Iran leader denied WTC wreath request

[Pekka]

Who knows, but to me this seems like a security issue. Like you guys pointed out, if you're going to announce that you'll be there... it'll be trouble, or at least trouble is to be expected.

There could be demos and counterdemos just because of this and things could get out of the hand. Not seriously, but still, it means lots of security issued there, so then you think about is it worth it? It's just one guy... plus when you connect that he might be using it for propaganda purposes, you'll just have to consider the pros and the cons, the cons seems to outweigh the pros.

IN general I'd say let the guy go there, after all, he takes personal responsibility, he knows there's a risk for some looney to try something. But it's not about his safety alone anymore, so.... I mean I'd let him go there if he didn't announce this, so that epople wouldn't expect it. By all means, why not.

But because it is now known? FOrget about it, security risks for outsiders as well.

[Barnabas]

I was going to make a new thread, but Ill just post about it here.

Next tuesday the president of Argentina will denounce Iran at the United Nations, for this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_AMIA_bombing

"Argentina's justice, Israel, and the United States[18] suspected in 2005 that Hezbollah was behind the attack, with backing from Iran. Hezbollah has denied responsibility.[19]

On 25 October 2006, prosecutors in Buenos Aires formally charged Iran and Shi'a militia Hezbollah with the bombing, accusing the Iranian authorities of directing Hezbollah to carry out the attack and calling for the arrest of former President of Iran Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and seven others, including some who still hold official positions in Iran.[3]

Speaking on state radio, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hoseyni described the accusations against the country as "a Zionist plot." Both Hezbollah and Iran deny any involvement in the bombing.[20]

According to Hoseyni, the accusations were intended to divert "world attention from the perpetration of crimes by the Zionists against women and children in Palestine".

On March 6, 2007, former Congressman Mario Cafiero and former government official Luis D'Elia provided evidence at a press conference that Abolghasem Mesbahi, along with two other Iranians that gave alleged evidence implicating Iran in the bombing, were members of the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK,) which is designated as a terrorist organization by the US. They also said that there were arrest warrants issued by Interpol for the other two Iranians, Hadi Roshanravani and Hamid Reza Eshagi.[21]"

Now the Iranian government says if Argentina denounces them, it will mean Argentina is in favour of an american invasion of Iran. And blamed jewish organizations for this.

I guess this will separate Argentina and Venezuela (who is friends with Ahmie)

[Shrapnel12]

I feel sorry for Aggie. You have to be a very sad and lonely person to hate your own people worse then an advocate for genocide. Pathetic.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Then again, 'our own people' do have blood on their hands.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by Agathon


Because the U.S government would never send cash and arms to irregular groups that responsible for terror, like in countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Afghanistan.

Oh wait...



The real problem is that you right wingers are completely and utterly FOS. The problem is that when you finally burst, the rest of us will be knee deep in it.

The covert actions you mentioned were intended to overthrow dictators (and socialists) or supply arms to rebels for the purposes of containing communism. They were not intended simply to cause mass death for a religious belief, but to bring stability and prevent Soviet hegemony, which could have had disastrous consequences. The CIA isn't all about death to the infidels.

Regardless, the few times when the US government has screwed up and caused more harm than good, does not justify the many times bin Laden has successfully planned and inspired dozens of devastating and murderous terror attacks explicitly targeting civilians.

Also, why blame right wingers? Democratic as well as republican presidents sponsored the CIA actions you mentioned.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
The covert actions you mentioned were intended to overthrow dictators (and socialists) or supply arms to rebels for the purposes of containing communism. They were not intended simply to cause mass death for a religious belief, but to bring stability and prevent Soviet hegemony, which could have had disastrous consequences. The CIA isn't all about death to the infidels.

Uh.... they were also intended to put in PLACE dictators. For the advancement of US interests and all that.. which is a pretty strong belief .

[Wiglaf]

They installed dictators sympathetic to the US as opposed to democratically elected communists, sure.

Can you see how that is different from indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians?

[Pekka]

I also don't see how CIA or other intelligence service action is left/right issue.

[Wiglaf]

It isn't. In any way, shape, or form, historically or otherwise.

[Shrapnel12]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
They installed dictators sympathetic to the US as opposed to democratically elected communists, sure.

Can you see how that is different from indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians?

That's asking too much of your typical leftie Wiglaf, but don't forget how smart they are.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
They installed dictators sympathetic to the US as opposed to democratically elected communists, sure.

Can you see how that is different from indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians?

Of course... well, until the dictators or death squads the US funded also ended up indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians (Pinochet, Contras, etc).

Realistically though, it is strange to go after Iran for funding Hezbollah, after the US's efforts in Honduras and Nicaragua in the 80s (and prior to that). It's very similar stuff.

[MichaeltheGreat]

No it isn't, Imran.

What we do in our perceived geopolitical insterests = freedom and improved lives for everyone, even the dead.

What anyone else does in their perceived geopolitical interests used to = totalitarianism and slavery, now = terrorism.

[Arrian]

Ooh, MtG, you firebrand you!



-Arrian

[Shrapnel12]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Of course... well, until the dictators or death squads the US funded also ended up indiscriminately killing thousands of civilians (Pinochet, Contras, etc).

Realistically though, it is strange to go after Iran for funding Hezbollah, after the US's efforts in Honduras and Nicaragua in the 80s (and prior to that). It's very similar stuff.

I tend to agree, but when it comes to countries like these, exactly which democratic, freedom loving rebel group with unstained hands did you expect us to deal with?

[SlowwHand]

If you find unstained hands, be suspectful.