Iranian protestors beaten, etc. sidetrack

[firefly]

Having so often exhibited my unfortunate tendency to torture language, grammar, spelling, until it would confess to anything if I would just STFU, it is impossible for me to pretend that I do otherwise.

The sentence that I said was "worthy of moi," was meant to indicate that the structure of the sentence and the use of the wording was tortured and confusing.

Pro-opposition protests? Why not anti-government protests?


Months-long has always been hyphenated. When written as all one word, it sounded like some Middle Eastern mountain tribal government, as in "...a monthslong government crackdown..."

"...protestors rallying aganst the disputed..."? as opposed to "protestors demonstrating against...? "Rallies" are usually in support of something. When used with a negative it sets off a little mental ping pong game in my mind, trying to connect a negative group to a positive action. The way it was written led me to think they were protesting against the disputed June election.

anti-riot police and plainclothes pro-government Basij militiamen had blocked the neighborhood, the Web sites said.

First time I've ever heard the word "Basij." Tribesman? NGO security group, like Blackwater

"They didn't allow anybody to enter the mosque," Salavati told The Associated Press. "Tens of thousands gathered outside for the memorial but were savagely attacked by security forces and the Basijis."

Again, who are Basijis. The name is so casually dropped into the report, as though everyone knows whether the Basijis are actually under the control of the government of Iran, or are a group of paramilitary tribesman who just want to beat the hell out of someone, like "tea-baggers" on steroids.

I looked it up on Wiki, okay. Just telling me something named Basijis beat up two people does not a monster make of things named Basijis.

"I saw at least two people with blood pouring down their face after being beaten by the Basijis," Salavati added.

I thought that was a pretty succint tie up of what has happened from the elections

It was perhaps too succinct for someone who has the peculiar mindset allotted to me. I didn't ask for it. I just got it this way.

The information could be entirely accurate, but it isn't enough and it was so condensed (perhaps because the writer is well trained in being stingy with words--an excellent trait in a good professional journalist or writer), for people like me, who aren't bothered by the extra words, if we can feel we thoroughly understand what is being described when we are done reading.

Mousavi is not without fault in the prolongation of the violence and civil unrest in Iran.

There have been accusations of stolen elections in the USA, Palestine, Israel, Venezuela, Bolilvia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, as well as Iran. In all cases, the losers make some appropriate objection and then the election is accepted. Why? For the good of the country, I would assume. Mousavi has continued to whip up the frenzy of his supporters (think of the similarity between Mousavi and the "birthers" or the "tea-baggers" with accusations of communism and socialism and death squads), and it is my feeling (based upon past performance, most recently including the Hamas victory in Palestine) that Mousavi is being aided and abetted by the CIA, among others. For the rioting and the deaths to be continuing at this late date, for the loser of the election to continue to whip up a resistence and civil violence, is not something I take as a sign of a person who wants to clear up a disputed election, but a sign of someone who is willing, eager, to cause disruption and violence, possibly revolution, to REMOVE the legally accepted winner of the election.

Therefore, for all I know the Basinji militia groups may be doing some legitimate head banging, just as our police officers do when riot squads are called out to deal with violent civil disobedience in our country. There was insufficient information as to the kinds of behavior the protestors were engaged in that caused them to be beaten. Somehow, I don't think they were beaten for calmly marching while carrying signs.

And so, my attempt at simple humor went awry and I have now committed torture upon more words on this message board.

Now where is the potted plant?

ff

[wheelspinner]

One thing worth remembering is that, in Iran, the opposition is to more than just the government. They are opposing the non-government forces (the mullahs) who endorsed the results of a disputed election. So the terms "pro-opposition" and "anti-government" do not mean exactly the same thing in this situation.

You didn't highlight it, but I've always though the term was "riot police" not "anti-riot police".

[firefly]

In all honesty, Wheelspinner, I hadn't thought too much about the mullah's as being separate from "the government," because I think of Iran as a theocratic State. If I am not mistaken--which of course I could well be--Ahmadinaejad is not actually in control of the State, but is in a subordinate position to the religious leader.

Ahmadinejad seems to act in the forums where someone is required to interact with outsiders of different faiths and different customs. He obviously delivers all of his speeches with an acknowledgement to "the Prophet."

Somewhere, I have gotten the impression that Ahmadinejad's plans, even with concern for the nuclear goals, are controlled by the wishes of the religious leader.

I see what you mean about "anti-riot police." That's another one of those contradictory sounding phrases.

Also, I didn't make clear, I don't think, that sentence containing the words "protesting against the disputed election" can give one the impression that they are protesting against the fact that the election is disputed, just as it could mean they are protesting against the election, which they feel should be disputed.

Maybe this is a translation and english is not the native language of the author.

Thanks for the heads up. And thanks for being interested enough to comment.

ff

Oh, and Happy Holidays, everybody.

[firefly]

Thank you! ;D

[firefly]

For starters...

www.constitution.org/mil/link2mil.htm


plus, nationally coordinated...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_militia_movement



The modern constitutional militia movement, the constitutionalist wing of the "militia movement" in the United States, became active in the mid 1990s in response to outrage about the violent confrontation at Ruby Ridge, the Waco Siege and gun control legislation. [1] The movement is composed largely of veterans, libertarians, and Second Amendment advocates who share a common motivation of anger at federal government actions and also a set of ideals associated with the values of the militia they see embodied in the Constitution. [2] [3]


and for those who feel a bit independent....


www.constitution.org/mil/al/mil_usal.htm

www.constitution.org/mil/ar/mil_usar.htm

www.angelfire.com/wa3/nwwr1/Californiamilitia.html

indianamilitia.homestead.com/

www.constitution.org/mil/la/mil_usla.htm

www.michiganmilitia.com/

www.michiganmilitia.com/SMVM/smvm.htm

www.constitution.org/mil/ut/mil_usut.htm

Live, and learn. It's not a subject most folks discuss every day. Who do you think those guys are dressed in camo who are out running around in the woods in their pickup trucks and SUV's? It isn't the US Army. And these folks do consider themselves the patriots who are training to save the world from whatever it is they consider is un-American, even if that something is a gay person, an abortion doctor, a welfare mother, a non-english speaking worker, a person with dark skin, or an advocate of single payer healthcare.

I rest my case. Peace?

jd

[firefly]

Re: Iran protesters ‘savagely attacked,’ reports s
« Reply #16 Today at 11:28am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne,

One, or both, of us is not reading the same material.

The sources I have provided clearly indicate there ARE State Militia, and they are not the US Army, or the National Guard, or the State Police.

They are paramilitary groups who have banded together in the name of patriotism, the constitution, and because they think the US Government is inadequate to govern this country, so need to be ready to do so when the opportunity finally arises.

They refer to themselves as "Militia." They have web sites inviting patriotic persons to join. They wear uniforms. There are places that know the colors and types of insignia they use to identify themselves. They have ranks.

Why they wear uniforms is probably due to the Geneva Protocols. They are preparing for the day when they may fight a foreign enemy on American soil, and the Protocols only protect as POW's those who are a formal, recognizable, identifiable, "militia."


Prisoners of War

The 1949 Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war defines PoWs as members of the armed forces captured during a conflict, or: Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, … provided that such militias or volunteer corps … fulfil the following conditions:


That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
That of carrying arms openly;
That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

(This llink is no good, so I have added in some new ones below. They all give the same information re: the uniforms and insignia and chain of command being a requirement for a combatant to be considered a POW.

www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/genevaconventions.htm)

www.cdi.org/terrorism/guantanamo.cfm



Article 4. A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:[
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e63bb/6fef854a3517b75ac125641e004a9e68

Article 4
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the
present Convention, are persons belonging
to one of the following categories, who have
fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a
Party to the conflict, as well as members of
militias or volunteer corps forming part of
such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and
members of other volunteer corps, including
those of organized resistance movements,
belonging to a Party to the conflict and
operating in or outside their own territory,
even if this territory is occupied, provided
that such militias or volunteer corps,
including such organized resistance
movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) that of being commanded by a
person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed
distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their
operations in accordance with the laws and
customs of war.

www.mineaction.org/downloads/Emine%20Policy%20Pages/Geneva%20Conventions/Geneva%20Convention%20III.pdf

I do not understand your saying that such "militia" do not exist, or would be considered "State Police."

Can you clarify?

jd
Link to Post - Back to Top Logged


firefly
Full Member

member is offline







Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 175
Karma: 1 Re: Iran protesters ‘savagely attacked,’ reports s
« Reply #17 Today at 11:41am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These groups are certainly NOT State Police, or Regular Army. They are NOT the National Guard. They are increasing in number since the election of Obama.

I have personal knowledge of such a group in LA, and I assure you, they were training to kill black people, gay people, athiests, communists, draft dodgers and democrats, whom they thought of as the minions of "the enemy."

The sites below are, I believe invitational sites for joining, plus one of several companies who specialize in selling the insignia and uniform components for various "militias, and some other indications of militia identification designated by State, with links to State Constitutions, Governorships, etc, and, of course by uniform and group name. They are NOT State Police, or National Guard. Oh, and National Guard is under the control of the Governor, and, unless the law was changed under Bush (Which I think it WAS) the President has to ask the Governor to hand over control of the individual State's national Guard.

There was a conflict between the Governor of Louisiana, Blanco?, and GWB during Hurricane Katrina, because the Governor refused to grant control of the LA National Guard to the Federal Government. Seems to me there was a change in the law made after that incident, which made it possible for the President to take control of each and every State's National Guard away from the Governors.

www.northidaho21lightfoot.org/files/Uniform_and_Insignia_rev12.pdf

www.1800nametape.com/georgia.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Defense_Forces

I can find more sites, if you think you need them. There are plenty of militia sites.

jd

[joethree56]

Read with interest firefly. I reckon that Iran is both more complex and volatile than the reports suggest. The geraniums are a treat also. Although I grow em' here at home wherever I see em' they always remind me of Greece

[firefly]

I think geraniums are really very happy looking plants. A spanish speaking lady in my neighborhood told me the name for them in spanish is "margarita." Somehow, I think that suits them. Do they grow especially well in Greece? So colorful.

Thanks for taking the time to read. Sorry about the bad link.

A lot of the militia links are dead, but I think they've just gone underground.

FROM WAYNE:

To call it a "state militia " implies that there is some connection between the government and that militia. A state law, state police force, state highway- these are all connected to the state. But that's not the case of the Michigan Militia. That would be like assuming Shelbyville Tire and Muffler was a government agency in the city of Shelbyville. I just wanted to make the distinction that putting the name of the state in their title does not make them a state militia. There really isn't any such thing.

So when you're comparing the Basijis to a "state militia", you're really confusing the issue.

"Our USAian (thanks, Oskar) State Militias would be appropriately seen as representing the State Government in any action they might take against their fellow citizens who were rioting or setting fires, or destroying public/private property, or shooting guns at people."

I don't see it that way. If the state government requested one of these outside groups to intervene, then, yes, they are representing the state. But the Bajisis? From what I have seen, they do not represent any government entity.
Link to Post - Back to Top Logged

WEBSITE for Arizona Militia:


Arizona Citizens Militia
"Endorsed by the SPLC as Number ONE in Arizona"

The threat of Martial Law has increased
A Global Financial Apocalypse is bearing down on us
Foreign military troops are inside the USA for "training"
FEMA Concentration Camps are being readied
We will not go quietly
We aim to misbehave


Is this the future of America?
Do you see yourself in this picture?
Do you see your family here?


We are off for the Holidays, please contact us again after the New Year.
Have a Very Militia Christmas!

www.arizonamilitia.com/



WEBSITE for the Alaska State Militia:


Alaska Statutes.
Title 26. Military Affairs, Veterans, and Disasters
Chapter 5. Military Code of Alaska
Section 70. Governor May Order Organized Militia Into Active Service. previous: Section 60. Control of Alaska National Guard and Alaska Naval Militia.
next: Section 75. Reemployment Rights of the Organized Militia.

AS 26.05.070. Governor May Order Organized Militia Into Active Service.
In the event of war, disaster, insurrection, rebellion, tumult, catastrophe, invasion, or riot; or if a mob or body of men act together by force with intent to commit a felony or to offer violence to persons or property, or by force and violence to break and resist the laws of the state, or the United States; or in the case of imminent danger of the occurrence of any of these events; or whenever responsible civil authorities fail to preserve law and order, or protect life and property, or the governor believes that failure is imminent, the governor may order the organized militia or any part of it, into active state service to execute the laws and to perform duties in connection with them that the governor considers proper. Whenever any portion of the militia is ordered into active service by the governor, it becomes an additional police force, retaining its separate entity and operating at all times as a military organization under military command, with power to cooperate with but not to supersede the existing civilian law enforcement officers whenever possible, for the re-establishment of law and order and for the protection of life and property. The governor may also order members of the organized militia to active state service, with their consent, for the purpose of training or for full-time duty with the office of the adjutant general.

All content © 2008 by Touch N' Go/Bright Solutions, Inc.

Note to HTML Version:

This version of the Alaska Statutes is current through December, 2007. The Alaska Statutes were automatically converted to HTML from a plain text format. Every effort has been made to ensure their accuracy, but this can not be guaranteed. If it is critical that the precise terms of the Alaska Statutes be known, it is recommended that more formal sources be consulted. For statutes adopted after the effective date of these statutes, see, Alaska State Legislature If any errors are found, please e-mail Touch N' Go systems at E-mail. We hope you find this information useful.


This page has been updated: 01/05/2009 20:03:28

touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title26/Chapter05/Section070.htm


Origins
Revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a decree founding the Basij as "a large people's militia", in November 1979. He is reported to have stated that "a country with 20 million youths must have 20 million riflemen or a military with 20 million soldiers; such a country will never be destroyed." [1] At least originally the Basij was open to those below the age of 18 and above the age of 45, and all women.

During the Iran–Iraq War tens of thousands of young Basij were killed on the battlefield. Believing that they were holy martyrs and chanting songs about the Battle of Karbala, in which the Imam Hussein, died a heroic death, the basij cleared minefields as “human waves” so that more experienced soldiers could advance against the enemy.[10] The Basij reportedly marched into battle marking their expected entry to heaven by wearing plastic "keys to paradise" around their necks similar to soldier's dog tags.[11] By the spring of 1983 the Basij had trained 2.4 million Iranians in the use of arms and sent 450,000 to the front.[12]

[edit] Duties after the war
After the war, the Basij was reorganized and gradually developed into one of the Islamic regime's "primary guarantors of domestic security." By 1988 the number of Basij checkpoints dramatically decreased, but the Basij were still active in monitoring the activities of citizens.[13] They enforce hijab, arresting women for violating the dress code, arrest youths for attending mixed gender parties or being in public with unrelated members of the opposite sex,[14] seized 'indecent' material and satellite dish antennae.[1]
In 1988 college Basiji organizations were established on college campuses to fight "Westoxification" and potential student agitation against the government.[14]

Basij also act as an emergency management service, being mobilized in case of earthquakes or other natural or human-made disasters. It may supplement law enforcement by setting up street inspection posts in urban areas to intercept drug smuggling and potential insurgency.[citation needed]

The Ashura Brigades are reported to have been created in 1993 after anti-government riots erupted in various Iranian cities. These Islamic brigades were made up of both Revolutionary Guards and the Basij and by 1998 numbered

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basij


Islam does not have a concept of a Separation of church and state and has been the official religion and part of the governments of Iran since the Islamic conquest of Iran circa 640 AD.[12] It took another few hundred years for Shi'a Islam to gather and become a religious and political power in Iran.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Iran


Wayne,

I really can see no difference, since there is no distinction between the church and the State of Iran. It appears to be an equal opportunity government.

Since the Ayatollah created this group of young men as a militia, to act in the same capacity as a State Governor in the USA might expect to use the various State's Militia, I just don't see the distinction you are seeing.

I guess we are going to have to do one of those "agree to disagree" thingees on this one.

There are unorganized, unrecognized, unofficial State Militia within the USA that may or may not be recognized by the Governor as a potential official body should the need arise, but I believe there is sufficient evidence of various and sundry groups organizing, wearing uniforms, taking their guns and calling themselves a "militia," when they aren't officially recognized by the State as such. However, there are those which ARE recognized by the individual States as having legalized status.

I am really trying to get this discussion on the State militias off of the thread having to do with Iran. So I am responding to you on the General thread I started.

This thread, to my way of thinking is more concerned with whether or not there is a similar function for the Bisiji's in Iran as might be seen were conditions in the USA to become as disruptive, contentious, unsettled, and lawless as conditions have become in Iran.

It is my opinion that such a state of affairs within the USA is just the kind of event our militia would most desire, as they have been planning for it, training for it, working for it, threatening the arrival of it, since the revolutionary war. Unfortunately, it may take another revolution to finally put all their efforts to the test. Somehow, I don't think it would be very pretty. Not at all like they would make it in the movies. I think our USAian militias, official or unofficial, would behave in much the same manner as the Bisijis.

The point being, what does one expect to happen if the person who lost the election refuses to accept the fact that he has been beaten, or outfoxed, or out voted, or whatever, and wants to keep a nation in perpetual upheaval rather than make another legal try to be elected when the time is appropriate.

If Al Gore had tried to perpetuate a violent, blood soaked, encited protest, because he lost in 2000, there may have been no 9/11/01, because America would have been in the same kind of disorder and chaos in which Iran finds itself. We could not have survived as well, if at all, the events of 9/11.

Iran is currently under threat of all kinds of action, from embargo to sanctions, to attacks, to nuclear bombing of what Israel and the West are claiming are underground nuclear sites. Any government put in this positon, including our own, would have to do something to regain order so that this lost election protest does not turn into a complete revolution in a nation that is already under serious threats.

So, my question is, "What would America do, if Al Gore had acted like Mousavi, and how many Americans would have to die before it was settled?"

Wouldn't we, or any other country, have to do something to regain order within our nation for the sake of human life, property values, and safety?

Is it truly so earthshakingly incomprehensible that Iran is using oppressive force in this endeavor. It may be inhumane, and deadly, but would the situation not deteriorate even further if order is not re-established? Would there not be more bloodshed and destruction if this rioting is not stopped? What should they do? What would we do?

USA has always been protected by its diversity, I think. Iran has a limited number of opponents. We, the people, are so dispersed and diverse it would be difficult to get so many people to feel compelled to go out and face death over a lost election.

ff

[Peltigera]

We are off for the Holidays, please contact us again after the New Year.Have a Very Militia Christmas!
Which is why they are just a joke. Should there be a "need" for them, would it wait for the holidays to be over?