Okay, Canada's got problems. I'm the first to criticize Canada's police and justice system when necessary. And Canada should be held to account for any hypocrisy (and as a leftist, I'm among the first to do so).

But this is hilarious, coming from Iran. IRAN! Home of torture, extrajudicial killings, kangaroo courts, public floggings, inhumane death sentences like stoning and throwing off of buildings, and state-sanctioned misogyny! Truly a human rights model for the rest of the world!

quote:

---

Written by Iran "in the name of God," the document asserts that the Canadian government denies its people food, clean water and the right to work.

"Routine unlawful strip and beatings by Canadian police has been a matter of concern for international community," notes the booklet, entitled Report on Human Rights Situation in Canada, adding that "the practice of police is alarming simply because ... it is functioning as if there is no need to have judges."

The publication, which claims its allegations are drawn from "objective and factual information released by authentic and credible international sources," alleges that a range of human rights violation occur in Canada, especially toward aboriginal peoples, refugees and immigrants.

"To the great dismay of the international community, it is a great concern that the rights of women are violated, and no serious attention has been paid in promotion and protection of women's rights in Canada."

Moreover, the document concludes, "Canada's position as a self-declared standard-bearer on human rights has been demoted to a blind-folded-and-bullied follower of the new school of unilateralism and the axis of derailment of international human rights law."

---

Thank you so much for this, Iranian government! You have real moral authority on this subject. Ha!

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

The booklet emerges on the eve of the UN's annual summit, to be attended by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier.

Part of the two men's efforts will be to convince other world leaders to stay on side with a resolution Canada drove through the UN General Assembly in 2006, denouncing Iran's poor human rights record. [...]

Iran typically positions itself as the victim, and last year came within two votes of winning enough UN support to throw out the Canadian-led condemnation of 2006.[...]

The booklet says Iran calls on the Canadian government to "comply with its international commitments before ... find faulting [sic] against others at the international community." [...]

While there is an enormous gulf between Canada's and Iran's human rights records, many of the economic and social rights Iran highlights in the booklet are viewed by a significant number of developing countries as more important than civil rights.

---

So, Canada spearheaded a condemnation of Iran in the U.N., and Iran is fighting back.

quote:

---

Attempts to reach a spokesman for Iran's mission to the UN were unsuccessful Friday.

---

In my opinion, this article is part of the neo-conservative campaign for nuclear genocide against Iranians, in Iran.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: CUPE_Reformer ]

This point about economic and social rights is an important one. A human rights focus on civil rights only works fine for people that are rich enough to never worry about their economic well being nor give a shit about the economic well being of others.

quote:

---

The UN has been unable to adopt a comprehensive convention against terrorism. The Organization of the Islamic Conference insists blowing up Israelis and Americans in the name of self-determination doesn't count.

---

and this:

quote:

---

The Security Council serves as the conduit for Palestinian claims that terrorists are martyrs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
So, Canada spearheaded a condemnation of Iran in the U.N., and Iran is fighting back.

---

With all due respect (not much), you sound like an apologist for the Iranians.

We left Iran in the 1980s to find a better life. We did not want to live under the religious tyranny. For you to say that this Iranian booklet is just tit-for-tat is obscene. You have NO IDEA what conditions are like in Iran. I do. And other members of my family do. I still have families in Iran.

You be quiet about things you do not understand. Listen before you speak.

Canada is a great country, and nothing to apologize for. Canada has allowed my family to prosper in ways we never could have in Iran.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:

You be quiet about things you do not understand. Listen before you speak.

---

I didn't say one single positive thing about conditions in Iran in my posts. I didn't say anything at all about conditions in Iran.

Did I?

Follow your own advice, and stop lecturing people until you have learned how to read.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Michelle, with all due respect, did you read the whole article?

---

Yes, I did. I understand that they were highlighting Canada's hypocrisy.

I think Canada might also have been motivated to condemn Iran because of what happened with Iranian-Canadian Zahra Kazemi. It's entirely appropriate for Canada to criticize Iran's internal policies if they've victimized one of our citizens.

Also: I think that it's okay to pass resolutions through the UN when countries like Iran violate human rights the way they do. Canada doesn't even begin to compare to Iran in such a regard. If you don't believe me, ask thousands of Iranian refugees now living in Canada.

I am completely against waging wars of liberation against countries like Iran. But I have no problem with diplomatic criticism.

N.Beltov: I suppose I should have found the same story in a Toronto Star article and posted that, but I happened to be on the National Post web site when I saw it, so I posted it. Here's a Toronto Star article on the same topic if it makes you feel better.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:
With all due respect (not much), you sound like an apologist for the Iranians.

You be quiet about things you do not understand. Listen before you speak.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Yes, I did. I understand that they were highlighting Canada's hypocrisy.

---

That's correct. And Iran was doing so defensively, because Canada spearheaded a condemnation of Iran in the U.N., at precisely the time (2006) when the U.S. was seeking to isolate Iran over alleged nuclear weapons and prepare public opinion for war.

Your response (in your OP) was to laugh it off, because a country (Iran) which obviously abuses human rights on a daily basis has no business criticizing another.

My feeling about Canada (especially under Harper) is precisely the same. As for the Kazemi affair, however horrendous it was, let's move on, shall we? This is a big world and we've killed and tortured (or delivered to torture) lots of people abroad since the Iranians tortured and murdered her. I haven't seen one single resolution in the U.N. condemning Canada for these horrendous actions, have you?

And even though Canada may be nicer than Iran (except for sending soldiers to kill people in other countries, which Iran does not do), that doesn't make anyone's criticisms of Canada's record laughable. At the very least, I'd like to read the Iranian pamphlet before laughing it off based on the selective quotes of the National Post which likes to interview neocon Islamophobes like Anne Bayefsky.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:

You be quiet about things you do not understand. Listen before you speak.

---

You may or may not be who you say you are. Regardless, neither unionist nor anyone here that I know of} has suggested that the human rights in Iran is a good one. I see nothing inaccurate in unionists statements including those about the neocon-based site "Eye on the UN" and the obvious political retaliation by Iran for Canada's attacking Iran's human rights. Again, that doesn't mean there are not gross human right violations by Iran but your telling him simply to "be quiet" is not helpful.

Some possible insight for the National Post's timing with it's source, "Eye on the UN", from the Asia Times:

":....Neo-conservatives in the US who see in Iran's nuclear program and its theocratic regime an existential threat to Israel, as well as an increasingly powerful rival to US power in the Middle East/Gulf region, have been at the forefront - both within the administration (particularly in the offices of Vice President Dick Cheney and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld) and outside it - of efforts to rally the public behind a policy of confrontation and "regime change" in Tehran.

While they have insisted that such a policy is best pursued through political and other forms of support for non-violent opposition forces in Iran, they have also called on the administration to prepare to carry out a preemptive attack against Tehran's nuclear facilities before President George W Bush leaves office, if not sooner.

They have also strongly opposed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's efforts to work with the so-called EU-3 - Britain, France and Germany - to engage Tehran in negotiations designed to impose safeguards on Iran's nuclear program and denounced as "appeasement" the State Department's offer earlier this year to talk directly with the regime for the first time since 1979 if it froze its uranium-enrichment program.

Thus, in their view, the decision to grant former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami a visa to travel to the US is the latest in a series of State Department actions designed to reduce tensions between the two countries and encourage engagement. These are moves that they strongly denounce as "appeasement".

It "is not an isolated event", wrote Anne Bayefsky, a senior fellow at the neo-conservative Hudson Institute and editor of EyeontheUN.org. "As the pattern of all talk and no action takes hold, this move too will undercut any [US] demand to the international community for immediate, serious sanctions on Iran. If we aren't prepared to isolate Iran, why should anyone else?""
Jim Lobe in Asia Times
Edited to add:
This is an old report but still timely in its content.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: contrarianna ]

This is the end result : stereotyping and it's the media to blame.

Just looking at two of there accusations : womans rights....there is no question that the Cons are trying there best to remove and discourage the womans right to have a legal and powerful voice.If it were up to the neocon they would be in the kitchen..we all know that.

Police beatings: That goes on , on a daily basis in Canada..some cases get more attention than the others like the Toronto football player that was beaten up and then coke planted on him to frame him ..all because he was black..So yeh depending on what side of the police boot your on Canada can be perceived as a a racist police beating piece of shit country if publicized correctly.

It all depends on the media attention..just like the recent vote at the UN..Canada votes AGAINST human rights..why is that? US control? Ignorance?

Boy the media can easily make Canada look real bad if they wanted to over that one.

Pushing people off buildings..shit Canada might of been responsibe for blowing up air india and covering it up the police are so trusted...The headlines could say that tomorrow and if the media doesn't tell Canadians to get upset ..they won't , they'll just sit there and accept it.Just like police dressing up as insurgents, downplayed bigtime but extremely serious.

And if they can get away murder like shooting people in the back of the head..they can push them off buildings like they do in Iran...furthur they can drive what they deem to be undesirables out of the city limits on extremely cold nights and watch them freeze to death. so common a practice they call it a "starlight" drive.

In the US they take blacks out to the everglades at night..alligators!But that's the US..they don't do things like that here..only there and 3rd world countries like Iran...har har har.

Nope given the right publicity you can pretty well rip the fabrication of a hypocritic country to shreds, or a political party for that matter..like the adscam liberal wipe out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buddy Kat:
I'm sure if you dig deep enough you will find a case where someone was stoned to death in Canada..probably Alberta if my memory serves me correctly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

And even though Canada may be nicer than Iran (except for sending soldiers to kill people in other countries, which Iran does not do),

---

Right. Ever hear of Iran-Iraq war? Iran invaded Iraq many times. And Iran occupies islands that belong to the UAE. Iran sends weapons into Afghanistan to support the taliban and to make Afghan government unstable.

If you were truly an Iranian, then your siding wyith the invader of your country would make you a traitor.

quote:

---

We left Iran in the 1980s to find a better life. We did not want to live under the religious tyranny. For you to say that this Iranian booklet is just tit-for-tat is obscene. You have NO IDEA what conditions are like in Iran. I do. And other members of my family do. I still have families in Iran.

---

YOu are Persian then and Ajami?

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: 1234567 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Iraq invaded Iran on September 22, 1980, and Saddam Hussein carried on his murderous war backed to the hilt by the United States.

If you were truly an Iranian, then your siding wyith the invader of your country would make you a traitor.

That, and everything else you said, is the kind of bullshit spewed by any two-bit warmonger trying to justify war against Iran. It is not worthy of refutation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
But if Cutlass is from Iran, and Michelle has the experience with the Iranian-Canadian community that she does, it might be best not to dismiss them out of hand on the issue of Iran's human rights record.

---

I'm not dismissing anyone. However, when someone spews bullshit, I dismiss that bullshit. That's an important distinction that should not be blurred, don't you think?

Just read what I said very carefully and tell me if I have said anyone is a warmonger. I do write very carefully.

In particular, why are you talking about Iran's human rights record? I've already stated my view on that. Michelle thinks Iran is so horrible that when they defend themselves against Canada in the U.N., it is laughable. I think it is only normal.

When, however, Cutlass accuses Iran of being the aggressor in the Iran-Iraq War, the word "traitor" just comes naturally to my lips. Sorry about that.

ETA: Also, Coyote, arguments from "authority" don't impress me in the slightest. I know Michelle has lots of experience with Iranian refugees and émigrés. That means that her comments must be all the more well-founded and thoughtful - it does not mean that I have to accept whatever she says at face value (especially when I am not disagreeing with her in the slightest about Iran's human rights abuses).

As for Cutlass, her/his fleeing from Iran and "prospering" in Canada doesn't impress me. What was Cutlass family doing while the Shah was still in power? Prospering? Why not flee then? I need a lot more information before "respecting" the opinion of someone who sees Iran as an aggressive country.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

And no. You didn't call her a war-monger. You said she SOUNDED like a war-monger. You do, indeed, write carefully.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CUPE_Reformer:

In my opinion, this article is part of the neo-conservative campaign for nuclear genocide against Iranians, in Iran.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:

Iran has also called for Israel to be wipped off the planet

---

If you understood Farsi you would know that is not what Ahmadinejad said.
But heck, according to the same neocon disinformation crowd (and National Post source) "Eye on the UN" that is what the UN itself has done:

Check out the "Eye on the UN" spin on a 2005 UN Day of solidarity with the Palistinaian People.
An old 1948 historic arab map of Palestine without borders is featured in the background of the meeting.
The "Eye on the UN" spins this piece of history in their web page to: " UN Wipes Isreal off the Map".

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
I don't think you get to call someone a traitor without knowing their reasons.

---

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: contrarianna ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
I don't think you get to call someone a traitor without knowing their reasons.

---

The U.S. targetted the regime resulting from the 1979 overthrow of its puppet the Shah. It pumped and armed Iraq as part of its desire to achieve that aim. Cutlass, a self-styled Iranian, calls her/his country the "aggressor", when it was defending itself against aggression and held no territorial designs against anyone. I call that treason.

quote:

---

Are you a traitor for opposing Canadian missions? Am I? Were Spanish who enlisted with the Internationals?

---

No, Coyote, I didn't say "treason" meant disagreeing with your country's foreign policy. If Afghanistan or the Spanish Republic had invaded Canada, and you or I sided with the invaders, we would be traitors to our country and our people. This is not that complicated, and I'm sure you understood the distinction while you were typing the words.

quote:

---

Iran is not homogeneous. Would you expect an Iranian Kurd, say, to necessarily be on the side of the Iranian regime (well, maybe against Saddam, but then at the time maybe not).

---

Any resident of Iran who took the side of Iraq in that war was a traitor. That's my opinion.

quote:

---

We are on the same side 90% of the time, there was bound to be some disagreement. But I remember a time i defended you from some of those here who suggested you should posit no comment as to the leadership of the Palestinian resistance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by contrarianna:

... it is almost inconceivable to think any Iranian, regardless of their political stance, would not know that Iraq invaded Iran.

---

Yeah, that's why I'd like clarification as whether the author of this quote is an Iranian:

quote:

---

Ever hear of Iran-Iraq war? Iran invaded Iraq many times.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buddy Kat:
Talk about the kettle calling the pot black...It's funny how we have all these conceptions of Iran from singled out cases in Iran that are heavily publicized and they have singled out cases in Canada that are heavily publicized.

This is the end result : stereotyping and it's the media to blame.

Just looking at two of there accusations : womans rights....there is no question that the Cons are trying there best to remove and discourage the womans right to have a legal and powerful voice.If it were up to the neocon they would be in the kitchen..we all know that.

Police beatings: That goes on , on a daily basis in Canada..some cases get more attention than the others like the Toronto football player that was beaten up and then coke planted on him to frame him ..all because he was black..So yeh depending on what side of the police boot your on Canada can be perceived as a a racist police beating piece of shit country if publicized correctly.

It all depends on the media attention..just like the recent vote at the UN..Canada votes AGAINST human rights..why is that? US control? Ignorance?

Boy the media can easily make Canada look real bad if they wanted to over that one.

Pushing people off buildings..shit Canada might of been responsibe for blowing up air india and covering it up the police are so trusted...The headlines could say that tomorrow and if the media doesn't tell Canadians to get upset ..they won't , they'll just sit there and accept it.Just like police dressing up as insurgents, downplayed bigtime but extremely serious.

And if they can get away murder like shooting people in the back of the head..they can push them off buildings like they do in Iran...furthur they can drive what they deem to be undesirables out of the city limits on extremely cold nights and watch them freeze to death. so common a practice they call it a "starlight" drive.

In the US they take blacks out to the everglades at night..alligators!But that's the US..they don't do things like that here..only there and 3rd world countries like Iran...har har har.

Nope given the right publicity you can pretty well rip the fabrication of a hypocritic country to shreds, or a political party for that matter..like the adscam liberal wipe out.

Iran is right in there assessment and I'm sure if you dig deep enough you will find a case where someone was stoned to death in Canada..probably Alberta if my memory serves me correctly.

---

quote:

---

shit Canada might of been responsibe for blowing up air india and covering it up the police are so trusted.

---

It's this extreme that's keeping us in the 30 seat range.We have to stop this nonsense or Harper will gwt his majority.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:

Right. Ever hear of Iran-Iraq war? Iran invaded Iraq many times. And Iran occupies islands that belong to the UAE. Iran sends weapons into Afghanistan to support the taliban and to make Afghan government unstable.

Iran has also called for Israel to be wipped off the planet (I somewhat agree with that position, I don't want the Jews dead, but i don't like Israel very much, they are enslaving Muslims and torturing them to death but that is for another topic I think

---

I have known a number of people who fought in that war, both Iranian, and Iraqi, I have never heard one suggest that Iran started the war. This include people who are here now after having escaped from the tyrranies they live through.

quote:

---

When the war first broke out, the Soviet Union turned back its arms ships en route to Iraq, and for the next year and a half, while Iraq was on the offensive, Moscow did not provide weapons to Baghdad.[30] In March 1981, the Iraqi Communist Party, repressed by Saddam Hussein, beamed broadcasts from the Soviet Union calling for an end to the war and the withdrawal of Iraqi troops.[31] That same month U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that he saw the possibility of improved ties with Baghdad and approvingly noted that Iraq was concerned by "the behavior of Soviet imperialism in the Middle Eastern area." The U.S. then approved the sale to Iraq of five Boeing jetliners, and sent a deputy assistant secretary of state to Baghdad for talks.[32] The U.S. removed Iraq from its notoriously selective list of nations supporting international terrorism[33] (despite the fact that terrorist Abu Nidal was based in the country)[34] and Washington extended a $400 million credit guarantee for U.S. exports to Iraq.[35] In November 1984, the U.S. and Iraq restored diplomatic relations, which had been ruptured in 1967.[36]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
What was the USSR's involvement in the Iran-Iraq war?

---

The Soviets stopped supplying Iraq with weapons by 1980. Iraq relied solely on US government and western corporations for weapons, chemical and biological warfare tech, and even nuclear technology apparently for at least the first three years of the Iran-Iraq war. The Soviets, observing the hypocrisy of western aid to Saddam and the the Iranians with covert Iran-Contra, and began supplying weapons themselves. The Soviets were also in Afghanistan and fighting a proxy war with the west at the time. Lots of cold war maneuvering went down in the 1980's.

ETA: Canadian Gerald Bull aided the Iraqi's in refitting Russian scud missiles for longer range into Iran. Up until then Iranian missiles were reaching Iraqi cities while Iraqi missiles fell short of Tehran and populated areas. Bull's help with missile and cannon technology was instrumental to the Iraqi war effort as he was with aiding S.Africa/UNITA against ANC and their allies in Angola and border wars.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Yawn... I grow weary of this skin.

Hey moderator...you need to put more lipstick on that pig-face of yours...

There we go, that should earn a banning.

quote:

---

Both superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, were caught off-guard by the start of the war. The United States, of course, had been attempting to solve the hostage crisis since before the war started and was not on friendly terms with Iran. And, the U.S. had not had diplomatic relations with Soviet backed
Iraq since 1968. The Soviets had not been welcomed in Iran by the Shah, and were tied down in Afghanistan. Khomeini, a religious
fanatic, was definitely not willing to deal with the Soviets. When Iraq invaded, the Soviets immediately stopped supplying weapons since Iraq had not consulted them concerning the attack. The Soviet Union did, however, sign a treaty of 'peace and friendship' with Iraq after the war began and has been supplying weaponry ever since.

---

Of course he has an attitude. He had to come begging for us to let him in and he has had to suffer so badly, by being a country where a woman has rights. Poor limp guy. I really feel for him.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: 1234567 ]

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Anyone have an opinion on the topic of this thread? I notice Cutlass has succeeded - in his very first post on babble - in sabre-rattling us onto a tangent. Well done!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cutlass:
It's not hard to push simples onto another course.

Yawn... I grow weary of this skin.

Hey moderator...you need to put more lipstick on that pig-face of yours...

There we go, that should earn a banning.

See you in about a week under another handle and IP.

---

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

It's a fairly common name for a sword, if you are a native English speaker, but rather on periphery of usage for non-native speakers. One would expect strong language skills from someone using that nick. Yet its all pidgeon English. "Pig-face"?

I am sure Cutlass will be reading this, so its a good tip for next time. Just a hint for an troll moving up in the world.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
Well now I feel dumb.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
First clue: Nicknamed "Cutlass."

It's a fairly common name for a sword, if you are a native English speaker, but rather on periphery of usage for non-native speakers. One would expect strong language skills from someone using that nick. Yet its all pidgeon English. "Pig-face"?

I am sure Cutlass will be reading this, so its a good tip for next time. Just a hint for an troll moving up in the world.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

---

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Donna Summers Video Restoration of Diplomatic Relations with Iraq 1984.

---

Rumour Has It? How bout, "Last Dance" ? I know, "In Another Place and Time"?

All of America was enthralled with the OJ Simpson story. They forgot about Al Gore's landmark speech and solemn promise to get to the bottom of Iraqgate.

[ 22 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frisko:

It's this extreme that's keeping us in the 30 seat range.We have to stop this nonsense or Harper will gwt his majority.

Can you list 10 things you like about Canada?

---

Sure can ...but this thread isn't about things I like about Canada?

If the NDP isn't getting more than 30 seats maybe a decent left wing national media would help. The only reason Harper will ever get a majority is if the media wants him too..simple as that.

Imagine a poll the day before the election that says 80% of Canadians will vote NDP...what would happen the next day? 80%or more will vote for what they are told is the winner. You know I'm right!

Is this good that a segment of the population are like sheep? not, and there is the first thing I like about Canada....there all not like sheep. As witnessed by this forum,but believe me they want you to be.

Another thing is limited free speech, and I like exercising it..more Canadians should also.

The rest are, but not all environmental...

I really think if Canadians knew how they have been made fools of and even killed by government and taken advantage of by media, political parties and corporations they would have no choice but to elect a left wing type of government with social values. As opposed to one composed of strictly corrupt corporate values.

There is not enough bandwidth on the internet to cover it all...but 100 pages of babble should get you in the ballpark.

You kinda proved my point, and I'll tell you despite the bad things that happen in Canada when you know what's going on you don't run to the organized criminals (liberals and Neo-Cons) who created it for help.

I hate to compare it to a beer commercial especially a company that has been sold to the US. But every Canadian should be "proud to be Canadian" and if that means stamping out the liberals and conservatives ..so be it.You think they have any qualms about selling us all out?

But beware of the "on the fence' liberals ..they will take or steal a social policy just to keep the Neo-con ball rolling. People who sit on the fence eventually fall off the fence. sometimes they have a hard time getting back on ..like now.