL if we had kept negiotiating.  As far as Iraq+WMD and going to the UN, I seem to remember Colin Powell holding a small vial of 'anthrax' - it was just a PR stunt.

Reader: "Here's a feed from MSNBC.com: 'Georgia sits on a strategic oil pipeline carrying Caspian crude to Western markets and bypassing Russia. The British oil company BP shut down one of three Georgian pipelines, saying it was a precaution.' So that's it man... Russia's doing it for the oil!  NO BLOOD FOR OIL! "Medvedev lied... people died!!"

Reply: Ummm last time I checked - 2005 edition of Economist Pocket World in Figures

Russia Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d.  Consumes 2,469,000 barrels/d

USA  Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d  Consumes 19,708,000 barrel/d

Right.... Russia needs oil like I need another new car

 Reader: "South Ossetia is officially part of Georgia, they had a right to put down an armed rebellion in their own country."

This admittedly a little muddy. From Wiki:

"According to the Tskhinvali election authorities, the referendum turned out a majority for independence from Georgia where 99% of South Ossetian voters supported independence and the turnout for the vote was 95% and the referendum was monitored by a team of 34 international  observers.... However, it was not recognized internationally by the UN, European Union, OSCE, NATO and the Russian Federation, given the lack of ethnic Georgian participation and the legality of such referendum without recognition from the central government in Tbilisi.The European Union, OSCE and NATO condemned the referendum."

 Like Tbilisi would give permission!  There was also another referendum in 1992 in favor of independence.

So this all depends on your definition of 'official'  To me in this case, what is official is W Wilson's  infamous 'self-determination'  Whether this election was rigged/misrepresented, etc. I can't comment, but with the observers, % of the reported vote, and the fact that South Ossetians are killing Georgians and vice versa, is a sign to me that they have some serious problems playing together, so probably its best to allow SO to officially 'secede.'  Even if before the war some S Ossetians or Georgians living in SO thought differently, I bet they prefer independence now after getting shot at by their government!!!

 Reader wrote: "Another amazing point - is that the Russians, Putin in particular, used almost the exact same argument for going into Georgia as Hitler used to take the Sudetenland. "We were just protecting our Russian Nationals, that want to be part of Russia and not Georgia".  wonder if Sarkozy will go back to France and say "There will be peace in our time". I guess we're just doomed to never learn from History.

Reply: I don't completely agree with the way you put it, but this whole thing does sure seem like something out of the Balkans or Middle East.  Messy!!

Report violation

Posted By: Matt Kough
Date: 2008-08-13 17:30:50

Reply: Ummm last time I checked - 2005 edition of Economist Pocket World in Figures

Russia Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d. Consumes 2,469,000 barrels/d

USA Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d Consumes 19,708,000 barrel/d

Right.... Russia needs oil like I need another new car

 

Jake,

Russia is going forward to control oil that reaches Europe for domination. Whoever controls the oil, controls the world (shamelessly stolen from Dune). Look how Russia has threatened Ukrain, Belaruss and Western Europe with restricting oil if they don\'t get their way.

www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/14931716.htm

www.fairness.com/resources/category?node=702

 

This admittedly a little muddy. From Wiki:

"According to the Tskhinvali election authorities, the referendum turned out a majority for independence from Georgia where 99% of South Ossetian voters supported independence and the turnout for the vote was 95% and the referendum was monitored by a team of 34 international observers.... However, it was not recognized internationally by the UN, European Union, OSCE, NATO and the Russian Federation, given the lack of ethnic Georgian participation and the legality of such referendum without recognition from the central government in Tbilisi.The European Union, OSCE and NATO condemned the referendum."

Like Tbilisi would give permission! There was also another referendum in 1992 in favor of independence.

 

Exscuse me for a moment.... GEORGIA DID NOT, I REPEAT DID NOT INVADE RUSSIAN TERRITORY...THEY WERE ASSERTING CONTROL OVER A REBELLIOUS PROVINCE THAT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY MEDLED WITH BY THE RUSSIANS!

 

Poor economy? Read this... http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/georgia/intro-econ.htm

and this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Georgia

So this all depends on your definition of \'official\' To me in this case, what is official is W Wilson\'s infamous \'self-determination\' Whether this election was rigged/misrepresented, etc. I can\'t comment, but with the observers, % of the reported vote, and the fact that South Ossetians are killing Georgians and vice versa, is a sign to me that they have some serious problems playing together, so probably its best to allow SO to officially \'secede.\' Even if before the war some S Ossetians or Georgians living in SO thought differently, I bet they prefer independence now after getting shot at by their government!!!

 

You are soooo right dude,

We should have let the South go. Long love slavery. I mean the owners of slaves agreed to leave the Union. Great argument! Ummmm...hello, the Russians have been involved in SO for a long time...

You're right, the glorious leader did not say wipe Israel off the map...precisely he said

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iran\'s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad today echoed his earlier threats to "wipe Israel off the map" by telling a mass demonstration in Tehran, commemorating the 27th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, that Palestinians and "other nations" will remove Israel from the region, adding a warning to the West that harsh measures against the nation\'s nuclear program would result in Iran walking away from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).

"The policy of Iran has so far been pursuing nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT and IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)," he said. "If we see you (the West) want to violate the right of the Iranian people by using those regulations (against us), you should know that the Iranian people will revise its policies. You should do nothing that will lead to such a revision in our policy," said Ahmadinejad.

The crowd, numbered in the hundreds of thousands accoding to state media, responded to Ahmadinejad\'s defense of its nuclear program – believed by U.S. intelligence to be an effort to acquire atomic weapons – with cries of "Nuclear energy is our undisputable right," "Death to America," "Death of Israel," "Death to Denmark."

I guess saying "remove Israel from the map is not exactly wiping it off the map. And the deat to the USA, Israel, and Denmark is strictly metaphorical.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48790

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/101999

In his 2005 conference titled "World without Zionism" President Akmadinajad said"...Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.^[2] ^ [link edited for length] [link edited for length] Fathi, Nazila (October 30, 2005). "Text of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad\'s Speech". Week in Review. The New York Times. Retrieved on 2006-10-17."

Pretty clear cut to me.

Democracy in Georgia?

Look up the Rose Revolution and the reforms of the current presidnet.

Is there perfect democracy in Georgia...um no...they are learning after decades of RUSSIAN domination. 

 

 

Report violation

Posted By: Matt
Date: 2008-08-13 17:36:47

As far as the sane and rational man in Iran and the Holocaust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/world/middleeast/27holocaust.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/world/middleeast/27holocaust.html

Of course he kinda changed his mind when he went before the students of Columbia University.

 

Oh yeah, at that same speech, he denied that homosexuals existed in the glorious state of Iran. 

 

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-13 21:17:41

Dear Matt - 

1) Point taken on the oil, as I am sure Russia would love to have more control over Europes oil. (Unable to access the websites you posted thogh).  My point is simply that its not nearly as economy-threatening for them as it is for the USA, as they are a net exporter, that's all!  

2) You wrote "GEORGIA DID NOT, I REPEAT DID NOT INVADE RUSSIAN TERRITORY...THEY WERE ASSERTING CONTROL OVER A REBELLIOUS PROVINCE THAT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY MEDLED WITH BY THE RUSSIANS!"

My reply - I don't believe I wrote or thought anywhere that SO is Russian territory.  Georgia ('aggressively' if you will) attacked South Ossetia, which has been trying to become independent for 15 years and has a lot of Russian passports (that rascal Putin, giving away passports!)  Even supposing that SO is a section of Georgia, the point is now moot.  Do you really think that SO wants to go back to Georgia after what Georgia just did, esp. when they see how Russia will protect them?

3) On succession, if you really believe that we are the "United States of America" then each state has a right to secede.  Lincoln decided to execute a civil war more or less because of this and the economic implications (glad you didnt say he started the war just because he wanted to free the slaves!), but principally there needs to be a benefit.  For instance, if California gets tired of paying more than its fair share of federal taxes and decides to secede, or if Montana just gets super-pissed off, why not allow these states to leave?  If its not in their best interest to join the Union, independence.

4) On Ahmadinejad unfortunately not all the links you posted.  I did look at the BBC and NY Times and worldnetnews and israelnationalnews links.  Sorry, have to throw these all out as false propaganda.  Ahmadinejad is no lover of the West by any means, but you are following along with a media that is completely out of context.  Look at your one solid quote again:

"The policy of Iran has so far been pursuing nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT and IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)," he said. "If we see you (the West) want to violate the right of the Iranian people by using those regulations (against us), you should know that the Iranian people will revise its policies. You should do nothing that will lead to such a revision in our policy," said Ahmadinejad.

So check the NPT and IAEA.  Where in them is the permission to build WMD?  You won't find it.  However, they are allowed to pursue nuclear technology for electrical power.  (Just like the rest of mankind (esp the USA) that doesnt have hydroelectric power should do, by the way) 

Fortunately Dan Alba wrote this article series here so you can examine the media manipulation of Ahmajinehad and a bunch of other topics for yourself in   [link edited for length]

Heres another thought. As far as him going to Columbia to lecture, can you imagine Bush going to a top university in Iran?  McCain?  Obama?

5) Yeah, been learning a lot more about Georgia since I wrote this article, thanks for helping.  Apparently learned that Russia actually DID go to the UN Security Council to try to get permission to help SO (it was denied). 

"

In 2003 with considerable CIA help, Georgia's President Saskashvili came to power in the so-called bloodless "Rose Revolution." Georgia held parliamentary elections on November 2. International observers called them unfair. Sackashvili claimed he won. He and the united opposition called for protests and civil disobedience. They began in mid-November in the capital Tbilisi, then spread throughout the country. They peaked on November 22, the scheduled opening day for parliament. Instead, Saakashvili-led supporters placed "roses" in the barrels of soldiers' rifles, seized the parliament building, interrupted President Eduard Shevardnadze's speech, and forced him to escape for his safety.

Saakashvili declared a state of emergency, mobilized troops and police, met with Shevardnadze and Zurab Zhvania (the former parliament speaker and choice for new prime minister), and apparently convinced the Georgian president to resign. Celebrations erupted. A temporary president was installed. Georgia's Supreme Court annulled the elections, and on January 4, 2004, Saakashvili was elected and inaugurated president on January 25. New parliamentary elections were held on March 28. Saakashvili's supporters used heavy-handed tactics to gain full control, but behind the scenes Washington is fully in charge. It pulls the strings on its new man in Georgia and stepped up tensions with Russia for control of the strategically important southern Causasus region."   [link edited for length]

Yeah, agree, that doesnt sound like any type of democracy I've ever heard of

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-13 22:52:06

A couple of other comments to me privately and my response:

ReaderA: "Of course, we know that Russia's decision to invade Georgia is really all Bush's fault. Bush MUST have asked Russia to attack Georgia so he could position his forces to invade Iran - it all makes so much sense now"

My reply: Umm, you are missing the point.  Russia's decision was Russia's.  They actually went to the UN Security Council an hour after the most severe fighting starting as the Olympics started, got denied, but went in a few hours later anyways.  I think that for sure Georgia and quite possibly the US as well thought the response would not be so immediate. 

Please do not be so naive in thinking that there is no possibility that geopolitical events are disconnected these days.  Nation-states these days mostly act of self-interest, principles be damned.  And its completely within the realm of possibility that a nation-state A would do an action, expecting that nation-state B would react in a certain way.  Sort of like chess.

Reader B: The Democratic intelligencia composed of  Nancy Pelossi aka "save the world from I do not know what" and Barack Obama aka "inflate my head out of this" would have us believe that Putin is justified in killing any number of Georgians.  But Pres Bush needs the Pope's permission to spank an Afghan!"

My reply:  Sorry, I am not up on Pelosi's and Obama's responses, can you please send me the links?  As far as Pres Bush needing the Pope permission to spank an Afghan, I think you missed my point. 

My point is that while these wars are all happening, the President of the United States is literally hanging out in China laughing, wacking chicks on the ass, and in general having a great time.  Reminds me of how China used to control the world in the late-14th and early-15th centuries; Bush is basically kowtowing in my mind.  However Georgie fully expects that come next January he can ride off into sunset and chill out in Crawford, Texas.

Report violation

Posted By: Iranian Activist
Date: 2008-08-14 00:49:48

The Islamic Republic of Iran has openly executed tens of thousands of Iranian freedom fighters. It has also secretly executed many more. In total, more than one hundred thousand Iranians were executed by this regime during its existence.

The Islamic Republic of Iran stones women to death. It amputates its citizens. It gouges Iranians' eyes.

There are two hundred thousand political prisoners across the country, many of them being tortured physically and psychologically on a daily basis until they die or until they become a vegetable.

A cloud of misery and hopelessness reigns over Iran's skies.

The regime trains and exports terrorists to the rest of the world. They want guaranteed survival despite committing atrocities in Iran. They will get their guarantee once they become a nuclear power.

We must leave such government alone, otherwise we will burn in a lake of fire and brimstone.

From the bottom of my heart, I wish that one day, you suffer the same fate than the people of Iran while a so called superpower watches over you idlely.

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-14 01:19:47

Dear Iranian Activist -

Interesting feedback, can you send any links or proof of what you wrote? Hundreds of thousands are a lot of people, should be easy to prove.  Not at all like the movie Inside Iran, that I posted, but personally I havent visited.

Thanks for the well wishes. I thought I was being a little controversial by damning those who support the war with those who are merely passive - in retrospect this is a little Bush-like - with us or against us, but at least its for peace not war in this instance.

Jake

Report violation

Posted By: Matt
Date: 2008-08-14 19:29:25

Come on Jake!

Are you telling me that opression on a horrible scale does not exist in Iran???

Ok man, you discount my sources etc etc etc...please enlighten us. Which sources credible and not propoganda for what you vbelieve?

You dont like Le Monde, BBC, CNN, Fox, WSJ,NYT (cant blame you)...what...who's the good guy in the media.  Alex Jones?  Michael Savage? Arrianna Huffington? LOLOLOL 

I find Dan's piece silly.  Case in point..."The perceived — conceived — existential threat has also been debunked by Iranian officials. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — who has the final word on military and nuclear matters — has issued fatwas against preemptive war and the acquisition and use of nuclear weapons, reaffirming that both are un-Islamic, and Iran has not aggressed upon another nation in over two hundred years."

Yes the Ayatollah's are a trustworthy lot.  I find it inconceivable that supposed freedom lovers on this frorum quoate people like Ayatollah Ali who is a prcaticer of the most death embracing religion after Nazism.  I have never hid my disdain for the muslim and his/her faith.  

I suggest that Dan and others read "Religion of Peace" by Spencer and America Alone by Steyn. 

 

You posted" So check the NPT and IAEA.  Where in them is the permission to build WMD?  You won't find it.  However, they are allowed to pursue nuclear technology for electrical power.  (Just like the rest of mankind (esp the USA) that doesnt have hydroelectric power should do, by the way) "

Ummmm...do the black hats really care about permission.  Do you really think that they abide by them? North Korea...support for Hezzbolah...the murder of anti-Iran politicians in Lebenon etc etc. 

You post;" Heres another thought. As far as him going to Columbia to lecture, can you imagine Bush going to a top university in Iran?  McCain?  Obama?"

Dude...your side stepping the issue of what he said and the human rights abuses in Iran.  Can anyone say Revolutionary Gaurd inside of Iran that arrests people for un0Islamic activity.  

Help me understand here man...What ground are you defending? The right of Putin to flood residents of S.O. with Russian passports? The right of Iran to build nukes and threaten Europe? 

Since when does Jake, the Champion of the Constitution, care if Russia, of all friggin countries, goes to the friggin UN?  THe UN...that august body of people that elected Lybia to the human rights council? C'mon man!

" My reply - I don't believe I wrote or thought anywhere that SO is Russian territory.  Georgia ('aggressively' if you will) attacked South Ossetia, which has been trying to become independent for 15 years and has a lot of Russian passports (that rascal Putin, giving away passports!)  Even supposing that SO is a section of Georgia, the point is now moot.  Do you really think that SO wants to go back to Georgia after what Georgia just did, esp. when they see how Russia will protect them?

Ok...lets say that the South was justified in leaving the Union (in some ways it was legal)fine...lets talk about Georgia.  Should any region of any country be granted independence just because the people say that they want their own territory.  THe treaty of Westphalia (1648) which ended the Thirty Years War gave a precedence that allowed nations within their territory this quaint little term called sovereignty. Georgia wants to maintain its borders.  Why is that wrong.  If the Ossetians want to be closer to Russia...then moveeeeeee. 

 

Ummm last time I checked - 2005 edition of Economist Pocket World in Figures

Russia Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d. Consumes 2,469,000 barrels/d

USA Oil Production 7,698,000 barrels/d Consumes 19,708,000 barrel/d

Right.... Russia needs oil like I need another new car

 No, your point is that Russia's not doing it for the oil...you're right...they are doing to control Europe...that's the point.

 

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-15 00:35:33

Matt -

Thanks for writing, back, I think this is the most interchanges I've ever had on an article at this site yet. 

1) On Iranian oppression, havent studied it too much or traveled to Iran yet, but I would agree that human rights have been trampled on since Mossadeq was removed in the 1950s.  That includes both the US-backed Shah AND the Ayatollahs, sir.  Where I live now, I have no web access to Amnesty or other human rights org's but those reports I've read a few of in the past and they are probably mostly correct. However if you think the US is on a high pedestal above all other nations in terms of int'l human rights violations I would disagree.  That's why I find the Inside Iran movie I linked up above so interesting.  If you have an open mind try watching the first 30 minutes and see what you think - in this case, the BBC guy came off to me as making an effort to be legit and present both sides - did he succeed?  I dunno, but I suspect he did.

2) On the media, I always take care to link the sources I use so others can read them in the articles and debunk if necessary.  In general I just use the big media companies to report the general facts.  However, who to trust?  No one completely I am afraid, but non-religious, non-biased sites or just solitary columnists opinions are interesting.  I try to get both sides as well.  I may find a link at antiwar.com or informationclearinghouse.info, but I always back these ones up.  My issue with MSM is that they "miss" a lot of news and always put a "spin" on things.  I confess I do check globalresearch.ca daily, but everything - everything - I try to take with more than just a grain of salt. here are a couple interesting links

individual columnist [link edited for length]

"Putin Walks into a Trap " [link edited for length]

3) On my mention of Russia going to the UN, I was referring to the satire of another reader.  You misinterpreted that I am a UN lover and supporter of the UN being a higher sovereignty to US citizens that the US govt.  The actual case is that I support Ron Paul's HR 1146 that not only removes the US from the UN but kicks the UN off our turf and out of New York City.  I think its a travesty that Bush signed us back up for UNESCO in 2002 after Reagan got us the hell out of it. (link on UNESCO if you ever have time [link edited for length])  The reader had wriiten why "I'm just all upset that Russia didn't formally declare war.. nor did they go before the U.N. and formally ask permission to invade months in advance and get an international coalition together."   However, like it or not, the UN members are supposed to use the UN as a forum for diplomacy.

4) Jake: So check the NPT and IAEA.  Where in them is the permission to build WMD?  You won't find it.  However, they are allowed to pursue nuclear technology for electrical power.  (Just like the rest of mankind (esp the USA) that doesnt have hydroelectric power should do, by the way) " 

Matt: Ummmm...do the black hats really care about permission.  Do you really think that they abide by them? North Korea...support for Hezzbolah...the murder of anti-Iran politicians in Lebenon etc etc. 

Jake: Okay, first point, the NPT and IAEA do not sanction Iran to build the A-bomb, so if they did they are violating the treaties that they (as far as I know) willingly signed.  Your point is valid as in why trust Iran, North Korea (or any country for that matter!)   However, due to all the attention Iran has been receiving the IAEA has been conducting surprise audits.  What have they found?  Absolutely nothing.  Back to the media thing.  My sources

American mainstream media - I've seen no mention of these surprise audits, not a shock as this goes against the neocon and democrats war propaganda. 

American government - see 2007 NIE report link above, basically no sign of a weapons program

Ron Paul - in June 2008 stated that the IAEA reported Iran had passed 9 surprise audits in the last year (ok, I do pretty much trust this guy, but he's been repeating the same thing publicly in Congress for about as long as I have been alive, so sue me)   [link edited for length]

Iranian press (which if you watch Inside Iran is really the Iranian govt) -  Iran has passed a total of 14 IAEA surprise audits  [link edited for length]

5) On the 'independence of SO'

Matt: Should any region of any country be granted independence just because the people say that they want their own territory.  THe treaty of Westphalia (1648) which ended the Thirty Years War gave a precedence that allowed nations within their territory this quaint little term called sovereignty. Georgia wants to maintain its borders.  Why is that wrong.  If the Ossetians want to be closer to Russia...then moveeeeeee. 

Jake:  Correct me if I am wrong but the origins for SO wanting independence go back 16 years or so, to the breakup of the USSR.  You do realize that South Ossetians are ethnically Persians, mostly Christian right?  I don't think its as clear as day, but why NOT let the people choose?  Are you scared of lots and lots of little nation-lets all over the place?  I'm really not.  On your comment about South Ossetians needing to move.... well maybe they will now that they've been rocketed and shot at.  What mother and father in their right minds would want to raise kids there? 

However, people have ties to their ancestral lands - such as the Palestinians, maybe even yourself to where you grew up or now live.  Like or not, the truth is the Israelis have them separated and penned off so they can control them easier, but that hasn't stopped them.  I am not a fan of Ahminejad, but he raises a few funny questions - if America and Europe felt so bad for the plight of the Jews after WW2, why not give them part of South Carolina?  Nova Scotia?  Scotland? for them to settle down and make babies.  Instead they created a nation from Chaim Weissmans? settlements on Palestinian land.

Report violation

Posted By: Dan Alba
Date: 2008-08-15 13:47:15

This is really simple.

My detractors intentionally confuse 1) my deconstruction of the lame reasons behind illicit neocon foreign policy toward Iran with 2) a defense of barbaric Iranian domestic policy or "radical Islam."

Beyond these dishonest tactics, neocon empire-apologists offer no potent dispute over the arguments against insane and ill-advised neocon foreign policy. All they can do is divert attention away from the political sphere, and onto the arena of religion, which has no weight in matters of legality. The U.S. Constitution gives us no authority to base government policy on "our" religion or that of chosen enemies.

Thanks, Jake, for your efforts; but, until the ankle-biters show us where in the Constitution (or even international law) the U.S. government is granted the authority to wage aggressive economic and military war against Iran or any other nation — no matter their religion or domestic policies — they are just spinning their wheels.

1. Iran has not invaded another country in centuries.

2. Iran declares nuclear weapons to be un-Islamic (supremely illegal).

3. The NIE and the IAEA show no Iranian nuclear weapons program exists.

4. The U.S. Constitution, the Algiers Accords (Iran-US), the UN Charter, and other international laws forbid military and political intervention, much less preemptive war, against any foreign country, even theocracies we might be paranoid over.

5. Good luck with the first four. If the wanna-be antagonists make it this far, we can have an honest debate. Otherwise, they shouldn't waste people's time. Thank you.

 

Report violation

Posted By: Dan Alba
Date: 2008-08-15 14:20:34

I almost forgot. The ankle-biters love to omit the most legitimate evidence against their case. Like above, where one of them shows only the second half of my deconstruction of the "wiped off the map" myth and the hyped Iranian nuclear threat.

Here's the first and most important half of it (bold added):

Still, the "wiped off the map" and "Holocaust/myth" deceptions have persisted in AP’s coverage for 2½ years, despite incontrovertible supplications by Iranian dissidents, Farsi language scholars, and others; all of whom are politically opposed to the current Iranian regime.

So, to update the cursory list of obstacles to honest debate for the ankle-biters...

1. Iran has not invaded another country in centuries.

2. Iran declares nuclear weapons to be un-Islamic (supremely illegal).

3. The NIE and the IAEA show no Iranian nuclear weapons program exists.

4. The U.S. Constitution, the Algiers Accords (Iran-US), the UN Charter, and other international laws forbid military and political intervention, much less preemptive war, against any foreign country, even theocracies we might be paranoid over.

5. The "wiped off the map" and "Holocaust/myth" deceptions have been irrefutably debunked by Iranian dissidents, Farsi language scholars, and others; all of whom are politically opposed to the current Iranian regime.

Good luck with the first five. If the wanna-be antagonists make it this far, we can have an honest debate. Otherwise, they shouldn't waste people's time. Thank you.

Report violation

Posted By: Matt
Date: 2008-08-15 19:18:26

Jake:However, people have ties to their ancestral lands - such as the Palestinians, maybe even yourself to where you grew up or now live.  Like or not, the truth is the Israelis have them separated and penned off so they can control them easier, but that hasn't stopped them.  I am not a fan of Ahminejad, but he raises a few funny questions - if America and Europe felt so bad for the plight of the Jews after WW2, why not give them part of South Carolina?  Nova Scotia?  Scotland? for them to settle down and make babies.  Instead they created a nation from Chaim Weissmans? settlements on Palestinian land.

Me: You've got a point.  Since we are taking a trip back through times i.e. "...setllements created a nation on Chaim Weissmans settlements on Palestinian land"  lets go back to the beginning.  The Bible is a good reference. We remove the Jews and find the Hittites.  We can go find some Mayans and eject anyone not "Mayan" enough.  We should abolish the Constitution and the US  giving the land back to the Indians.  

For that matter, Syria, Lebenon, Turkey, and all the rest were actually Christian lands before the infidel Muslims conquered  them.  We Christians should get these areas back and ship the Mohamed lovers to Medina. 

Of course I am using an absurdity to illustrate a point.   

 I can throw the same question back.  If Iran or Syria love the Palestinians so much. 

I understnd your point about S.O. peeps wanting independence for 16 years.  However, I reject the basic premise that Georgia does not have the right to maintain the integrity of its own borders, even at the cost of war.  Russia invaded Georgia in 1921 or '22 and absorbed that geographical location. This current action by the Russian Empire is not without precedent.  

 Jake: On my mention of Russia going to the UN, I was referring to the satire of another reader.  You misinterpreted that I am a UN lover and supporter of the UN being a higher sovereignty to US citizens that the US govt.  The actual case is that I support Ron Paul's HR 1146 that not only removes the US from the UN but kicks the UN off our turf and out of New York City.

Amen brother. I despise that institution and its system.  Its just another exstention of the League of Nations set up by the first American dictator Woodrow Wilson.  

I will ask that you read the NIE report.  Its full of half guesses and the such with different levels of confidence.  But I really like this little nugget : " We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons."

But this statement can survive scrutiny from both directions:

"We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years. (Because of intelligence gaps discussed elsewhere in this Estimate, however, DOE and the NIC assess with only moderate confidence that the halt to those activities represents a halt to Iran's entire nuclear weapons program.)"

A lot of wiggle room there.

Jake, I have never stated that you are a U.N. lover.  You know that I agree with you on a lot of domestic stuff.  I jst think we have different opinions on this S.O. conflict.  But rest assured if I've used any personal language that was offensive then I humbly apologize.

P.S. Sorry about the sucky spelling. 

 

Report violation

Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-08-16 00:35:49

Matt -

Not offended at all, have developed a thick skin here so to speak, but I really like hearing your point of view.  Thanks again for the conversation, if you ever want to give Dan's 5 points above a shot, go right ahead, you have made a small start on them already.  I wonder if we agree enough that you'd be willing to join the Campaign for Liberty?  :)

Jake

Report violation

Posted By: Matt
Date: 2008-08-17 20:29:17

Dan,

I really love your use of the term ankle biters and neo-cons.  
Although I might have called your article silly (especially the part where you call the MSM war criminals…wow I thought a Constitutional scholar such as yourself would love the first amendment) I never called you silly.
However, what you have done by calling we that dissent names is an attempt to debase the person and not the argument.  These are the same tactics that Stalin and Hitler used to purge their own parties.  I didn’t know that you admire the Nazi’s and the Communists. But hey…each to his/her own.  

Now my little castrati (since we are name calling now) I will attempt to answer your five erudite points.

1. Iran has not invaded another country in centuries.

    Four problems with this:
    A) logically speaking your argument boils down to this illustration; I beat my wife but I  don’t club baby seals, therefore I am a good person and tree hugging nature boy
    B) Iran has not existed for centuries. It was the Persian Empire/Kingdom until 1935 when the nation’s leaders changed the name. #
    C) Prior to the name change Iran fought numerous border wars with Russia, the Ottoman Empire, Georgia, etc. The most notable was the seizure of the Peacock Throne by Nader Shah in 1738.#  There were other wars with Russia, the Ottomans, the Afgans.
    D) What exactly is the time period in your saintly opinion when a country becomes an honest broker in international relations for not invading another nation? I mean we haven’t invaded a nation since’03...are we good guys now? Its been half a decade.  We are definitely on the high road to a pious place.

This point of yours is rather anemic and sophomoric.

2. Iran declares nuclear weapons to be un-Islamic (supremely illegal).
It is interesting to note that “…There is a binding rule that saves the fatwa pronouncements from creating judicial havoc, whether within a Muslim country or at the level of the Islamic world in general: it is unanimously agreed that a fatwa is only binding on its author. #  It is interesting to note that “In 2003 Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khomeini issued a fatwa, an official religious ruling, that declared Islam forbids the building or stockpiling of nuclear weapons.” # Who is that Ayatollah speaking for?
Pakistan , certainly a Muslim nation, enjoys the possession of nukes.  
Iran’s top mufti issues a fatwa the same year that the NIE and the IAEA think that Iran was still covertly building nukes#, wow, there’s a stretch.  Did you ever pause to consider that an Ayatollah can lie to the infidel.  Matter of fact, in Islam, it is perfectly legal to lie to an infidel.#

So your point proves what?  Sounds like convenient  propaganda to me. I bet when you read history you believed Hitler’s justification for going to war with Poland.



3) The NIE and the IAEA show no Iranian nuclear weapons program exists.

Ahhhh, the game of semantics.  I love those games.

Nowhere in the NIE report does it state that there is no weapons (nukes)  being fashioned at this time.  The report simply states that there is a low probability of a current operation.  The report goes on to state that there is a high probability that there was a high probability of a program in 2003. The NIE report uses the word confidence in place of my word of probability.# Wow, confidence , I am so glad we are dealing with the use of feelings in verifying the hard evidence of discontinued nuclear arms research.   
I can’t really speak to IAEA except to chuckle at this line: “To build further confidence, Iran has decided, on a voluntary basis, to continue and extend its suspension to include all enrichment related and reprocessing activities, and specifically: the manufacture and import of gas centrifuges and their components; the assembly, installation, testing or operation of gas centrifuges; work to undertake any plutonium separation, or to construct or operate any plutonium separation installation; and all tests or production at any uranium conversion installation.” Yeah, I love the term voluntary


What are those wacky nuke programs doing in this five year hiatus ?  Maybe they went on vacation.  Maybe they got part time jobs at a strip club.  Makes you wonder.

4) The U.S. Constitution, the Algiers Accords (Iran-US), the UN Charter, and other international laws forbid military and political intervention, much less preemptive war, against any foreign country, even theocracies we might be paranoid over.

Sorry, just reread the Constitution and can’t find the part that states without equivocation that preemptive war is allowed.
The Algiers Accord: Says we can’t mess with the internal affairs of Iran.  If your enemy is potentially building weapons that are for external uses then it ceases to be an internal matter. The Accords become moot at that time.
I really have no good response to a UN charter than to say: Screw ‘em, they’re the UN, who cares? We should never have signed on that org in the first place.

5) The "wiped off the map" and "Holocaust/myth" deceptions have been irrefutably debunked by Iranian dissidents, Farsi language scholars, and others; all of whom are politically opposed to the current Iranian regime.
You’re right Ahmadinejad did not utter those words, he was just repeating what that peace loving Ayatollah Khomeini said.  He just repeated it. I’m sure he meant nothing by it.
“…the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time.”
My snicker moment comes when Dan sites this source Juan Cole and Cole proceeds with this nugget
“It is in fact probably a reference to some phrase in a medieval Persian poem. It is not about tanks.”
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Regarding the Holocaust, Iran has set up a “World Holocaust Foundation”#investigating the veracity of the number of dead as oft quoted by Jews, history, and the media. Yeah, good job Dan, side with David Duke, he was a member at the council on Zionism in Tehran.

Well castrati, that’s my attempt.  In case you haven’t noticed, us wanna-be antagonists just have different opinions. If you insist on calling people names, be more true and be like Stalin (who you seem to emulate) and call us agitators and saboteurs.

# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran 
# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nader_Shah
# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatwa
# 15. Robert Collier, "Nuclear weapons unholy, Iran says Islam forbids use, clerics proclaim," San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 31, 2003.

# http://odni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf# http://odni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf
#http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070206103633.e95j3556&show_article=1
# http://www.hirhome.com/islam/culture01.htm

For some reason my footnotes did not survive the cut and paste.  I can email the article I wrote with the footnotes in the proper place. 

Report violation

Posted By: Matt
Date: 2008-08-17 20:32:29

Sorry, just reread the Constitution and can’t find the part that states without equivocation that preemptive war is allowed.

Should have read "isn't".  I hate when I forget to conjugate properly. 

Report violation