Ahmadinejad "wins" Iran presidential election

[innonimatu]

For the record, the second is a somewhat gory 2 second video of lying on the street, soaked in blood. Rather than linking a bunch more videos you can't watch without an account (IE, the ones where it's not just a pretty singular bullethole) I'm linking The Daily Dish. Just keep scrolling down for more videos

Every side has admitted that several deaths have already occurred, so I guess that the videos can represent part of what happened. Still not any massacre, but it's looking bad. According to this other side wounded are being taken into embassies, so we should finally have some more reliable information confirming or denying that.

 

[luiz]

No, the main issue is that you were obviously wrong and you still won't admit it. Instead, you continue to try to dodge that fact. And that makes you ... honest?

When you want to start acting like an adult instead of claiming people who disagree with you aren't, perhaps I'll respond to you again.

Obviously wrong where? When I claimed that Iran supported terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, both widely condemned by the democratic world?

Instead of addressing that, you went on and on about how not everybody has officially classified Hezbollah as terrorist, which is irrelevant because not only does Hezbollah clearly employ terrorism as Iran also supports Hamas, even more widely recognised as a terrorist group.

Which brings us back to the only relevant point, and one which you've been dodging repeatdly: Iran supports terrorism.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Does this mean the protestors are now terrorists?

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Iran/idUSTRE55J1DY20090620

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Two people were killed in a suicide bombing on Saturday at the shrine of Iran's revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, state television said.
Iran's English-language Press TV said eight people were also wounded in the bombing, which was likely to inflame anger among Iranians who revere the founder of the Islamic Republic.

Press TV later said the attacker also died, without saying whether it had counted the bomber in the two dead.

The semi-official Fars news agency said the bombing took place at the northern wing of the shrine. Its report was confirmed by a senior police official.

Elsewhere in Tehran, Iranian riot police used teargas to disperse demonstrators protesting against a disputed presidential election, a witness told Reuters.

Press TV said police also used water canon against demonstrators at Tehran's Enghelab square.

 

[Flying Pig]

Those ones are. War of any sort is fought by soldiers against soldiers, anything else is terrorism.

 

[Formaldehyde]

By that definition, any violent protest is terrorism.

 

[Flying Pig]

Only if it is done to hurt civilians, and by doing so intimidate others or influence them.

 

[Miles Teg]

By that definition, any violent protest is terrorism.

But not all protest is violent. There's now a terrorist faction within the Iranian protestors movement.

 

[Flying Pig]

Ever heard of Mohandas Ghandi?

 

[JerichoHill]

Does this mean the protestors are now terrorists?

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Iran/idUSTRE55J1DY20090620

In the 79 revolution, those protesting blew up their own mosque to create momentum to overthrow the Shah. We do not know who attacked the mosque, but it could be that those now in power remember that trick and did it this time. You can see alot of these articles on BBC.

Because of the near media blackout, hardly anything can be confirmed at this moment.

 

[JerichoHill]

There's one of the dead female protestors.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Got a source?

 

[biggamer132]

Got a source?

Now you're just being heartless.

Here's a link about the video

Now, obviously, given the media blackout I can't provide you with a death certificate, but I saw numerous reports on Twitter from various Iranian posters saying someone had been shot on Karekar Avenue. I'm pretty sure this is from today.

 

[GinandTonic]

Got a source?

Got a right mouse button?

 

[El_Machinae]

Moderator Action: Okay, I'm asking people to raise the level of discourse in this thread. No more potshots. No more insinuations.

 

[Cutlass]

Strange Bedfellows


What weird times we live in, when a very liberal president and a very not liberal libertarian are agreeing on something.

America hasn't had a liberal, much less a "very liberal" president in your lifetime.

 

[choxorn]

Only this hasn't been 'war' in most cases. It certainly isn't in the case of Gaza, and to call the illegal occupation of Iraq after its illegal invasion a 'war' is really pushing the definition.

People of one nation are killing people of another nation, and people of another nation are killing people of one nation. I think that's called "war."

Neither Israel or the US has hesitated in the least to use standoff weapons against alleged enemies hiding in what are known to be buildings with innocent civilians occupying them. After all, their lives are far more precious than the lives of the people in the countries which they are occupying with force.

Granted, Israel and the US don't care about killing Hamas's human shields, but Hamas still put them up in the first place. I take it you expect Israel to sit around and do nothing while Hamas fires rockets at it's cities?

That's what we are discussing here, isn't it? It doesn't matter how many people disagree with their acts. Most everybody disagrees with Israel's acts. What matters is if Hezbollah is indeed a terrorist organization. Right?

Why does it matter if they're a terrorist organization? Call them terrorists or freedom fighters, it doesn't change what they're doing, and doesn't justify it any more or less.

Are you seriously suggesting that people always use avatars that express their real alliances instead of just the opposite? Think I'm a Nazi?

Have you ever read any of his posts? He almost always takes a position slightly right of Ronald Reagan. And you think he's a liberal? He's poking fun at liberals and communists, and everybody in between.

And BTW, that's Che Guevara, the person he just accused me twice of having strong sympathies with. Does that sound like something a leftist would do?

me stupid and me not know what the hell either of you are talking about.

In case you hadn't noticed, he's not only trying to take the moral high ground here, he is DEFENDING these atrocities.

Just like you're defending the atrocities of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Ironically, he doesn't. He actually thinks the people of Iran overthrew their democratically elected government and installed a brutal fascist dictator in his place.

They did, or at least some of them did, with some help from the CIA and MI6. The CIA and MI6 did not do it all on their own. THAT'S what he's saying.

 

[dosed150]

America hasn't had a liberal, much less a "very liberal" president in your lifetime.

so your saying america isn't a liberal country? i'd say that as far as the rest of the world goes america is at least in the top 3rd of countries in the world rated on liberalness

 

[choxorn]

so your saying america isn't a liberal country? i'd say that as far as the rest of the world goes america is at least in the top 3rd of countries in the world rated on liberalness

Wait, you were serious?

 

[Cutlass]

so your saying america isn't a liberal country? i'd say that as far as the rest of the world goes america is at least in the top 3rd of countries in the world rated on liberalness

That's a difficult question to answer. We are more liberal than countries with no democratic tradition. Which is to say most countries. And there's a lot of dispute concerning what "liberal" means. That said, by US standards, there is no reason to call Obama, Clinton, or Carter liberals as president. If you look at economic and civil rights policy, none of the 3 are liberals. Compared to other Western Democracies, the US tends to be to the right of them on nearly all issues.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Now you're just being heartless..

Er. When I posted my question, that post consisted of a black box with no photo or text. I was actually referring to his previous post.

But thanks for assuming I am an ass. This is what I want a source for:

In the 79 revolution, those protesting blew up their own mosque to create momentum to overthrow the Shah. We do not know who attacked the mosque, but it could be that those now in power remember that trick and did it this time. You can see alot of these articles on BBC.

I seriously doubt that the mosque was actually bombed as part of an elaborate disinformation campaign.