[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009, tests-diplomat]UK Guardian Newspaper[/url]




Iran's ambassador to London was summoned to the Foreign Office this morning after the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, singled out Britain as Iran's foremost enemy. In his speech during Friday prayers, Khamenei played on the historic suspicions many Iranians have of Britain by hinting at its involvement in the demonstrations and describing it as "the most evil" of foreign powers.

He held up the Westminster MPs expenses scandal as a prime example of the corruption which he said was rife in many western countries.

Then he unleashed a thunderbolt – a warning not to be wooed by foreign enemies.

Western countries were "hungry wolves ambushing us and removing the diplomatic cover from their faces. Do not neglect these people," he warned.

"The outstanding diplomats of some western countries who have talked to us with diplomatic courtesy up to now, have, during the past few days, taken the masquerade away from their faces and are showing their true image.

"They are showing their true enmity towards the Iranian Islamic state and the most evil of them is the British government."

The mention of Britain triggered chants of "Marg bar Ingles" (Death to Britain) from the ranks of worshippers.

Brown intensified his criticism of Iran's handling of the election dispute today.

"We are with others, including the whole of the European Union unanimously today, in condemning the use of violence, in condemning media suppression," he told a news conference after a European Union summit in Brussels.

"It is for Iran now to show the world that the elections have been fair … that the repression and the brutality that we have seen in these last few days is not something that is going to be repeated," he said.

"We want Iran to be part of the international community and not to be isolated. But it is for Iran to prove … that they can respect these basic rights."

In playing the British card, Khamenei was appealing to traditional resentment of interference in Iran's affairs by Britain at the peak of its imperial power, while also tarring the demonstrators by association with a foreign power.

He took aim at other foreign elements, namely the "Zionist-controlled" western media and the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. Without naming her, he contrasted her comments about human rights in Iran with the FBI raid on the Davidian cult headquarters in Waco, Texas, in 1993 that left 75 dead. The incident occurred in the early months of Bill Clinton's presidency.

wow- one up for the US.

Britain has replaced America in Iran's black book.

So all the talking and globe trotting finally paid off.

Even in their place of worship they scream ''DEATH'' - Islam is such a savage and bloodthirsty religion!

And let the supreme terrorist of iran blab all he wants. . .The sane world wouldn't sit back and watch a terrorist nation get nuclear weapons. Iran can support terrorist groups if they want but should know the tolerance and patience of the peace loving majority is wearing thin.

The most painful part is when war breaks out they all hide underground leaving the innocents to bear the bombardment.

Tudór:

The most painful part is when war breaks out they all hide underground leaving the innocents to bear the bombardment.

is that not enough reason to avoid war? the war hungry poor diplomats in the republican party are already shouting at obama to attack the iranian regime for the election. as if that will solve anything. infact it will do the opposite, galvanise the theocratic hoodlums in iran and suppress the uprising violently with many more deaths.

didn't he also accuse the Zionist media of trying to destabilize his country.

but hey according to richyblack, this is a democracy.

I look forward to reading RichyBlack post.

I must give him Credit though. Amongst all the crazy iran-hard-liners butt kisser that we have here. He is the only one worth debating with.

tpiah:

wow- one up for the US.

Britain has replaced America in Iran's black book.

So all the talking and globe trotting finally paid off.

I don't know how you see that as progress. I would be very proud right now to be a Briton, considering that the people who are opposed to fundamental human rights consider my nation to be the highest threat to their entrenched hegemonies. Oh how the mighty (US) is falling!

ElRazur:

I look forward to reading RichyBlack post.

I must give him Credit though. Amongst all the crazy iran-hard-liners butt kisser that we have here. He is the only one worth debating with.

richy won't say shit now that his hero has congratulated ahmadinejad

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has congratulated his Iranian counterpart Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the success of his re-election bid, in yesterday’s poll.



In a telephone conversation with the Iranian president, Chavez said, “The victory of Dr. Ahmadinejad in the recent election is a win for all people in the world and free nations against global arrogance,” Iran’s Presidential Office reported. Chavez usually uses the term “global arrogance” to refer to Venezuela’s arch-foe the United States.



The call came after preliminary results were announced by the Interior Ministry saying that Iran’s incumbent president has won a landslide victory, gaining more than 64 percent of the votes.
Chavez also noted that the Venezuelan people and government always stand behind the Iranians.



In his reply, Ahmadinejad said that, “Despite all pressures, the nation of Iran had completely won (the election) and indeed this victory shows the clear road for the future.”

bawomolo:

didn't he also accuse the Zionist media of trying to destabilize his country.

but hey according to richyblack, this is a democracy.

Chineke God of Abakaliki, wetin I do these people o.

This is one attempted measurement of democracy called the Polity IV data series. This map shows the data presented in the polity IV data series report as of 2003. The lightest countries get a perfect score of 10, while the darkest countries (Saudi Arabia and Qatar), considered the least democratic, score -10. -- Wikipedia

1. From the figure below, it is clear that Iran is a democratic nation.
2. That we're talking about elections in Iran, is evidence that Iran is a democracy.
3. That Iran has a legislature, is evidence that she is a democracy.
4. That minorities, like Jews, Catholics and Armenians are directly represented in Iran's legislature, is evidence that she is a democracy.

Finally, for those not belonging the color-blind squad, take a good look at the image below; If Nigeria is a democracy, then Iran is most definitely one!

2. That we're talking about elections in Iran, is evidence that Iran is a democracy.

china holds local council elections and elections to congress. i guess china is a democracy.

3. That Iran has a legislature, is evidence that she is a democracy.

china has a legislature too.

4. That minorities, like Jews, Catholics and Armenians are directly represented in Iran's legislature, is evidence that she is a democracy.

you mean a discriminated minority? kurds are represented in the Turkish government but does that mean all is fair in turkey?

Your anti-western sentiments has gone to new levels.

hang on though, we might need you to defend North Korea

@Richy and bawomolo,

Now that both of you have taken the opposing views in this discussion, I am at a loss to how to contribute. I hate to be in agreement with either of you !

Men, I need to find a middle ground. Chei. The life of a moderate. Standing for nothing is absolutely not my forte!!

muhsin:

[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009, tests-diplomat]UK Guardian Newspaper[/url]




Iran's ambassador to London was summoned to the Foreign Office this morning after the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, singled out Britain as Iran's foremost enemy. In his speech during Friday prayers, Khamenei played on the historic suspicions many Iranians have of Britain by hinting at its involvement in the demonstrations and describing it as "the most evil" of foreign powers.


In playing the British card, Khamenei was appealing to traditional resentment of interference in Iran's affairs by Britain at the peak of its imperial power, while also tarring the demonstrators by association with a foreign power.

He took aim at other foreign elements, namely the "Zionist-controlled" western media and the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. Without naming her, he contrasted her comments about human rights in Iran with the FBI raid on the Davidian cult headquarters in Waco, Texas, in 1993 that left 75 dead. The incident occurred in the early months of Bill Clinton's presidency.

Is this the sort of preaching these reprobates hear in their mosques on Fridays
And we wonder why they breed terrorists like houseflies lay eggs.
God keep us from these offsprings that entered their mother's wombs through the backdoor

$osisi:


Is this the sort of preaching these reprobates hear in their mosques on Fridays
And we wonder why they breed terrorists like houseflies lay eggs.
God keep us from these offsprings that entered their mother's wombs through the backdoor

Out of curiosity, can you explain how people enter their mama's womb thru the backdoor?

Tayo-D:

Out of curiosity, can you explain how people enter their mama's womb thru the backdoor?

Go and ask Chinua Achebe

$osisi:

Go and ask Chinua Achebe

We better keep this an internet secret. Homos could find this very upsetting! Don't want them witchhunting the bobo!

It's an Igbo proverb

Now the European leaders too should have a taste of what tyrranny in feels like.

When Bush was fighting on behalf of everybody he was called names, Now Obama has played Black man sense for them, siddon look.

US would deal with any direct threat facing it, and Europe should deal with their especially with growing populations of Arabs in their fold

France, Germany next

@dayokanu,

Interesting perspective!

Tayo-D:

I don't know how you see that as progress. I would be very proud right now to be a Briton, considering that the people who are opposed to fundamental human rights consider my nation to be the highest threat to their entrenched hegemonies. Oh how the mighty (US) is falling!

i'm sitting here, thinking deeply, trying to remember the last time the british toppled tyranny by making noise from london

Tayo-D:

I don't know how you see that as progress. I would be very proud right now to be a Briton, considering that the people who are opposed to fundamental human rights consider my nation to be the highest threat to their entrenched hegemonies. Oh how the mighty (US) is falling!

oh, the mighty US is falling b/c obama did not come out openly in iranian affairs. oh suddenly the US has fallen and the Uk is great b/c the UK gives a ''voice'' against iranian crisis (even though the UK is giving relatively little in irag and afghanistan where real crises exists)

even though the UK did not rage of iranian human rights record when 5 british sailors were captured by iranian revolutionary guards.

even though the US interference in iranian politics will galvanise the powers that be in iran and lead to high handed response from the and eventually more deaths and tayo d will be in minnesota posting in nairaland while families will be burying loved ones.

now that the ayatollah has spoken, what will the UK do? wait for US marines?

what did the UK do when british nationals were killed in the mumbai massacre? . . . . spoke against the massacre?

listen, the british PM is very unpopular at home now, so he is trying to feel good abroad. get an image and probably boost his standing at home

Tudór:

Even in their place of worship they scream ''DEATH'' - Islam is such a savage and bloodthirsty religion!

so the fact that some Christians pray for the death of their enemies while in the church makes Christianity a savage and bloodthirsty religion?

@Tayo-D,

Europe should now face their own threats of radical moslems in their midst.

If Obama had spoken against Iran trust the Ayatollah to blame US for the crisis and the whole Europe would rather sit on the fence or go against the US.

Bush probably went to those war with the intention of making the world safe.

Islamic extremists cannot easily penetrate the US like they would penetrate Europe.

Check countries like France, Germany, Holland and UK See the number of Arab immigrant they have,

Do you remember the case of Mohammed Bouyeri and Theo Van Gogh in Holland? I learnt people are not allowed to display Dutch flags so as not to offend Arab immigrants

Another example, A German player of Iranian descent Ashkan Degajah declined national duties because Germany was to play Israel and he couldnt be on the same field with Israelis.

In the UK a policeman of Arabian descent declined that he could not guard the Israeli embassy.

Remember the riots in France some years back.

The summary is that the US have been fighting a lot of wars that would not affect her directly. They have been staking their neck for other European countries, Now let the Europeans take charge.

The European President were probably expecting the US to condemn Iran so they can counter the US Now the WISE black man has adopted a classic SIDDON LOOK method, Now everybody go answer him Papa name

biina:

so the fact that some Christians pray for the death of their enemies while in the church makes Christianity a savage and bloodthirsty religion?

Another silly post!!!

Anyday I go to church and they insite violence from the pulpit, I will stop going to that church.

If christainity associates itself with terrorism and do not speak out against violence, I will quit the religion.

mikeansy:

Another silly post!!!

Anyday I go to church and they insite violence from the pulpit, I will stop going to that church.

If christainity associates itself with terrorism and do not speak out against violence, I will quit the religion.

The usual double standard. A post is termed silly simply because the measure used on Islam was used on Christianity
Somebody concluded from the occurrence in a single mosque, that the entire religion of Islam was savage and blood thirsty, and you saw nothing wrong with it, but took exception when same logic was applied to Christianity. Matthew 7:12 says do unto others as you have do unto you.

I don't know which church you go to, but I have witnessed enough pastors praying and preaching for the death of their enemies and /or enemies of their congregation and/or the church.

The fact that I can support my wrong actions based on my narrow interpretation of selected text of the bible does not mean Christianity supports my actions, or was it not stated in Leviticus 20:13 to kill homosexuals

Islam does not preach terrorism, and the facts that some terrorists are Muslims is not a valid argument. After all the terrorists in Ireland or Spain were not Muslims, nor were the Suicide bombers employed by Germany and japan during world war II.

Let each man be held responsible for his actions and/or sins, and not paint an entire religion with broad strokes.

biina:

The usual double standard. A post is termed silly simply because the measure used on Islam was used on Christianity
Somebody concluded from the occurrence in a single mosque, that the entire religion of Islam was savage and blood thirsty, and you saw nothing wrong with it, but took exception when same logic was applied to Christianity. Matthew 7:12 says do unto others as you have do unto you.

I don't know which church you go to, but I have witnessed enough pastors praying and preaching for the death of their enemies and /or enemies of their congregation and/or the church.

The fact that I can support my wrong actions based on my narrow interpretation of selected text of the bible does not mean Christianity supports my actions, or was it not stated in Leviticus 20:13 to kill homosexuals

Islam does not preach terrorism, and the facts that some terrorists are Muslims is not a valid argument. After all the terrorists in Ireland or Spain were not Muslims, nor were the Suicide bombers employed by Germany and japan during world war II.

Let each man be held responsible for his actions and/or sins, and not paint an entire religion with broad strokes.

Another ridiculous argument to justify irationality

There are a whole host of verses in old testament which do not reconcile with the New Testament.

The basis of Christanity is the new testament, most of what u have in the old testament are drawn from Jewish laws for educational purposes only. There are also things like the teachings of 'an eye for an eye' which christanity does not support because christainiity preaches forgiveness.

If you have a proof of any world recognised leader of the christain church standing on the pulpit and encouraging violence like the Ayotollah did yesterday pull it out lets see.

We see people time and time again kill people in the name of Islam and those who want to claim this terrorist do not represent their religion will not denounce this terrorist publicly.
I think the Islamic world has some serious work to do, they need to go far enough to prove that Islam does not condone violence . . .and in my assessment they are not doing enough at the moment.

Tayo-D:

@Richy and bawomolo,

Now that both of you have taken the opposing views in this discussion, I am at a loss to how to contribute. I hate to be in agreement with either of you  !

Men, I need to find a middle ground. Chei. The life of a moderate. Standing for nothing is absolutely not my forte!!

why not side with richyblack, don't worry.

Rush limbaugh won't spank you 

mikeansy:

Another ridiculous argument to justify irationality

There are a whole host of verses in old testament which do not reconcile with the New Testament.

The basis of Christanity is the new testament, most of what u have in the old testament are drawn from Jewish laws for educational purposes only. There are also things like the teachings of 'an eye for an eye' which christanity does not support because christainiity preaches forgiveness.

If you have a proof of any world recognised leader of the christain church standing on the pulpit and encouraging violence like the Ayotollah did yesterday pull it out lets see.

We see people time and time again kill people in the name of Islam and those who want to claim this terrorist do not represent their religion will not denounce this terrorist publicly. 
I think the Islamic world has some serious work to do, they need to go far enough to prove that Islam does not condone violence . . .and in my assessment they are not doing enough at the moment.

You have simply given your understanding of Christianity, and there is no law that states that others have to agree with you. Each is free to make a judgent on what he deems relevant and superseded. Example, some people feel tithes are not applicable to christians, some feel otherwise.

The Ayatollah is not only a religious personality, but also the supreme head of Iran. Why then have you ascribed his statements to him as a muslim speaking on behalf of Islam, and not as the political supreme head of Iran? or are the US and UK referenced in the Quran?

History is littered with atrocities conducted by 'Christians' including the crusade and the pope controlled roman army.
Did the church not persecute people for thinking the world is flat?
Even more recently, didn't the serbian orthodox church approve of muslim genocide?

An individual's approval (or otherwise) of terrorism is not the position of a religion, or are you saying all Muslims support terrorism?
Or people that disapprove of terrorism are only non-Muslims?

Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah al Sheik (highest Sunni cleric in Saudi) condemned terrorism but you did not make reference to such, but only wait for the quotes of those that buttress your biased opinions.

Terrorism is wrong and should be condemned, but i have not heard of it being a tenet of Islam.

You should try not to be bigot in your view of others and their religion. The self righteous view was a short coming of the pharisees.

Pope controlled army

If you are a muslim be man enough to denounce terrorism
you won't die cos of it. Its that simple

mikeansy:

Pope controlled army

Constantine is regarded as the first pope by some (as against  St Peter).

If you are a muslim be man enough to denounce terrorism
you won't die cos of it. Its that simple

People that condone terrorism or any other act that is deemed criminal by most, will find justification for the act, irrespective of their religion. I personally condemn terrorism and similar criminal acts.
I also disapprove of sweeping judgment of another religion simply based on the actions of words of a fraction of its practitioners, and I feel those who defend such views are guilty as well.
If you don't like sweeping statements about your religion, you shouldn't defend those that make such remarks about the religion of others.

As to the Khomeni event, his utterances are inflammatory and disappointing coming from a cleric, but less surprising if one views him as another politician (as that is what I see him as). Iranians should be encouraged to find a peaceful resolution to the issue, and not be inflamed by any of their leaders. Mousavi should not risk innocent lives in a bid to further his own political ambitions.

Yet all this is simply politics and has less to do with Islam. (and FYI I am not a muslim)

It makes me feel good when the only habbits u can find amongst christains to compare to even today's muslims are histories of the attrocities that took place in the christendome in probably 12th to 15th century.

It simply shows how world apart these two religions are as far as civilization goes.