The title is a bit misleading and implies that some scientific principle that is believed by one of the candidates is opposed on the grounds of religion. This isn’t an article about evolutionary biology, stem cell research or global warming being opposed by religious fundamentalism. It’s about the ruling establishment opposing candidates based on their political beliefs not their scientific beliefs.
In Iranian School evolution is taught as a fact that doesn’t clash with their interpretation of religion and isn’t controversial in the country. Whereas in the US we’ve been still arguing this a century after the scopes trial.
When George Bush banned stem cell research Iran's Royan institute was cloning animals and doing biomedical stem cell research.
And there is no debate in Iran about wether global warming is occurring or not. In that sense they are not “just like us”, they are better
So rather than teach evolutionary theory as their neighbors to the east, the Iranians do, the Iraqis prefer to follow in the footsteps of the American conservatives into science denial.
In Iran children learn the theory of evolution as fact from elementary through college. Its not even controversial in Iran as it is in the USA.
Juan cole himself even pointed this out in his article
"Hillary Clinton goes full Neocon at AIPAC, Demonizes Iran, Palestinians"
Hillary Clinton in the end is a warmongering Neocon who just happens to be pro-choice and supports Gay rights. And when she tries to form coalitions Europe will listen to her, when theyll be much more likely to Ignore Trump out of spite.
I agree with Bill. The tone of this article seems to imply that the Iranian and Russian press are just being silly, or propagandistic about this. Much of our own press here in the US considers Clinton much more Hawkish than Trump and also agree with Iran and Russia. the overwhelming majority of Bernie supporters also point this out. here are just a few from the NYT, Chicago tribune, salon etc...
Iran and the Kurds were never enemies as I mentioned above.
Dr. Richard Frye who recently passed away writes: "the mosaic of peoples living in Iran today reflects the central geographical situation of the country throughout history, frequently described as a crossroads of Eurasia. Although many languages and dialects are spoken in the country, and different forms of social life, the dominant influence of the Persian language and culture has created a solidarity complex of great strength. This was revealed in the Iran-Iraq War when Arabs of Khuzestan did not join the invaders, and earlier when Azeris did not rally to their northern cousins after World War II, when Soviet forces occupied Azerbaijan. Likewise the Baluch, Turkmen, Armenians and Kurds, although with bonds to their kinsmen on the other side of borders, are conscious of the power and richness of Persian culture and willing to participate in it."
Tehran's popular Mayor M.B. Ghalibaf is Kurdish and was the runner up to the Presidential elections. Thus Iran almost had a Kurdish president 2 years ago .
Khamenei who is the highest authority in the country is an ethnic Azerbaijani
One of the major positive policy changes that the current regime did was to be much more culturally inclusive than the the previous Pahlavi Shahs. The Pahlavis tried to homogenize all of Iranian society into "Persian" society.
For example the University of Sanandaj (Iranian kurdistan's capitol ) offers courses in Kurdish and papers are published in Kurdish language, as well as radio stations and newspapers in Kurdish, but only after the revolution.
Use of local language newspapers / radio was not allowed before the revolution, nor were loacal language courses allowed at Universities. Anthropologist Lois Beck from the university of Chcago in her book on Iranian minorities writes "Tribal populations, as well as all ethnic minorities in Iran, were denied many national rights under the Pahlavis and were victims of Persian chauvinism. National education, in which all students were required to read and write in Persian and in which Persian culture and civilization were stressed to the almost complete neglect of the contributions of other population segments, was culturally destructive."
Even Iraqi president Jalal Talabani expressed that Kurds are treated well in Iran and stated in an interview to a Jordanian newspaper once and he stated "Iran never tried to obliterate the Kurd's identity. There is a province in Iran called Kordestan province. The Iranians name their planes after the province in Iran [including Kordestan]" - Interview in the Jordanian newspaper al-Ahram al-Yawm (amman), December 1, 1998
In Irans 6th parliamentary elections 18 Kurds won seats.
Thus your statement about "enemies of my enemies" doesnt really apply to Iran and the Kurds. The US and Israel often try to exploit Irans ethnic diversity but mostly its results arer limited.
Frank, Iran has been supportive of the Kurds since the Iran Iraq war days. Iranians and Kurds share ethnic and cultural ties. Tehran's Mayor is Kurdish, there are lots kurdish celebrities in Iran and in the Iranian Government. While Iran is against some Kurdish separatist groups such as Pejak and PKK, it considers these groups to be in the minority.
Its a bit like the US government and population being against Texan separatist groups who wish to declare themselves an independent republic while still being proud of the state of Texas and people from Texas.
Judge Andrew Napolitano, a constitutional law professor who was until recently always on Fox before they happened to fire him over something he said on air they didnt like. points out France's free speech is very selective and sisnt a French vs. French muslims issue either. it goes much deeper http://reason.com/archives/2015/01/15/what-freedom-of-speech
Hi Curt,
So what you say above is what I was brought up to believe from my parents up until I went to college and actually checked such claims. This belief that the CIA overthrew the shah is widespread amongst Monarchists only. No other Iranian political group take this view. The reason they do is because the Shah himself stated he was overthrown in his memoirs and they believe him.
If you study the history of 1951-52 and the oil nationalization, the whole point of overthrowing Mossadegh was to denationalize the oil. The shah denationalized the oil in exchange for his throne back. The monarchists refuse to believe this simple fact of Irans oil denationalization that has now been admitted to by the US and UK governments. The british changed the Name of the anglo Iranin oil company (AIOC) to BP after they installed the Shah.
Thus the shah increasing oil prices would also increase oil profits for the Euro-American oil companies that still owned significant shares. Secondly all they had to do in return was remind the Shah of who put him in power, decrease cooperation, retaliate by selling american goods at even higher prices.
The shah quickly would have caved in. Thus overthrowing him and placing a nation that bought so much US goods, that relied so heavily on imports for everything from food to clothes and was such a huge market for American products doesnt make any sense. Certainly a CIA regime change scheme via revolution certainly would have been counterproductive.
After the Shah left Reagan lamented the loss of such a staunch aly who "did our BIDDING" and actually criticised Carter for giving up on him and not doing enough to prevent it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5Ae5FRHH0k
Also dont forget even after all the former Shah's talk of pushing the country towards modernity, after 60 years the literacy rate in 1977 was only 35% with a large gender gap.
Today the literacy rate is 97.5% according to UNICEF and that Gender Gap is now closed.
They also have the highest female to male ratio in school in the world. And the majority of the country's physicians and med students are women.
Say what you want about the government in Iran about other things, but when it comes to educating the population and promoting science they did a pretty darn good job at taking a backward uneducated country and turning it into a highly educated country.
Likewise Netanyahu will oppose solar Power in Iran too. “Oye Ve, Iran doesnt need solar power, Its awash in oil and natural gas. Therefore these must be giant magnifying glasses to potentially and theoretically reflect and concentrate the suns rays towards Israel to cause a huge conflagration is Israel and burn us off the map. I urge the international community (i.e 6 countries) to put a stop to this. This isnt solar power, its Shoah power”
As an Iranian Jew (actually half Jewish), I dont see the logic of war talk from Israel. Many Iranian Jews will be killed by Israel's IDF in a case of war as there really aren't Jewish neighborhoods. Jews live in the same neighborhoods as muslims, go to the same schools, shop at the same stores. Thus the "collateral damage" imposed by israeli "friendly fire" will no doubt have many Jewish casualties.
More disturbing is the talk of nuking Iran preemptively, as that nuke will not discriminate between Iranian Jews and gentiles. Thus Israel if it choses to go that route will be responsible for the largest mass murder of Jews since Nazi Germany. That will be a lot of Jewish blood on the Jewish states hands.
If people want to remove Ahmadinejad from office all they have to do is wait. His second term of his 2 term limit is almost over. Hes not even a threat given that he is not the commander and chief of Iran's armed forces, parliament summoned him for questioning with possible impeachment, and his strained relations with much of the conservative establishment who dislikes him anyways. Even if he was a threat to Israel, why all the hype when he has no power over the military? Sounds like American/Israeli war mongering to me
Not necessarily. We have tons of armed militias in the USA, despite a strong well established centralized government.
The title is a bit misleading and implies that some scientific principle that is believed by one of the candidates is opposed on the grounds of religion. This isn’t an article about evolutionary biology, stem cell research or global warming being opposed by religious fundamentalism. It’s about the ruling establishment opposing candidates based on their political beliefs not their scientific beliefs.
In Iranian School evolution is taught as a fact that doesn’t clash with their interpretation of religion and isn’t controversial in the country. Whereas in the US we’ve been still arguing this a century after the scopes trial.
When George Bush banned stem cell research Iran's Royan institute was cloning animals and doing biomedical stem cell research.
And there is no debate in Iran about wether global warming is occurring or not. In that sense they are not “just like us”, they are better
So rather than teach evolutionary theory as their neighbors to the east, the Iranians do, the Iraqis prefer to follow in the footsteps of the American conservatives into science denial.
In Iran children learn the theory of evolution as fact from elementary through college. Its not even controversial in Iran as it is in the USA.
Juan cole himself even pointed this out in his article
"Hillary Clinton goes full Neocon at AIPAC, Demonizes Iran, Palestinians"
Hillary Clinton in the end is a warmongering Neocon who just happens to be pro-choice and supports Gay rights. And when she tries to form coalitions Europe will listen to her, when theyll be much more likely to Ignore Trump out of spite.
I agree with Bill. The tone of this article seems to imply that the Iranian and Russian press are just being silly, or propagandistic about this. Much of our own press here in the US considers Clinton much more Hawkish than Trump and also agree with Iran and Russia. the overwhelming majority of Bernie supporters also point this out. here are just a few from the NYT, Chicago tribune, salon etc...
What’ll It be Folks: Xenophobia or Genocide?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/31/whatll-it-be-folks-xenophobia-or-genocide/
Hillary the Hawk ( Chicago Tribune)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-wp-clinton-hawk-analysis-20948014-54ed-11e6-bbf5-957ad17b4385-20160728-story.html
How Hillary became a hawk (New York Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/magazine/how-hillary-clinton-became-a-hawk.html?_r=0
Democrats, this is why you need to fear Hillary Clinton: The NY Times is absolutely right — she’s a bigger hawk than the Republicans (salon)
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/27/democrats_this_is_why_you_need_to_fear_hillary_clinton_the_ny_times_is_absolutely_right_shes_a_bigger_hawk_than_the_republicanse/
This other piece from counter punch also points out that despite Trumps outlandish talk, he likely won't be as warmongering as Clinton will
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/29/could-trump-be-good-for-peace/
Turkey violated Greece's airspace 2244 times last year.
Dan,
Iran and the Kurds were never enemies as I mentioned above.
Dr. Richard Frye who recently passed away writes: "the mosaic of peoples living in Iran today reflects the central geographical situation of the country throughout history, frequently described as a crossroads of Eurasia. Although many languages and dialects are spoken in the country, and different forms of social life, the dominant influence of the Persian language and culture has created a solidarity complex of great strength. This was revealed in the Iran-Iraq War when Arabs of Khuzestan did not join the invaders, and earlier when Azeris did not rally to their northern cousins after World War II, when Soviet forces occupied Azerbaijan. Likewise the Baluch, Turkmen, Armenians and Kurds, although with bonds to their kinsmen on the other side of borders, are conscious of the power and richness of Persian culture and willing to participate in it."
Tehran's popular Mayor M.B. Ghalibaf is Kurdish and was the runner up to the Presidential elections. Thus Iran almost had a Kurdish president 2 years ago .
Khamenei who is the highest authority in the country is an ethnic Azerbaijani
One of the major positive policy changes that the current regime did was to be much more culturally inclusive than the the previous Pahlavi Shahs. The Pahlavis tried to homogenize all of Iranian society into "Persian" society.
For example the University of Sanandaj (Iranian kurdistan's capitol ) offers courses in Kurdish and papers are published in Kurdish language, as well as radio stations and newspapers in Kurdish, but only after the revolution.
Use of local language newspapers / radio was not allowed before the revolution, nor were loacal language courses allowed at Universities. Anthropologist Lois Beck from the university of Chcago in her book on Iranian minorities writes "Tribal populations, as well as all ethnic minorities in Iran, were denied many national rights under the Pahlavis and were victims of Persian chauvinism. National education, in which all students were required to read and write in Persian and in which Persian culture and civilization were stressed to the almost complete neglect of the contributions of other population segments, was culturally destructive."
Even Iraqi president Jalal Talabani expressed that Kurds are treated well in Iran and stated in an interview to a Jordanian newspaper once and he stated "Iran never tried to obliterate the Kurd's identity. There is a province in Iran called Kordestan province. The Iranians name their planes after the province in Iran [including Kordestan]" - Interview in the Jordanian newspaper al-Ahram al-Yawm (amman), December 1, 1998
In Irans 6th parliamentary elections 18 Kurds won seats.
Thus your statement about "enemies of my enemies" doesnt really apply to Iran and the Kurds. The US and Israel often try to exploit Irans ethnic diversity but mostly its results arer limited.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/07/07/preparing-the-battlefield
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false_flag
Frank, Iran has been supportive of the Kurds since the Iran Iraq war days. Iranians and Kurds share ethnic and cultural ties. Tehran's Mayor is Kurdish, there are lots kurdish celebrities in Iran and in the Iranian Government. While Iran is against some Kurdish separatist groups such as Pejak and PKK, it considers these groups to be in the minority.
Its a bit like the US government and population being against Texan separatist groups who wish to declare themselves an independent republic while still being proud of the state of Texas and people from Texas.
Judge Andrew Napolitano, a constitutional law professor who was until recently always on Fox before they happened to fire him over something he said on air they didnt like. points out France's free speech is very selective and sisnt a French vs. French muslims issue either. it goes much deeper
http://reason.com/archives/2015/01/15/what-freedom-of-speech
General Wesley Clark sums up our foreign policy well "when all you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw
Hi Curt,
So what you say above is what I was brought up to believe from my parents up until I went to college and actually checked such claims. This belief that the CIA overthrew the shah is widespread amongst Monarchists only. No other Iranian political group take this view. The reason they do is because the Shah himself stated he was overthrown in his memoirs and they believe him.
If you study the history of 1951-52 and the oil nationalization, the whole point of overthrowing Mossadegh was to denationalize the oil. The shah denationalized the oil in exchange for his throne back. The monarchists refuse to believe this simple fact of Irans oil denationalization that has now been admitted to by the US and UK governments. The british changed the Name of the anglo Iranin oil company (AIOC) to BP after they installed the Shah.
Thus the shah increasing oil prices would also increase oil profits for the Euro-American oil companies that still owned significant shares. Secondly all they had to do in return was remind the Shah of who put him in power, decrease cooperation, retaliate by selling american goods at even higher prices.
The shah quickly would have caved in. Thus overthrowing him and placing a nation that bought so much US goods, that relied so heavily on imports for everything from food to clothes and was such a huge market for American products doesnt make any sense. Certainly a CIA regime change scheme via revolution certainly would have been counterproductive.
After the Shah left Reagan lamented the loss of such a staunch aly who "did our BIDDING" and actually criticised Carter for giving up on him and not doing enough to prevent it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5Ae5FRHH0k
Also dont forget even after all the former Shah's talk of pushing the country towards modernity, after 60 years the literacy rate in 1977 was only 35% with a large gender gap.
Today the literacy rate is 97.5% according to UNICEF and that Gender Gap is now closed.
They also have the highest female to male ratio in school in the world. And the majority of the country's physicians and med students are women.
Say what you want about the government in Iran about other things, but when it comes to educating the population and promoting science they did a pretty darn good job at taking a backward uneducated country and turning it into a highly educated country.
Likewise Netanyahu will oppose solar Power in Iran too. “Oye Ve, Iran doesnt need solar power, Its awash in oil and natural gas. Therefore these must be giant magnifying glasses to potentially and theoretically reflect and concentrate the suns rays towards Israel to cause a huge conflagration is Israel and burn us off the map. I urge the international community (i.e 6 countries) to put a stop to this. This isnt solar power, its Shoah power”
As an Iranian Jew (actually half Jewish), I dont see the logic of war talk from Israel. Many Iranian Jews will be killed by Israel's IDF in a case of war as there really aren't Jewish neighborhoods. Jews live in the same neighborhoods as muslims, go to the same schools, shop at the same stores. Thus the "collateral damage" imposed by israeli "friendly fire" will no doubt have many Jewish casualties.
More disturbing is the talk of nuking Iran preemptively, as that nuke will not discriminate between Iranian Jews and gentiles. Thus Israel if it choses to go that route will be responsible for the largest mass murder of Jews since Nazi Germany. That will be a lot of Jewish blood on the Jewish states hands.
If people want to remove Ahmadinejad from office all they have to do is wait. His second term of his 2 term limit is almost over. Hes not even a threat given that he is not the commander and chief of Iran's armed forces, parliament summoned him for questioning with possible impeachment, and his strained relations with much of the conservative establishment who dislikes him anyways. Even if he was a threat to Israel, why all the hype when he has no power over the military? Sounds like American/Israeli war mongering to me