New here, not new to forums

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
She and her husband were tried and convicted for actions threatening national security. They are sentenced to hang.
Click to expand...

You are murdering people for protesting against you.

That makes you pigs.

But it's far worse, you're going to rape her with her husband watching because your sick and degraded gutter religion says that will deny them both entry into paradise.

Because the rulers in Iran are pigs, filthy animals.
 
Damocles said:
That is simply untrue... I explained, you ignored. There was slavery, cannibalism, etc. among the natives. This pastoral perfection of the natives is a false narrative. Not every tribe was the Taino, and sometimes the Taino were victims.

Read, educate yourself, do better and stop judging based on biased nonsense.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, we all choose (guess about) which narratives are mostly the truth...and which are mostly false.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Unfortunately, we all choose (guess about) which narratives are mostly the truth...and which are mostly false.
Click to expand...
Or we understand and value information even if it doesn't fit a narrative we wanted it to fit.

It isn't like I think Columbus was "great", I just also understand that we should judge based on all of the information rather than based on a narrative.
 
Damocles said:
Or we understand and value information even if it doesn't fit a narrative we wanted it to fit.

It isn't like I think Columbus was "great", I just also understand that we should judge based on all of the information rather than based on a narrative.
Click to expand...
What else do we have of history but narratives...and lots of guesses, Damo?. Some stuff, I acknowledge based on fact...but most based on what amounts to legends...verbal narratives that most low level psychology courses show that degrade with each telling.

I had an aunt who used to go to city council meetings dressed as Christopher Columbus, She resented what the council was doing with regard to the memory of Columbus...she considered herself as defending people of Italian heritage. The city has been dominated by Italian immigrants...and had slowly become "African American" dominated. A huge painting of Columbus by Albert Bierstadt valued at $15M was removed from a wall in the City Hall...and resentment among the remaining folk of Italian heritage was a big thing.

Meh. They give Sir William Herschel credit for "discovering" Uranus; Johann Galle for "discovering" Neptune and Clyde Tombaugh for "discovering" Pluto. Others may have seen them first, but...
 
Matt Dillon said:
Because gutting 3 men like fish just might take a toll on a human soul.
And they stopped what they were doing and got her dad down from there.
I understand that killing others is not easy on the soul.
I don't think she ever had to or did, but I know there were times she would have. Not just then, either. Multiple other times.
That's life. You gotta be ready to put a motherfucker slap the fuck down, because there are fucked up people out there.
Click to expand...
Good for granny.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
You are murdering people for protesting against you.

That makes you pigs.

But it's far worse, you're going to rape her with her husband watching because your sick and degraded gutter religion says that will deny them both entry into paradise.

Because the rulers in Iran are pigs, filthy animals.
Click to expand...

1) “Iran is murdering people for protesting”​


✔ Partly supported (but needs precision)​


There is credible, well-documented evidence that Iranian authorities have:


  • used lethal force against protesters
  • carried out mass arrests and killings during protest crackdowns
  • conducted executions of some protest-related detainees after trials

Examples:


  • Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch report mass lethal crackdowns on protests, including killings of protesters and bystanders during dispersals
  • Thousands have been arrested and there are reports of fast-tracked trials and executions in protest contexts

Bottom line:​


✔ “State violence and killings of protesters have occurred” → true in documented cases
❌ “systematic, continuous murder in all protest cases” → overgeneralized



2) “They are raping women, including rape in front of husbands, as policy”​


❌ Not substantiated as a verified general practice​


This is the most serious claim in the statement.


What credible human rights reporting says:


  • There are credible allegations of torture and sexual violence in detention in Iran
  • Amnesty International reports include:
    • rape and sexual violence as forms of abuse used against detainees in custody

However:


  • There is no verified evidence of an official policy
  • There is no credible documentation of a systematic practice specifically described as “rape in front of spouses to deny paradise entry”

Bottom line:​


✔ Sexual violence in detention has been alleged and documented in some cases
❌ The specific narrative described here is not verified and appears to be ideological/propagandistic framing



3) Dehumanizing language (“pigs,” “filthy animals”)​


❌ Not factual content​


This is:


  • moral condemnation
  • not analysis
  • not evidence-based reporting

From a factual standpoint:


  • dehumanizing language is a rhetorical device, not a claim that can be verified

It is also significant because:


  • dehumanization is widely studied as a factor that increases justification for violence and reduces analytical accuracy


4) Bias analysis​


This statement shows several clear bias patterns:


1. Emotional escalation​


  • starts with a real issue (protest repression)
  • escalates into extreme, absolute claims

2. Selective amplification​


  • takes documented abuses (real)
  • expands them into universal or ritualized behavior (unverified)

3. Dehumanization​


  • replaces institutions or individuals with animal metaphors
  • eliminates nuance or legal distinction

4. Collapse of complexity​


  • treats “Iran” as a single actor with uniform intent
  • ignores variation between:
    • security forces
    • judiciary
    • political leadership
    • different time periods


5) What is actually well supported overall​


A factual, evidence-based summary would be:


  • ✔ Iran has used violent repression against protests
  • ✔ There are documented killings of protesters in multiple crackdowns
  • ✔ There are credible allegations of torture and sexual abuse in detention
  • ✔ Iran’s human rights record in this area is severely criticized by major NGOs
  • ❌ Specific claims of ritualized rape practices as described here are not verified
  • ❌ Dehumanizing conclusions are not factual claims


Bottom line​


This statement mixes:


  • real human rights abuses (verified in general form)
    with
  • unverified extreme allegations
    and
  • emotional, dehumanizing rhetoric

So:


It contains a real kernel of documented abuse, but expands it into an absolute and highly inflammatory narrative that goes beyond what credible evidence supports.
Click to expand...
 
Grim Reaper said:

1) “Iran is murdering people for protesting”​


✔ Partly supported (but needs precision)​


There is credible, well-documented evidence that Iranian authorities have:


  • used lethal force against protesters
  • carried out mass arrests and killings during protest crackdowns
  • conducted executions of some protest-related detainees after trials

Examples:


  • Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch report mass lethal crackdowns on protests, including killings of protesters and bystanders during dispersals
  • Thousands have been arrested and there are reports of fast-tracked trials and executions in protest contexts

Bottom line:​


✔ “State violence and killings of protesters have occurred” → true in documented cases
❌ “systematic, continuous murder in all protest cases” → overgeneralized



2) “They are raping women, including rape in front of husbands, as policy”​


❌ Not substantiated as a verified general practice​


This is the most serious claim in the statement.


What credible human rights reporting says:


  • There are credible allegations of torture and sexual violence in detention in Iran
  • Amnesty International reports include:
    • rape and sexual violence as forms of abuse used against detainees in custody

However:


  • There is no verified evidence of an official policy
  • There is no credible documentation of a systematic practice specifically described as “rape in front of spouses to deny paradise entry”

Bottom line:​


✔ Sexual violence in detention has been alleged and documented in some cases
❌ The specific narrative described here is not verified and appears to be ideological/propagandistic framing



3) Dehumanizing language (“pigs,” “filthy animals”)​


❌ Not factual content​


This is:


  • moral condemnation
  • not analysis
  • not evidence-based reporting

From a factual standpoint:


  • dehumanizing language is a rhetorical device, not a claim that can be verified

It is also significant because:


  • dehumanization is widely studied as a factor that increases justification for violence and reduces analytical accuracy


4) Bias analysis​


This statement shows several clear bias patterns:


1. Emotional escalation​


  • starts with a real issue (protest repression)
  • escalates into extreme, absolute claims

2. Selective amplification​


  • takes documented abuses (real)
  • expands them into universal or ritualized behavior (unverified)

3. Dehumanization​


  • replaces institutions or individuals with animal metaphors
  • eliminates nuance or legal distinction

4. Collapse of complexity​


  • treats “Iran” as a single actor with uniform intent
  • ignores variation between:
    • security forces
    • judiciary
    • political leadership
    • different time periods


5) What is actually well supported overall​


A factual, evidence-based summary would be:


  • ✔ Iran has used violent repression against protests
  • ✔ There are documented killings of protesters in multiple crackdowns
  • ✔ There are credible allegations of torture and sexual abuse in detention
  • ✔ Iran’s human rights record in this area is severely criticized by major NGOs
  • ❌ Specific claims of ritualized rape practices as described here are not verified
  • ❌ Dehumanizing conclusions are not factual claims


Bottom line​


This statement mixes:


  • real human rights abuses (verified in general form)
    with
  • unverified extreme allegations
    and
  • emotional, dehumanizing rhetoric

So:
Click to expand...
No mention that some on the streets were agents of the Demonic Empire, in some cases direct agents of MOSSAD......under orders to kill as many Iranians as possible and to destroy for instance as many police stations and ambulances as possible.

With that missing nothing else should be taken seriously.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
No mention that some on the streets were agents of the Demonic Empire, in some cases direct agents of MOSSAD......under orders to kill as many Iranians as possible and to destroy for instance as many police stations and ambulances as possible.

With that missing nothing else should be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

On the “Mossad / foreign agent” claim​


There is no credible, independently verified evidence that protesters in Iran were broadly acting as agents of the Mossad or any coordinated foreign command structure ordering mass violence or destruction of infrastructure.


Serious allegations involving coordinated intelligence operations inside domestic protest movements would require a high standard of proof (multiple independent investigations, intelligence disclosures, or documented operational evidence). That standard is not met here.


What is documented by major human rights organizations is state response to protests, including arrests, use of force, and reported abuses in detention. These findings come from organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and UN reporting mechanisms—not from speculative geopolitical narratives.


Why this matters analytically​


Introducing an unverified conspiracy explanation doesn’t “cancel out” documented reporting. Instead, it:


  • replaces evidence-based analysis with intent speculation
  • collapses all actors into a single hidden mastermind narrative
  • removes the ability to distinguish between verified abuses and unsupported claims

That makes the overall argument less reliable, not more.


What remains supported by evidence​


A grounded summary still stands as:


  • Iranian authorities have used force against protesters in multiple documented crackdowns
  • There are credible reports of arrests, killings, and harsh treatment of detainees
  • There are documented allegations of torture and sexual violence in detention in some cases
  • These issues are widely reported and condemned by major human rights organizations

Bottom line​


You don’t need conspiracy explanations to recognize serious human rights concerns. But adding them without evidence undermines the credibility of the entire argument, including the parts that are actually well-supported.
 
Grim Reaper said:

On the “Mossad / foreign agent” claim​


There is no credible, independently verified evidence that protesters in Iran were broadly acting as agents of the Mossad or any coordinated foreign command structure ordering mass violence or destruction of infrastructure.


Serious allegations involving coordinated intelligence operations inside domestic protest movements would require a high standard of proof (multiple independent investigations, intelligence disclosures, or documented operational evidence). That standard is not met here.


What is documented by major human rights organizations is state response to protests, including arrests, use of force, and reported abuses in detention. These findings come from organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and UN reporting mechanisms—not from speculative geopolitical narratives.


Why this matters analytically​


Introducing an unverified conspiracy explanation doesn’t “cancel out” documented reporting. Instead, it:


  • replaces evidence-based analysis with intent speculation
  • collapses all actors into a single hidden mastermind narrative
  • removes the ability to distinguish between verified abuses and unsupported claims

That makes the overall argument less reliable, not more.


What remains supported by evidence​


A grounded summary still stands as:


  • Iranian authorities have used force against protesters in multiple documented crackdowns
  • There are credible reports of arrests, killings, and harsh treatment of detainees
  • There are documented allegations of torture and sexual violence in detention in some cases
  • These issues are widely reported and condemned by major human rights organizations

Bottom line​


You don’t need conspiracy explanations to recognize serious human rights concerns. But adding them without evidence undermines the credibility of the entire argument, including the parts that are actually well-supported.
Click to expand...
Bullshit......both the Zionist colony and the Americans have admitted it....were at one point bragging about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top