Iran the new nemesis

I am extremely sorry to hear that the UK Ambassador to Iran has been arrested at a vigil for the victims of the plane crash. I mentioned previously that Facebook refused to publish a remark I’d made about Iran after that plane crash, that was made even before they finally admitted that it wasn’t an accident.

I am very concerned for any hostages held imprisoned in Iran and that Iran sinks so low as to even arrest the British Ambassodor shows how low Iran are sinking.



It is the point

Just been warned by Facebook because I used an emotional word in reaction of the newsthat a plane crashed in Iran with the deaths of 176 and 3 Britons amongst those victims. I made a comment that obviously crashed out because Facebook seems to have a filter, which automatically prevents some words from being published.

I have been warned that if I ever use another word that is not acceptable by their filters my account may be restricted. I accepted that decision. Politeness is important but that politeness is the demise of Jeremy Corbyn. I am quoting Yahoo News here who published the following comment of J Corbyn: ““Soleimani is the head of special forces of Iran. They obviously operate in all kids of places that you or I would not agree with or want. That is not the point.”

Unfortnately for Mr Corbyn it is the point. The operations of any military force against whoever is the point.

The same article also states that Corbyn was paid by Iran to appear on their state TV.

It seems that Jeremy Corbyn’s naivity is beyond comprehension. He seems to argue like a school-child making points that bullying is always wrong and that heads of state should never bully another.

I think he doesn’t understand the concepts of political violence or not even the concept of indidvidual terrorist violence and how states or their employees can be involved in all of that. Whilst Jeremy Corbyn has criticised the Iranian record on Human Rights, that is not a free pass for all that happened or for his defence of that regime to be acceptable.

Whilst it is a commendable strategy by a publisher like Facebook to wipe out hate speech by using filters against certain words, it makes it a much longer process to proof nuisance politicans are actually useless because of their continued use of elaborate wordings makes it harder to proof the point.

I don’t even understand why Crobyn sees himself as judge and jury of recent American military actions.


Magnificent seven

selective focus photography of cowboy holding revolver pistol statue

Photo by Amaury Fernando on

Watched this film recenlty and the scenario in Mexico, where the crime lords attack the farmers for their crops, to feed those gang members, and then the cowboys fighting the attacking marauding gangs to obliterate them and secure the freedom of the village farmers and their families made me think.

Not so different those Mexican gangs with today’s Taleban. If Cowboys, like the Magnificent Seven hadn’t fought those crime gangs, we would today have a similar society to those of the Taleban.

Repression of civilians by crime gangs who extort local farmers for the purpose of controlling regions, driving locals into slavery and forcing women into slavery of gangs is the result of serving the criminal gangs.

The ultimate result is sexual expoitation of girls from the age of 9 and no freedom of choice to develop a civilisation.

Repressive societies do still exist and the atrocities being carried out there are ongoing.

The freedom of any culture needs to be preserved and for us, who are cultivated to accept freedom of expression and from slavery, we are constantly fighting off attempts to impinge on our freedoms.

Jeremy Corbyn is far removed from reality when he writes this letter asking whether the US informed the UK in advance about the neutralisation of Qasem Soleimani. It is something a child would do as part of a history exam.

The Labour Party needs to make a clear choice of cultural affiliation to get any serious following in this country.

Unfortunately an economic strategy must be aligend to a clear cultural affiliation but it seems that with Labour everything is mixed up and confusing. That will not win any elections.


Of course I have got to make a remark about this latest bombshell that rocked the world of media and communications. Wikileaks seems to be, to be the new generation of high-tech protest, something to tell the world about the secrets and behind closed doors activities of political leaders and also how military actions do get carried out.

I watched an interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, you can watch it here too, where he tells us who finances his operations. He says it’s ordinary families with children who give him money and not businesses or organisations. I think this is significant because in my view its often ordinary families that are the most deprived of having a say in our society today. Running a community focussed group I find that parents of children are the least consulted about anything and our housing estates are dominated by non parent persons who have the time to come to meetings because families with children have to stay indoors to care for their children.

Also in the media families with children, especially if they are poor, are often portrayed as scroungers on society, being perceived as problems and in my view single parents are the most discriminated against group in society today, that it is people with children who fund Wikileaks the most. Of course I would  also like to know of what ethnic background those families with children are before being able to appreciate the situation fully.

Wikileaks of course is a new generation of protesters who want to do something about something they perceive as important.

As far as I understand Wikileaks has now been declared a terrorist organisation and as such has reached the status of subversive criminals. I remember not so long ago an autistic individual had great problems with extradition procedures to the US over his hacking into US military computers when he searched for evidence of aliens but this Wikileaks situation  is of course far more problematic because it displays findings to the public whilst the previous hacker was a private individual who did not widely publish his findings. Gary McKinnon I thought was a relative isolated one-off matter, but the Wikileaks situation shows that high-tech is the new widely used media by protestors around the world. I had experienced it that Chinese hackers were the most prominent group of people who tried to hack into my systems when I ran an online business some time ago.

This new generation of ‘revolutionaries’ is far more technology-wise than the old-fashioned warriors who excelled in causing physical damage mostly through bombs. I have several problems with this, one of which is that Wikileaks helps the Taleban. I read that Taleban leaders have now assigned a 9 strong group to sift through Wikileaks material to pinpoint US informers and then will want to go  out and kill them.

As a woman I find the Taleban abhorrent. They treat women as rubbish and as such I would not appreciate them at all. They are very sexist and would want to undo all progress western women have fought for so hard. Incidentally in Afghanistan single mothers are treated with the utmost contempt, women being made responsible for the rape by a man and punished, and then released with little chance of survival in the outside world. I fear there is a tendency in our society to make single mothers scapegoats for their status too.

Wikileaks activities support those gross human rights breaches against woman in Afghanistan because they support the Taleban and woman should be very careful before supporting his cause. In effect Assange’s actions help the Taleban discover US military activities and weaken the US military effort. So at least  the women of this world who have a concern about their freedom should stop supporting Assange from that perspective alone. Sweden once issued an arrest warrant over rape accusations against Assange. Women have to be very careful whom they support because  if it is a male with underlying sexual motives, we need to think more cleverly.

Of course the matter of disclosing diplomatic incidents is most likely perceived with eager interest by the whole world and that is a totally different matter but it can also weaken diplomatic efforts throughout the world and play into the hands of dangerous leaders like the Iranian president.

Iran hangs Sunni leader

What interested me on this story is the remark at the end, that allegedly Mr Abdolmalek Rigi, was on a plane to fly to a meeting with American military on an US base and that the US had promised him weapons.

I quote from the BBC website they report “”They said they would co-operate with us and would give me military equipment,” he said in a video statement broadcast on Iranian TV.”

The question of course is how much was the man told to say what he said and how much is this a public relations exercise of the Iranian authorities to show-execute those they want to hold responsible for Sunni uprisings, as a deterrent for others.

Needless to say, you cannot counter terrorism with terrorism and what is really going on in Iran is hard to establish at the best of times but what any Iranian TV channel would broadcast can only be a public relations exercise. The question is whether Mr Rigi and/or his brother ever were in charge of terrorist attacks or whether they were conveniently blamed for those attacks.

Belgium bans the Burka

The Belgian parliament (lower house) has passed a law, making wearing a full-face burka in public illegal. The vote did not have 1 opposition to it. The law already exists in France.

I am very much in favour of having such a law also here in Britain as the wearing of the Burka not only causes security concerns but also prevents women to wear what they like and it is also bad for communication.  Furthermore wearing the full veil will also pose a lot of employment restrictions and fall foul of requirements to take a job when offered or lose benefits. If women can wriggle out of taking a job over wearing a veil then that in itself would create a problem. I think we have to make a choice over cultural policies and identity that we wish to promote.

In Belgium currently only 30 women wear the veil, out of a 1/2 million Muslim population, the numbers are equally low in France, where the veil has been outlawed some time ago. (I believe it to be 78).

The Belgium Senate now has to approve the new law and there may be discussions about the wording of the law. But when are we going to see this move here. Britain is full of full-face veil wearing women. Wearing this garment in Britain is not necessary as our law already forbids sexual harassment of any type. Women here in Britain can wear as little as its allowed and do not have to worry about the morals of it because by law no man can take advantage of dress taste.

There are of course in any culture men who cannot contain themselves regardless of how many or how little clothes a woman may wear.

There are two types of concerns, which prompted the introduction of this law, one is of course obviously security, in today’s digital age, a CCTV camera is useless if people cover their faces, and of course the oppression of women.

I am surprised that Amnesty International calls this a dangerous precedent because the veil oppresses women without a doubt. We have seen it in Iran where the religious police imprisoned women who wore head scarfs with a bit too much colour on it. I think Amnesty International looks at the issue the wrong way around. Women in Muslim countries are dangerous oppressed and so much used to oppression that they have lost the ability and all confidence to even show their faces. I cannot understand why Amnesty International wants to support something like that.

There is always a danger that some women do not want to leave their homes even without the veil, that is a phobia that we treat with therapies.

The full veiling of women can hardly be seen as a religious outfit as it is oppressive to the extreme. There are plenty of national costumes that I fully support and people wear with pride in cultural festivals of all sorts.

Only 2 abstained whilst the other 134 MPs voted for the new law.


In support of Iranian Democracy

Mir-Hossein Mousavi Khameneh, candidate in the 2009 Iranian elections

Mir-Hossein Mousavi Khameneh, candidate in the 2009 Iranian elections

Zahra Rahnavard who is the wife of defeated candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, has a Facebook Supporter’s group and all interested on democracy and who want to support the struggle of pre-western politicians in Iran should join her Facebook Supporter’s group here.

The woman is obviously risking her life and that of her husband, they both are in constant danger from the Ayatollah’s henchmen.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has forbidden any further protests and the opposition have promised that protests will continue.

An aide to Mr Karroubi also told the BBC that a rally would take place and that it would be attended by Mr Mousavi and Mohammad Khatami – the former president, key reformist and ally of Mr Mousavi.

Mr Mousavi is expected, along with fellow challengers Mr Karroubi and Mohsen Rezai, to discuss more than 600 objections they had filed complaining about the poll at a meeting of the Guardian Council, which certifies elections, on Saturday.

Chat over dinner in Iran

not easy today as rioters spread across the city of Tehran, as incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared winner of the Iranian presidential elections.

Mir Hossein Mousavi called the elections a “charade” and there is widespread dissatisfaction. The changes introduced during Mr Ahmadinejad’s reign involved stricter dress codes with punishment for those women who dressed too colourful or didn’t cover their hair.

 Are any elections completely fair, isn’t there always a doubt of fiddling? We don’t know and can only assume and they think they know and they are frustrated and some are happy. One cannot assume, would like to know though how Mr Mousavi explains his expectation of a win.

A high turnout usually always results in a Conservative victory, we saw this also in the French elections, giving Mr Sarkozy the leadership. In Iran we saw 85% casting a vote and it is possible that some would have been too afraid to vote liberal or pro reform in case the votes could be turned against them. But that would be paranoid. So far its the pro American movement that’s rioting and causing a lot of destruction in Tehran.

Since 1979 the western style Shah of Persia has been replaced by the “Supreme Jurist” Ayatollah and we just do not know.  We cannot assume that the result is a fraud just because we would like to see a reformed government in place of the autocratic one.

If the poor support Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei they are likely to vote for more traditional leaders as they are often not fussed with reforms that usually only benefit the Middle classes. The poor want simply and easy lifestyles that helps them to manage their daily grind.

I can well believe that they would not vote liberal.

No chow of voting papers in Iran

Map of Iran

Map of Iran

These Iranian elections remind me a lot of the Zimbabwen ones. Incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in charge of the state media and desperately wants to win, whilst the Reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi has a lot of popular support.
I thought it was a bit too good to be true if there really were proper elections in Iran.

Blog Stats

  • 55,049 hits
%d bloggers like this: