[B-Man.]

(Original post by Democracy)
The allegations of "human rights abuse" are also highly dubious and misrepresented, and in many cases were proved to be regime disinformation a long time ago anyway.

Could you offer example(s) of cases that were proved to be regime disinformation?

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by B-Man.)
Could you offer example(s) of cases that were proved to be regime disinformation?

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...6#post34548866

(Original post by Democracy)
Indeed. That said, the Mojahedin, both in its current form and certainly in its pre-revolution days had all manner of idiotic policies anyway, it's not simply down to them being Marxists or economic liberals.

I'm far more than "kinda" right I'm wholly right. The Mojahedin do not do random bank robberies, kidnappings and certainly aren't financed by the drugs trade. That would be the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

What the Mojahedin did do once upon a time was bump off Islamic Republic MPs, a Prime Minister, a President, a head torturer and many other examples of fascist filth. For which I can only say fair play to them

The allegations of "human rights abuse" are also highly dubious and misrepresented, and in many cases were proved to be regime disinformation a long time ago anyway.

Agreed but people react better when you sugar coat their wrongness. What opposition group would you like to see run Iran, out of curiosity?

[B-Man.]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...6#post34548866

That wasn't proven to be false, although it obviously serves to discredit that accusation.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by B-Man.)
That wasn't proven to be false, although it obviously serves to discredit that accusation.

You're just clutching at straws. Any evidence of them actually taking part in the suppressing of the Kurdish people I can proclaim it wasn't proven to be true, although it obviously serves to credit that accusation.

[Democracy]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Agreed but people react better when you sugar coat their wrongness. What opposition group would you like to see run Iran, out of curiosity?

I don't take a party line. I believe in some fundamental rights which I believe all people are entitled to: freedom (of speech, activity, assembly, etc), justice, state assistance, education, healthcare and so on. I believe these ought to be honoured in a future constitution. As for who governs, well, what I'd like to happen is this:

Spoiler:

Show

"The Spring of Liberty is near...tomorrow's Iran, for all of us"

(right to left: Mensheviks, atheists, neutral, religious, Islamist reformists, national socialists, Mojahedin, communists, civic nationalists, monarchists).

I would like to see democracy in place so people can decide for themselves. Though as a socialist, of course I'd prefer for a socialist government to be in place. If you're asking me which particular opposition socialist group I support now, the answer is none.

(Original post by B-Man.)
Could you offer example(s) of cases that were proved to be regime disinformation?

I suggest you read from page 28 onwards, especially page 34:

http://ncr-iran.org/images/stories/a...with cover.pdf

[Aj12]

Anyone think we should just rename this the Iran and occasionally other middle Eastern affairs hub?

Anyway according to Assad Turkey is party to the bloodshed in Syria because they are among other things arming the rebels.

[Organ]

(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone think we should just rename this the Iran and occasionally other middle Eastern affairs hub?

Anyway according to Assad Turkey is party to the bloodshed in Syria because they are among other things arming the rebels.

In other news the Pope is a Catholic

[Aj12]

(Original post by Organ)
In other news the Pope is a Catholic

True but usually we don't see people coming out and saying it It's interesting to see Assad coming out with this right now though. It marks a change from trying to defuse tensions between the two earlier in the week. Apologising for shooting down the Turkish jet and saying he was not going to increase border forces in response to Turkey doing the same.

[MxSK]

Thomas Erdbrink reports from Bandar Abbas on the floating oil tankers:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/wo...ref=middleeast

you know... real reporting... actually being there, talking to people.


Also:
Al-monitor has obtained a document that the IRI UN mission is distributing around to IRI diplomats outlining the iranian position for the negotiations.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/88722748/al-...20document.pdf

up to page 5 is irans own "5 point proposal" which doesn't offer anything concrete.

page 5 onwards is irans response to the P5+1 proposal. This bit is more interesting because it has a quote of something the P5+1 has demanded and then irans response.

[B-Man.]

(Original post by Democracy)
I suggest you read from page 28 onwards, especially page 34:

http://ncr-iran.org/images/stories/a...with cover.pdf

It's quite worrying how easily Iranian MOIS managed to manipulate human rights organisations and foreign politicians.

The report states that "Most of the allegations made against the NLA regarding the Kurdish people come from a man named Jamshid Tafrishi-Enginee." The report doesn't say, but out of curiosity, do you know if he ever gave a reason for why he chose to confess that he was payed by MOIS to discredit MEK?

[Democracy]

(Original post by B-Man.)
It's quite worrying how easily Iranian MOIS managed to manipulate human rights organisations and foreign politicians.

The report states that "Most of the allegations made against the NLA regarding the Kurdish people come from a man named Jamshid Tafrishi-Enginee." The report doesn't say, but out of curiosity, do you know if he ever gave a reason for why he chose to confess that he was payed by MOIS to discredit MEK?

Apparently his conscience got to him (final paragraph):

http://www.iranterror.com/content/view/64/48/

I myself am slightly dubious about that as I don't believe it takes a decade for your conscience to "get" to you. There may have been some sort of deal struck but I really don't know. Or maybe I'm just too much of a cynic, I don't know. This sort of business is very convoluted indeed.

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Give examples and evidence. Speculation doesn't do anyone any good.

MEK's military operations based in Iraq has always been somewhat cloudy. Human Rights Watch released a support criticising the organisation's abuse of human rights and liberty of it's members based. And for the rest, you can read the response I will write for Democracy.

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
And if they're working against Iran's nuclear ambitions, this is good for the Iranian people and everyone.

Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology for energy use. Economically, it is within Iran's interest to produce its electricity needs from a non-oil source, so that it can export more of its oil at the high price it earns on the global market. We don't know much about Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions; so much of what we "know" comes from MEK, and MEK are keen to see the current regime removed, and their lack of ideological grounding and direction means they will consider any means to meet their ends, including provoking a Western invasion. It's not like they haven't supported foreign invasions of Iran in the past.

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
The only way they would be able to hold power in Iran is if there's a regime change and a regime change is unlikely to result in anything but a democracy so I can't see how they would be much of a use to foreign powers.

I don't know quite what you're saying here? Are you saying democracies are immune from foreign subversion?

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Foreign powers only care about two things; money and security.

Indeed. Every time I go to Israel, during the many many hours of intrusive questioning, I always get a heavy session of indirect enquiry as to whether any of my friends or family in Iran have any sympathy with MEK. That alone should speak volumes about where MEK stands, how it operates, and who it is willing to deal with.

(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
If whatever opposition group comes into play, I doubt they would be anti-western or very anti-capitalist.

So?

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by Democracy)
I'm far more than "kinda" right I'm wholly right. The Mojahedin do not do random bank robberies, kidnappings and certainly aren't financed by the drugs trade. That would be the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

No, MEK were just happy to be financed by a brutal murdering dictator. Now which is a worse source of income? Drugs, which should not be illegal anyway? Or a brutal murdering dictator?

(Original post by Democracy)
What the Mojahedin did do once upon a time was bump off Islamic Republic MPs, a Prime Minister, a President, a head torturer and many other examples of fascist filth. For which I can only say fair play to them

MEK also supported and collaborated with a non-humanitarian war instigated by a foreign country (Iraq). That war cost 1 million lives. The violence that FARC has been associated with does not come close to this.

FARC did many reasonable and well intentioned things in the past, especially during their early days of struggle with the fascist government of Columbia. However, like MEK, the brutality that they faced, and the egos of their respective leaders, lead the organisations to loose pretty much all ideological and moral grounding, to the point that they were willing to undertake any means to achieve their ends, to the point that they became vacuous and cult-like.

(Original post by Democracy)
The allegations of "human rights abuse" are also highly dubious and misrepresented, and in many cases were proved to be regime disinformation a long time ago anyway.

No they haven't

[Democracy]

(Original post by Rat_Bag)
No, MEK were just happy to be financed by a brutal murdering dictator. Now which is a worse source of income? Drugs, which should not be illegal anyway? Or a brutal murdering dictator?

Can you prove that?

MEK also supported and collaborated with a non-humanitarian war instigated by a foreign country (Iraq). That war cost 1 million lives. The violence that FARC has been associated with does not come close to this.

Again: prove this using non-regime sources and non-regime inspired sources.

FARC did many reasonable and well intentioned things in the past, especially during their early days of struggle with the fascist government of Columbia. However, like MEK, the brutality that they faced, and the egos of their respective leaders, lead the organisations to loose pretty much all ideological and moral grounding, to the point that they were willing to undertake any means to achieve their ends, to the point that they appear vacuous and cult-like.

Why do I get the feeling you've been watching too much PressTV and reading too much of Massoud Khodabandeh's ramblings?

For the record, if the regime and its agents are to be believed, everyone who opposes the Islamist Regime is either a "monafeq" cultist, a communist apostate or a monarchist lackey. Or all three

No they haven't

The document I provided would beg to differ But then again your reply of "nuh-uh" is so very convincing.

[MxSK]

Democracy seems to dismiss even the MEK's own claims as regime propaganda.... Things they GLOAT about...

Sorry but you're out of touch on this issue. No one likes the MEK. No one believes anything they say. They don't interact with iranians at all, they're in their own world.

[Aj12]

Has Iran ever had much of a biological or chemical weapons program? Since Iraq used chemical weapons against them I assume they had something?

[Democracy]

(Original post by MxSK)
Democracy seems to dismiss even the MEK's own claims as regime propaganda.... Things they GLOAT about...

Sorry but you're out of touch on this issue. No one likes the MEK. No one believes anything they say. They don't interact with iranians at all, they're in their own world.

Unlike you, I am not concerned with who is liked or disliked. I care about the facts and I hate regime propaganda, whoever it's directed at. This is a debate forum, not a political rally, we deal with facts and sources here, not your personal assessments of who is "liked" or otherwise.

Your point about me being "out of touch" only makes sense if I am personally invested in making sure the Mojahedin are well regarded. I have already told you on several occasions that that is no concern of mine, so it would serve you better if you stopped bringing it up.

[Jakanory]

(Original post by Aj12)
Has Iran ever had much of a biological or chemical weapons program? Since Iraq used chemical weapons against them I assume they had something?

Do not evn try go there sunshine, You want an invasion in Iran as well now? Where will your war mongeering stop for christ sake?

And no Iraq used chemical and biological weapons on Iran but Iran did not return the favour (although it ahd full right to do so) because the Ayatollah had already issued a religious order against doing so.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by Jakanory)
Do not evn try go there sunshine, You want an invasion in Iran as well now? Where will your war mongeering stop for christ sake?

And no Iraq used chemical and biological weapons on Iran but Iran did not return the favour (although it ahd full right to do so) because the Ayatollah had already issued a religious order against doing so.

Hahahaha, ****ing dying. You're acting like AJ12 is some top general who can influence foreign policy rather than a student on a forum. Calm down brah.

[MxSK]

(Original post by Democracy)
Unlike you, I am not concerned with who is liked or disliked. I care about the facts and I hate regime propaganda, whoever it's directed at. This is a debate forum, not a political rally, we deal with facts and sources here, not your personal assessments of who is "liked" or otherwise.

Your point about me being "out of touch" only makes sense if I am personally invested in making sure the Mojahedin are well regarded. I have already told you on several occasions that that is no concern of mine, so it would serve you better if you stopped bringing it up.

Not sure why I'm not allowed to comment on the popularity or extreme unpopularity) of a group. if that's something you don't care about then fine, I'll let you deal with your own issues. Also, I didn't "bring up" anything, just responding to posts like you and everyone else, not sure what you're harping on about.

What you can't deny is that IF they are delisted, then they have a massive hurdle to climb if they want to regain any credibility. Heck I don't see why they haven't done anything up to now. Instead of interacting with Iranians, they are more interested in pursuing corrupt US officials to declare ridiculous **** like that they are the "legitimate democratic government" of Iran, rajavi as the "legitimate president". I mean instead of this crap, they could be interacting with everyone else, open up etc. But they don't, so there is no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt at all. Out of all the wackjobs we have in opposition, they have got to be the worst.