Iranian Election Part 3

Cueball wrote:

Yes. I do know that. They would not put it that way, but if you like you can put it that way.

howardbeale wrote:

Your expanding the arguement. I've said nothing about prostitutes in Canada. And now that means I minimize violence against women? That's disgusting and uncalled for. You're baiting and trolling and being pointlessly argumentative.

I am not expanding my arguement. I am saying that morality codes exist in all societies, some are enforced by law and some not and women who are deemed to be sexually promiscuous against the moral code, determined pretty much on the basis of how they are dressed, are often arrested for breaches of the moral code, and then beaten when they resist arrest.

Ultimately it comes down to being identified as a "loose woman".

Well, thats how I put it because I shouldn't have to have surgery in order to be with a man or to be a woman.

howardbeale wrote:

I'm not responding to your posts anymore. You accused me of not giving a fuck about violence against women.

No I didn't.

I said that violence against women is often justified on the basis of the existing cultural norms of what constitutes unlawfully obscene behaviour, a morality code, and this is "normalized" in this society to the extent that we accept it as an unfortunate but more or less inevitable aspect of daily life, but then when we see the same kind of processes at work in another country, but based on morality codes that do not match our own, they seems strange and abnormal, and the mainstream media tends to pick up on such things as part of their campaign to demonize our enemies, while ignoring our own normalized and socially tollerated abuse.

The crowd in the street watching a police officer roughing up "a hussy" on Davie Street in Vancouver ignores the abusive behaviour of the cops, just as the crowd on the street ignore the police officer roughing up "a hussy" in Tehran.

Chavez Urges 'Respect' for Iran Election Outcome:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/98720.htm?sectionid=351020704

"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says that the world must respect Iran and the 'triumph' of its incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the election..."

Iran, Gucci Anti-Imperialism and Movement Anti-Intellectuals

http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2009/06/iran-gucci-anti-imperiali...

"As outside observers, we have two obligations now. First we need to keep our own states from using the events in Iran to advance imperialist strategems. But we also need to show solidarity with the struggle for greater freedom in Iran..All we are asked for is to respect the Iranian people, all of them, both those who voted for Ahmadinejad and those who didn't and not to confuse their voice and their interests with that of either their unelected ruling clique or the foreign "support" that seek to exploit them.."

2X

takeitslowly wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Yes. I do know that. They would not put it that way, but if you like you can put it that way.

howardbeale wrote:

Your expanding the arguement. I've said nothing about prostitutes in Canada. And now that means I minimize violence against women? That's disgusting and uncalled for. You're baiting and trolling and being pointlessly argumentative.

I am not expanding my arguement. I am saying that morality codes exist in all societies, some are enforced by law and some not and women who are deemed to be sexually promiscuous against the moral code, determined pretty much on the basis of how they are dressed, are often arrested for breaches of the moral code, and then beaten when they resist arrest.

Ultimately it comes down to being identified as a "loose woman".

 

Well, thats how I put it because I shouldn't have to have surgery in order to be with a man or to be a woman.

I agree. So we agree. Iran is not very good at human rights in terms of LGB people. But my point remains. We look at the exceptionalities of their behaviours, culture and laws, and what we find within them that which is particularly odious. Conversely, we are never asked by the MSM in these cases to look at the behaviours, culture and laws that are particularly odious in our societies, such as rampant racism against Black people in the United States, including jailing en masse in the largest prison gulag system in the world, and frequent summary executions by police services.

And because of this we create a false moral equation that establishes the appearance of their moral inferiority and tyrrany which are then used to justify our belligerent attitude toward them in the pursuit of our "interests".

US Neocons Sniff a Chance

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF20Ak01.html

As United States President Barack Obama attempts to navigate the treacherous currents of the ongoing political crisis in Iran, he faces a heated attack from neo-conservatives and other right wing hawks who are urging him both to offer unequivocal support to the protesters supporting defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and to scuttle his planned diplomatic engagement with Tehran.."

Beijing Cautions US over Iran:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF20Ak03.html

See that Howard! Erik's got your back! Meanwhile, Erik has spent the last two threads practically saying nothing on topic, and only trolling the thread by talking about me, and how I post, to other people in a series of passive agressive trolling attacks. How the hornets fly when you ask people to question their own cultural biases and privilege.

They'd rather chat about the "Eeeevil Ayatollahs".

Eric, my good man.

I don't read much of Cueball's nonsense, but I think I've figured him out as far as it goes.  He isn't defending the Mullah's per se and he is defending the concept of dictatorship and despotic government.  He is not trying to say that the Mullahs are any good, just that there isn't much difference between the Mullahs and 'western style' democracy.

Hence, a community standard that exists in a democracy that places cultural limits on what women wear is no different than a standard imposed by a theocratic government and imposed by the rule of law and force.

I think his reasoning is to promote the idea of dictatorship. It's not that he'd like to see an Iranian theocracy imposed in Canada, but he'd clearly like to see some left wing dictatorship that does what he wants without having to appeal to the popular will or be limited by the corporate power elite.

As I say, I don't read much of his nonsense, so I don't know what his aims are, but he clearly wants to be either Lenin or a follower of Lenin.  Whether his left wing utopia is banning free market capitalism and imposing communism, as some here would like, or just banning advertising and maybe the automobile, as some left wing loons here in Vancouver would like to do, I have no idea, but I think clearly promotion of the concept of dictatorship is his aim here.

Yes I am aware it does occur. The important thing to understand about you though is that you're not a left wing anarchist who'd like to do away with the police, you're a left wing dictator wannabe who'd like to be in charge of the police, and use them to beat up people you don't like.

Here is an article that raises statistical questions about the legitimacy of the election result:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/20/AR200906...

Mind if I raise some questions about the ethical basis for red baiting as arguement?

Where did I say I wanted anything imposed, here or anywhere? You are really off tonight, "Cueball wants to impose something, somewhere, but I don't know what it is. Damned if I will actually respond to what he says he thinks, I just know he isn't entirely on board with me, so I'll bring out the communism tropes for good measure."

Talk about authoritarian logical constructs, Adam T... That is one thing, the other is, I really hope that you don't think anything you wrote above sounds rational at all.

Cueball wrote:

Yes, talk on amongst yourselves for a while. Just do me the kindness of not talking about me in the third person, and my behaviour, in your posts, so they don't look like you are trolling. If you want to add anything or refute anything I have said, address your post to me, or try this: Use the quote function and quote what I actually said, as opposed to what you think it is that you want me to have said.

I was responding to Adam T, and disagreeing with him but on this particular one you are right, I will just delete my last and replace it with something more direct.

So, who would you like to see the police beat up?

I'd rather the police didn't beat anybody up.

Good for you. Now where is your outrage hiding?

Cueball wrote:

Adam T wrote:

Yes I am aware it does occur.

How bland. You mean its not an outrage? Not an internatinal call to arms? We don't have to rally the forces of democracy the world over to support the plight of abused women in the USA? No Twitter campaign? Nothing. Just, "I am aware that it does occur"? That is all you can muster?

That is precisely the kind of "normalized" cultural bias I am talking about. What we tollerate here, there is a rallying call for international action!

Heh.

And there You go again.  As has been said already, without even being denied, the situation here and there are not identical either -eg, women here no longer have religious courts telling them what they can or can't wear or own etc on pain of imprisonment or worse, therefore your insistance that others are just being hypocritical or culturally "biased" is also off the wall.    Christ, this is exactly why I dropped out several months ago, it's almost impossible to get any nuanced discussion going, at least when it comes to Islam versus Amerika.

CB:  "I don't actually know that the situation for women in Iran is better for women there in comparison to here. I couldn't tell you. Can we claim that 65% of our university students are women? I am really only making an inquirey into certain kinds of cultural biases that a commonly present in these kinds of discussions.

It is always very comforting to know that we are not so bad as someone else so that we can lecture them about civilization. Let me remind you Erik that while you may not intend it to be an "either/or equation" of bomb them or not, but that our little lectures on civilized behaviour are part and parcel of our imperial history of bringing civilization to the heathens... the white mans burden."

Ok, so you don't think the situation over there is better but you don't necessarily think its worse, as we really can't tell.  I think its still significantly worse there, at least if youre not a minority, even IF none of can know exactly whats going on the ground, but that's no credit to our own religion or culture but rather to all the women who struggled against Our more reactionary elements, and to some degree the men who finally came around to seeing the justice of what their sisters, mothers, neighbours or lovers were saying.   

In return however I'll restate in no uncertain terms that anyone who thinks whats going on thee is a justification for "our" assuming "the white mans burden" is badly mistaken.  The situation for women in Iran is for example at least marginally better than Afghanistan and I have never seriously entertained that attacking them would improve it anymore than bombing the deep south would have made them anymore open to equality forty years ago.  

There is some danger of that being assumed in this situation but believing we can't csupport their own demands for change for fear that our own reactionaries will of course try to exploit for other purposes isn't IMO the safest course either.  It just means we have to phrase our own positions more carefully and watch for ongoing manipulation by those who don't really care fpr equality themselves.  

I'm not out to "get" you, Cueball, or anyone here, but only hope to get these subjects back on some grounds where some real discussions can take place, on the left of...whatever.

Well in Iran the newspaper covered the killings that happened in the last week, the MP's may pass laws but generally the police are not accountable for their crimes (you remember anyone going down for assassinating Dudley George), we have court inquiries which do things like whitewash the Ipperwash thing, just as the Iranians will have a court inquirey into ransacking and killings in the Tehran University dorm (read about it in the IRNA newspapers if you like -- I am sure it will be a slap on the wrist affair, just like here) , and so on and so forth.

Your world view is a make believe sand castle of falsehood, and lies you chose to believe.

So, tell me about the NGOs in Iran. Or the times where police have gone to prison there.  Tell me about the Canadian secret police.

If you are going to equate some things and say there are no difference, equate all the things.  Tell me how frequently police (or secret police) beatings occur there and how frequently they occur here.

Make an actual empirical study of cases, rather than just pointing to a handful.

That's one way intelligent people try and judge things.

That's what NGOs like Amnesty International do, and nobody there would seriously equate Iran with Canada, or the U.S.

You're the one making the charge that there is no difference, it's up to you to tell me. All I have to do is point to Amnesty International Studies that point out the clear differences

http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa/iran

The authorities maintained tight restrictions on freedom of expression, association and assembly. They cracked down on civil society activists, including women's rights and other human rights defenders and minority rights advocates. Activists were arrested, detained and prosecuted, often in unfair trials, banned from travelling abroad, and had their meetings disrupted. Torture and other ill-treatment of detainees were common and committed with impunity. Sentences of flogging and amputation were reported. At least 346 people were known to have been executed, but the actual number was probably higher. Two men were executed by stoning. Those executed included eight juvenile offenders.

NGOs in Iran:
Human rights defenders were harassed and intimidated but continued to press for greater respect for the rights of women and ethnic minorities and for an end to executions of juvenile offenders. Some were arrested and imprisoned, with prosecutions brought on vague charges; others were banned from travelling abroad.

This is the first thing you find googling "Canada" + "Amnesty International"
Amnesty International Canada - Jobs

"I am asking you to prove you case and show me how a whitewash inquirey in Canada is superior to a whitewash inquirey in Iran. I suppose you are going to tell me that the SIU in Ontario is an NGO."

Why? Just because there may have been one case in Canada where we behaved no better than in Iran, proves that we're no better than Iran?

I've actually not said that I was more rational than you were, I said that there are groups that are rational that do examine these things, and they would not begin to equate what goes on in Canada (or even the U.S) with Iran.

If I were clearly more rational than you, I'd be like Stockholm, or Eric Redburn or everybody else here and I would have ignored your nonsense long ago, like I said I would.

From now on, unless you can find clear empirical studies showing major similiarities, and not just isolated unfortunate cases, good day.

How many cops have been charged with murder. How many convicted?

You obviously know how to use google. Why not use it.

One last response, I never did say I was 'up in arms' with what was going on in Iran.  While I don't like it, I've complained far more about the tasering that occurred at the Vancouver airport.  In neither case do I think that anything I post here will make any difference to the outcome.

I got involved in this discussion because I didn't like a wannabe dictator such as yourself telling other people what they were allowed to comment on and what they weren't allowed to, like your angry post trying to tell Stockholm that what is going on in Iran is none of his business. 

If you're truly concerned with terrible things like Ipperwash and the Vancouver Airport tasering, you could spend more time here and elsewhere with those things (though I suspect NGOs actually wouldn't want your kind of assistance) and less time trying to dictate to people what should be and what shouldn't be their business.

Now, good day.