Why is self-determination an inalienable right for the people of the Falklands, but a gross example of Iranian meddling for the people of Bahrain?
Answers on a postcard please with a twenty pound note and framed photo of William Hague to Wars’R’Us, Oil and Armaments Ltd, House of Lords.
Donald wrote: “There are associated formations all the way across into the South American mainland. Some of this stuff was in reports, some of it was in articles on the online databases I had access to; some were old enough to have turned up in monographs by then. Oh to have access to such resources now!”
.
Where might be a good place to start looking?
bonifacegoncourt, I’ve read The God Delusion. Very entertaining, and the points about discrimination against atheists really needed to be clearly stated.
.
The point of understanding a religion is that doing so enables one to converse with its adherents from the basis of their preexisting beliefs. In every religion you’ll find plenty of moral concepts that enable the promotion of ethical behaviour. Using these is far more efficient than trying to convert everyone to atheism and then persuading them to become Humanists. Atheistic beliefs are as corruptible as those of any religion. Look at how some capitalists have drawn upon Darwinism to justify oppression of “inferior” people on the basis of “survival of the fittest”.
.
There is nothing meaningless about ‘You simply cannot dissociate Universe from Mind.’ Presumably, you haven’t appreciated eighty years-worth of quantum physics. Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg, Planck, Schrödinger and others struggled for decades to separate the observed from the observer. They really tried their best to preserve the “objectivity” of the old, classical physics. That argument became testable with Bell’s inequality theorem, and was finally laid to rest by the experiments of Alain Aspect – and it can’t be done. Observation of a system is what collapses the wave function. How one observes affects the experimental system. That, or you need to postulate an infinity of universes, each sprouting a further infinity of universes at every infinitesimal instant, all of which except “this one” are entirely inaccessible to us even in principle, such that every possibility at every instant all occur – an article of faith if ever I encountered one. Dawkins entirely missed this point in The God Delusion. But then, he’s not a physicist.
.
Yes, religion makes some people unhappy. My religious upbringing made me very unhappy, and it took me decades to escape it. However, religion also makes other people very happy. Each to their own, I guess, though it isn’t for me. I do hope that one day, children will no longer be indoctrinated into religious belief.
.
I think you have two essential problems in this conversation with me.
.
(1) You seem unable to separate religion from the concept of “God”. I’ve tried to emphasise this distinction. I wrote ‘Huge damage is done by the various religious descriptions of “God”’ and ‘We should treat any person or group that claims to speak on God’s behalf with vigorous skepticism.’ In my opinion, religion, by and large, hijacks people’s natural, intuitive reverence for That Which Continually Creates. Effectively, religion usurps “God” and sets itself up in the space thus cleared. No surprise there, then! Just the usual pursuit of power.
.
(2) You think of “God” in the way taught by most religions, as a sort of “person” who existed outside the Universe, and then “created” it, and then sort of retired. There’s a very funny section in The God Delusion that describes exactly this attitude. It’s in complete contradiction to all that science has taught us, which is that the Universe evolves, continually and at every point within it. Two more points follow from this:
.
(1) Science has clearly shown us why things decay; it’s just a set of statistical rules known as thermodynamics. However, no clear mechanism – nor even an unclear one, so far as I’m aware – has been so much as proposed for the constant creativity of inorganic evolution.
.
(2) The biologists (which includes Dawkins) get an easy ride on this. Where you have life, you do have a good mechanism for the creativity of evolution. But so far as we know, life is the exception rather than the rule – enormously so. And yet the inanimate universe is full of diversity that just keeps getting more and more diverse. Life just speeds up this process a lot.
Bonifacegoncourt; I feel that I should deconstruct some of your earlier comment:
.
Why should you feel ‘awe’ for the universe, just because it is bigger than you? – Well yes, there’s its size, of course, but it’s the huge amount of increasing diversity, i.e. creativity, that I find truly stunning. Is there nothing that awes you? That would be a shame.
.
The universe is an incompetent and wasteful piece of design, – Well, it isn’t designed, it’s spontaneous. I find physical law and natural forms beautiful and elegant, not incompetent. I don’t know what you mean by “wasteful”. I think that’s a perspective us humans acquired because we tend to want too much stuff and our technology is too energy-inefficient to give it to us all. Besides, remember the conservation of mass/energy. Our Universe is neither wasteful nor acquisitive.
.
all those explosions and collisions and massive wastes of energy giving no clue [unlike other machines] what it is actually for. – Ah, you’re looking for a purpose in the Universe. Well, maybe it has one, and it’s beyond your understanding. Do you think evolution stopped when it got to humans i.e. that there can never be better understanding than our own? Or maybe it just diversifies because that is better than not diversifying, i.e. it’s for the “Greater Good”. And the Universe is not a machine i.e. it is not a device. Those subject-object style creation myths are rubbish, ignore them.
.
Bringing ‘god’ into the frame, as always, just makes it dull. – Yes, but only if “God” is used as a spurious explanation, thus quenching the spirit of inquiry. But then if someone wants to be lazy of mind, that’s their own problem; they should take responsibility and not use “God” as an excuse.
.
The G-word is meaningless because it is the only word that cannot be defined, explained, illustrated, exemplified, or described, except in terms of itself, – Science, like language, defines and describes things in terms of other things. But neither are concerned with ultimate explanations, they’re more like maps. The fundamental things are like the key to the map, or like the axioms we use in maths. We don’t have any good reason why, say, 1 + 1 = 2, we just define it that way because it seems right, and then make use of it from there.
.
‘God’ comes from the right hemisphere of the brain, along with fairies, UFOs, and inability to read maps. – Hey, that’s half of your own brain you just discounted!! Do yourself a favour. Also from the right hemisphere we have intuition (see Penrose’s ideas about mathematical creativity), music, singing, poetry, dance… I don’t see how an inability comes from there; are you suggesting that the right hemisphere prevents the left hemisphere from learning to map-read? Incidentally, I map-read pretty well, even though I try to say my prayers.
.
Your misunderstandings of “God” seem to derive entirely from religious ideas. Misapplied religion really can do vast damage to people’s relationship with God.
@Clark
Yes, yes, old Uncle Tom Heisenberg and all…quantum godbanging is no less daft than the traditional smells and bells. I don’t have a “relationship with God” because ‘god’ is imaginary, or maybe you missed that part. Clark you seem sincere but lighten up or you’ll end up on the Goydian’s CiF Religion, godbangers droning on about their favourite subject, themselves. That’s the appeal of the nonexistent sky wizard to lazy minds. He makes you seem important. He makes the universe seem important. He even makes ‘god’ seem important.
Bonifacegoncourt, “smells and bells” is my thing, or rather sound and lights, sets and props. Most of my work has been as a theatre technician, doing the best I can to make people believe in make believe, for an hour or two at a time. It’s honest work, and not for the lazy of mind.
.
What’s that little saying? Something like: Most journalists convince people of lies by telling selected truths, whereas novelists try to convey important truths by telling a pack of lies. It’s all about who is being honest about what they’re really up to. Theatre is one of the better aspects of religion, something a bit special each Sunday. Religious manipulation to provoke immoral behaviour is one of the worst. I know, the one is too often used for the other. Yes, the “sky wizard” is imaginary, but I wasn’t writing about him. That’s the trouble, the turds are all mixed in with the treasure.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9gq-ANfjc0
Only murderous zionism is more noxious than this islam rubbish. Beware of anything from a desert.
.
Zionism is from Europe.
Clark, I think it can be made simpler by realizing that atheists don’t believe in the monotheistic God, nor polytheistic gods, nor the type of cosmic-y Goddish gods that are believed in by those attempting to split the difference. Atheists just don’t believe in any of those and will not find your religion (or religion-like beliefs) any more compelling than say Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Scientology, Tenri-kyo, Caodaism, Satan-worship, Mormonism, Jainism, Tarot reading, Hindusim, Sikhism, Shintoism. To the extent that I understand your theories it sounds nothing more than another “God-of-the-gaps” argument which insists that that which is not explicable must be explained by God.
Clark: Angrysoba, that’s good enough for me. The UK knew the Falklands could be useful for oil extraction.
.
I’m not sure what you mean. Are you saying it is good enough to believe your initial assertion that the UK fought the Falklands War in 1982 because of oil?
.
Well, fine. But we’re obviously going to disagree on that too. I think it had nothing to do with oil.
Cameron and Hague will love the ezistence of this testimony about Argentina in the 80s. More grist to the mill. Stolen babies, etc.
.
http://www.zcommunications.org/elliott-abrams-dark-history-in-latin-america-and-the-struggle-for-justice-by-cyril-mychalejko
Voila
What you say is correct, but this lot are not interested in these facts. Are you Muslim, or just very well informed?
Oil, water, and the Antarctic
.
As fishing reserves dwindle, securing oil and fresh water reserves has become the main strategic role of the Falklands for Britain. Though it had long been suspected there were large oil reserves around the islands, exploration has only begun in the past few years. In February of 2010, British Desire Petroleum began drilling 60 miles from the capital of the Falklands, Port Stanley, for what may be 200 million barrels of oil worth 17 billion pounds. By May, British Rockhopper Exploration joined the frenzy, along with a host of other companies that have won large contracts for oilrig and equipment services.
.
Great oil and gas reserves also lie underneath the Antarctic, a continent Britain has also set its sights on. Thanks to its control of the Falklands, it has claimed 660,000 miles of Antarctic territory. In May of 2009, before the deadline for countries to make submissions to the U.N. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, it submitted an additional claim of 386,000 miles of ocean off of its Antarctic holding. Many, including Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund, condemned the U.K. in what is seen as an environmentally dangerous move to secure access to oil, water, and other natural resources.
.
The Antarctic is also the continent that holds 70 percent of the world’s fresh water reserves, a resource becoming scarcer and more valuable each year. The Antarctic Treaty signed in 1959 has thus far protected the continent’s environment from resource extraction and military activity, however, it neither affirms nor denies territorial claims currently held by seven countries. As access to fresh water becomes more critical, the treaty may become another ideal purported on paper but trampled in practice.
.
/…
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/argentina-archives-32/2987-resource-control-and-military-might-the-future-of-the-malvinasfalkland-islands.
06 April 2011
.
Francesca Fiorentini is a freelance journalist based in Buenos Aires. She is also an editor of Left Turn magazine and a regular contributor to WarTimes.org.
Voila said;”Denying this is denying the Quran.”
Bullpucky, there is no mention of the Abu Bakar in the Quran, and further there are documented Hatdith as for the preference of Muhammad for Ali as the first Caliph.
,
As for disunity of the Muslims to be blamed on Shia it is the most anti Islamic statement ever made, but there again whilst the Saudis are at the vanguard of the Muslims anything is possible. Included is the negative and almost maniacal image of Islam that is so prevalent across the globe. What has the money and power of the Saudis achieved for Islam?
,
Whilst Rome/Baghdad/Damascus/Sana’a/Manama is burning the Islamic “leaders” are jockeying for power, by their contemptuous and unforgivable support for the zionist mafia.
,
So spare me the carp about Muslim brotherhood, and start looking around you, to see how the Muslims are perceived?
,
,
The ziofuckwit commenting here about the “terrorist” this and “terrorist” that, goes unchallenged, about the illegitimate apartheid theocratic regime that is based on terrorism; Irgun, et al. Whilst Muslim brotherhood is debated, you cannot make this shit up!
Angrysoba, you should examine the context of my comments on this thread. I was initially responding to this, from Bonifacegoncourt:
That is a very strong statement. It also looks likely to be offensive to many people, and to act as a block to constructive debate of many other subjects. If someone opens their discussion with a statement like “you only believe what you believe because you’re stupid and gullible”, they’re expressing an arrogance that is likely to provoke a similar counter-reaction. They’ve initiated disrespect.
.
I am not trying to convince anyone of the existence or non-existence of any kind of god. I’m trying to demonstrate that strong belief in the non-existence of, er, I’m going to have trouble with words here, aren’t I? If I write “God” or “god”, you’ll criticise my argument on the basis of a “sky wizard” who imposes will on the Universe from outside of it, and that really isn’t what I mean. Anyway, I’m trying to show that strong belief in this non-existence is a type of faith, it is a belief not backed by evidence.
.
And like other faiths, this faith can lead to passionate battles over dogma, and to offensive forms of argument. I see no reason that this could not escalate, in extremis, to actual violence. That may seem unlikely to you*, but I see the same mechanisms at work as in battles between religions. It starts with disrespect, the looking down on someone for some reason, holding them to be inferior. The opponent, of course, is likely to respond similarly, and it’s all downhill from there.
.
My argument is not a “God of the Gaps” argument; quite the opposite. Bell’s inequality theorem pitted a “gap” (Einstein’s “hidden variables”) against the correctness of quantum physics. The “gap” lost when the Aspect results came in. That left consciousness as a fundamental element in our Universe, rather than the “emergent phenomenon” as postulated by Dawkins etc. I’m prepared to accept that result (provisionally, of course). The strong atheists aren’t.
.
*[Actually, it shouldn’t seem unlikely. We know that atheists have been persecuted for their atheism; i.e. this conflict has already occurred; that the atheists suffered is due to them being in a minority. And after the Russian Revolution, wasn’t all religion banned? Atheism does not hold a monopoly on morality.]
Clark,
Just so that we can clear up a few things:
1. Atheism is not a faith. There doesn’t have to be evidence for atheism. What is lacking is evidence against atheism.
2. Atheism doesn’t come with an a morality attached to it. There are various people who are atheists who have various different systems of morality.
3. Communism =/= atheism.
4. In the developed world, there is almost no existence of persecution of atheists. It’s hyperbolic for atheists to claim persecution in the developed world except possibly in the Southern states of the US. Obviously it is not hyperbolic to say there is persecution in some parts of the Islamic world for any kind of heresy including athesim.
5. Unfortunately, those most prone to be offended will be offended almost no matter what someone says. If being an atheist offends someone then that’s their problem. Not mine.
Guano, I am interested in the debate about branches of Islam that is proceeding on this thread. However, I am ignorant of these matters so I have nothing to contribute. It is good to see debate to identify where violence of Muslim vs. Muslim is coming from. I strongly get the impression that this is a morally motivated debate intended to reduce conflict and increase unity.
.
Passerby, your apparent prejudice against Angrysoba seems to be causing you to throw away the treasure along with the turds. I disagree with Angrysoba in both degree on some matters and in principle on others, but he has written the following (26 Feb, 1:23 pm):
And:
A “ziofuckwit” would have written neither of those. And his assessment on the cause of public perceptions of Palestinians hasn’t gone unchallenged. MJ, CheebaCow and myself have all disagreed.
Angrysoba, to take you points out of order,
.
(2) Atheism is increasingly coming with arrogance and rudeness attached to it, as demonstrated on this thread. Glenn does it to, and you usually challenge Glenn, but not on this matter.
(1) When atheists direct arrogance and rudeness at others, it looks increasingly like a faith – “By their works shall you know them” – they must have a belief or they wouldn’t feel so righteous!
(3) No, Russian “communism” was not atheism, but it did try to enforce atheism.
(4) This point contradicts much that Dawkins documented in The God Delusion, though it’s more discrimination than outright persecution – but that is merely a matter of degree.
(5) I didn’t accuse you of offensiveness, I accused Bonifacegoncourt. Your attribution of the entire sense of offence to non-atheists seems like prejudice to me. Bonifacegoncourt attempted offence; that seems quite clear. He provoked a bit of a response from Guano.
I shall attempt to clarify my position. My provisional theory is that there is something inherently creative about the Universe, and that people (and everything else) have a non-local type of connection to it which they sense intuitively. They give it various names, and amongst those names are “God” and “The Creator”. Whatever it is, people agree that it must be supremely powerful.
.
People get together and express their reverence for creation and whatever marvelous something brings it about. This is the start (but only the start) of that ubiquitous Human phenomena called religion.
.
Some people then attempt to write definitive things about “God”. Such attempts are inevitably inaccurate and incomplete. Creation occurs in the interface between the future and the present. You can study that which has already happened, but that which creates is always just out of reach.
.
Those who seek power over people see some powerful opportunities. They see widespread belief in this powerful creator-thing, and they see a load of vague writings, grasping at an ungraspable concept. Whoa, ripe for propaganda, or what? We are familiar with what happens next.
.
Note that everything beyond my second sentence is likely to happen whether my concept of a creative something-or-other has any truth to it or not.
Clark said: “your apparent prejudice against Angrysoba seems to be causing you to throw away the treasure along with the turds.”
,
prejudice defined as per dictionary:
1.an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
,
2.any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
,
3.unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
,
,
I don’t have to explain myself to you or anyone else, however for the record, if the millions of dispossessed and displaced Palestinian refugees (made refugees in the unprovoked attacks of the ziofuckwit thugs posing as an army) are not reason enough. If knowledge of knowing that millions more Palestinians are incarcerated in open air concentration camps, under a siege conditions and surrounded by the armed to the teeth ziofuckwits bent on stealing their lands and chattel, are not reason enough. If the constant attacks of the demented and aggressive ziofuckwits on their immediate neighbours are not reason enough. If the corruption of our political systems by the advocates of these murderous bunch of ziofuckwits who suffer en mass from masada complex whilst they are armed to the teeth and being in possession of a filled arsenal of atomic, and hydrogen bombs, as well as having the means of delivering these deadly payloads in addition to being capable of secondary retaliatory action, ie ziofuckwit submarines can still blow up the planet, post destruction of Isreal, are considered to be an acceptable and mundane affair. Then your assertion of prejudice obtains valid.
,
Stop shilling for the ziofcukwits, you may prefer to engage these scum bags in debate, however do not prescribe your preferences to all and sundry.
Can we have some self-determination too? Send it in an envelope to the Parliament building just opposite the Queen’s impressive pile in Holyrood Park.
Passerby, no, you don’t have to explain yourself to me. However, I assume you’d like as many people as possible, including me, to give your viewpoint serious consideration. If you appear prejudiced you alienate some of your potential audience.
.
You list many crimes attributable to aggressive Israeli foreign policy. Trivially, Israel has never held a monopoly on such atrocities; similar behaviour can be found throughout history across many societies.
.
More importantly, you seem to think that a list of Israeli crimes justifies your abuse of Angrysoba. But wait and think. Look at the UK mainstream media. With near saturation pro-Israeli propaganda, do you not expect some people to be less critical of Israel than they maybe should be? Maybe many support Israel who wouldn’t if they were presented with more of the facts.
.
Why treat Angrysoba as part of your enemy? In doing so, you risk discrediting yourself with any non-commenting readers who identify with Angrysoba’s viewpoint. There could be hundreds or even thousands of these.
.
Now you accuse me of being a shill for Israel. Well, it’s odd that I was on the demonstration opposing Operation Cast Lead, then, isn’t it? Maybe you want to alienate me as well. For goodness’ sake think!
Clark, if you agree the sky wizard is imaginary, why are you bollocking on about it? It’s your own time you’re wasting. Why not study something useful? I advise against namedropping Bell, Aspect etc – a little learning is a dangerous thing. I fear you
might be at home amongst the wibble-wabblers on the Goydian’s CIF religion.
Atheism is not a ‘faith’ any more than not smoking is a faith. Godbangers invent their meaningless monosyllable and try to shoehorn reality in order to make it mean something. [Why is god called god? Why not bip?] See St Augustine’s ‘Confessions’. Tragic case of brilliant mind wasted by madness. God is like heroin. Just say no.
I am very glad to give offence to freaks with no foreskins. The more annoyed they get the better, whether those perverts who mutilate, flog and stone little girls, or the eternally
bloodthirsty ZioNazi master race with their Final Solution for Palestinians. The only use for quran or torah is when printed on extra-absorbent two-ply tissue.
Passerby, I respect Angrysoba because he responds to debate. He used to maintain that Ahmedinejad called for the destruction of Israel on the basis of that well-known (i.e. propagandised) biased translation. People here engaged him in debate. This was sufficient to prompt Angrysoba to search out an Iranian and ask for a translation. He returned to the thread and wrote that he’d changed his mind.
.
And that is what it’s all about; changing minds. But, to engage in that honestly, you have to be prepared to have your own opinions changed, too. Otherwise, you’re just engaged in yet more propaganda.
Bonifacegoncourt, thanks for the offensive language. You have revealed your prejudice. Jewish boys are circumcised as infants when they have no choice in the matter, and it doesn’t grow back. You’re right, I’ll waste no further time on you, unless you develop some maturity.
@Clark
Good. Offence may be the spur to clarity.
Whatever happened to the Bennies and the Argies with their Plankton Wars? I was getting to enjoy that.
Arison now has to deal with Argentina turning away two of his ships.
.
Falklands tension: Argentina turns away cruise ships
This April marks the 30th anniversary of the start of the Falklands War
.
Falklands tensions
Competing claims
Tensions alive in Buenos Aires
Life on the islands
Falklanders confident about future
.
Two cruise ships carrying almost 3,000 passengers have been turned away from an Argentine port, apparently because they had visited the Falklands.
.
The Adonia and the Star Princess had arrived off Tierra Del Fuego, on the country’s southern tip, on Monday but were prevented from docking in Ushuaia.
.
British diplomats in Argentina are trying to clarify what happened.
.
Tensions have risen recently, as the 30th anniversary of the Falklands war approaches
/..
The Adonia and the Star Princess, which are both operated by the Carnival Group, arrived off the port of Ushuaia on Monday morning.
.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17184955
@bonifacebenny, offence ‘may be’ the spur to clarity, but honesty and looking within oneself provides you with a light so bright you wish you ‘d be a torch.
Spirituality is within us all, it is the engine that encourages us to care, the basis to intuition and resolve wherever we rest and stay, from one horizon to the other, it has nothing to do with books and prophets and what others tell you to believe.
nevertheless accepting other views for what they are, rude in your case and that of passerby, regardles of the deatnh and history and whats done to whom where, is the first basis of sitting around the table. Those who don’t want results, use the numbersgame to perpetuate the past.
Clark: Passerby, I respect Angrysoba because he responds to debate. He used to maintain that Ahmedinejad called for the destruction of Israel on the basis of that well-known (i.e. propagandised) biased translation.
.
Thanks for the compliments, Clark, but you shouldn’t waste your time trying to make me and Passerby play kissy-face. I can quite handle being called a “ziofuckwit” and other things as it takes a lot to make me cry. In fact, I think that one of the main problems with the religious debates is that too many people are ready to whine and cry and bawl on the slightest pretext always claiming to be offended and victimized and usually when the apparent offendee is bending over backwards to proffer the kind of tolerance that wouldn’t be reciprocated if the religious nuts had their way. Indeed, the very all-loving, compassionate, merciful God that most of them believe in would sooner throw people into an eternity of pain and suffering if they offended His vanity. It seems quite obvious that there is some projection going on where ultra-religious turn out to be deeply, deeply sensitive about their beliefs and seem to presume the divine entity they believe in would be equally petulant. Talk about small gods!
.
By the way, on the Ahmadinejad quote thing, you got some of that story right but you still gave it a tinfoil twist which I can’t accept. There’s no doubt Ahmadinejad does want the destruction of Israel and his repeated “Marg Bar Israel!” calls and his government’s insistence that Israel will not be recognized and there can be no peace with Israel demonstrates this well enough. Also, the “biased translation” was initially printed in Iranian media, as I said at the time. Somehow, in your mind, you have formed a narrative around this which pleased you better in which Western media initiated this “wiped from the map” meme and yet it is commonly translated as this in Iran. I pointed out that my friend had gone through the phrase and made it clear that “disappear” closer to the correct translation, because it was intransitive, and the rest was indeed literally “pages of time”.
.
I live in Buenos Aires.
Argentines can be cocky but they are not fools. There is zero appetite for a military invasion. In fact, the state the Argentine military is currently in, there is a greater threat of invasion from the Falklands.
The great Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges once described the Falklands War as 2 bald men fighting over a comb. Most Argentines today would agree but rightly or wrongly, Argentina will never renounce its claim to the Malvinas. The strategy appears to be to make the comb as expensive as possible for Britain. Britain maintains an overwhelming military edge but Argentina’s soft power has increased dramatically since the days of the dictatorship. Diplomatically and economically, Argentina is in a much stronger position than 30 years ago. That will probably count for more as time goes by. But no Argentine is under any illusion that the albiceleste will fly over Stanley anytime soon. The question for Britain is whether the kelpers should have a veto over a compromise with Argentina which might be in Britain’s longer-term interests.
For nearly a century Argentina and Britain were close friends. The respect that many Argentines show for British culture and its place in Argentine history is something that continues to surprise me.
There will be no war. And I have faith that both countries will one day find a way to “share the comb” and return to warm relations.
Angrysoba:
“Imam goft een rejeemeh ishqalqar al-Qods bayad az safeyeh ruzgar mahv shavad”
…
The Imam (Khomeini) said that the regime which occupies al Qods (Jerusalem) should vanish from the pages of history.
…
Ahmedinejad was calling for regime change in Israel. Now let me think…who else calls for regime change…hmm…….
Angrysoba:
Iranians at rallies regularly shout Marg Bar Amrika! Does that mean they are going to destroy America?