Five Iranians including a woman were executed this morning. Farzad Kamangar, the dissident Iranian Kurdish teacher, Shirin Alamhouli, Ali Heidarian, Farhad Vakili and Mehdi Eslamian were hanged in the early hours of this morning.
Their lawyers said they had not been informed at all about the sentences being carried out today.
I have been informed there will be a demonstration outside the Iranian embassy today at 5 pm, in protest to these executions.
I am rather wary of the Embassy Protests now, the last one I went to they told me off for waving the Lion and Sun Flag and told me to "go away if I was here to cause trouble"...apparently waving the flag of Iran is considered causing trouble by these regime goons. Last time I give up my time for them.
I feel your pain my brother. This tops all possible cruelty.
Did you also mention that they were terrorists, detonating bombs in mosques?
Muhammad Siddiq Khan was also a teacher. Does it mean he was innocent?
Can you give us the name of just one person Farzad Kamangar had supposedly killed?
Can you prove to us they went through a fair trial?
Was Muhammad Siddiq Khan executed?
Discretion is advised.
Please watch this video and send every where in the world, especially to the human right organisation in your location.
After five students were executed by Iranian revolutionary guard, Iranian regime asked the student family, to pay for government because the Iranian government spent some time for execution of their children.
Please watch this video film and send to the world, after you watched this video, you will understand the pain of those family.
We are calling to:
Human right organisation around world
Human right watch
European court of human rights
United States congress
And individual who care for human rights
Please watch this video and ask Iran to stop exaction of innocent Kurdish student.
© Kurdistan united news agency
The lion and sun flag is an insult to the people who have lost their lives and livelihood in this movement. It's an insult to the people who have been imprisoned, raped, and tortured. It's an insult to the people who were hung this morning.
You are basically telling them lets swap one dictatorship for another by waving that flag. It's as if opposition Russians came waving the flag of Czar Nikolis in opposition to the Bolsheviks/Soviets.
The lion and sun flag is the Pahlavi flag. It is the symbol of a dynasty. No matter if it came to being 500yrs ago with the Safavids (another ass-backwards dynasty).
We are trying to give Iran back to the people, not back to a family.
Don't taint the movement by waving that flag publicly - leave it in your room.
Boy you are a demagogue. Iranian nationalists, and not just Monarchists, take pride in the Lion and Sun flag. Plus, if the folks over the are risking everything to fight for freedom of speech and assembly, shouldn't our protest movements reflect the same values by allowing people to express dissent however they want to?
You Islamic Republic supporters use this idiotic argument the whole time. Genius, one idiotic group does not taint an ancient flag. If that were the case then no Briton should ever fly the Union Flag since according to your warped argument it is only the flag of the fascist BNP. Get a clue!
Pray tell, if the Lion and Sun flag were a Pahlavi flag why do ANTI-MONARCHIST groups like the PMOI, NCRI, etc use it?
If it is a symbol of the Pahlavi dictatorship why did groups opposed to the Royal dictatorship like the National Front and Dr Mossadegh use the flag?
More to the point, why would I, an ardent republican fly the Lion and Sun flag if it were a monarchist flag? Please note that I am referring to the Lion and Sun Flag without the Imperial Crown, since that flag was the Pahlavi flag, if you don't believe me you can check any Pahlavi era passport or military service card, the Lion has a crown above the Sun.
The symbol of the Lion and Sun dates back thousands of years to the Achaemenid dynasty, it is an ancient symbol of the Persians, unlike your Islamic Republic kharchangi/onion flag which has only ever been associated with Islamism and dictatorship.
I do indeed have a Lion and Sun flag on my bedroom wall and I also have one that I take to protests. If any group is scared of that flag they are definitely tied to this filthy regime and I have no interest in working with such groups.
Please use intelligent arguments next time
Arash, You are too old and don't understand what I am saying.
If my statements get turned into calling me an "Islamic Republic supporter" then I mean, I just can't take you seriously.
So Arash, fuck you, the pmoi, mek, the shah, the safavids, and any other dynasty.
All the opposition exile groups are irrelevant and have not been a part of Iranian society for years. So if Massoud Rajavi wants to wave that flag then he may because he is entirely irrelevant - just like the flag itself and anyone who chooses to raise it.
Just ask yourself one question, have you seen that flagged waved in Iran in opposition? NO.
You are detached from reality and what everyone in Iran in fighting for. You are no different than the mullahs, for you're a monarchist.
We are against mullahs and monarchs.
You are someone who thinks that Iran is defined by a flag and can't understand why someone would ask you not to come and wave that flag at an opposition rally!! Were they IRI supporters too!?
Just like the Allah will one day be removed from the flag and take its place in history, so has the lion and the sun.
Put down the flag and join your people. Stop spitting in their bloody faces.
" I am rather wary of the Embassy Protests now, the last one I went to they told me off for waving the Lion and Sun Flag and told me to "go away if I was here to cause trouble"...apparently waving the flag of Iran is considered causing trouble by these regime goons."
So the people who take the time to come and protest in front of IRI embassies are themselves "IRI goons?" LOL
How can anyone take you seriously!!?? I sure as hell don't.
Or Sohrab for that matter. He's just another Lion's-ass sniffing buffoon. Haha, "demagogue" You sure you know what that means counselor? LOL.
It's hard for me to take you seriously Sohrab, but what the hell:
There can't be dissent within dissent. Ideally, yes - the opposition movement should represent what it is trying to achieve. Yet, Iranian history is nuanced - so if that flag causes disintegration amongst the opposition then the opposition naturally weakens.
And furthermore, to be so stubborn over a flag as to eschew the same people fighting against the regime is absurd to me (which is what Arash is doing).
Just as absurd as your arguments and off-point use of the English language is. Do me a favor and look up demagogue and then tell me how my statement led you to believe I am a demagogue. LOL.
When you act retarded, Sohrab, I have to call it like I see it, RETARD.
Next time try to engage me without calling me names, Sohrab and Arash. But if not, I can play your game better than you.
Arash, last thing:
"The symbol of the Lion and Sun dates back thousands of years to the Achaemenid dynasty, it is an ancient symbol of the Persians..."
So why didn't the Achaemenid dynasty use it as their flag? I mean, if it's the symbol of Persians why wouldn't they use their own symbol?
Who decided to make it the flag of Iran? Oh yea, that happened 2,000 years later with the Safavids. Wait, they're telling me that the Safavids emphasized the Lion and the Sun as the two tenets of Iranian society: the State and, wait for it, Shia Islam!
The only meaning the lion and the sun had back during the Achamenid days was astrological buddy.
If you want to wave a a truly historic flag then raise the flag of the Achamenid dynasty, not the two-bit flag of the Safavids, Qajars, and Pahlavis - who all tortured and oppressed their societies in one way or the other in order to stay in power (just like the IRI).
" I do indeed have a Lion and Sun flag on my bedroom wall and I also have one that I take to protests. If any group is scared of that flag they are definitely tied to this filthy regime and I have no interest in working with such groups."
Good. They don't either, that's why they told you to go away.
Mission accomplished. Loser.
It's hard to use "intelligent arguments" when your responding to people who lack even the semblance of intelligence. LOL.
Barmakid you Un-Iranian Mullah lackey, I'll tell you this one more time in the hope that it penetrates your skull, Shir o Khorshid is an ancient symbol of the Iranian nation and is waved by all manner of people, Nationalist, monarchist, anti-monarchist and so on.
You didn't answer my other question. The BNP neo nazi party in the UK have the Union Flag in their logo. Does this mean that the Union Flag is suddenly a fascist flag?! Get real!
The only reason you dislike the Lion and Sun flag is cause you dislike the idea of Iranian nationhood. You're just another Ommati, you probably agreed with Khamenei when he denounced Chaharshanbeh Souri...don't forget, the Qajars also celebrated Chaharshanbeh Souri, according to your warped logic obviously Norouz is a symbol of "torture and oppression" :))))
Yes, only an idiot would take my words and twist them into "nourooz is symbol of torture bla bla bla"
To be sure, it is a pagan holiday though :))
And Amir, the lion and sun are NOT the symbol of Iranian nationhood. That's RIDICULOUS.
IT WASN'T EVEN A SYMBOL OF THE IRANIAN NATION UNTIL THE 1500S! DO YOU GET THAT?
IN FACT IT WAS NEVER A SYMBOL OF THE IRANIAN NATION - IT WAS THE SYMBOL OF A DYNASTY THAT LATER CAME TO BE PERCEIVED AS A NATIONAL SYMBOL. AND OF COURSE WITH EACH DYNASTY IT TOOK ON SOME CHANGES.
DO YOU GET THAT IRAN HAS NEVER HAD A GOVERNMENT THAT IS NOT TIED TO ONE FAMILY OR THE OTHER?
DO YOU GET THAT EVERY FLAG HAS REPRESENTED A DYNASTY AND NOT THE PEOPLE? (EXCEPT FOR MAYBE A FEW ASTRONOMICALLY ORIENTED FLAGS OF THE ACHAMAENIANS)
You are a relic of the past, just like your ideas.
p.s. And your union flag example is retarded. I am not calling the lion/sun flag a fascist flag or whatever. I am simply saying it is the symbol of dynasty and monarch. It is a symbol propagated by some family that was in power at some time, not one that represents the collective history of pre-islamic Iran and its people.
The lion and sun flag is a flag of Islamic dynasties, and you're a fool if you think otherwise.
IR mozdoor, the Lion and Sun is a Mithraist symbol and is over 5000 years old.
You illiterate idiot; it has nothing to do with monarchy. Why don't you stop your blabbering and go and pick up your pay check from IR?
they were having a serious discussion about the flag....and here you come with your stupid idiotic allegations that just because someone doesn't agree with you...they must be getting paid by the Iranian government.
Seriously, shut the fuck up and get lost bitch. you're a dirty whore who doesn't deserve the time of day.
they were having a serious discussion about the flag....and here you come with your stupid idiotic allegations that just because someone doesn't agree with you...they must be getting paid by the Iranian government.
Seriously, shut the fuck up and get lost bitch. you're a dirty whore who doesn't deserve the time of day.
Hey barmakid Bache Kooni/Toodehi you antinational mozdoor aren't worthy of speaking Pahlavi's name.
The one dynasty that liberated us from the Qajar scum and foiled every single pro- soviet Hezbe toodeh/Fadayan-khalgh conspiracy in the interest of your islamomarxist paymasters.
Reza Shah-e Bozorg shall be remembered as the great father of modern Iran and there is nothing you can do against it.
LOL. Ghorboonet beram Neda jan. harfhat kheili bamaze (va bimani) hastand :))
I got nothing against Reza Shah. In fact I think the reforms (land and literacy) he undertook did more for the Iranian nation than anything the IRI has ever done.
Please, do not confuse my disdain for monarchy with disdain for Reza Shah.
Let's say Reza Shah was the best king Iran has ever had, even better then Korosh-e bozorg. How can we be sure that his son, or his son's son, would govern the country just as nobly?
We have fallen victim to such a thing many times; the Safavids and the Qajars (as you mentioned) are vivid examples.
We simply cannot be sure.
As a younger Iranian it is my belief that my parents' country should not be governed at the whim of an individual.
It is my belief that one of the oldest and richest nations in the world should not be governed by ONE man.
I cannot support the return of a monarch, no matter if Reza Shah was an exceptional leader that brought Iran into modernity (and in many ways, he did).
I cannot support velayet-faqih, for that is simply a religious monarchy.
Just as Reza Shah brought Iran into modernity in the 19th century, we should honor his legacy and intent by understanding that it's not just our government that needs to be modernized today, but our ideas.
You are such a confused little boy. First you have a go at the nonpartisan symbol of the Iranian nation, the Lion and Sun flag, but then you express admiration for the unconstitutional fascist Reza Shah Pahlavi. You're living in a paradox!
Go away, do some reading, and come back when you can really tell what's oppressive and what's not.
Reza Shah's reign was during the 20th century you illiterate moron, Barmakiri.
Oh look Bache basiji, SZ is back! Missed you, where have you been?
So you're not IR mozdoor? I thought you said your Sepahi daddy fixed you up with a job with an oil company to "develop Iran's oil"!!!
Why don't you run along and develop some more oil now!!!
We all know that Reza Shah's reign was in the 20th century, it was a simple mistake.
And by the way, do you know what 'illiterate' means? I know you don't know what demagogue means, but it's kind of embarrassing for someone studying law to not know that it illiterate means, "unable to read and write."
So after I responded to your statement with seriousness, that's how you choose to engage me?
To call me out on a stupid mistake like saying 19th century instead of the 1900s?
Your a little bitch Sohrab. I tried to show you some respect so we can have the opportunity for constructive debate, but you couldn't take it.
I guess the only hing you're worth is name calling. Don't ever ask me a a question and expect me to take you seriously, because we all know your a retard - and it's kind of difficult to take a retard seriously.
I never called Reza Shah a fascist. And again, the lion and son is not "nonpartisan symbol," it seems to me that YOU need to do the reading.
If you would actually talk like a civilized person and instead of instantly calling me a "regime supporter" (and other names) maybe you could make sense of what I'm actually saying instead of choking on your own rage.
There is only one regime supporter on this blog: SZ. And it pains me to say, he seems to be exponentially more educated and worthy to debate than any of you two-bit losers that only know how to call people names.
Just look at this thread,
Neda: Said nothing but called me names
Sohrab: He asked me a question, I answered it, and rthen he decided to call me names (albeit with words he doesn't know the definition of)
Arash: Well, Arash just seems like an angry old man who misses the way the Shah's penis used to taste in his mouth. (Btw, I'm sorry you don't have the capacity to understand my nuanced views about Reza Shah and monarchy).
If you guys want to call people names, do it on your own time. A blog is for debating.
SZ illustrates the Islamists' love for women, passionately touted by Mr. Ahmadinejad.
Arash (a man) calls Barmakid an "Un-Iranian Mullah lackey" who uses "idiotic argument[s]."
Barkakid (a man) calls Arash "a monarchist" and an "idiot."
Later, Neda (a woman) calls Barmakid an "illiterate idiot" and suggests he "go and pick up your pay check from IR."
Then SZ (an IR supporter) -- that's "IR" as in "Islamist Regime" not "Islamic Republic" -- SZ writes:
SZ: "Neda, they were having a serious discussion about the flag....and here you come with your stupid idiotic allegations..[etc.]" And concludes: "shut the fuck up and get lost bitch. you're a dirty whore."
So, if men insult one another, it is a serious discussion. BUT if a woman dares join in, she is a disrupter and deserves to be abused in specifically -- and may I say disgustingly -- sexual terms.
First: IR supporters hope this kind of language will intimidate IR opponents because it is a verbal expression of the all-to-real violence that threatens them when they dare oppose Islamism in daily life, and especially because it reminds women that they may be attacked physically simply for daring to act as equals, thereby annoying 'bottom-dwelling' men. The goal of SZ's disgusting display is to remind the victims of the whip, thereby inducing self-censorship.
Second: SZ has kindly illustrated what the IR will bring to the Commission on the Status of Women.
And let me add, regarding the outpouring of hate by SZ towards Neda: how infuriating it must be for the Islamist Regime misogynists to see the fierce equality of the rebels.
When one of the women was asked by some TV interviewer, "Why do you young women gather the stones and then give them to the young men to throw at the basij?" -- she answered something like: "Because they can throw further."
Well, to paraphrase John Milton ("On my Blindness"): 'They also serve who only gather the stones.'
I wrote my two comments above before Barmakid's last two comments were posted, so I have just read his comments now.
How appropriate that barmakid, whose assignment here is to attempt to undermine opposition to Islamist rule through aggressive incoherence, mockery, and attempted intimidation, and who has NO convincing arguments against what Arash and Sohrab wrote about the Iranian flag, would insult the two men using the language of violent sexual hate!
In doing this, barmakid reveals the depths of his (or perhaps "their" or maybe "its") intimacy with the IR.
Because in his language, doesn't barmakid remind one of that IR tactic of "persuasion" -- to threaten young men, that if they dare to fight injustice, the Basij will violently feminize them -- i.e., rape them just as those sadomasochistic criminals rape women who dare to act as equals?
SZ and barmakid are essentially the same. Hence barmakid finds the sewer-mouthed SZ to be "exponentially more educated and worthy" than Arash and Sohrab. Are barmakid and SZ in fact one and the same individual? Or are they just members of the same team?
Sohrab had it right, you are illiterate.
If you had the brains to click on my profile you'd see I was a republican. How can one be a republican and a Shah supporter simultaneously, you genius?!
Both you and the unconstitutional Pahlavis who you admire can go to hell.
Exactly as you say; however neither I nor any freedom loving Iranian woman will be intimidated by these words.
Maa bishomarim. Let them say what they like. We will not be silenced.
Such displays only serves to confirm what we have been saying about the Islmaic Regime's supporters.
In Iran, when we see a rough, rude aggressive lout, (we call them laate bi saro paa, Arazel va Obaash), we tend to say, oh look, he's one of those Ahmadi supporters. They are quite easy to identify, by the way they act and talk.
I like this guy, Barmakid, he must think we were born yesterday. He comes on here, talks absolute nonsense, all the time supporting the Islamic Regime, and then pretends he is not an IR supporter!!
Hey why are so ashamed of being an IR supporter? What's so bad about supporting the IR?
What arguments did Arash make about the flag instead of calling it "a symbol of the Persian nation."
You just lost all credibility (not that you had any to begin with).
Your views of international affairs have ossified with your age. You no longer even have the mental dexterity to discern who began spewing vitriol first on this thread.
Because if you look at the progression of this thread I never once called someone a derogatory name until they began to call me names.
And as far as Neda goes, all she does is call people names - she doesn't make arguments.
NOBODY MADE A COGENT ARGUMENT AS TO WHY THE LION AND SUN SHOULD STAY ON THE FLAG. JUST STATEMENTS BASED ON EMOTION.
Jared, you seem reasonable - but I just can't be reasonable when everyone that responds to me calls me names.
LOOK AT THE PROGRESSION OF THE THIS THREAD.
YOU'RE SO OUT OF TOUCH THAT YOU DON'T EVEN REALIZE ARASH IS DENOUNCING PEOPLE WHO COME TO PROTEST AT IRI EMBASSIES.
SUCH CRAZY PEOPLE YOU ARE.
AND JUST BECAUSE NEDA IS A WOMAN MEANS NOTHING.
YOU GUYS ARE THE OLD, FILTHY REMNANTS OF AN OLDER IRANIAN GENERATION - WITH WAY TOO MUCH HATRED IN YOUR BLOOD.
SO MUCH HATRED THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN A RABID ANTI-IRI OPPONENT (THAT WOULD BE ME) AND MADE ME ALIGN WITH THE ONLY TRUE REGIME SUPPORTER ON THIS BLOG (SZ)
And I'll say it again, he seems to be more educated then the rest of you.
p.s. Jared, I challenge you to show me one cogent argument Arash made, or even Neda for that matter.
And what about that little bitch sohrab who tries to argue but when he gets beat has nothing to say but call people names.
You're such a demagogue sohrab. LOL
When you guys are ready to have serious, constructive arguments I shall respond.
Until then I'm not wasting my time on a bunch of post-40yr olds who have no sense of reality and just want to hold on to the past.
AGAIN - ARASH IS CALLING THE PEOPLE WHO COME TO IRI EMBASSIES TO PROTEST "REGIME GOONIES"
If that doesn't illustrate how demented your ilk is, then I don't know what will.
I'm calling the protest organisers who are backed by the criminal Mir Hossein Mousavi "regime goons"...because that's what they are. I don't diffrentiate between "reformist" Islamists and "hardliner" Islamists.
It's a shame that barmakid posted another comment. This discussion had a certain elegance when it ended with Neda's evisceration of SZ and Barmakid.
But since, although eviscerated, the undead returns, demonstrating true job loyalty, I'll reply.
1. Barmakid insults me childishly, then claims I falsely accused him of starting the insults in the discussion of the Irani8an flag.
That's an example of his intentional incoherence. In fact I wrote that Arash first called Barmakid "an Un-Iranian Mullah lackey," after which Barmakid called Arash "a monarchist." My point was that when Neda then added a similar POLITICAL insult, she was answered by SZ with a threatening tirade of anti-female obscenities -- precisely the kind that woman beaters spout when working up the courage to use force. It was after SZ made his disgusting sexual insult-threats that barmakid praised SZ's "exponentially more educated and worthy" self.
What I DID write about barmakid was that when defeated in argument, he launched into tirade of really disgusting sexual insults against his MALE opponents, Arash and Sohrab, thus showing that he/they/it has the monstrous and truly peculiar mind of a Basij, who sexually assault men and women, alike.
So a) the claim that I got the order of who insulted whom wrong is simply a lie and b) barmakid tells this whacky lie in the hope of provoking a response that will obscure the points made in this thread, since that is his/their/its job.
2. Regarding the flag:
A) Arash and Sohrab's arguments are perfectly clear: historically, the Sun and Lion has been the flag of Iran, not just the Shah (whose version adds a crown), and anyway, NOW, for millions of all persuasions, it stands for opposition to the IR.
And B) Arash did NOT call everyone at anti-IR demonstrations “IR goonies.” Apparently it was some ORGANIZERS who attacked him for daring to carry the Iranian flag. Now why would barmakid, the IR employee, side with those organizers against Arash?
He sides with them because what the IR leaders (and their ultimate sponsors, in Washington, Paris, London, Berlin and Rome) -- what they fear most is that, because millions who protested want secular democracy and hate the destruction of Iranian culture embodied in the IR's violent religious cultism, they will coalesce around anti-IR leaders of the independent-minded, non-sectarian variety, thus threatening the IR's existence and therefore the international influence of Islamism, which is so handy for controlling populations.
Hence the Islamist Regime says: when you protest, we will come down hard. But when you move beyond the limits set by Mousavi ("Islamic Republic, not one word more or less") we will REALLY crush you. When demo organizers tell Iranians "NO FLAGS" they are allowing the IR to define their movement. And Barmakid works here as a digital Basij, trying to silence voices of INDEPENDENT-MINDED protest in the Iranian Diaspora, which voices can encourage similar voices within Iran.
"Arash and Sohrab's arguments are perfectly clear: historically, the Sun and Lion has been the flag of Iran, not just the Shah (whose version adds a crown), and anyway, NOW, for millions of all persuasions, it stands for opposition to the IR."
LOL. That's what you call an argument? You're an idiot bro.
Do you even know what an argument is?
Jared your comments are so boring it's tedious to get through them.
It almost seems like your goal is to try to get under my skin. LOL
We're on a blog, it's not gonna work!!
When you say things like Neda "eviscerated" us it makes me LAUGH (OUT LOUD).
The only thing she has eviscerated is her intelligence and dignity as a woman.
I feel like you've been deprived of vagina for a while now and somewhere in your mind you think Neda will you give you some down the road. Good luck with that.
I WILL SAY IT AGAIN. WE WILL NOT TRADE THE SYMBOL OF ONE DYNASTY FOR ANOTHER.
THE LION AND SUN IS IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY AND SO WILL THE FLAG WITH ALLAH ON IT.
I COULD GIVE A FUCK WHAT THE LION AND SUN REPRESENTS TO IDIOTS LIKE ARASH AND NEDA, FOR THEIR DISLIKE FOR THIS REGIME STEMS FROM THEIR NOSTALGIA FOR THE PREVIOUS REGIME.
IT IS A FLAG PROPOGATED BY THE SAFAVID DYNASTY THAT FORCEFULLY MADE US SHIA.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH KOROSH-E BOZORG AND OUR ZOROASTRIAN PAST, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU THINK IT DOES.
ARASH, YOUR KIND IS FILTH AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
YOU ARE OPPOSERS OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADVOCATES OF DYNASTY.
CALL ME AN IRI SUPPORTER ALL YOU WANT, I COULD GIVE A FUCK.
AT LEAST I KNOW I AM NOT JUST TRYING TO CHANGE THE COSTUME OF THE DICTATOR THAT IS DIVESTING MY PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHTS.
"What I DID write about barmakid was that when defeated in argument, he launched into tirade of really disgusting sexual insults against his MALE opponents, Arash and Sohrab, thus showing that he/they/it has the monstrous and truly peculiar mind of a Basij, who sexually assault men and women, alike."
I was never defeated in argument for no one presented an argument against me. Secondly, so your response to me is to call me a gay basiji? LOL. OK buddy
p.s. Jared. I just can't stress to you how worthless your comments are. The first time I argued with you they were better and more intriguing. But now, you are taking the side of Neda (who said nothing but call people names) and Arash/Sohrab (who made no arguments) and yet you say they did.
You are now one of the perennial retards that post on this blog.
You should be ashamed to have your name on this list:
Plateau (or Persian plateau/ whatever that retards name was)
These people are basijis of another kind. All they have is passion with NO BRAINS.
Show me one argument made on this blog by Arash or Neda. PLEASE. Maybe I missed it.
The only semblance of an argument, to which I responded respectfully, was Sohrab's claim that the opposition should itself tolerate the very ideals it is seeking.
And as far as your condemnation of SZ, yes, he has a dirty mouth, but SZ adds to the discussion. ALL NEDA DOES IS CALL PEOPLE NAMES.
It would be fun to argue with an IRI supporter, but all NEDA does is insert her uncanny ability to repeat the same unsubstantial shit over and over again: "mozdoor. now go pick up your check from the IRI"
NEDA IS AS WORTHLESS AS YOUR CLAIM THAT ARASH MADE AN ARGUMENT.
Since what Barmakid wrote is at best raving, intended to foul the discussion to prevent people from reading and thinking about it, and since he/they/it brings up nothing new, I need not respond to most of it. However, I should answer one point, where clarification is necessary.
In reply to my assertion that: "he/they/it [i.e., Barmakid - J.I.] has the monstrous and truly peculiar mind of a Basij, who sexually assault men and women, alike," Barmakid writes, in part: "so your response to me is to call me a gay basiji? LOL. OK buddy."
I certainly did NOT insult gays by comparing them to Barmakid. "Gay" is a term referring to personal traits, which are neither good nor bad.
On the other hand, men who "sexually assault men and women, alike" are not therefore gay. They are criminals (like those Catholic priests who rape children), who, I wrote, have "monstrous and truly peculiar mind[s]."
Barmakid and SZ spit out the venom of Basij sexual violence and hatred often in their writing. They just cannot seem to restrain themselves.
first off, you are the kind of person who thinks he is better than anyone else just because your views are different.
I think people on this blog would like to know that you are a 9/11 truther...on your site, you state that 9/11 was essentially an inside job by the US government.
Anyone who doesn't think 9/11 was the act of a bunch of crazy wahabi saudi men, must have some sort of mental problems.
Beyond that point. People on this blog, like Arash and Sohrab are clearly monarchists and supporters of the late Shah. Even winson on the Shah's birthday dedicates his whole blog to that worthless man.
To you, the current Iranian government is a nightmare. That is fine, you can certainly have that opinion, but thank God you don't live in Iran.
Taking a quick glance at your site, you are the typical conspiracy theorist who sees more in every situation than is actually present.
So why don't you do us all a favor, continue posting on your blog about the "real 9/11 events" and leave the real world discussions for adults of a proper mind.
Apparently it's not just Barmakid who's illiterate.
Genius, how can one be a republican and a monarchist at the same time!?!
You bache sefaratis are so hilarious, I swear to god, have you considered going on tour? People are always looking for a bit of stand up comedy :)))
Title: When Provocateurs Fail
SZ's latest post is mind-blowing.
Aside from his sudden change of style -- look at his earlier post, with its violent obscenities, and then this one, written in the style of Juan Cole; it really gives one the sense that SZ and Barmakid are part of a team -- aside from his weird change of style:
1) SZ is obviously responding to my charge, that he and Barmakid employ the language of sexual violence in order to remind Iranians that by attacking the IR, even on the web, they can themselves become victims of the very real sexual and other violence of the IR.
2) Thus I have accused SZ of a crime. If it were untrue, wouldn't SZ immediately respond: "That's a lie"? But if he had no defense, if I have exposed his purpose -- to drive Iranians away from the Internet in general and this blog in particular -- mightn't SZ pass the ball to the Barmakid personna and let it try to confuse the issue? And when it failed, making things worse by employing the language of sexual violence with increasing stupidity, mightn't the team try to find something -- anything -- to discredit me or at least provoke a discussion- destroying response?
In other words, if what I wrote on May 15th were untrue, SZ would have said so immediately. By waiting four days, then raising the 'pressing matter' of some 911 articles I wrote in 2001 – and I hope people will read them, because I think they are good – by bringing up this 911 non sequitur in lieu of answering my accusation that he and Barmakid are digital Basij who employ the language of sadomasochist and misogynist violence to intimidate opponents of the IR, especially women, SZ has admitted the truth of what I wrote.
3) As for the content of SZ's post, aside from constituting an admission of guilt:
A) Most of SZ-Barmakid's opponents on this blog are not monarchists. Monarchists do post here - why shouldn’t they? -- but most posters (e.g., Arash, Sohrab and Neda) are secular minded independents of varying views. Potkin has a liberal policy, even letting SZ-Barmakid post, but the blog’s tone, set by Potkin, is clear: secular democracy.
SZ-Barmakid have the assignment of driving people away, any way they can. Besides using the language of sexual threat, one way is to insult people by misdescribing their views, provoking them to violently attack the views falsely attributed to them, which then offends others who DO have those views. SZ and Barmakid are provocateurs assigned to try and intimidate people from posting and get the anti-IR movement fighting among itself.
I think it is very important to avoid this manipulation and keep our eyes on the real enemy, Ahmadinejad-Khamenei, and all who apologize for them.
4) Although it's really not relevant, I am not a "911 truther." In 2001 and 2002 I co-authored the first articles effectively debunking key parts of the official story on 911. Then I returned to other issues. It is bizarre that SZ chooses to attack me, of all things, as a "conspiracy theorist" just because I -- like billions of others - can't swallow the official story on 911. Because the REAL conspiracy theorists are the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad leadership of the IRI, who argue that for hundreds of years the world has witnessed a great battle against a Jewish-led menace, slated to culminate in the return of a guy who has been hiding for a thousand years in a well, who will then bring on Armageddon; and have a nice day.
I mean really, what could prove that SZ-Barmakid are on ASSIGNMENT here -- are provocateurs -- better than that Barmakid ignores the accusations I made about his own monstrous behavior, and instead, himself a supporter of the mother of all conspiracies theorists -- Khamenei-Ahmadinejad -- attacks me for, of all things, the articles I wrote about 911.
I guess when provocateurs fail, their bosses get mad, and they have to try anything.
"SZ-Barmakid have the assignment of driving people away, any way they can."
Yes, I am assigned, in fact, I get a paycheck each month from the IR...they pay very well, I actually enjoy doing this for my full time job....(sarcasm off)...dude, get over your stupid conspiracy theorist. I am a Project Manager for a major oil company. I live in Iran half the time, and half the time in Houston Texas. Get over yourself dude, you're theories and statements are hilarious and idiotic. I didn't know ignoramuses like you still exist in this day and age.
"It is bizarre that SZ chooses to attack me, of all things, as a "conspiracy theorist" just because I -- like billions of others - can't swallow the official story on 911"
No dude, its not you and billions of others. Its you and billions of islamic fanatics who think there is a world conspiracy against them. You're an idiot. 911 was real, it wasn't an inside job, and the criminals are the Saudi Regime. Stop spewing bullshit, and stop giving your blog posts titles as if they are real articles.
You are officially an idiot. Just because I did not respond to your post right away, I am guilty of your accusations? Wow...its called work, and travel. I don't have time unlike you to sit behind a computer and respond to 911 conspiracy theorists who are completely detached from reality.
I write obscenities to people like Neda and Arash and Sohrab because they deserve it. They don't have any coherent arguments, therefore they resort to name calling and cursing....so I do as well. Fight fire with fire.
"1) SZ is obviously responding to my charge, that he and Barmakid employ the language of sexual violence in order to remind Iranians that by attacking the IR, even on the web, they can themselves become victims of the very real sexual and other violence of the IR."
We employ the language of sexual violence? really? I call a female on this blog who regularly curses at me and others who disagree with her narrow world view a bitch and a cunt, and I am a sexual deviant? Really? that's the best you have? If you think that just because I post curse words on a blog, that I am threatening my "victims" with real sexual violence, then you're an idiot. get over yourself dude.
"2) Thus I have accused SZ of a crime. If it were untrue, wouldn't SZ immediately respond: "That's a lie"? But if he had no defense, if I have exposed his purpose -- to drive Iranians away from the Internet in general and this blog in particular -- mightn't SZ pass the ball to the Barmakid personna and let it try to confuse the issue? And when it failed, making things worse by employing the language of sexual violence with increasing stupidity, mightn't the team try to find something -- anything -- to discredit me or at least provoke a discussion- destroying response?"
This point is so obtuse and idiotic, that i won't even respond to it. Not everything is a conspiracy dude, get over it. You're an idiot.
So me and Barmakid, who I have never met, and who I don't always agree with, but have had some good discussion with are "digital basij"??? You can't make this stuff up if it were a movie, but to you, this weird conspiracy is somehow obviously true. Like I said above, why don't you go back to your blog, write about conspiracies on 911, and leave the real discussion to adults.
"A) Most of SZ-Barmakid's opponents on this blog are not monarchists. Monarchists do post here - why shouldn’t they? -- but most posters (e.g., Arash, Sohrab and Neda) are secular minded independents of varying views. Potkin has a liberal policy, even letting SZ-Barmakid post, but the blog’s tone, set by Potkin, is clear: secular democracy."
The only person who I can say on this blog who is truly a secularist, is potkin, and he is actually kind enough to post opposing views on his blog, and for that, i respect him. I may not agree with him, but i respect him. The others, don't do anything but post idiotic vitriol against Iran and the IR without cause or merit.
Post a Comment