Thousands rally again in streets of Iran's capital
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
N Korea stages mass military parade for late leader
( 7 )
-
Maid kills Singaporean widow after being called stupid
( 4 )
-
At least 356 killed in Honduras prison fire
( 3 )
-
Republicans oppose any cuts in nuclear weapons
( 26 )
-
Russia: West 'slammed door' on Syria at U.N.
( 11 )
-
- Financial Advisor
- Select Asset Management KK, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥100,000 ~ ¥999,999 Paid Training Commission Based
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
Order by Time Order by Popularity
31 Comments
Login to comment
0
sabiwabi
The media coverage of this situation is quite suspicious; something must be in the works. I wonder what external forces are behind Mousavi. I don’t think a recount will favor Mousavi, so why is he pushing so hard? Is he expecting a military coup, or an Israeli attack against Tehran? The sooner things return to normal, the better it will be for Iran and the world.
0
skipthesong
why bother protest. He's not different than AJ.
I too am suspicious Sabi, but I am sure its on different lines than you.
0
Altria
Mousavi! Mousavi!
0
thundercat
I love how people are screaming for Mousavi when little over a week ago they had never even heard his name before. The majority of people do not live in Tehran. The majority of rural voters selected Ahmadinejad. We may not be happy with that but it seems the people have spoken. Sour grapes?
0
teleprompter
Shame, shame on Obama and the Democrats.
0
teleprompter
Ordinary Iranians want Hope and Change.
Obama wants his waffle.
Message to Iran - He'll get back to ya when his handlers and PR people work out what Alinsky would have done.
0
smithinjapan
Newsflash for teleprompter:
The American election was last year. Your side lost. This election has nothing to do with the US and/or Obama. Once you accept these facts, particularly the first two, you'll simply lead a less stressful life and can get rid of the denial.
"“If the whole people become aware, avoid violent measures and continue their civil confrontation with that, they will win. No power can stand up to people’s will,”
Let's hope Mhotashamipor is right, and that the Ayatollah decides not to test his theory with more militia.
0
Helter_Skelter
The sooner Iran's nuclear facilities are destroyed, the better it will be for Iran and the world.. Not to mention we'll no longer have to give a rip about what happens in this country.
0
amerijap
Really? That's something new. But is he pro-Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?
I'm still not sure which side the vast majority of Iranian citizens are taking sides with.
0
amerijap
Oops, I mean "taking with."
0
teleprompter
I have heard reports that Iranians are facing down the mullahs and the totalitarians with taunts that go something like this
"Iraq is free, why aren't we?"
0
Nessie
Appeasing Iran is much more like Reagan, who paid off Iran.
0
teleprompter
Reagan played Iran.
0
Nessie
He played for Iran, against a sitting president. What a patriot!
0
smithinjapan
Helter_Skelter: "The sooner Iran's nuclear facilities are destroyed, the better it will be for Iran and the world.. Not to mention we'll no longer have to give a rip about what happens in this country."
At least you don't try to hide your 'morally superior' attitude and pretend you give a toss for the people of Iran. Country A destroying country B's infrastructure is good for country B, and country B alone.
0
skipthesong
Really? That's something new. But is he pro-Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?
I'm still not sure which side the vast majority of Iranian citizens are taking sides with."
Hey, this other guy was the prez during the revolution! they're both down the Ayatollah!
0
dragonczar
Israel will seize the chaos as oppurtunity to strike iran's nuclear sites
0
dragonczar
Was that necessary to hold an election in iran? Those ayatollah will rule out the results anyway!
0
teleprompter
In the streets of Iran, in the living rooms, factories dormitories and prison cells they must be wondering why in America Obama's party call themselves "Liberals" when it is clear liberty is something they oppose.
0
smithinjapan
teleprompter: "why in America Obama's party call themselves "Liberals" when it is clear liberty is something they oppose."
The Iranians oppose liberty? Why would they wonder that from their election?
0
teleprompter
smith to helter:
Why should he hide it? I wouldn't be surprised if it was the hundreds of thousands of Iranians who voted with their feet, left Iran and moved to Helter's country that only further persuades him all cultures are not equal and that your brand of multiculturalism in particular is a sad joke.
0
yabits
George W. Bush's senior policy advisor on Iran, Suzanne Maloney, is on record saying that Obama is handling this situation just right.
It's a fine line that has to be walked, and the Republican jackals and hyenas lending their unique brand of "support," doesn't make things easier for Americans or Iranians.
0
smithinjapan
teleprompter: Helter is one of the people on this thread with a sad history of posting simply intolerant messages towards a religion he does not and has no intention of understanding. What's more in his comment he suggested 'destroying' Iran's facilities and then simply not caring one wit about the country and/or its people any more. That kind of attitude is one reason Obama has been forced to go around the world apologizing and trying to get people to stop hating rightly hating Americans (or at least showing the world that only a small group of hateful Americans think like the above poster does and do not at all represent the majority -- and proof of that is in them electing Obama; a REAL leader).
What's more, I was actually kind of congratulating Helter on no longer pretending to actually care about a populace in order to use it for political gain, as you try to do in your 'arguments'.
"...left Iran and moved to Helter's country that only further persuades him all cultures are not equal and that your brand of multiculturalism in particular is a sad joke."
Clearly with comments like his he is posting with a superior ATTITUDE -- the content, or the thinking he represents as such -- is clearly vastly inferior to people more open to other cultures.
But again, back to the thread at hand... do you actually have any comments on the Iranian election and what's happening as a result (ie. people in the streets shouting for a new election), or is it more, "Obama wants waffles", etc.?
0
teleprompter
smithinjapan:
From what I have seen he knows far more about Islam than you do.
And who are you trying to fool? Your concern for anti-religious sentiment on JT is as selective as any of the other posters you are usually in agreement with here when the topic is Israel, Iran, Iraq war, Palin, abortion etc.
"...clearly vastly inferior to people more open to other cultures."
Let me ask - does your "openness" extend to the opinions of expat Iranians in N America?
From what I have heard on radio shows the last few days this community, to a caller, has condemned Obama and the US media.
Full disclosure here - the show was Hugh Hewitt's. You are of course free to come with the name-calling ("He's a right-winger and a capitalist and a Xtian!") but if it is debate you truly seek on this issue I would expect you to qualify any comments against my sources for info on modern Iran with disclosure of yours. Hewitt has brought onto his show Iranian expats (like author Amir Taheri) specialists on the region (like author Michael Ledeen and journalist Michael Totten) and writers and visitors to Iran like Christopher Hitchens, Max Boot and Michael Yon, in addition to interviews with ex-Mossad and Israeli gov't members.
So yeah, I do have a few comments. I have been following this for years.
You?
0
smithinjapan
teleprompter: "From what I have seen he knows far more about Islam than you do."
Keep word is 'I' in that sentence.
"Let me ask - does your "openness" extend to the opinions of expat Iranians in N America?"
It does indeed. 'Tis a shame you need to ask, since I was clearly referring 'openness' in general.
"From what I have heard on radio shows the last few days this community, to a caller, has condemned Obama and the US media."
And? They're as entitled to their opinion, as Americans, as you are. According to your logic I should hate all Iranians and not care about them since they condemn Obama? Or are you just saying that you are FOR Obama since they condemn him (or for Iranians since they condemn Obama). Ie., absolute black and whites like that don't work well, do they? As I said, everyone is welcome to their own opinion.
"...but if it is debate you truly seek on this issue I would expect you to qualify any comments against my sources for info on modern Iran with disclosure of yours."
Excuse me? This and 'I've been following this for years'? This just happened this week, and Obama was just elected last November, and all of your comments today and yesterday have simply been Obama-bashing comments while at the same time dissing Iran. NONE of that has one wit to do with following anything for years, my friend... even if you back it up with giants like Hugh Hewitt (nice of you to honestly claim where you get your knowledge, though. And what's an "Xtian", by the way? I've never said that once in my life).
0
teleprompter
Another fine dodge from smith.
0
smithinjapan
teleprompter: "Another fine dodge from smith."
Please! All you do is dodge the topic. I asked you clearly beforehand:
"But again, back to the thread at hand... do you actually have any comments on the Iranian election and what's happening as a result (ie. people in the streets shouting for a new election), or is it more, "Obama wants waffles", etc.?"
And you couldn't even answer, except for "So yeah, I do have a few comments. I have been following this for years" followed by a very audible ellipses and no comments.
Anyway, enough of this. It's clear you don't actually wish to do anything but talk about what Obama has to do with this election (as you've been doing 'for years', in your own words).
As I said before, I truly hope indeed that the peoples' voices are heard, in a peaceful manner with no more deaths. I truly believe the Ayatollah knows he cannot simply wish the matter away.
0
teleprompter
If Obama - "the progressive's progressive" - won't stand up to the misogynist, homophobic, religious fanatics and war-mongers currently ruling Iran well then I guess those of us from North America and grateful for the freedom we enjoy should look to Canada to put pressure on Iran's government.
from thestar.com
Mar 01, 2009 04:30 AM
REUTERS NEWS AGENCY The ideology of the Iranian government is "evil," Prime Minister Stephen Harper says.
Speaking to the Wall Street Journal's editorial board, Harper criticized Iran, which the West accuses of covertly seeking to build nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge.
"It concerns me that we have a regime with both an ideology that is obviously evil, combined with a desire to procure technology to act on that ideology," Harper said, as reported in the newspaper's online edition late Friday.
"My government is a very strong supporter of the state of Israel and considers the Iranian threats to be absolutely unacceptable and beyond the pale."
0
smithinjapan
teleprompter: What does a March 1st article have to do with the current election? Are you suggesting Harper is psychic and KNEW who was going to win the election? Or is this yet another unrelated rant on your part?
Anyway, if you agree with Harper and look up to Canada on this issue that's all good and dandy. Personally I think Harper is right in that the Iranian government (pre and post election) is something to be concerned about, but disagree entirely with the man's assessment of Islam. It's very irresponsible for a leader to issue such statements. It's not the ideology of the Iranian government that's the problem, it's how they are interpreting and abusing the religion for their own means that's evil. The same goes for the Christian anti-abortion nut who shot the doctor the other day: it's not Christianity that's evil it's the man, and him claiming the religion led him to do "what's right" is just wrong.
Likewise Harper is wrong here.
I was about to say, "At least you didn't harp on about Obama in that thread" but reread it and noticed you did just that in your 'opening'. Sigh. Someday you'll be on-topic, teleprompter. Some day.
Back to top