Iran 2011 Demonstrations (2 Viewers)

ReBeL

The Jackal
Jan 14, 2005
22,871
#23
Iranian ex-leader Rafsanjani loses powerful role

TEHRAN, Iran – Former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani lost his position on Tuesday as the head of a powerful clerical body charged with choosing or dismissing Iran's supreme leader.

Rafsanjani is a bitter enemy of hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and tacitly supported his rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, in Iran's bitter dispute over the 2009 presidential elections.

Hardliners and supporters of Ahmadinejad had lobbied hard in recent weeks to push Rafsanjani out of the post and supported Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Mahdavi Kani to replace him as the head of the Assembly of Experts. Kani is a moderate conservative not seen as a supporter of the opposition.

The Experts Assembly monitors the all-powerful supreme leader and picks a successor after his death. That makes it potentially one of the most powerful institutions in Iran, although it does not involve itself the daily affairs of state.

Rafsanjani told the assembly that he wouldn't seek re-election to "avoid division" if Kani ran for the post, and Kani got 63 votes as the sole candidate for the post.

Rafsanjani, who had chaired the assembly since 2007, will remain a member of the 86-member assembly.

The 77-year-old Rafsanjani — who served as president from 1989-1997 — still heads the powerful Expediency Council _a body arbitrating between legislators and the Guardian Council, the hard-line constitutional watchdog that approves candidates for parliament, president and the Assembly.

The Assembly's real clout kicks in after the supreme leader is gone — a sort of Iranian version of the Vatican's College of Cardinals when they gather to pick a new pope. The assembly has done that only once since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In 1989, it picked Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to succeed his late mentor, the Islamic Revolution patriarch Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Rafsanjani has long been an elusive inside player in Iran's clerical leadership. He has supported a policy of improving relations with the West including the United States and has tried to play a bridging role between hardline extremists and the marginalized reformist opposition.

But Rafsanjani has been losing power gradually over the years step by step. His son, Mohsen, resigned as the head of Tehran subway system after 17 years in office on Friday, citing lack of support from the government.

Mohsen Hashemi said Ahmadinejad's government had ulterior political motives in withholding a $2 billion budget for the subway system that was approved by parliament.

Rafsanjani's daughter, Faezeh, who has appeared at opposition protests in the past, was briefly detained last month while allegedly trying to cause unrest by chanting anti-government slogans in one of the main streets of Tehran.

Faezeh was confronted by several hardline vigilantes last month and verbally insulted for supporting the opposition.

In November, an arrest warrant was issued for Rafsanjani's younger son, Mahdi Hashemi, on charges of fomenting the postelection unrest. The son, who has been living in Britain since shortly after the disputed 2009 election, has denied the charges and is not known to have had any key role in the opposition movement or the street protests.

Hardline member of parliament Mahmoud Ahmadi Biqash said Rafsanjani paid a price for not condemening the opposition leaders who challenged the ruling system.

"Today, Experts Assembly members showed that they are pioneers in confronting enemies ... and seditionists and obeying the orders of the supreme leader," he told the official IRNA news agency.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110308/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran
 
Jul 2, 2006
19,431
#25
McCain Decries Obama Iran Policy as a 'Failure'

"I think if we had supported the demonstrators at the time it could have meant a significant change in the government of Iran," McCain said on CBS' "The Early Show," adding it was "opportunity that we lost."

"We should have supported them and they could have overthrown the government then," the Arizona Republican said.
-------------------

Purpose of demonstrations was already obvious.
 

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#26
whether or not it serves Western purposes is of secondary importance to the will of the Iranian people. Though i'm not sure if the majority of Iranian people are with or against the government. The Iranians i have met have mostly been against the government, not so sure about people in Iran.
 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
#27
McCain Decries Obama Iran Policy as a 'Failure'

"I think if we had supported the demonstrators at the time it could have meant a significant change in the government of Iran," McCain said on CBS' "The Early Show," adding it was "opportunity that we lost."

"We should have supported them and they could have overthrown the government then," the Arizona Republican said.
-------------------

Purpose of demonstrations was already obvious
.
What was it?
 

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#28
I think he means that the demonstrations served the purpose of foreign powers more than it did the Iranian government. All due respect Turk, but thats exactly the same thing we heard in Egypt, Libya and Syria.
 
Jul 2, 2006
19,431
#29
They wanted ''freedom''. A freedom like in Reza Pahlavi and Mustafa Kemal era, where people tortured, insulted, taken from their home and got hanged because of their belief. I maybe overly sensitive on this issue but seculars caused more terror than you can ever imagine, though it was not me or my family who got the damage, witnessing the cruelty is enough for me.
 

delrey

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2009
1,121
#30
Yeah but, compare Pahlavi perod and this one. In Pahlavi, Iran was puppet state, industry was joke, the guy extract billions from country.
 
Jul 2, 2006
19,431
#31
I think he means that the demonstrations served the purpose of foreign powers more than it did the Iranian government. All due respect Turk, but thats exactly the same thing we heard in Egypt, Libya and Syria.
It's not the same. Egypt, Libya, Syria. These are either secular or anti-Islamic governments.

Yeah but, compare Pahlavi perod and this one. In Pahlavi, Iran was puppet state, industry was joke, the guy extract billions from country.
Exactly and that's what will happen again if those israeli supported ''freedom fighters'' manage to overthrown current government. Iran will turn into a hell hole for Muslims.
 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
#32
They wanted ''freedom''. A freedom like in Reza Pahlavi and Mustafa Kemal era, where people tortured, insulted, taken from their home and got hanged because of their belief. I maybe overly sensitive on this issue but seculars caused more terror than you can ever imagine, though it was not me or my family who got the damage, witnessing the cruelty is enough for me.
Educate yourself before making a total idiot out of yourself.

Yeah but, compare Pahlavi perod and this one. In Pahlavi, Iran was puppet state, industry was joke, the guy extract billions from country.
You too.

Exactly and that's what will happen again if those israeli supported ''freedom fighters'' manage to overthrown current government. Iran will turn into a hell hole for Muslims.
You are so low, pathetic and also stubborn in being wrong all the time that I'm not really willing to put energy or time to show you how you can't be any more wrong on an issue you have zero knowledge about but in this goddamn hole you are afraid of it being a hell hole for Muslims, only a few days ago, Peyman Aref, a student, got lashed 74 times for "insulting Ahmadinejad". All he had written (which is exactly why he got lashed), was that "he'd never say hello to such man".



iran+activist.jpg


In the post-elections protests, no one intended to overturn the regime. It was a protest against an alleged fraud. What happens in Syria, which you are crying over, happened in Iran only a few years back. Such brutality, such brutality did happen in front of my eyes, in the street I live, few meters away from the place I was watching it. The difference in the number of these two occurrences' death tolls is only that our people stopped it for the sake of their lives earlier and I'm happy about it.

No one could be as low as someone who thinks he has to have a say over everything even over those he knows absolutely nothing about.

 
Jul 2, 2006
19,431
#35
All of those insults are belong to you if you prefer Shah regime over the current one. What was the student's reason of not saying hello to ''such a man''? We have some guys like him here too, those who are booing Prime Minister because of his Muslim identity, or not greeting his wife for being dressed like Muslim.
 

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
#36
All of those insults are belong to you if you prefer Shah regime over the current one. What was the student's reason of not saying hello to ''such a man''? We have some guys like him here too, those who are booing Prime Minister because of his Muslim identity, or not greeting his wife for being dressed like Muslim.
I can prefer any regime to the other one. It does not make me pathetic, low or an idiot. That happens when you talk over things you know nothing about. It shows even more when you are totally wrong.

What was the student's reason? Is it even important? There are so many reasons why "such man" should never even live on this planet but forget about them, for whatever reason it is, why should one get lashed for saying such thing?
 

Lion

King of Tuz
Jan 24, 2007
36,185
#37
It's not the same. Egypt, Libya, Syria. These are either secular or anti-Islamic governments.



Exactly and that's what will happen again if those israeli supported ''freedom fighters'' manage to overthrown current government. Iran will turn into a hell hole for Muslims.

iran's government is not anti muslim? in iran khamenie, the suprme leader's world is law. his word is absolute, more than fucking god. how is that not anti-islamic?

also most in iran the rampant worshiping of ali is insane. most poeple pray to ali, or say his name when they are about to under take a task then say god's name.

iran's government is fucked up beyond belief. the government exists to serve it's people. after all you pay as a citizen pay the salary of the people in charge. when the people no longer want the government, the government needs to get the fuck out. it's that fucking simple. all this talk about isreali inflfunece, western infulence. is irrelevant. governemtns exist to serve the needs of the people. if poeple say we don't want you anymore then thats it.
 

ReBeL

The Jackal
Jan 14, 2005
22,871
#38
iran's government is not anti muslim? in iran khamenie, the suprme leader's world is law. his word is absolute, more than fucking god. how is that not anti-islamic?

also most in iran the rampant worshiping of ali is insane. most poeple pray to ali, or say his name when they are about to under take a task then say god's name.

iran's government is fucked up beyond belief. the government exists to serve it's people. after all you pay as a citizen pay the salary of the people in charge. when the people no longer want the government, the government needs to get the fuck out. it's that fucking simple. all this talk about isreali inflfunece, western infulence. is irrelevant. governemtns exist to serve the needs of the people. if poeple say we don't want you anymore then thats it.
I have to agree here...

Turk, it is not as democratic as you think there in Iran. People have the right to stop that kind of regimes.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)