Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditIn a distinctly Orwellian turn of events, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ("Mr. Sixty-Three Percent") has pledged to investigate the death of Neda Agha-Soltan. It reminds me of O.J. Simpson's pledge to leave no stone unturned in the search for his wife's killer.
In a letter to judiciary chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi-Shahroudi, Mr Ahmadinejad described Neda's death as "suspicious," reported the official IRNA news agency on Monday.His letter added: "I request you to order the judicial system to seriously follow up the murder case... and identify elements behind the case and inform the people of the result," reported IRNA.
Since Iran has already blamed the BBC for causing the unrest in Iran, what will Ahmadinejad say about the BBC's dutiful reporting of his call for an inquiry? Does it mean that Ahmadinejad himself is a tool of BBC? Oh, what a tangled web he weaves.
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
ahmadinejad...
iran's W...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 10:14am
You are a fucking low-life, pro-Israel, pro-Empire, idiot.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 10:13am | ignore this person | warn this person
harsh...
how bout it DREYFUSS? mr. kuryakin seems upset...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 10:16am
iran's W...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 10:14am
Reminds me more of W pretending he really wanted to get to the bottom of the treasonous acts that outed Valerie Plame.
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 10:42am
While it seems clear that the "investigation" of this one person's death (didn't any of the other deaths matter, or just the one sensationalized by Western feminist commentators and mass media?) would be a farce, it does merit pointing out that the graphic video of her death doesn't actually show who pulled the trigger. Probably nobody other than the killer actually knows who killed "Neda". Frankly I find it obnoxious the way this one figure's murder has been transformed into a political football.
At this point, outside pressure on the Iranian regime will, I speculate, only make matters worse for people who actually live in Iran because the outside interference will only inflame further anger and conflict. The Iranian people certainly have a lot of rights, and one of those rights is the right to not have outside parties with clear agendas in Iran - such as the US and Britain - encouraging further division and destabilization in an already bad situation.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 10:43am
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 10:13am | ignore this person | warn this person
First, I can't stand your degree of incivility here. However, I was wondering if you would be willing to quote verbatim - by typing the text in - the statements from Dreyfuss' books you bring up, with enough material around them for context?
If Dreyfuss called for US "intervention" of any sort to restore Reza Pahlavi to power, I want to know, so I know more about the figure whose reporting I am taking very seriously.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 10:46am
Posted by IlyaKuryakin -SAY fucking something, you fucking android -Congrajufuckinglations! -You are a fucking low-life, pro-Israel, pro-Empire, idiot
Ilya, If you actually have something relavant to say, it is completely lost in the vitriolic vulgarities you spew. If you must insult, at least be creative about it, you sound more like a prepubescent, drunken hillbilly.
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 11:00am
Second the "sounds like a drunken hillbilly" comment.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 11:03am
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 10:42am | ignore this person | warn this person
yup...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:13am | ignore this person | warn this person
LOL!!!
indeed, native english speakers are FAR more likely to suffer from dyslexia than native speakers of almost any other language.
i should know...
it does go a long way to making english a fascinating and flexible literary language, though...
not meaning to get too personal, but...
where you from boy???
lol...slavic lands? or just a fan of UNCLE?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:31am
For ONCE, SAY fucking something, you fucking android.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 10:53am | ignore this person | warn this person
thats not gonna work, ilya...dreyfuss DOES respond from time to time, but not to THAT.
save the mean vulgarities for other posters if you REALLY want dreyfuss to respond.
i'll serve as something of his proxy, however, since i could care less how many "f-bombs" you set off. not that i agree with everything dreyfuss says, but i DO think characterizing him as a closet neocon practicing fascist ketman amongst a coterie of new york leftists is a bit of a stretch, though...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:39am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:39am
I'm fairly certain were you to meet Ilya face to face, you and your Bolshevik biker buddies would have him hanging from a lamp post in short order.
Posted by Benchrest at 06/30/2009 @ 11:45am
Like I said: any one, any time, any where. Bring it on.
Do you have a QUESTION?
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:13am
Good grief, you remind me of the drunk guy you see at a bar at closing, standing outside, so excited to fight someone anyone he just doesn't care. He would take a swing at his own mother if she got too close.
I am glad "someone" (KGB?)taught you our crazy language, too bad they did not teach you manners. All I am suggesting is that if you must insult, be creative about it. It is much more fun to read if someone is not being a bore and resorting to banal vulgarities.
In no means am I suggesting we dismiss your 'credibility' due to your language. No, instead I would dismiss you altogether due to you paucity of civility.
Now to your question... Do you have a QUESTION?
Sure, what is your motivation for posting on this site?
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 11:53am
Posted by Benchrest at 06/30/2009 @ 11:45am | ignore this person | warn this person
i think he has potential.
you know, they show up from time to time, emboldened by the generosity and tolerance of the editorial staff who allows nearly any crazed wack job (like me, lol) have their say for free on an internationally viewed, hundred and forty year old political rag...
and i like the fire and brimstone, bite the hand that feeds you edge they bring.
but since dreyfuss is NOT going to respond to f-bomb laced angry tirades...
let grasshopper take a few shots at master ibble if he has an axe to grind.
like i said, i think this one has potential. a little too much "barry25" edge, but like a wild bronco, a little breaking would sharpen and improve his message, i think...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 11:54am
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:53am | ignore this person | warn this person
a serbian nationalist? a third way'er? i respect that. i'm really a closet benevolent fascist myself, to be honest...
national democratic socialism mixed economy sans the racist scapegoating crap appeals to me greatly, some days more than others...
i'm also an economic autarkist, opponent of unrestricted free trade, and admirer of the accomplishments of european civilization and its american derivative.
which is why i am often so critical of all the above.
but regardless...
although i kind of like your flailing, insulting, snarling, f bomb laced style...
dreyfuss ain't gonna respond to it. lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 12:27pm
http://www.amazon.com/Hostage-Khomeini-Robert-Dreyfuss/dp/0933488114
and tell me this swine does not have a dog in this hunt.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:52am | ignore this person | warn this person
thats still not telling me anything about dreyfuss' point of view. all i see are a few reviews.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 12:36pm
Let's get to the point: Ahmadinejad and some posters think that there may be something sinister and covert behind the murder of a young girl to incite greater violence and anti-Iran sentiment in the West. And you're honestly trying to say this doesn't sound like the M.O. of Israel? If this were a legitimate investigation, Israel would be at the TOP of the suspect list. Means, motive and precedent couldn't be more obvious.
Posted by DejaVu at 06/30/2009 @ 12:55pm
Dreyfuss is a LaRouchian!!! LOL No wonder the point of view of these columns have that bizarro distortion to them.
Posted by gren at 06/30/2009 @ 1:03pm
Posted by DejaVu at 06/30/2009 @ 12:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person
oh i'm sure rabid anti-semites will go and are going there, but its especially hypocritical and silly considering the circumstances surrounding this poor young woman's death.
she's a REAL martyr, and that scares the shit out of islamofascist theocraic shits like Ahmadinejad and his theocratic backers.
i understand the ugly history of the country and region, respect the abilities of mossad, but cannot condone the iranian regime's cowardly attempts to scapegoat outsiders...
especially "the jews"...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 1:05pm
Venezuela's Foreign Ministry wrote on its website:
"The Bolivarian Government of Venezuela expresses its firm opposition to the vicious and unfounded campaign to discredit the institutions of the Islamic Republic of Iran, unleashed from outside, designed to roil the political climate of our brother country. From Venezuela, we denounce these acts of interference in the internal affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while demanding an immediate halt to the maneuvers to threaten and destabilize the Islamic Revolution."
Posted by theo51 at 06/30/2009 @ 1:07pm
Venezuela's Foreign Ministry wrote on its website:
"The Bolivarian Government of Venezuela expresses its firm opposition to the vicious and unfounded campaign to discredit the institutions of the Islamic Republic of Iran, unleashed from outside, designed to roil the political climate of our brother country. From Venezuela, we denounce these acts of interference in the internal affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while demanding an immediate halt to the maneuvers to threaten and destabilize the Islamic Revolution."
Posted by theo51 at 06/30/2009 @ 1:07pm
It seems we have thousands of OJ's in Iran and they are all angry of this article. Be angry, you all and die of this anger
Posted by anmadinejad at 06/30/2009 @ 1:11pm
Posted by theo51 at 06/30/2009 @ 1:07pm | ignore this person | warn this person
well THAT'S a foolish tack don hugo is taking.
i understand that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. ww2, you know...
but...chavez IS making a mistake here.
i mean...i understand what he's going for. the US HAS illegally attempted to meddle in venezuela's internal affairs, sneakily supporting a rightwing coup attempt against chavez a few sort years ago.
and ironically hugo's advise to us to stay out of iran is by far the best advise we could possibly follow if we want to see regime change there anyway...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 1:20pm
Mr. Dreyfuss is beginning to get quite fulsome.
Posted by lingum at 06/30/2009 @ 1:26pm
Posted by anmadinejad at 06/30/2009 @ 1:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person
wow - you IN iran?
welcome. be careful.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 1:35pm
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 1:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person
hey! yer still here. good. i like you.
now answer MY questions and don't worry about Extraneous. he/she IS kinda extraneous after all (lol - just kidding, Ex...)
so you are a serbian. i say this since you continue to refer to yugoslavia. you also seem to be something of a slavophile as evinced by your comments concerning slavic language superiority.
your sympathy for those you consider oppressed (including the vaguely defined "poor") pegs you as having at least some socialist tendencies, tempered by nationalism...
ie - national socialist, sorta LIKE ME!!!
but different nation...
answer my questions or leave, grasshopper!!!!
;)
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:06pm
Yo' Nation bloggers.
Here's an excerpt from an interesting --and thought provoking-- piece I ran across recently via the exceptional web site "Information Clearing House":
Original source
www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/prop-j24.shtml
Once again: WHO IS THE NATION'S IRAN CORRESPONDENT, ROBERT DREYFUSS?
The Nation has not provided any answer to the question posed by the World Socialist Web Site on Monday: "Who is Robert Dreyfuss?"
As we explained, Dreyfuss is a contributing editor of the magazine, which presents itself as the voice of "progressive" politics in America. He wrote a book--Hostage to Khomeini--in 1981, calling for the Reagan administration to organize the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran and denouncing President Jimmy Carter for having betrayed the Shah.
At the time, Dreyfuss was a member of the fascistic organization led by Lyndon LaRouche, serving as "Middle East intelligence director" for its magazine Executive Intelligence Review.
This is the man that the Nation relies upon as its chief commentator on "politics and national security" and who it sent to Iran to cover the election. He has echoed the line promoted by the New York Times, declaring himself in favor of a "color revolution" in Iran.
A comparison of what he wrote then and what he writes today only makes it all the more urgent that the Nation explain why such an individual is one of its editors.
This arises particularly in relation to one of Dreyfuss's principal sources during his recent trip to Iran, Ibrahim Yazdi, Iran's former foreign minister and a so-called "dissident." An article published by the Nation on June 13 entitled "Iran's Ex-Foreign Minister Yazdi: It's A Coup," consisted largely of an interview with this man, who said the election was rigged and illegitimate.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:19pm
cont.
In his book Hostage to Khomeini, however Dreyfuss said that Yazdi was part of a "coterie of experienced, Western-trained intelligence agents."
He claimed that Yazdi's "directions from Washington and London came via the ‘professors,' men such as Professor Richard Cottam of the University of Pittsburgh," whom he described as a former "field officer for the CIA attached to the US embassy in Tehran."
Dreyfuss wrote: "Yazdi's wife once described Cottam as ‘a very close friend of my husband, the one person who knows more about him than even I do.'"
Elsewhere in the book, Dreyfuss refers to Yazdi as "Mossad-tainted."
The question is: which Dreyfuss are we to believe--the one who exposed Yazdi as an intelligence agent for the US, Britain and Israel, or the one who now quotes him at length as an advocate of "democracy" and "reform"?
Dreyfuss has never publicly repudiated what he wrote in 1981. Was he lying then, or is he lying now? The Nation is obliged to answer. Its readership deserves to know what Dreyfuss is doing at the magazine.
End quote.
I'll leave it to bloggers --and The Nation staffers-- to continue the discussion.
I hope it's fruitful.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:19pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person
good find. raises some interesting questions indeed.
but of course people DO change their views and all. look at half the surviving 60's leftist radicals...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:27pm
the comments about the Times on b_kool's reffed sight about the times' venezuela coverage are interesting as well.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:32pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person
This is the first time I may have actually seen useful thread commentary on this web site. Do you know anything about the author of the piece at "Information Clearing House"?
As far as I am concerned, if it is credible that Dreyfuss' primary source on the Iranian election is a former and/or current "Western-trained intelligence operative" then in my eyes Dreyfuss has to be suspect of being associated with an agenda or agendas that are opaque to us, his readers, at this point.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 2:33pm
I confess I'm not terribly familiar with Bill Van Auken --author of the above excerpt from a WSWS article of June 24. I've read a few pieces by him and haven't found him to be disagreeable or blindly ideological.
Here's a succinct "about" page for the source journal:
www.wsws.org/about.shtml
I personally find the recent work of Robert Dreyfuss at The Nation in reference to Iran to be substandard at best.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:44pm
"Like I said: any one, any time, any where. Bring it on.
Do you have a QUESTION?"
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:13am
"answer my questions or leave, grasshopper!!!! "
;)
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:06pm |
I at least have to give Ilya credit for having the common sense not to poke a grizzly bear with a stick, even if I'm fairly certain he isn't familiar with Dexter666.
Posted by Benchrest at 06/30/2009 @ 3:05pm
don't worry about Extraneous. he/she IS kinda extraneous after all (lol - just kidding, Ex...)
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:06pm
WHAT?! No worries I won't deny there is some truth to that.
Funny thing is I actually thought Ilya has some good points of discussion burried under his vitriol. I think there is a good reason to question Dryfuss' impartiality/objectivity. But no one would respond to an angry serb screaming obscenities at them.
Thanks Sy and b_kool for some real info.
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 3:06pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:44pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I don't know what the standard would be in terms of coverage of the Iranian event - reading publications like NYT, for example, it is just so clear that there are agendas at work, which make I think any Western journalism on the topic suspect - but Dreyfuss is one of the few journalists "covering" the issue who has actually been in Iran during the chaos, and who could actually point to Iran on a map 2 weeks ago.
However, involvement with a LaRouche-ite organization with ties to SAVAK, that the Washington Post claims employed dozens of intelligence operatives, as "middle east intelligence director", along with an allegiance to Reza Pahlavi, raises a LOT of questions about Dreyfuss and agendas in Tehran. As does interviewing a figure who is part of the "reform" movement in Iran who he previously identified as a Western-trained intelligence operative.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 3:13pm
Posted by Benchrest at 06/30/2009 @ 3:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person
MOOHAHA!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 3:06pm | ignore this person | warn this person
yeah...i thought they guy had some good points too. hope i didn't scare him off. bet he'd be fun to get drunk with...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 3:17pm
My two cents worth:
We all know that Ahmadinejad is at least a bit of a kooky character at minimum, and he has certainly contributed --during the backlash climate of the last several years against the reformist movement in Iran that was fostered under the previous president (Khatami)-- to a clamp-down on Iranian personal freedoms. But I have some personal doubts as to the degree to which Ahmadinejad is himself a "monster".
He's essentially been more buffoonish than beastly, yet the U.S. foreign policy establishment has steadily portrayed him as a holocaust denying, anti-Semite who would stop at nothing to destroy Israel. This is not only not helpful, but essentially a bald-faced lie.
Here's a small counterpoint to the absurdity --again via Info Clearing House:
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm
Does Iran's President wants Israel wiped off the map?
To raze Israel to the ground, to batter down, to destroy, to annihilate, to liquidate, to erase Israel, to wipe it off the map - this is what Iran's President demanded - at least this is what we read about or heard of at the end of October 2005. Spreading the news was very effective. This is a declaration of war they said. Obviously government and media were at one with their indignation. It goes around the world.
But let's take a closer look at what Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. It is a merit of the 'New York Times' that they placed the complete speech at our disposal. Here's an excerpt from the publication dated 2005-10-30:
(source: www.nytimes.com, based on a publication of 'Iranian Students News Agency' (ISNA). Passages in {brackets} will be left blank in the MEMRI --Middle East Media Research Institute in Washington DC-- version)
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 3:58pm
"They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan. Let's take a step back --{We had a hostile regime in this country which was undemocratic, armed to the teeth and, with SAVAK, watched everyone. An environment of terror existed.}-- When our dear Imam Khomeini said that the regime must be removed, many of those who claimed to be politically well-informed said it was not possible.
All the corrupt governments --{all the Western and Eastern countries supported the regime even after the massacre of September 7, 1978}-- were in support of the regime when Imam Khomeini started his movement, and said the removal of the regime was not possible. But our people resisted and it is 27 years now that we have survived without a regime dependent on the United States.
The tyranny of the East and the West over the world should have to end, but weak people who can see only what lies in front of them cannot believe this.
Who would believe that one day we could witness the collapse of the Eastern Empire? But we could watch its fall in our lifetime. And it collapsed in a way that we have to refer to libraries because no trace of it is left. Khomeini said Saddam must go and he said he would grow weaker than anyone could imagine. Now you see the man who spoke with such arrogance ten years ago that one would have thought he was immortal, is being tried in his own country in handcuffs and shackles --{by those who he believed supported him, and with whose backing he committed his crimes.}
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 3:58pm
Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front? This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world.
Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."
End Ahmadinejad quote.
It's becoming clear. The statements of the Iranian President have been reflected by the media in a manipulated way. Iran's President betokens the removal of the regimes, that are in power in Israel and in the USA, to be possible aim for the future. This is correct. But he never demands the elimination or annihilation of Israel.
End article excerpt.
There's more, and I recommend the whole article but I think readers here get the picture.
More importantly, we should remember that political complexity is rife on both sides of this equation.
In the U.S. we have a foreign policy establishment (and powerful Israel Lobby) that makes it incredibly difficult for any sitting president to make a clean break --not to mention the fact that foreign policy is often run in de facto fashion by individual CIA station chiefs over the head of the U.S. State Department.
In Iran, power is not centrally located but lies in the hands of a complex intermingling of clerics, justices and military forces --e.g. the Republican Guard primarily.
We do ourselves no favors oversimplifying and berating single leaders for faults that may lie deeper.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 3:58pm
I actually do read the comments here,and I would have responded earlier but for the fact that I was outside in the real world, doing some reporting today.
However, I am reluctant to respond to anyone, including Ilya, who insists on using vile, uncivil language.
It is true that, nearly 30 years ago, I wrote for Executive Intelligence Review. Since then I've had nothing to do with any LaRouche-affiliated publications or organizations, and I believe that LaRouche himself is a crackpot. None of which has anything to do with my opinions today.
As for the idea that I am "pro-Empire" and "pro-Israel" and all that, well, I don't know what to say. I have an enormous body of work here in this blog, in the pages of The Nation, and elsewhere, that stands on its own merits.
No one makes you read this column, and no one makes you comment, either.
Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 06/30/2009 @ 4:11pm
hello b kool 66
I don't understand you. In the quoted article A. says that acceptance of Jewish sovereignty in Israel is unacceptable to the Islamic world, which must re-establish Islamic sovereignty. The elimination of jewish sovereignty could occur only as a result of a crushingmiltary victory by islam over Israel.
If your point is that A. did not threaten to nuke Israel, fair enough. But he did demand a continuation of the Islamic military struggle against jewish sovereignty. So yes, he seeks to destroy Israel.
Posted by gren at 06/30/2009 @ 4:16pm
Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 06/30/2009 @ 4:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Thanks for taking the time to clear matters up somewhat on LaRouche. Further, I think that "Ilya" is clearly an obnoxious figure and I am surprised you deigned to respond at all.
Can you please clarify further for us how you are relying on a figure today as a major source on "reform" in Iran and the election, whom, 25+ years ago its true, you identified as a "Western-trained intelligence operative" who is also "Mossad-tainted".
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 4:23pm
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 11:13am
I have a question. Ever heard of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/
If you are going to be a dick, use it to some effect. Being a dick all the time just makes you a dick.
Posted by srjenkins at 06/30/2009 @ 4:47pm
Posted by gren at 4:16pm
I'll let you re-read the last lines of my post beginning with:
"There's more, and I recommend the whole article but I think readers here get the picture.
More importantly, we should remember that political complexity is rife on both sides of this equation...."
Continued mud-slinging (from both sides) will reap what only it sows --eventual disaster. Personally, I believe it ultimately resides with us here in the West to raise our game, and perhaps take the time to understand the Middle East in general in a more thoughtful way.
In Iran particularly, a culture with a rich heritage of intellectual achievement and civilized discourse exists that we give massive short shrift to when we simplify it into some medieval caricature of our own Western European roots.
Yes, there are undoubtedly forces in Iran that would enjoy a future world of darkness. But those forces are not at all alien to our own culture as well.
Simply open your eyes, "gren".
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:30pm
And thanks, Mr. Dreyfuss, for the timely reply to the posts today.
I harbor no ill will toward you personally of course, but I think serious questions have been raised regarding not just the objectivity of some of your more recent Iranian dispatches, but the quality and depth of the inquiry.
I know you can do much better, and I sincerely hope that you will.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:34pm
Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 06/30/2009 @ 4:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i had yer back, man...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 5:49pm
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 7:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Do you think you could calm down a little bit? The invective is over the top. For my part, I think you should be kicked off the site permanently under any name alias. It's not your view of Dreyfuss or his work; that's your prerogative. The problem is that you are being a creep, probably the worst creep I've seen on the site on the few months now I've been more closely reading these threads. Like R.D. said - nobody is making you read what he writes, or post profanity-filled tirade after profanity-filled tirade.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 7:20pm
Enough of these "forums" for a while. What a time sink!
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 7:22pm
Hey you......
Yeah you, Ilya.
I was happy to see someone throwing down when I first popped in at The Nation on the Iran election imbroglio. You sounded a bit overheated, but I appreciated the fact that you were passionate about an issue that I too found almost surreal with so many bloggers and columnists parroting a vastly oversimplified storyline.
But you're wearing out your welcome at this point, dude.
I suggest you take a serious chill pill, or maybe just take some time off from the site to get your head back together. I like people with fire in their bellies, but without a well-developed neural frontal lobe we all just end up burning ourselves and our causes with uncontrolled, self-immolating rage.
I'm gonna take a wild stab here and assume that you got better in ya.
Don't worry, Dreyfuss has put himself in a pickle and there are --no doubt-- plenty of eyes and minds here that have set sights on the issue. Wild-eyed invective is not likely to contribute any illumination to the topic.
Peace out, dude.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:24pm
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 7:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person
he's a serbian nazi.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 7:53pm
maybe its BLAGO! he's got the potty mouth for sure...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 7:57pm
Well, thanks for the clarification, "Ilya".
If I'd know that you were the reincarnation of Kurt Vonnegut earlier I'd certainly have cut you some slack.
:D
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 8:00pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 2:19pm
"In his book Hostage to Khomeini, however Dreyfuss said that Yazdi was part of a "coterie of experienced, Western-trained intelligence agents."
Wow. But how could he have survived in the state's culture of governance? Read on, Pax...
Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 06/30/2009 @ 8:11pm
Oh, for the record, and thanks to your Saint Clinton the 1st, I am Macedonian, and no longer a Yugoslavian.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 8:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person
oh that explains everything. i knew a serbo-macedonian in basic training. one of the most negtative, foul mouthed son-of-a-bitches i've ever known.
tough as nails, though...
are you a serb nazi?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 8:32pm
There is not a single character in American history who is even worthy to wipe Tito's ass.
Tito was a Man. The US? A rat.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 8:20pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Ilya, you have got to stop holding back like that. Tell us how you really feel!
Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/30/2009 @ 8:37pm
It's rather :)))) to see `shadows' of Ily being poked at....
Another slow day at TN!
Posted by Happy at 06/30/2009 @ 8:48pm
Dear "ilya"
Tito was arguably a communist dictator and quite frankly the word "democracy" would not exist in english or your own language without the US
You can take your vacant anti-American narrative and walk off the nearest pier with it. You clearly are little more than a blowhard yourself and you obviously cannot mentally differentiate between the abstract concepts of "empire" etc. you learned from(American educated bourgeois) Yugoslav "intellectuals" and the American populist history. You aren't worth the TP it took to improvise for kleenex when Eugene Debs had A cold.
Now, fucker off, k? Everyone thinks you are a creep.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 8:51pm
The fact that you picked up on that is cause for (minor) celebration. Not everyone in the US, apparently, is retarded. I rejoice - insofar as the concept of such is possible in our present state of affairs.
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 8:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i think its brother theodore come back from the grave.
"i stared into the abyss. the abyss stared back. neither of us liked what we saw!"
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 8:56pm
posted by "Ilya" at 8:39pm
Thanks, Ilya.
I've been a big fan of Fyodor ever since I read "Crime and Punishment" and "The Idiot" many, many years ago. I'm an existentialist myself --albeit the atheist variety.
HEY NATION BLOGGERS!
Another good one here -- an excellent analysis of the Iranian election farce from today's Counterpunch:
www.counterpunch.org/alamin06302009.html
"Has the CIA Been Caught in Iran's Cookie Jar, Again?"
Excerpt:
The biased performance of the mainstream media in reporting the Iranian elections can be illustrated through the coverage of the over-votes. Soon after the elections, it was reported that a major proof of fraud was that the participation rate exceeded 100 percent in many districts. The clear implication was that the authorities were so sloppy in their election tampering that they simply stuffed the ballot boxes.
Had media outlets consulted any experts on Iranian elections, they would have discovered the simple explanation. In Iran, there is no requirement to vote in a designated district. People do not carry a voter registration card like American citizens. Each voter has a voting book allowing him or her to vote anywhere in the country. After voting, the book is stamped and the index finger is inked to ensure that no one can vote more than once. This fact was not unique to this election. In many previous elections, many districts had a high turnout when compared to the number of registered voters in that district because many Iranians had voted there while traveling or during their summer vacations.
The example of the over-votes, not only demonstrates gross negligence by the media, but also deliberate deception.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 9:00pm
On June 22, Abbas Kadkhodaei, a spokesperson for Iran's Guidance Council (GC), the official body in charge of investigating all 646 complaints filed by the defeated candidates, held a press conference. He gave details about the complaints under investigation by the Council.
Kadkhodaei explained that the main complaint filed by Mousavi related to the elections was that the number of over-votes existed in as many as 170 cities, potentially affecting more votes than the margin between the top two candidates. Kadkhodaei then presented the GC's preliminary findings, which showed that such over-votes existed (as they had existed in previous elections), but in no more than 50 cities across Iran, affecting no more than three million votes. In other words, there were no more than three million voters who had voted outside their districts. He emphasized that, with 11 million votes between the top two candidates, even if all three million votes were to be excluded (although there is no valid reason to do that), clearly the outcome of the elections would not be affected.
But within minutes the German News Agency followed by Reuters, reported that the GC "admitted" that there were an excess of three million votes in 50 cities, leaving the listener and reader with the impression that these were fraudulent votes, rather than valid votes for people voting outside their districts like the spokesman explained. This report was instantly placed on the front pages of every major Western news media websites. The deception continued and made the front page of every major Western paper the following day.
End excerpt.
www.counterpunch.org/alamin06302009.html
Entire piece highly recommended. Includes some juicy bits on Kissinger and Zbig, and new dope on the so-called "twitter revolution".
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 9:00pm
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 8:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person
And while we're at it, your "humanist" country has produced a 20th century filled with monarchy after dictatorship after monstrously racist quasi-NAZI war criminals sending marauding armies to slaughter innocent people in great numbers.
While the US has had some truly monstrous episodes, including the wars that took the land from North America's natives, we've never sent a mechanized modern army into pastoral village land specifically to rape, murder, pillage, and destroy thousands upon thousands of people because they have a different ethnic background and RELIGION than we do.
Frankly, your country at some points has bordered on being Somalia.
You can take your vacant anti-Americanism and put it in your pipe and smoke it. Frankly, we've contributed a hell of lot more to the world than Slobodan Milosevic and the Yugo.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 9:01pm
osted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 9:01pm | ignore this person | warn this person
quasi nazi! i called him a pseudo nazi but i think i like "quasi" better.
he's technically a montenegran which is he last (i think) non serbian republic of "yugoslavia", which technically still exists since the montenegrans voted to stay.
not sure there IS any real differences between the montenegrans and serbs except perhaps some long subsumed illyrian and mediterranean strains.
the illyrians were some of rome's best soldiers.
i've only really known two serbo-montenegrans in my time until now. the guy was an unrepentant asshole who i disliked less than most and the woman was smart, sarcastic, cool and utterly gorgeous in that short haired slavic way.
takes all types to make a world.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 9:17pm
Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 9:17pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I agree, it takes all types to make a world. One type is the type that approaches individual members of a foreign culture with at least an iota of humility and open-mindedness. Another type is the sort of private-school-brat nationalist or supremacist who confronts individual members of a foreign culture with a bullshit anti-American rhetoric he memorized in translated books written by American-educated bourgeois "intellectuals" residing comfortably in a developing country courtesy one way or another of American money. Gentlemen ex-patriates and all that.
Now, seriously, enough of these "forums" for a while. Its just not worth the time.
Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 9:36pm
"My grandfather served WITH Tito....If I were half the man he was..."
~Ilya
Well, let's just postulate that your OTHER grandfather was a sweet transvestite from Transexual, Transylvania.
Still longin' to be "half the man he was"?
(It's just a thought experiment, dude. Relax.)
;-)
Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/30/2009 @ 10:23pm
Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/30/2009 @ 10:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person
yer a canadian serbo-montenegran national socialist anti-semite whose grandfather fought nazis.
but you are still a national socialist anti-semite, but NOT a nazi since you are not german and your grandaddy fought germans.
how long you lived in canada, whole life?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/01/2009 @ 12:22am
It has been clear ever since 1979, when Ahmedinejad and his friends held our diplomats hostage for 444 days, that Iran's ruling mullahs are a gang of ruthless fanatic. Washington has across five years complained that Iran has been supplying the insurgents with weapons, IEDs and training. But Dreyfuss missed all that.
It has taken recent events to let him him see and predict, >>> "With Iran now revealed as a fundamentalist-run, naked military dictatorship, I expect Iran to act ruthlessly vis-a-vis Iraq."<<<
It is not right to say that this "journalist" remains as twisted and cuckoo as when he wrote for Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche. He is in worse shape now.
Now he has six year of slandering Bush and the neocons to look back on. For six years he explained how wicked it was to wring Saddam's neck, how cruel to oust the fascist Baath, how foolish to think a military solution possible, how unchivalrous to oppose insurgents driving exploding cars into civilian crowds, how dumb to clutch the pipe-dream of a secular democratic Iraq. To this patriot it was unAmerican to oppose a "Resistance" that denounced freedom of speech and religious toleration, gender equality and democracy. Six years later, the Americans are leaving and leaving in power the govt they created, and Iraqis are cheering, and insurgents are weeping. And so too, Dreyfuss. He spits at Malaki, and pretends it is not happening, and stamps his feet like Rumpelstilskin, all of whose precious spinning came to nothing.
The US was mocked for spending its blood and money on a regime change in Iraq that profited Iran. These days we are seeing Iraq's nascent democracy helping undermine the sham Islamic democracy of the sainted Khomeini. Dreyfuss wrote a book about him. No wonder he's going crazy.
Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 07/01/2009 @ 05:36am
hello b kool 66
I re-read your post 3 times, but I still don't see how it is responsive or relevant to the spefic issue you previously posted on and which I responded to. My response to you was limited to a very narrow issue which you first raised -- whether A. had in fact called for military aggression against Israel for the purpose of extinquishing Jewish sovereignty over Israel. His own words confirm the charge. How is your response about mud-slinging and the glories of Iranian culture responsive to that issue and my post. And why insult me for purpotedly not opening my eyes.
???? WTF ????
Posted by gren at 07/01/2009 @ 09:00am
Hello syfriendly
It's amusing reading your posts to Dreyfuss. You're like his little lapdog. I'm glad one sentence from him was sufficient for you to continue your idol worshipping of him.
Posted by gren at 07/01/2009 @ 09:02am
Enough of these "forums" for a while. What a time sink! Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 7:22pm | ignore this person | warn this person
me thinks thou protesteth too much.
Posted by emile duBois at 07/01/2009 @ 12:25pm