Strange thing I found when researching Ali Khamenei

Originally posted by Deetermined
In 2006, that might have changed due to Ahmadinejad.

IRANIAN FATWA APPROVES USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

In yet another sign of Teheran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons.

One senior mullah has now said it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.

The pronouncement is particularly worrying because it has come from Mohsen Gharavian, a disciple of the ultra-conservative Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi, who is widely regarded as the cleric closest to Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

This quote came from the dissident online-newspaper Rooz. The cleric Mohsen Gharavian rejected these statements on the same day.

The theologian, who was talking in an exclusive interview with IRNA, added, "We do not seek nuclear weapons and the Islamic religion encourages coexistence along with peace and friendship."

Recalling his statement, Gharavian reiterated, "I said if the enemies plan to launch attacks on our vital sites, we have the capacity to defend ourselves and take retaliatory measures against them.

"Unfortunately, these websites have tried to misquote me," he reiterated.

He said Iran is doing its best to promote spirituality and humanistic and Islamic values and never wages a war.

www.muslimnews.co.uk...

Originally posted by Drunkenshrew

He said Iran is doing its best to promote spirituality and humanistic and Islamic values and never wages a war.

If that were really the case, they wouldn't be so publicly supportive of terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihadists.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a meeting with Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement, Ramadan Abdullah, stressed the inspiring role that the Palestinian people's resistance played in provoking Muslim nations to stand against their tyrannical rulers.

abna.ir...

and

Shiite Jurisprudence, Political Expediency, and Nuclear Weapons, Part 1...

Islamic law exists to serve the interests of the Muslim community and of Islam. [Therefore,] to save Muslim lives and for the sake of Islam’s survival it is obligatory to lie, it is obligatory to drink wine [if necessary]. – Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

www.thecuttingedgenews.com...

reply to post by Deetermined

I don't know if he is telling the truth or not. Followers of Islam, like those that claim to follow Judeo-Christian values oftentimes have a strange interpretation of humanistic and spiritual values.

The creation of all three groups (Hamas/Hezbollah/Islamic Jihad Movement) is a direct results of Israel's policies. Hamas and Hezbollah have committed acts of terror, but they are also elected political parties with the backing of large parts of the population. So is Iran not allowed to back them?

This would also make both Israel and the US pariah states. Both support terror groups like the MEK and Jundallah and both have a long history of engaging in terroristic activities. In fact terrorists, like those responsible for the bombing of the King David Hotel have become Israeli prime ministers. Far from being shunned and buried in silence, the gravesite of the mass-murderer Baruch Goldstein is used as a pilgrimage site by thousands of militant Zionists. The CIA has assassinated presidents, stolen elections and bombed civilians. So I don't see much difference here.

The Jewish website which claims, that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-Muslims reminds me very much of the rhetoric used by anti-Semites when they make similar claims about Jews. They usually also have numerous quotes of famous Jews on their websites and refer to the Torah and the Talmud to make their case.

Originally posted by Drunkenshrew

The CIA has assassinated presidents, stolen elections and bombed civilians. So I don't see much difference here.

The Jewish website which claims, that Muslims are allowed to lie to non-Muslims reminds me very much of the rhetoric used by anti-Semites when they make similar claims about Jews. They usually also have numerous quotes of famous Jews on their websites and refer to the Torah and the Talmud to make their case.

edit on 5-2-2012 by Drunkenshrew because: grammar

edit on 5-2-2012 by Drunkenshrew because: grammar again

The difference is that the U.S. and Israel don't run their entire governments around a theological system.

We don't claim that we run our economy or jail/execute our own people based on the Bible or Torah.

We've never claimed that it's against our religion/government to go into debt or enter into wars.

However, doesn't it make you laugh just a little bit whenever you hear Iran talking about how "unjust" everyone else is? How oppressed everyone else's people are? How they actually have the nerve to speak out about someone else's human rights violations, such as police cracking down on OWS? Yet they're helping the Syrian government to crack down on civilians? I've never seen so much double speak in my life!

reply to post by Deetermined

The difference is that the U.S. and Israel don't run their entire governments around a theological system.

The Shah was a secular leader. He was implemented in an US coup and well-liked by the West. The Shah was even encouraged to start his nuclear program. Israeli and US forces trained his Savak in torture and suppression techniques. The Iranians didn't like this kind of government and they had their revolution to get rid of the Shah. I believe we should leave it to the Iranians, which kind of government they want. I might not agree with a theological system, but unlike Israel and the US this theological regime has not engaged in aggressive warfare against foreign countries.

We don't claim that we run our economy or jail/execute our own people based on the Bible or Torah.

For thousands of years, leaders have used religion and religious laws, to rule over their people. The enlightenment changed that, but I am unsure, if secular leaders are much better. Genocide, wars and capital punishment is also happening in secular states which follow secular laws and the economy and banking system can be based upon worse ideas than Islamic law.

Israel and the US aren't behaving like secular states either. Israel's founders have defined their country as a Jewish State and Israel has checkpoints and segregation. In the US you have no chance to become President if you are not a Christian and the pledge of allegiance has been changed to include “under god”.

Iran is the grim leader in capital punishment. More citizens per capita are executed than in any other country in the world. But at least the organs aren't harvested after the execution and sold to rich patients like it is happening in China. Also capital punishment is still widely practiced in the US and the US with it's privatized prison system is leading the world in prisoners per capita.

We've never claimed that it's against our religion/government to go into debt or enter into wars.

Which wars has the Iranian government initiated? Here are some statistics which show that Iran is not very interested in amassing military might. Constant threats from Israel and the US might change this attitude, but here are data from 2009

Military spending according to SIPRI (Military Expenditure Database for 2010):

USA: 687,105,000,000 US$ = 4.7% of GDP
Israel: 13,001,000,000 US$ = 6.3% of GDP
Iran: 7,044,000,000 US$ = 1,8% of GDP

Source
en.wikipedia.org...

However, doesn't it make you laugh just a little bit whenever you hear Iran talking about how "unjust" everyone else is? How oppressed everyone else's people are? How they actually have the nerve to speak out about someone else's human rights violations, such as police cracking down on OWS? Yet they're helping the Syrian government to crack down on civilians? I've never seen so much double speak in my life!

Yes, when they do this, they are hypocrites. But if the roles are reversed, our leaders and journalists do exactly the same. If it is convenient, they support bloody dictators and excuse war crimes as collateral damage. Presidents who are responsible for the deaths of thousands of people are belauded in hagiographies for their human rights record and warmongers and criminals are awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize.

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


You must have missed the announcement that came out yesterday or today that Iran is doubling it's military spending for 2012.

As for those who always ask, "what war has the Iranian government initiated"? This is part of their religious ploy. This why they have always used proxies to do their bidding and to poke everyone else in order to claim "defense" when war breaks out. There's plenty of information on the internet right now about Iran's current involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria unrest. They hide behind their religion.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Drunkenshrew

 

You must have missed the announcement that came out yesterday or today that Iran is doubling it's military spending for 2012.

As for those who always ask, "what war has the Iranian government initiated"? This is part of their religious ploy. This why they have always used proxies to do their bidding and to poke everyone else in order to claim "defense" when war breaks out. There's plenty of information on the internet right now about Iran's current involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria unrest. They hide behind their religion.

In fact I had a link to an opinion piece about yesterday's announcement and the reactions to this announcement included in my post (change).

Yes, there is plenty of information about Iranian covert support in foreign countries. While there is no doubt, that Iran has supported Shias in Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan is much less clear. There is lots of conflicting information on the web about who is really supplying the Taleban with weapons. But stories about Iranian agents acting inside Afghanistan are much more sparse (do you have any credible sources for this?). Also there is no reason to believe, that Iran is supporting the unrest in Syria. Assad is more or less an ally of the Iranian regime. If you wanted to express that Iran supports Assad - well so do most of the Syrian citizens.
www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


Iran and Hezbollah's operations in Afghanistan.

Establishing suicide bombers inside the capital and rise questions on the ability of the Afghan Government to rule, in the past the Islami Regim of iran has done so in the presence of the american forces, and have created a terror astmospher by smmugling arms and profesional combatents into the neighbouring country, even recently few military personel of Iran as to sabotage the peace and create panic have interfiered inside afganistan and they were arrested by the security police, the said activities have taken more force than before at the present situation of Iranina govenment.

The Republic of Iran has decided to expand such activities on a higher scale. In future we well have more news and will witness suicide bombs and other terrorist activities. This is not fare to our coluntry and the people of Iran to be rubbed of their ligitimate economical benefits by the criminal government of Iran to kill and abuse of the life of other nations. With all natural wealth that our country posses we could have built our country and set an example in world.

sepahonline.blogspot.com...

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


As for news coming out of Syria, if most Syrian civilians were siding with the Syrian government, why is there such a huge media/journalistic crackdown? Wouldn't the government and the civilians want the whole world to see what unwanted terrorists were doing there in order to gain support? What about the agreement that the Syrian government made with the Arab League only for it to end less than 24 hours later because the government didn't comply?

First you have to consider the long term relationship between Iran and Syria. They are each other's biggest ally. To think that Iran isn't helping the Syrian government (Assad) fight the opposition army would be ignorant. Here are a few examples.

Tehran has cultivated and expanded its relationship with Damascus in recent years.[1] Examples of these ties include reports involving Iran’s financing of Syrian weapons purchases and the construction of an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) base in Damascus.[2] In July 2007, Damascus and Tehran reportedly entered into an agreement under which Iran would supply Syria with Iranian-made weapons in exchange for a “Syrian pledge to not enter peace negotiations with Israel.”[3] Ties between the two countries also extend to economic cooperation. Syria reported in January 2007 that Iran was the top non-Arab economic investor in the country.[4] More recently, Iranian and Syrian officials have begun negotiations over energy sector projects, including a natural gas pipeline project that would involve Iraq.[5]

The loss of a key strategic partner in Assad would represent a significant setback for the Iranian regime.

www.irantracker.org...


So, let's take a look at what others have to say about Iranians inside Syria...

More relevantly - Iran has been recently accused by a senior Syria Regime defector – Mahmoud Haj Hamad – of providing thousands of lethal sniper mercenaries paid for by the Revolutionary Guards. This defector – was a senior Auditor with the Syria Defence Department – so can be expected to know where the Regime bodies are buried and indeed whose creating the need for the burials.

Here is what this insider recently had to say to THE TIMES newspaper: “SYRIA is deploying large numbers of Hezbollah and Iranian snipers as "military consultants" to murder anti-regime protesters, a senior government defector has told The Times. "The salaries of the marksmen are paid through a slush fund replenished with US dollars flown in from Iran, according to Mahmoud Haj Hamad, who was the treasury's top auditor at the Defence Ministry until he fled Syria last month.

alexblx.posterous.com...

reply to post by Deetermined

Iran and Hezbollah's operations in Afghanistan.
sepahonline.blogspot.com...

Sepahonline is dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian regime. It supports Reza Pahlavi. Furthermore the article contains lots of allegations, but no proof to support these allegations. All info comes from anonymous sources. I don't consider anonymous hearsay from a biased website to be a credible source of information.

As for news coming out of Syria, if most Syrian civilians were siding with the Syrian government, why is there such a huge media/journalistic crackdown? Wouldn't the government and the civilians want the whole world to see what unwanted terrorists were doing there in order to gain support? What about the agreement that the Syrian government made with the Arab League only for it to end less than 24 hours later because the government didn't comply?

Is there really such a huge crackdown? Here is a podcast of Webster Tarpley. He is an ideologue who embraces all kind of anti-American conspiracy theories and might act as an useful idiot for the Assad regime, but he is also a very educated man. He has quite a different story to tell, than what we hear in the MSM. He visited Syria last year.
www.kpfa.org...

Tarpley is not alone. His findings are mostly confirmed by the fact-finding mission of the Arab League.

...So the report was either ignored (by Western corporate media) or mercilessly destroyed - by Arab media, virtually all of it financed by either the House of Saud or Qatar. It was not even discussed - because it was prevented by the GCC from being translated from Arabic into English and published in the Arab League's website.

Until it was leaked. The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army, using lethal tactics such as bombing of civilian buses, bombing of trains carrying diesel oil, bombing of police buses and bombing of bridges and pipelines.

The Arab Agenda In Syria
report

First you have to consider the long term relationship between Iran and Syria. They are each other's biggest ally. To think that Iran isn't helping the Syrian government (Assad) fight the opposition army would be ignorant.

I also believe, that Iran is helping Assad in some way or the other, but Assad wasn't the one who started the violent unrest in Syria. The protests were not just peaceful dissent, answered by a brutal crackdown, they had a violent element from the beginning. Forces loyal to Assad were killed in ambushes. Since early spring last year, paramilitary forces were trained in Turkey by NATO and prepared for this armed insurrection.

Irantracker is a project of the American Enterprise Institute. The neocon-pundits (Kagan, Perle, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Ledeen etc) from the AEI were the driving force which pushed the lies about Iraqi WMDs and links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. They also predicted, Iraq would be a cakewalk and US boys would be greeted with flowers. Fool me once, shame on you - fool me twice shame on me

Defectors are often driven by an agenda. They have insider knowledge, which can be very valuable, but many defectors (Curveball, Chalabi) tell lies to please their new allies and defame their old masters. I don't believe the sniper story, but I might be wrong.

Let's take a look at some of the statements made in the Arab League report that you linked:

23. In Latakia and Deir Al-Zor, the Mission faced difficulties from Government loyalists. In Latakia, thousands surrounded the Mission’s cars, chanting slogans in favour of the President and against the Mission. The situation became out of control and monitors were attacked. Two sustained light injuries and an armoured car was completely crushed. In order to address the matter, the Head of Mission contacted the Syrian committee responsible for coordination with the Mission. Nevertheless, the Head of the Mission ordered the immediate return of the two groups to Damascus. He met the Minister for Foreign Affairs and made a stronglyworded formal protest. The Syrian side strongly condemned the incident and extended a formal apology, explaining that the events were not in any sense deliberate.

32. The Mission has received requests from opposition supporters in Homs and Deraa that it should stay on-site and not leave, something that may be attributable to fear of attack after the Mission’s departure.

Without being accused of too much pasting, I suggest you read the section on "obstacles encountered" in section VII, B, 57. Under Security Restrictions to see that the monitors were severely restricted from going into certain areas by the government.

Also, there is plenty of information talking about the restrictions of media/journalists in section VI, E and section VII, E (The Media).

In essence, the monitors were being driven out and being kept from accomplishing their mission. The monitors were there to protect the citizens. Why would the citizens drive them out?

If you look at the list of names of the people who were actually appointed as monitors from a number of different Arab countries, you'll see that most of them belong to committees for human rights.

No, I do not believe that the Arab League is some kind of conspiracy if you actually read the whole report.

Drunkenshrew, did you actually read this report? It looks to me like you just read the article and expected the report to back up the author's claims.

reply to post by Deetermined

It seems, we weigh things differently. I share the view of Pepe Escobar and find other points important. I recommend everyone to read the report for themselves. Yes, according to the report there were pro-Assad rallies which intimidated observers, according to the report, observers were also intimidated by opposition forces. I cannot fault them for that. Being caught in a civil war and trying to investigate the facts in a neutral, calm way needs not only integrity, it also needs lots of courage. Unlike you, I have no scruples to use a lot of copy and paste. The Syrians want no foreign intervention (74)

I have no doubt, that the Syrian government tried to steer the mission into a certain direction (57), but here is how the observers evaluated the cooperation from the Syrian government.

73. The Mission noted that the Government strived to help it succeed in its task and remove any barriers that might stand in its way. The Government also facilitated meetings with all parties. No restrictions were placed on the movement of the Mission and its ability to interview Syrian citizens, both those who opposed the Government and those loyal to it.

It is an armed insurrection, targeting government forces and spreading terror

26. In Homs and Dera‘a, the Mission observed armed groups committing acts of violence against Government forces, resulting in death and injury among their ranks. In certain situations, Government forces responded to attacks against their personnel with force. The observers noted that some of the armed groups were using flares and armour-piercing projectiles.

27. In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the Observer Mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against Government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus.

71. The Mission determined that there is an armed entity that is not mentioned in the protocol. This development on the ground can undoubtedly be attributed to the excessive use of force by Syrian Government forces in response to protests that occurred before the deployment of the Mission demanding the fall of the regime. In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.

Incited tension because insurgents target the infrastructure

75. Recently, there have been incidents that could widen the gap and increase bitterness between the parties. These incidents can have grave consequences and lead to the loss of life and property. Such incidents include the bombing of buildings, trains carrying fuel, vehicles carrying diesel oil and explosions targeting the police, members of the media and fuel pipelines. Some of those attacks have been carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some by other armed opposition groups.

Lies by the media and opposition forces

28. The Mission noted that many parties falsely reported that explosions or violence had occurred in several locations. When the observers went to those locations, they found that those reports were unfounded.

29. The Mission also noted that, according to its teams in the field, the media exaggerated the nature of the incidents and the number of persons killed in incidents and protests in certain towns.

Government reaction to peaceful, unarmed protests

30. According to their latest reports and their briefings to the Head of the Mission on 17 January 2012 in preparation for this report, group team leaders witnessed peaceful demonstrations by both Government supporters and the opposition in several places. None of those demonstrations were disrupted, except for some minor clashes with the Mission and between loyalists and opposition. These have not resulted in fatalities since the last presentation before the Arab Ministerial Committee on the Situation in Syria at its meeting of 8 January 2012.

Attempts by the media to discredit the mission and to incite.

68. Since it began its work, the Mission has been the target of a vicious media campaign. Some media outlets have published unfounded statements, which they attributed to the Head of the Mission. They have also grossly exaggerated events, thereby distorting the truth.

69. Such contrived reports have helped to increase tensions among the Syrian people and undermined the observers’ work. Some media organizations were exploited in order to defame the Mission and its Head and the Mission to fail.

www.columbia.edu...

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


Update February 6, 2012:

Secretary-General said "We are following with deep concern the developments very disturbing situation on the ground in Syria and witnessed by the city of Homs and Damascus areas of the escalation of military operations and the use of Syrian forces of heavy weapons against civilians."

The Secretary-General that the use of the Syrian government to step up military action, violence and security campaigns against civilians will not only lead to more destruction and bloodshed, which can not be tolerated by the League of Arab States, in addition to being a clear violation of the obligations of the Syrian government in accordance with the provisions of international humanitarian law and the Arab Charter of Human Rights.

www.arableagueonline.org...!ut/p/c5/vZLPjoIwGMSfxQcwLYKgx65FAW2BgihcCO4q8l-sC8jTryab7En3YvzmOJnvN4cBAbipjJokji5JVUY52IJAD vHUZp7ERAhdU4b6SMOMClScfMg333_sG8I_6Q3YQil00utJ77Oepb0NKayvLiYtUTNI1aR3Vwah2LOcrOqoq_dcYTpx50uBTwVvbqtIbzTjrA6AE51v_4JnxHufuw8fHILAB4Hyl1_YSwnqtjOmhmM JaAGB-8LGz1mjN7LEN7KEl7IMEMR5tbstdcP8qzLjpMVoFho-XXRyreFm5JyqC1MLooWq7phWqdh5U30eW7GcizzLXQV1H22K1UM0LkQvxlZWc_RVSIqkjpf7Zo2-V5u6ik7Tw56th61LDG0q-RxFx zI2m93cwZZO40Vub3gZarmcZD63SHlIU2LueJ-bsGvi2htGgGpVsQenYt0kbCL8SozRYPADdDwlpg!!/dl3/d3/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/?pcid=172b9f004a10f9b9a57bbd526698d42c

reply to post by Deetermined


Sorry, I cannot access this page. If I select English as language and click on the Arab League site, the site remains blank. I also cannot get access to this article by using google and using the whole quote as search words.

Is this article about statements made by Amr Moussa?

Edited to add, I have now read the short statement after going to the Arab version and using google translate.