I'm sure the torture chambers of the shah and the tens of thousands of innocent people he killed didn't cross your mind when you went to Iran.
You can definitely post these issues on another thread with your posting privileges, or dig up one of the older discussed topics with the issues. I mean no offense, and I think being on the defensive all the time has given you tunnel vision. I wouldn't want to see an entire thread devoted to that article anyways.
That's fine, but your logic is still somewhat problematic. You're almost justifying things by saying "well, the shah did it" or "we're not as bad as the shah." You said the same thing earlier, when the original article about the death penalty case was posted. You said that "well people in the DRC are killed and you don't post that. You just have an agenda." Regardless of whether we have an agenda, that DOES NOT make this right or acceptable by any means. That's the same bull**** idiocy and logic that the administration uses for torture and detainment. The administration has repeatedly used the "well, terrorists are worse line" to justify practices that are clearly unethical and unecessary. Instead of holding ourselves and others to a high ethical standard, we repeatedly peddle the "we're not as bad, or we're not the worst" line.
all i'm saying is that if injustices go on all over the world then there's no point in singling out iran...it's not very useful or beneficial to do so....it's actually quite irrelevant...but on this site every time something minor happens in iran, people are quick to post about it (this dress code thread and the iran soccer thread are good examples)...it seems as if the iran bashers are just looking for anything they can find to demonize iran...i'm just pointing this out and also pointing out that they largely ignore atrocities and catastrophies in other parts of the world while they report about ficticious dress codes and unenforced laws in iran.
And this is a response to your sexism? I don't think calling you a jackass, or a loser - is sexist. More on your sexism: What does it mean when a man says another is his “b****”? To me it implies that the man is his “woman,” which is intended to be very insulting. Calling a man a woman is contextually negative because being a woman is bad (note the sexism), and being a man who acts like a woman is bad (note the homophobia). Where did this charming expression originate? Most likely in prisons, where an incarcerated man who is in sexual servitude to another man is said to be his b****. [quoting Ann Bartow] On the first page of the D&D there are 8 threads about the US, 4 about Iraq, one mentioning China, one Afghanistan, one about Mexico and one about Iran. How exactly is Iran being 'singled out?' More importantly how does the fact that there are injustices elsewhere impact the injustices in Iran? Why not? It is useful to recognize what is happening in Iran as much as elsewhere. There is value in dialogue about those incidents. Please explain. How is it irrelevant? In relation to what? For one who constantly tells everyone how much we should learn about Iran, why are you now saying we should have less threads devoted to Iran? And we are quick to post about a plethora of other countries and other incidents. A quick survey of all threads disproves some claim of preponderance where Iran is concerned. Can we use the same argument about the US? Or China? Are we free to dismiss you because you consistently 'bash' the US? One has to wonder why you continue to mention the Congo but haven't started too many threads (ZERO if the search function is working properly) on the subject. And as we've seen today you have started your share of threads on 'ficticious' stories (see Ranger MacBeth). Why did you start that thread instead of one on the Congo?
You're still the king or maybe the queen of name-calling...then again you're also a liar, because you've said countless times that you'd stop responding to me, yet you continue to do so. I don't see people talking about executions, ficticious dress codes, and unenforced laws in other threads about other countries. It's not useful if all you want to do is focus on negative propoganda from places like iranfocus or rejectionist ex-pats living in canada. We can talk about all the minor negative things going on everywhere else, but we don't. So in relation to the relevance of this, are we going to start a thread or post an article everytime somebody is executed or killed somewhere? If not, then we shouldn't present a one-sided picture of iran. I never said any of the rest of the stuff. When was the last time somebody posted an article about a supposed impending execution or a ficticious dress code in another country? You've said that you've dismissed me on plenty of occasions and you also said you would stop responding to me, but you've done neither. I've posted about the Congo before and it's a good example to use and point out how ridiculous threads like this are.
More sexism and homophobia. You're setting a high bar for yourself. The really unfortunate thing is that others on the bbs seem to be willing to allow your sexism and homophobia to go unchecked. That's fairly disappointing. Try this thread - in it posters talk about ficticious executions, ficticious dress, and unenforced laws (IIRC the first poster claimed execution by the ficticiously uniformed individual would go unpunished): http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=113054 That you find gender discrimination, for example, a 'minor' concern does not make it so. You have quoted stories from sites like socialistalternative.org and blogs that have propogated falsehoods - so who are you to dismiss a site because of its bias? The reality is that you don't like criticism of Iran, for whatever reason. If it doesn't deserve comment then the thread will quickly go away, no? If you feel Iran is particularly singled out you also have the option of presenting threads showing how 'progressive' Iran is - if you can find any. There were quite a few about Moussaoui, also there have been several threads about executions in China, the death penalty in the US, stoning in Nigeria and elsewhere. The ironic thing is that you are actually contributing to the threads on Iran, lol. I dismiss you because you're an idiot and because you rarely respond to others points, not because you're a US basher. By your definition of a 'basher' most of this bbs are bashers, but I still respect their opinions and try and engage them in a dialogue. Please provide a link to the thread you started about the Congo. Or did you mention the Congo in a thread about something else, lol - the very thing you decry in this thread. And still you've provided no rationale why the goings on in the Congo mean other topics are unwarranted.
The outrage in the case of this woman being executed is not because she is a woman, but rather because she is being executed even though all she did was try to defend herself and her neice from a group attempting to rape them. The gender discrimination comes in there. The courts are basically saying that a women has no right to try to stop people from raping her. Do you really see nothing wrong with that? No one takes the pro-injustice position with regard to most other countries around the world. You seem to respond in favor of Iran in all of the Iran injustice threads, and that is why they keep getting posted. It is the same reason China gets talked about in so many threads, because there are those who will take the pro-China side. If there are not people on both sides of an issue, it isn't going to get talked about very much.
Just like they let your name-calling and lying go unchecked i never said gender discrimination was a minor issue and, in relation to sources and falsehoods, you've used a fake photo and other people's opinions as evidence. or the thread will contribute to more bias, bashing, and stereotypes vis-a-vis iran when was the last thread that was started about a public beheading in saudi or a dress code anywhere? I'm just countering all the negative propaganda. ah, name-calling what you do best....if you're so dismissive of me, why do you continue to respond? if i'm an idiot, stop responding to me. I never said I started a thread about the Congo so I don't know what you're talking about....I said I've posted about the Congo and I did when we were discussing a country that borders it (the Sudan)
They've closed the streets close to the Universities in fear of ordinary people not joining into the protests. number of injured Students are trapped in there dorms. the anti-riot police have been beatingup on anyone in sight. woman or children are no exception.
The b*stard general in charge of the police says, ' we are trying not arrest any'.. bull****. thats why there are hundreds of injured staudents in there dorm.
Back to the thread topic, Amir Taheri stands by his original report: "Regarding the dress code story it seems that my column was used as the basis for a number of reports that somehow jumped the gun. As far as my article is concerned I stand by it. The law has been passed by the Islamic Majlis and will now be submitted to the Council of Guardians. A committee has been appointed to work out the modalities of implementation. Many ideas are being discussed with regard to implementation, including special markers, known as zonnars, for followers of Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism, the only faiths other than Islam that are recognized as such. The zonnar was in use throughout the Muslim world until the early 20th century and marked out the dhimmis, or protected religious minorities. ( In Iran it was formally abolished in 1908). I have been informed of the ideas under discussion thanks to my sources in Tehran, including three members of the Majlis who had tried to block the bill since it was first drafted in 2004. I do not know which of these ideas or any will be eventually adopted. We will know once the committee appointed to discuss them presents its report, perhaps in September. Interestingly, the Islamic Republic authorities refuse to issue an official statement categorically rejecting the concept of dhimmitude and the need for marking out religious minorities. I raised the issue not as a news story, because news of the new law was already several days old, but as an opinion column to alert the outside world to this most disturbing development." http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/19508 No idea if this is legit, guess we'll have to wait & see.
Being a sexist/homophobe and projecting your hate is significantly worse than calling you an idiotic jackass and continuing to reply to you (although the time is fairly wasted). You said the issues being brought up were minor - the issues being brought up were focused on gender discrimination. 1+1=2, slick. You're so pathetic. Everytime you are caught you don't even defend yourself, you just lash out. Your answer does not deny that you started a thread with a lie, a fabrication, and that you haughtily basked in its revelations. So you are in no position to declare a website is biased and dismiss it out of hand. Do you have an answer to that? I don't think so. Your sexist and homophobic rants point to some control and power issues - but you're going to have to go see a therapist about that because you don't control the bbs. If we find the tragedy that is Iran interesting we'll continue to post on it and discuss it. If you want to share your vision of a 'progressive Iran' you are certainly welcome to do so. That you've participated in other discussions has, for example, given us a more well rounded idea of what you consider 'progressive' in gender relations. So more discussion is better. Hello? That's the point. You want threads on 'important stuff' and you continually interrupt other threads to interject we 'should be talking about the Congo.' So why don't you start a thread on the Congo instead of bringing it up in threads about other things. The situation in the Congo may be worth talking about but we can discuss more than one thing at a time.
If I'm such an idiot and If I'm so irrelevant, why do you cotinue to respond to me? Also, the issue of the dress code has already been settled. Amir Taheri is not an objective analyst: Iran dress code law does not target minorities Canada's National Post on Friday reported the draft bill approved last week would force Jews, Christians and other religious minorities such as Zoroastrians to wear colour-coded clothes to distinguish them from Muslims. A copy of the bill obtained by Reuters contained no such references. Reuters correspondents who followed the dress code session in parliament as it was broadcast on state radio heard no discussion of proscriptions for religious minorities. Senior parliamentarian Mohsen Yahyavi described the Canadian report as "completely false". "The bill aims to support those designers that produce clothes that are more compatible with Islam, but there will be no ban on the wearing of other designs," he told Reuters. Iran's Jewish MP Moris Motamed also agreed the bill made no attempt to force special garments on the minorities. "There is no single word in the bill about a special design or colour for the religious minority groups," he said. "Our enemies seek to create tension among the religious minorities with such news and to exploit the situation to their benefit," he added. http://in.today.reuters.com/news/ne...R_RTRJONC_0_India-250326-1.xml&archived=False As usual, people were allowed to carry out an impromptu protest in Iran until the protest turned violent and the students started attacking the police. Like any other country, Iranians are allowed to assemble and protest...there was another protests recently as well. I guess a country that allows all this is backwards and retrograde
