Close Topic Options

Iran Politics - Page 2

look at the bold part you fit that definition perfectly LDS_forever.

Third party? Who regulates the third party? In every single political system (excluding anarchy) ultimate accountability is towards the Constitution/Legal bodies/Executive. In other words the Government. I dont know much about this topic but what LDS_forever is proposing seems to border on Anarchy to me. Can you provide me an example where your idea of third party censorship takes place?

Personal grooming? I wouldn't classify the headscarf as an issue of personal grooming.

Maybe you should visit Iran. Iranian people are perhaps the biggest critics of their own Government. They definitely aren't robots or puppets. But I think it is fair to say that the Islamic Republic enjoys lots of support within Iran as the election of the hardline Ahmadinejad proves.

Wondering about a nation is a dangerous game. I can personally attest to the fact that women in Iran are treated much better than others in the region. Iran is a million light years ahead of e.g. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Arab Gulf States, Saudi Arabia, Iraq etc etc when it comes to womens rights.

Politics Iran

Karbala:

Some of my views may fit that description, nevertheless I don't like labels specially regarding politics since I am not a fan of politics in general.

No third party censorship, I meant an organization, committee whatever you may want to call it independent from the government or any other political party and that can be established for the purpose to mediate in Media affairs IF problems arise. NOT for the purpose to approve and censorship what a newspaper or a radio station may say. That's what is happening in Iran. The government is the one deciding what type of books can be published, what type of news can be mentioned...particularly those who are opposing the present regime.

It becomes an issue of personal grooming when is being wore by women but NOT to the satisfaction of the authorities (and they are indeed arrested for that). They also stopped allowing them to wear certain pants and as we have discussed before, "western" hairstyles are not allowed for men. Do you call that freedom? It is insane to me. So basically the government is telling you what to wear, how to wear it, who you can sit next to, what type of music you can listen to!, what type of books you can write as well as what type of news you can released. Sorry but it sounds crazy.

No, thanks. I really do not wish to end up in jail because as a foreigner AND as a non-Muslim I will refuse to wear the headscarf, NOT because I see anything wrong with it at all but because I do not like the idea of the government imposing me to wear it if I do not wish to do so.

I do not know if you can re-read your statement and how it sounds, "Women in Iran are treated better than..." Just because they may be treated better than other Muslim regimes does not mean they are being treated equally and well. I am definitly not impressed by what I read.

Oh yes, I can well see that and I think progress have been made. I just hope (somehow) things can improve and women as well as men can be given more freedom to do certain things WITHOUT compromising their religious beliefs. I do not pretend for a minute for Iran to have the same lifestyle than the US (who wants it anyways?) but I do (seriously) think that more progress can be done, specially in such a young society as Iran is.

Iran Politics History & Civil Business Politics

Thats exactly what I meant. An independent body who regulates what is acceptable for the media to show similar to the Advertising Standards Authority or Press Complaints Commission in the UK. The point I was trying to make was that even these bodies have to be accountable to Constitution/Legal bodies/Executive. Otherwise you have anarchy. Your dream of an independant body which deals with the media without any direction from Constitution/Legal bodies/Executive is only possible in an anarchist system. Can you provide me any example of such a body that exists today?

Every Government has laws dealing with censorship and what can and can't be published, not just Iran. You can criticize the Government if you want (if you have ever picked up an iranian newspaper you will know it happens all the time) as long as it isnt Libel or defamation of Character.

As for Western Hairstyles and types of clothes I do think Iran sometimes is a bit harsh and makes mistakes. They are only human and they certainly need to improve in this area. But I don't think there should be any problem in them imposing the headscarf since that is the societal moral standard there. LDS_forever you really should respect it.

OK ill rephrase. Women in Iran are treated extremely well. There is certainly room for improvement and I hope they can continue and progress. But I think they are doing very well arguably better than the USA or the UK when it comes to Society, morals, ethics and Womens rights. They have come a long way in 28 years.

Page 2 Politics Iran

Karbala:

Well yes, they must respect some type of laws obviously and I agree in regulations nevertheless my point is that in the case of Iran a newspaper is shutdown because of a cartoon describing the oil issue or because of a poem. It seems to me that is like an abuse of power rather than respecting the laws.

I do Karbala (sincerely). I do not see anything wrong with a headscarf as long as the women are happy about it. I know several Muslims in Trinidad who do not wear a headscarf.. I know every country is different and I respect that, having said that I just do not like the idea of forcing a foreigner to wear one if she does not want to.

I may agree with the moral and ethics issue but definitly not with women's rights...at least, not as yet. Looking forward seeing more changes in the near future.

Rather off topic, but... Maybe I should write an e-mail to the President and see if he replies as he usually does.

Politics Iran

This is from a blog of a correspondent that works for the Fox network. Since it is a blog, I do treat it with some skeptism. However, I also know that where this is smoke there is fire. So in checking into this, there is quite a bit of truth. I am not sure about the entire conclusion, but there does seem to be a tightening of the reigns, if you will, in Iran. The admission of torture, secret prisons, prison expansion plans that are quite significant and the overall execution rate are a bit disturbing.

https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291436,00.html

Also, note the statement about going after women dressed like models...

Not so sure that I would say that they have it better there than in the UK?

Liberalism is a pretty broad word within itself. In definition, it means a person that emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. A liberal society is characterized by individual freedoms, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a country where the legislated rights of all citizens are protected. This in general all sounds pretty good. However, it is the part where individual freedoms and rule of law continually feed off of one another where some may have issues with being called liberal. Modern liberals are constantly desiring to increase individual freedoms and legislating them into the rule of law. This is social progressiveness...which most true modern liberals hold to. This is where the political tag starts deviating from those who are religious or hold religious values.

Liberals are the ones that want to take "In God We Trust" off the dollar bill. They are the ones that do not want US children to say the "Pledge of Alligence". They desire to take the ethical and moral barriers that religions provide out of government and make them personal decisions or at least put them up for vote.

So while you may be a person that clings to individual freedoms and the desire to protect them, the liberal tag that includes the expansion of personal freedoms and distancing from God, may not be appreciated.

Actually, you may find that the base desire of initial liberals (basically, throwing out the social progressive agenda) is what created the neoconservative movement of the 60's/70's. Of course, this movement too has taken a change of direction and become more linked to the religious right, but in the beginning they had the similar agendas.

Edited: Vincenzo on 1st Aug, 2007 - 5:22am

Iran Politics

Vincenzo:

Try something.
Find the author of the link you provided.
Copy and paste his name into google.
See which organisations he is linked to.
Somewhere you will find he was a spokesperson for NCRI and MEK which is a listed terrorist organisation. And you trust this man to give you a fair picture if Iran? Its like trusting Osama Bin laden to tell you about the US.

No smoke without fire? Come on is this the priciple you are going to rely on in forming an opinion on Iran?

I have been to Iran and the hairstyles there are probably more western than in the west. Once every year the authorities get a little stricter and make examples out of a few people so things don't get out of hand. Personally I don't agree with this and this is an area they should improve of. But it really is not a big deal. It shows the desparation of the western media to blow something like this out of proportion.

Liberalism is a political ideology which strongly upholds individual liberty and freedom. You can be the most religiously conservative person in the world but if you believe that your values should not be imposed on others and everyone should find happiness in their own way you are a liberal. I am not tagging anyone of distancing themselves from God or ignoring religious values when I call them a liberal.

Iran Politics - Page 2

Karbala:

That seems to be your own definition. I do not consider myself a liberal simply because religion is a huge part of my life. Just because I think people should have rights, does not make me a liberal. Having said that, a liberal won't allow prayers in schools or any other type of religious manifestations, that goes against my personal beliefs because I believe every man should have the right to worship how and where they wish.

You mean the same guy that revealed the existence of clandestine nuclear facilities in Iran? NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran) a dissident group is a terrorist organization? Or you mean they are considered terrorists because they oppose the Iranian government?

This is what I found according to your allegations:

It seems to me that your comparison between this guy and a KNOWN LOW-LIFE TERRORIST such as Osama Bin Laden is not only untrue but an insult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alireza_Jafarzadeh

Iran Politics Politics Business Civil & History - Page 2

LDS_forever you amaze me. You clearly hate the Iranian Government but do you hate the Iranian People as well? It shocks me that you would stick up for terrorists!

LDS_forever you love to disagree with me but that doesn't mean you have to defend terrorists just because I called them terrorists.

Your a journalist LDS_forever your media analysis should be better than this.

NCRI is a front for an organisation called Mujahideen-e-Khalq or MEK. MEK are a listed terrorist organisation according to the US, UK, EU and funding is banned in Australia and Canada. Most importantly they are a designated terrorist organisation in Iran. What exactly do you not understand about "designated terrorists"?

The only evidence you brought to me was a wikipedia statement which says that the reason the US lists MEK as a terrorist organisation is due to a Wall Street Journal article claim that there was a deal between Clinton and Khatami. What does this prove? They are still a terrorist organisation no matter what reason Clinton decided to use? Are you seriously relying on this to refute claims they are terrorists? Khatami and the reformists are no longer in power yet MEK are still on the terrorist blacklist.

LDS_forever I do not exaggurate when I say everyone in Iran hates this organisation and I mean everyone 99.999999% of the people. Even anti-Islamic groups hate this organisation. You know what they are called in Iran? "Monafiqeen" (Hypocrites).

They blew up bombs in Iran, carried out assassinations, attacked civilians and even sided with Saddam against their own people!

Before you make such statements LDS_forever you really should research much more deeply. If you ever said such things to a average Iranian person they would be deeply offended just like I am. You really have proven how little you know about Iran. Alieza Jafazadeh a TERRORIST!

https://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15562.htm