Pictures of Iranian Special forces brutality (very graphic warning)

[tocqueville]

stormed the university dormitory



this guy is dead I bet







http://entesabat88.persianblog.ir/post/2/

a lot of those thugs are not even Iranian, they are Hezbollah

[bluestateguy]

1. I'm sure the Chomsky/Parenti/Zinn crowd will find an excuse to blame America for it

Just watch.

[bullimiami]

2. there is plenty of blame to go around and americas dirty hands have helped shape where iran is today

our cia has also exported the trick of corrupt elections all over the world.

[bluestateguy]

3. Thank you for example number 1

thx.

[tocqueville]

6. some lefties have to side with the enemy

because of our past mistakes

they sided with Stalin when the Nazis invaded France, criticizing "British and American imperialism", but not Germany
they sided with the FLN in Algeria despite the fact that it was a terror organisation that brutally murdered and mutilated hundreds of thousands of innocent Algerians that didn't wanted they communist-religious ideology
they sided with the Viet-Cong
they sided with Pol-Pot
they sided with Milosevic and other Serbian thugs
they sided with Saddam

I am expecting siding with Mahmoud and Kim. After all they are anti-imperialists...

same in France and in the US bluestateguy

unability to see the forest for all the trees

[EFerrari]

10. My frontal lobes are not the enemy.

lol

[tocqueville]

19. are you sure ? nt

[EFerrari]

29. Yes, I am sure. Sorry!

lol

[TheWatcher]

38. Since you rarely ever use them, they probably aren't much of a threat.

:rofl:

[bullimiami]

27. who is siding with any enemy. you seem to be viewing the world through paranoia shaded goggles.

i thought we believed in "democracy" and honest elections.
this is pretty obviously a sham election.
pointing out that this has been a tool of the US for years, even during the last presidency, is not siding with anyone except the principal of fair elections.

[Odin2005]

39. Here in the US we have a name for them "Hate-America-Firsters".

People who think everything bad that happens in the world is part of some underlying US plan. It's the left-wing version of the "Jews are taking over the world" BS of the Fascist Right. These morans jumped the shark w/Pol Pot.

[obliviously]

4. Thats it you nailed it!

It is the cia's fault and not he holy men of Iran . You are brillient have you ever thought about running for public office.

[lapfog_1]

5. While "our" cia probably knows a thing or two about corrupt

elections and corrupt dictatorships...

They certainly didn't invent the concept. Nor is there any lack of expertise in the subject in places around the world without cia involvement.

As a counterpoint to "cia" (or other US based organization) involvement in the Iranian elections, I would point out that the our crooks and liars are much more subtle about it.

[That Is Quite Enough]

7. Very true.

All of us are sharing blame on this one.

[michreject]

13. They were sadistic

before the birth of our nation. Can't blame this one on us.

[cali]

16. lol. that is naive beyond belief. n/t

[ThomCat]

35. Really? Do you know Iran's history?

Before you call him naive, do you realize that Iran is only a religious dictatorship because we overthrew their prior parliamentary democracy and installed a dictator we could control so that we could steal their oil?

Iranians rebelled and overthrew that dictator, the Shah, and that is when they became a religious dictatorship.

So, if not for our CIA interfering, and if not for our attempts to control their oil, Iran would probably be still be a democracy today, and would probably be one of our allies instead of one of our enemies.

Mentioning that we have historical responsibility for Iran's current position isn't naive.

[cali]

36. A bit. That's not my point. My point. is you seem to think that the U.S.

invented fraudulent elections and political corruption. Now, that's being utterly ignorant of history.

[ThomCat]

37. That isn't what he said at all.

He said that the US was party responsible for the situation in Iran, which is historically true.

If you are going to totally imagine what other people are saying then, yes, other posts are ridiculous. But if you actually read them and know what they refer to then they make sense.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Well we have plenty to be blamed for starting in the coup of the 1950s, but this

I doubt it. Unless you take into account that we MIGHT have a hand in it due to destabilization operations

Of course the little issue that the Iranian population is YOUNG and wants some basic things like oh freedom... has far more to do with it

Now if you saw any of the photos of the demonstrations. I wish Americans had half the guts to take to the streets... as we should have in 2000 and 2004

For the record I did in 2004 with ten more people. Where were you?

[alfredo]

22. All we did is emboldened the reformers, and that was a good thing.

The Cairo speech showed the Iranian people what a good leader is like, and they wanted that for themselves.

Amhadinejad exposed himself as a coward by not accepting that the people didn't want him anymore.

Obama did more with one speech than bush did with years of threats and violence.

[anonymous171]

31. The New Left always blames America.

Often they are right. However, sometimes they really really stretch it.

[BlooInBloo]

8. Haven't you heard? It's all false because people heard it on twitter!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

11. I'm still waiting for evidence of those

TANKS

and for the rounding up and killing of "young children".

It's fine to reach for information. It's not fine to spread that kind of rumor.

[BlooInBloo]

12. (shrug) I'll leave it to you to convince Iran to turn the comms back on then. Thanks!

[EFerrari]

14. That's not really good enough. When you post hysterical stories

about little children being rounded up, you've either vetted it or you haven't. If you can't, and that's understandable, the unconfirmed status of the story needs to be fronted or you are just spreading unconfirmed atrocity stories. I don't think that's what you want to be doing.

ETA, in case I'm not being clear: I don't think you want to ratchet up the anxiety but this of all times might be a good one to keep track of what we really know and what we really can't confirm, that's all.

[BlooInBloo]

15. "you've either vetted it or you haven't." - That's just fucking stupid...

I'm not a reporter, never will be a reporter, and never passed myself off as a reporter. All questions about "vetting" are 100% irrelevant to me.

Moreover it has been acknowledged by those who are much closer to being reporters than I am (but definitely still not reporters in the fullest sense) - Sully, for example - that in the absence of properly vetted and reported info, you go with the best available. Everyone knows that's far from ideal. But whining about that fact and saying nothing gets nowhere. Better to pass along what's out there, and let the various claims thrive or wither in the face of future information.

The people on twitter are continually asking for photo confirmation of the tanks. Everyone wants to see them, else have the claims rejected. Don't have them yet. (shrug) That's life in the big city.



EDIT: Certainly twitter and the like are risky. It'll either end up being an epic fail or an epic win for twitter. Time will determine that. But that riskiness doesn't change the fact that you go with best available. You just need to be ready to shift gears in the face of newer/better information.

[EFerrari]

24. No. It's not "fucking stupid", it's common sense.

You know, there are 250 people missing in Peru from a real atrocity last week. We hear nada about them because their government is in perfect sync with our owners. It's funny how those missing, probably dead Indians got no tweets, isn't it?

It's fine to put up stuff that is provisional. It's not fine imo to forget to point that out or we are just creating a cloud where real information could be.

[EFerrari]

9. Can you provide the bone fides for that site? Thanks.

I want to know what is happening. But after all the hysteria hear, I'm agnostic without clear sourcing.

[tocqueville]

18. this site is as good as anyone

there are plenty of independent reports of the attack on the dormitory at the university

attacks by thugs of that kind give that kind of results, could be worse.

liveblogging at huffpo corroborates the images

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/13/iran-demonstrations-viole_n_215189.html

ask [e-mail]

if he/she is spriding bull

[EFerrari]

28. Whose site is that? I can't read it. Can you?

The conflict at the university has been widely reported (or, widely for the people who are actually reporting, anyway).

[malaise]

30. There were plenty of reports about WMDs as well

I'll remain as skeptical as I was when Bushco was in charge.
Truth eventually will out.
For now I'll sit on the side and watch I've seen too many so called revolutions - velvet, orange, etc. and know they were all orchestrated and financed by outsiders.

[suffragette]

32. Here's corroboration from France24 that beatings took place there

http://www.france24.com/en/20090614-foreign-media-say-iran-blocking-coverage-protests

You can see the riot police using their batons. These are pics from afar, but the results from the close-up shots in the OP look like they would be the result.

Another picture bears a caption about the protesters there being tear-gassed.

From the story there, video is being confiscated and reporters from different countries are being prevented from reporting, some to the point of being ordered to leave Iran.




"An Iranian demonstrator runs for cover as policemen use tear gas to disperse the crowd during a protest against the election results outside Tehran University. "


"An Iranian riot police officer attacks a man with a stick near Tehran University."

[EFerrari]

34. Thank you!

[snot]

17. Are the statements

-- e.g., "a lot of those thugs are . . . Hezbollah"

-- from the blog you sourced; or if not, what authority? and what is the nature of the blog you sourced?

I just don't like to convict anyone without even knowing what the basis is for concluding they're guilty.

[tocqueville]

21. there are plenty of independent reports

on blogs or twitter that some of the "special forces" are speaking Arabic, not Farsi, thus indicating Hezbollah.
It could be Hezbollah forces training in Iran (which is widely known they do) and given a little "live" task...

nothing very strange

[Hannah Bell]

23. everyone who speaks arabic = hezbollah? thanks for the info.

[medeak]

25. latest tweet is disturbing:

http://twitter.com/Change_for_Iran

[lpbk2713]

26. "Just fraternity pranks"

That's what asshole OxyRush will say tomorrow.

[RollWithIt]

33. I did want to point out that there are significant Hezbollah factions in Iran that ARE Iranians

Ansar-Hezbollah being one of the most militant. They are Iranian citizens. Hard line right conservatives. The idea that Hezbollah doesn't have Iranian roots is preposterous.

[Odin2005]

40. Hizbullah? WTF?

:wow: