Iranian Election Protests and Rioting

I like how the Western media (and quite a few regular folks) say that Iran has to respect the democratic ideals expressed in the Iranians' taking to the streets in the face of violent repression, yet call Palestinians "terrorists" for expressing the same ideals when they try to do the same.

Cueball, are you saying that protesters should remain scrupulously "non-violent" (whatever that convenient construct means)? 

The Real Situation in Iran, Moving Fast:

http://revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com/2009/06/real-situation-in-iran-moving-fast.html

"The larger political questions are enormous.."

In fact Ze, I am not saying that people should not violently act against the state. I am saying that their is a certain amount of misrepresentation going on in the media, so we see simplistic analysis like the kind being disseminated by the "revolutionaryflowerpot" above:

The idea that all of the actions by the demonstrators were "peaceful" is common to the NDP statement as well. They are often based on false representations of the events in the media. From what I am seeing from the record, some of these crowds could easily be seen to be hostile, and indeed there seems to have been a core of people engaging in vandalism, that could easily be seen to be provocative by the authorities of any country, and result in a fulsome police crackdown.

For example, on 17th the demonstrators siezed a police station, apparently, and in the ensuing fight, a protestor was shot.

A defy anyone to tell me that a crowd of people could sieze a police station, or even attempt to, in this country without the extreme likelyhood that someone would get shot, if not several people. Siezing police station is not necessarily a bad thing mind you, but those who do it, will encounter a certain amount of risk.

So lets not get overly romantic about this, or falsify the record. By and large, the demonstrators seem to have be peaceful, but it seems to me there were some who were more agressive in prosecuting their demands.

Police violent response against protestors.

The problem is, many of the people now expressing their unwavering support for the "democracy" demonstrators in Iran are the very same people whom expressed unwavering support for the police and state security apparatii when the above incident occured.

See, that image is from Seattle in '99.

This whole Iran election incident is so full of rank hypocracy and cynically manipulation that one doesn't know what to believe. But when the people decrying the police response to demonstrators in Iran turn around and call for more violent repression of demonstrators at home when all them hippys and anarchists bust a couple of windows, the bullshit detector goes off the scale.

Jingles,

I was at the '01 protest in Québec, which had brutal police actions, which were covered atrociously by the media. I spoke out against that and speak out against this. It seems that those you are accusing of hypocrisy are not on babble - as I don't know any babblers who are not at least somewhat aware of police brutality of protesters here. (and as an aside my uncle worked for the RCMP at the time of the FTAA protests and when he found out I was going he begged me not to go - as he was part of the "training" of "security" for those protests). I agree there is hypocrisy, but I don't see it from many here.

New reports out of Iran: Violence flares again in Iran :

Yes, and moreso, deconstruct media images in the western press, of these kinds of events when they occur in the west.

For example, this piece about rioting by French Muslims, about the "11th night of arson attacks" is almost entirely described from the point of view of French athorities trying to "quell violence". This continues into a second piece in the series where commentator intones that "terrorism experts worry the unrest in France with its estimated 6 million Muslims will provide a foothold for terrorists", sound very much like the kind of reporting that Sanizedah described in the last thread, where he said:

In my experience, anytime there are confrontations between the people and the state, the mainstream media, jumps in to "reports on damage" and often starts alluding the existance of foreign elements taking advantage of, or even inspiring the protests. I certainly have never heard them describing large protests against the state as the righteous outrage of the opressed against the tyrrany of the state.

Ghislane, I remember well the discussions we had here about violent incidents during the G20 summit, and remember a fulsome and educational discussion, where numeroud people were advocating Gandhi like methods of resistance, and eschewing any kind of violence as a means of resistance. No such debate has occurred regarding these protests at all. No one has even dared to suggest that actions of protestors (pejoratively described as "anarchists" in the case of the G20) might have encouraged police violence, in the case of the recent protests in Iran an idea that was floated numerous times, when we discussed G20.

The absence of the narrative that blames the protestors for sparking the police crack down, is completely absesnt from the discussion we are having about Iran, but consistently present on this board where the state-media narrative is at least given cursory credibility.

I think its valuable to keep news filtered through the western press contextualized in the fact that the western press, in particular CNN, and mainstream US press, show a proclivity of forwarding narratives favourable to their own view.

I'm going to play opposition here and make an argument to your point Cueball, being that the Iranian regime has cracked down far harder on protesters than Western regimes ever cracked down on at WTO or G-7 or G-20 summits.

Where Western regimes still allowed these protests to occur (yes, in designated zones out of earshot of the hotels and conference centres...), the Iranian regime have been making every attempt to disperse these protests for the last four days now. Where Western authorities react with water cannons and tear gas only after protesters start assulting officers, or vandalizing local buisnesses, Iranian authorities have called upon militias to start beating protesters with clubs. At this point dozens have been killed. Where Western states are widely percieved to be relatively free (and are, IMO), Iran has been drifting towards becoming a police state in recent days.

I'm going to cut the Iranians some slack.

Its pretty amazing that people believe that. I imagin there are some people in Iran who believe the official version of events as well.

Sure. But I know for a fact that it is not always the case here, either.

Revolutionary Marxist Current Venezuela: Solidarity with the Iranian Masses

"In response to recent statements by Venezuela President Hugo Chavez the Venezuelan Revolutionary Marxist Current has issued this statement. They express their support for the movement of the masses in Iran and explain the differences between the revolutionary movement in Venezuela and the counter-revolutionary regime in Iran..."

http://www.marxist.com/venezuela-solidarity-iran-statement-cmr.htm

I agree and disagree with that.  On the one hand, it has come out as a fact that there were police agents sent to cause violence at the Quebec protests and it's pretty much the consensus that police overreacted in Chicago in 1968 regardless of who people blame for 'starting it'.  We also know that for several years here in Vancouver after the hockey riots in 1994 that the police tried to shut down pretty much any large gatherings as if that was there decision and not a decision for the city council to make.  There have also been attempts to limit protests at various events by forcing them to be held in specific small locations and the like.

That said, there have also been many many peaceful protests that have occurred in Canada and the United States over the last 20 or so years where no violence occurred and where the police did not break anything up or start any violence, including protests against the government like the protests against the Iraq War in the United States and Canada.  For example, I believe the protest in Washington against the Iraq War had something like 1 million demonstrators and it went off, as far as I recall, completely peacefully.  The Obama Admin also did nothing to break up the recent silly 'tea protests'.

So I think while there have been incidents, clearly the huge weight of evidence suggests there is no conspiracy by the governments or police to suppress or prevent most protests.

Anyway, I just learned something yesterday that should be something Cueball can play with.  He and you may have heard of a shadowy right wing organization called "The Family"

Rolling Stone Reporter Jeff Sharlet wrote a book on them last year and has a website: http://jeffsharlet.blogspot.com/2008/02/blog-post.html

"In public, they host prayer breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of "biblical capitalism," military might, and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, the Family's leader declares, "We work with power where we can, build new power where we can't"

I just learned yesterday that U.S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is either a member of this group, or at minimum a supporter. While she might no doubt argue that she is just involved in the prayer breakfasts, she has spoken to the leader of The Family a number of times and has praised him on at least one occasion.

All I can say is OMG and pray for the protesters.

Comments I was going to post on previous incarnation of this thread:

What can you tell me about Zahra Rahnavard? Her Wikipedia entry presents her as the Iranian version of the Feminine Misti
Mousavi's Message
http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/internationalus/iranian_opposition...
RE: There were unconfirmed reports on the popular Persian website Balatarin that the commander of the Revolutionary Guards in Tehran was arrested for refusing to obey orders from Iran's Supreme Leader to use force against protesters. General Ali Fazli, a one-eyed veteran of the Iran-Iraq war, was said to have been fired and taken into custody.

This is good news. Not that General Ali Fazli was fired or jailed, but that he refused to follow orders. This is what we want!

RE: Big business monopolists in the west want to be able to bribe their way into political influence in all countries, and especially those countries with oil and gas and any kind of natural wealth worth stealing from the nations of people who own them.

So Fidel, what do you think of the writings of Linda McQuaig and Naomi Klein? Well yeah, which is why attacking the US gained Ahmadinejad brownie points back home for so long - it made it look a bit less like Uncle Sam was his pimp - and why it is so important not to label the protest as a movement towards westernization.

Iran's Mousavi Defies Crackdown:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8118783.stm

"Iran protest leader Mir Hossein Mousavi says he holds those behind alleged "rigged" elections responsible for bloodshed during recent protests. In a defiant statement on his website he called for future protests to be in a way which would not "create tension". He complained of "complete" restrictions on his access to people and a cracdown on his media group. A BBC correspondent in Tehran says the statement is a direct challenge to Supreme Leader Khomenei..."

Montazeri Warns Iran over Crackdown

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ih5WwdcC2A3bSE44i_Mvc...

TEHRAN (AFP) - Top Iranian dissident cleric Grand Ayatollah Hossein ALi Montazeri warned on Thursday that continued suppression of opposition protests could threaten the very basis of the Islamic Republic. "If Iranians cannot talk about their legitimate rights at peaceful gatherings and are instead suppressed, frustrations will build up which could possibly uproot the foundations of the government, no matter how powerful," the cleric said in a statement faxed to AFP.

This is a great example of being well-meaning but stupid.
 
Inspired by images of Iranians taking to the streets to support the opposition presidential candidate, Michelle May decided to head to Tehran.
Michelle May, an American and Irish national, was detained and forced to leave Iran.
"I just felt a real need to be there with my friends, and I just wanted to be a part of what could possibly be history," May told CNN's "American Morning" on Wednesday. "So I made arrangements at the last minute."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/24/iran.woman.detained/
Of course, she gets picked up by the Basiji. I wonder if she cried out, "You can't do this to me! I'm an American!" like in the movies. Fortunately for her, she just got deported.

Eight Iran militiamen killed in unrest: report

A hardline Iranian cleric on Friday called for the execution of "rioters," in a sign of the authorities' determination to stamp out opposition to the June 12 presidential election result.

. . . .

Khatami, a member of the Assembly of Experts, said the judiciary should charge the leading "rioters" as being "mohareb" or one who wages war against God.

"They should be punished ruthlessly and savagely," he said. Under Iran's Islamic law, punishment for people convicted as mohareb is execution.

Dr Arash Hejazi talks to the BBC about his attempts to save Neda Agha-Soltan's

You think? That does not really jive with the statements posted above. Do you really think they have any concern with "saving face"? If they did, maybe they would stop being so brutal to protesters. And she is only one of the ones who has been killed. This one was just indeniable as the video is online.

the polarizing and increase in extremes here perhaps was expected. was it necessary?

heard on CBC this morning, Evan Solomon interviewed a fellow who used to teach in Tehran, who has background in elections, who countered a lot of the arguments being circulated about election 'fraud'.  notably, the guest said that Moussavi did in fact get elected in his home town, just not in the surrounding rural regions.  moreover, Ahmedinajab got elected in east Azerbajan.  that region is important because it's the alternate or complementary oil and gas route to the BTK.  actually the entire countryside is loaded with alternate routes, which is why there is such a conflict now.

another point he made was that the British government froze the assets of Iran earlier over the election.  that's another  pretty good indication of the issues at stake.

he also said Bush has had a documented covert operation in Iran, and Obama has done nothing to stop that. 

also, it still remains a question- who actually shot the woman who has become the 'face' of the opposition?  no one knows.

the radio show had another guest, a female prof in London UK who was writing a book on Iran.  she didn't have many facts to cite, and seemed to have faith in Obama's rhetoric that a 'new era' had dawned.  my own sense is that this is just a 'new era' of rhetoric.

the other element discussed was around the large opposition mobilization.

on mobilization, i had a few thoughts to share.

a number of years ago someone at the University of Chicago contacted a family member seeking to obtain documentation for some research he was doing.  This prof also wrote articles for Ab Imperium.  we declined to provide further info to this fellow.

he was doing cultural research on the Caucasus region. my sense is that these days, destabilization of countries is done by first understanding then manipulating emotional vulnerabilities, historical sensitivities, internal politics and cultural sensibilities. it's done by complicit academics and media, over time, using a variety of carrots and sticks inside and outside a given country, using diaspora as well as funded NGOs and other groups within and without a targetted oil route or resource base ( ie. 'country').  it's not all just by agents behind potted plants. 

so then existing leaders of a country, who aren't saints either, sometimes react with violence.  this extremism is then captured and becomes the dominant theme of events.  original issues of concern, to diversities of peoples in any given country, all get lost.

and other issues get lost in the ongoing tugs of war around global resource exploitation and political control.

someone please tell me why are elites still so fixated on fossil fuels, pipelines, mining, nukes and dams?  why is it so difficult to make the switch to clean renewables?  most countries have either a lot of wind, or a lot of sun, and all have geothermal potentials.

as long as we let a few have control of banking and energy, this warring at the expense of earth and peoples is going to continue.

They won't. First of all, they have already invented a story about her being killed by the agents of the opposition. Any change in that story would be a bigger loss of face. then, the Iranian government knows that giving an inch here will mean retreating a mile later. The rule there is that if any of the protestors demands must be met, it should be on the government's terms and at the time the government decides.

I doubt they would hang ordinary demonstrators. A few hundred students will end up in jail, but if the past is any indication, a harsh crackdown will await the leadership of the movement. So far over 500 of those associated with Mousavi's campaign have been arrested. Many of them are ex-ministers, clerics and officials from Khatami's and Mousavi's previous governments (including Khatami's chief of staff). I expect many of them will be given lengthy prison terms.  Khatami and Mousavi, as well as Grand Ayatollah Sanei who supported them, may end up under house arrest or forced into exile. This will be the first time since early 80s that a ruling faction of the Islamic Republic will attempt to physically eliminate its opponent faction from the system. In the past they merely isolate them politically.

That is the way I would do it. They must have been really panicked. They should have stuck with the Israeli line, which would be something like: "Reports of innappropriate actions by the police will be investigated".

Oooooooooh.

Thats a new twist, I've heard of groups like that high in the Republican party but didn't know Clinton was shmoozing with them.  In the end fundies are fundies and elected officials shouldn't be sucking up to any of em. 

More thread drift here, but since the last was closed by the time I got back I'll just say there was never any need to apologise to me, can't even think why.  Since I know how health problems can affect one I can only add that I hope youre recovering from your mild stroke ok; you seem to be doing alright here.  Be well.

In related news, Googletrends indicates that Waterloo Canada has the most extreme relative difference in interest between Michael Jackson and Iran, based on google shearches. Go Waterloo!

Yup. Right up there with the Phoenix program. Giving them access to the BEEB? Those fiends!

Report: Hospitalized Iranians seized

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/27/iran.protests/

I'm assuming you are talking about  this :

New protests. I have confirmation from a friend who was there.

New clashes in Iran as standoff worsens with West

Several thousand protesters — some chanting "Where is my vote?" — clashed with riot police in Tehran on Sunday as Iran detained local employees of the British Embassy, escalating the regime's standoff with the West and earning it a stinging rebuke from the European Union.

Witnesses said riot police used tear gas and clubs to break up a crowd of up to 3,000 protesters who had gathered near north Tehran's Ghoba Mosque in the country's first major post-election unrest in four days.

Some described scenes of brutality, telling The Associated Press that some protesters suffered broken bones and alleging that police beat an elderly woman, prompting a screaming match with young demonstrators who then fought back.

The reports could not be independently verified because of tight restrictions imposed on journalists in Iran.

Sunday's clashes erupted at a rally that had been planned to coincide with a memorial held each year for Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, who came to be considered a martyr in the Islamic Republic after he was killed in a major anti-regime bombing in 1981.

Witnesses said the protesters also chanted, "Ya Hussein, Mir Hossein," linking Mousavi's first name with a highly revered Shiite saint, Imam Hussein — the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad and a symbol of personal sacrifice for a cause.
...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090629/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election/prin...

Does someone have a link to the discussion of the fake Gaza footage?

Iran and Leftist Confusion
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/06/28-10

There is nothing thet relates to twitter in the opening paragraph of the article. Lets review by looking at the second sentence of the paragraph, below the heading "For the Love of Conspiracy", which is the paragraph we are talking about:

if

 (f)

2. Although possibly; even though: It is a handsome if useless trinket. 3. Whether: Ask if he plans to come to the meeting. 4. Used to introduce an exclamatory clause, indicating a wish: If they had only come earlier!

n. A possibility, condition, or stipulation: There will be no ifs, ands, or buts in this matter.
My opinion on that was that it was "not worth the bandwidth."
Waiting in ernest for you to storm around denouncing anyone who does not 100% identify themselves with the democratically elected president of Honduraa, and against the the military coup and the imposition of martial law, as being mealy-mouthed persons who don't have the courage to voice an opinion.

oops 2x

The person, who wrote the article, in Charting Stocks, is unattributed. As is every article on the website. The person who wrote the article he/she/it refers to in the Jerusalem Post is named.

Wrong again.

Ahh. So you admit you we're wrong. Growth is good.

Since you would like to bring Honduras into this, here is a question: Why did Chavez congratulate Achmadinejad (sp?) on his "victory", however is now threatening military action in Honduras?

double deleted

Selling Iran: Ahmadinejad, Privatization and a Bus Driver Who Said No

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/selling-iran-ahmadinejad-privatization...

Jon Bon Jovi and Iranian singer Andy Madadian record in tribute to the Iranian people:

"Stand by Me"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RASKaZFZtS8

glad the pieces have been useful - imagine if we only had CTV or the glob..

"but here's a thought - maybe the oligarchs can see the sun is setting, so they're setting themselves up as plutocrats.."

a la Gorbachev? Wouldn't be the first time such has happened..

Guardian: Faces of the dead and detained:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2009/jun/29/iran-election-de...

Dear Cueball, now you sound like those who go on the Honduras thread and support the coup there. What all these points have to do with a brutal crackdown on the civil rights of the people in Iran? I haven't seen anyone here trying to paint Mousavi or his camp as an angel. All defence of him has been in response to you and a few others who, at such critical times, try to deflect the attention from the crackdown by bringing up his past from 20 years ago or to make untrue allegations about him, or by claiming that the protestors have burned some tires too (so obviously they deserve to be shot at!)

If this is not tacit support of the reactionaries in Iran, what is it?

Heh. Now you are doing it. Lol. If you are not with us, you are against us. Anything other than completely sympathetic and obediently supportive narrative, without caveat is "tacit support of the reactionaries in Iran".

Note: the only thing I said about Mouavi is that I have a friend who lived in Tehran in the 80's, who was repeatedly beaten by the police, and now lives in exile, who destests Mouavi. He also believes this is a political power struggle pure and simple and nothing to do with human rights, false elections or anything of the kind. I am sorry contextualizing this debate in terms other than complete and total sympathy for your narrative and the protestors makes one a "tacit support of the reactionaries in Iran".

I will also note that the protestors have not merely limited themselves to burning tires, but indeed according to your own postings, bludgeoned to death a Basji militiaman without trial because they suspected that he had shot a protestor. These things are not pretty. Incidentally your report that the militiaman was killed by the protestors, came after you had repeatedly said here on this forum that all protests were peaceful, at least as far as you personal knowledge was concerned. But now it seems you actually had some knowledge of extremely violent acts committed by protestors, including lynchings.

Post 110 from the last thread linked to in the OP here:

Post 47 from this thread:

So, it seems to me that when the question of protestors violence was intitially brought up you avoided talking about specific violent acts of which you had heard from eyewitness accounts. So perhaps "All I can say is that the demonstrations I saw in Iran was peaceful", was not all you could have said. You might have added but "I did hear of violent acts committed by protestors, such as the lynching of a Basji militiaman suspected of killing a protestor", or some such.

Or you could compare your posts here with those you are debating on the Honduras thread. 

"International norms"? I can't believe I am reading this from you.

Is it a norm in Canada to arrest tens of the leading members of the opposition party on the first day after the election (before any protest has taken place)?or attack the campaign site of the main opposition leader and arrest all the staff?

Is it norm in Canada to shut down newspapers belonging to the opposition so that the opposition leader's statement on the election cannot be published (just happened to Karoubi's newspaper), after the editor-in-chief of the paper has already been arrested?

Is it norm in Canada to send the paramilitary force to ransack the student dorms of the main university in town, throw students from high floor to the ground, and then arrest the remaining students?

Is it norm in Canada to deny any permit to the opposition party to hold gatherings, even in their own campaign headquarters, while giving the winning party the permit to have their gathering in one of the city's main squares?

Is it norm in Canada to completely shut down the SMS system and bring down the mobile phone and Internet so that the news of the unrest cannot be distributed?

Is it norm in Canada to threaten the opposition leaders with death penalty for their criticism of the election process?

Such comparison is beyond comprehension. Please again talk to Iranians, from any political stripe, who have just come back from Iran and have observed the situation there. Or check their reports on their weblogs.

Again to bring example from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, does it not sound like the pro-Israeli crowd who always complain why Israel always gets such attention, e.g. in Durban conference? Aren't these just excuses to deflect attention from major atrocities that are happenning?

By the way, this is the first time in years that you find almost unanimous support among all Iranians outside Iran, left or right, religious or ateist, monarchist or republicanist, on a cause. As for Iranians inside Iran, one wonders where are the 64% who supposedly voted for Ahmadinejad. In the past the Iranain regime wasalways quick to bring its supporters o the streets to silence any opposition. that even happened after the attack by paramilitary groups on Tehran university dorms in 1999. Now it has been two weeks and no major demonstrations in support of the regime yet?

The Tudeh Party seems, in the most recent statement available in English, to be calling for the preparations for a general strike as in the great revolution of February 1979 that overthrew the US puppet regime under the Shah. I'm reading between the lines, but judge for yourself...

First, a reminder of the historic victory of the Iranian people ending 2,500 years of monarchy in February 1979 and the reasons for that shining success...

There then follows an assessment of the current situation ...

The statement is dated a week ago today.

Are you? I am not. Frankly I am just tired of the whole thing. People are pigs, basically. No hope for em, really. I find this whole discourse aroung Iran rather naive, really. Like, we are supposed to stand on the issue of "rights" as if the fact that someone rights are being abused is the be all and end all of the issue. Just because someones rights are being abused doesn't automatically make them "good". For example, the Basiji guy lynched because he is accused of shooting Neda Soltan, certainly didn't get a trial or anything. That sounds like an abuse of a persons rights, even if he was guilty. Did that put him on the right side of the issue? Probably not.

So, I expect more than a discourse around "rights". Wars, violent protest, conflict all entail the abridgement of rights, It is what they are about.

So here we are being told again and again about these "peaceful" protestors being abused by the state, and that no violence, (other than defensive violence), was engaged in by protestors. Bank windows smashed, vandalism, busses burned, police beaten. All of that is the work of agent provocateurs, and there are no revolutionary elements provoking or engaging in violence which is not instigated by the police, as if the entire population of Iranian citizens are completely disciplined, and of the same mind, and not like western "anarchists" who bring the wrath of the authorities down upon otherwise peaceful and lawful protestors, as it has been presented here.

Are we not angels? No. There they are siezing a police station. There they are beating a cop to death... and one asks the cop in question was evidently carrying a side arm. And what of it, and what happened to it, after the lynching?

I don't even think its a requirement that protest and action against injustice should be non-violent. When it is, the state has no justification for using violent means of repression. However, no one is trying to put it about that Palestinians are always non-violent, nor do I necessarily think that being violent undermines the justice of their cause. So, no, my arguement is not the same as that of the Pro-Israei lobbyiests who insist that Palestinians must cease all violence before their demands are heard. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am perfectly willing to accept that a certain amount of vandalism, and social disorder is legitimate protest, and necessary in fact, but don't try and tell me that there were no core group of demonstrators who were not pushing the envelope at these protests in Iran, themselves. That is just bullshit.

CB:  "Are you? I am not. Frankly I am just tired of the whole thing. People are pigs, basically. No hope for em, really. I find this whole discourse aroung Iran rather naive, really. Like, we are supposed to stand on the issue of "rights" as if the fact that someone rights are being abused is the be all and end all of the issue. Just because someones rights are being abused doesn't automatically make them "good". For example, the Basiji guy lynched because he is accused of shooting Neda Soltan, certainly didn't get a trial or anything. That sounds like an abuse of a persons rights, even if he was guilty. Did that put him on the right side of the issue? Probably not.

So, I expect more than a discourse around "rights". Wars, violent protest, conflict all entail the abridgement of rights, It is what they are about.

So here we are being told again and again about these "peaceful" protestors being abused by the state, and that no violence, (other than defensive violence), was engaged in by protestors. Bank windows smashed, vandalism, busses burned, police beaten. All of that is the work of agent provocateurs, and there are no revolutionary elements provoking or engaging in violence which is not instigated by the police, as if the entire population of Iranian citizens are completely disciplined, and of the same mind, and not like western "anarchists" who bring the wrath of the authorities down upon otherwise peaceful and lawful protestors, as it has been presented here.

Are we not angels? No. There they are siezing a police station. There they are beating a cop to death... and one asks the cop in question was evidently carrying a side arm. And what of it, and what happened to it, after the lynching?

I don't even think its a requirement that protest and action against injustice should be non-violent. When it is, the state has no justification for using violent means of repression. However, no one is trying to put it about that Palestinians are always non-violent, nor do I necessarily think that being violent undermines the justice of their cause. So, no, my arguement is not the same as that of the Pro-Israei lobbyiests who insist that Palestinians must cease all violence before their demands are heard. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am perfectly willing to accept that a certain amount of vandalism, and social disorder is legitimate protest, and necessary in fact, but don't try and tell me that there were no core group of demonstrators who were not pushing the envelope at these protests in Iran, themselves. That is just bullshit."

Nice edit Cueball, but you failed to remove all your misanthropy.  I'm just putting this here in case you decide to edit your true feelings out entirely.  Whether someone else thinks someone is in the right or not isn't an excuse for the state to abuse them, huma rights can't be based on such arbitrary measures.  Do let us know for tomorrow if you have any proof that their were "agents provocateurs" in the crowd, then second, we can go into why you think these protestors are bad enough to deserve arbitrary arrest and possible torture.   Later dude.

Long thread...feel free to continue in a new one.