UN Special Rapporteur not allowed to enter Iran, official says

[News_Editor]

UN Special Rapporteur not allowed to enter Iran, official says

2011-07-18 05:04:25 GMT+7 (ICT)

TEHRAN (BNO NEWS) -- Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights Mohammad Javad Larijani said Iran will not allow the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran's human rights situation to enter the country, Mehr news agency reported on Sunday.

Larijani described the move as "illegal and senseless". He said that the countries who have called for the dispatch of the special rapporteur to Iran should first allow the examination of the human rights situation in prisons and detention camps of the United States and Israel.

"The Western-engineered appointment of a Special Rapporteur for Iran is an illegal measure," Larijani told reporters on Saturday.

"This unilateral action makes no sense and if they want to send a Special Rapporteur to Iran, they should take the same measure in the case of other countries."

On June 17, the UN Human Rights Council appointed former Maldivian foreign minister Ahmed Shaheed as its Special Rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran.

"Iran has no problem with the individual who has been appointed as the Special Rapporteur, but the appointment of a rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran is unacceptable and Iran will not accept the decision," Larijani added.

In mid-June, Iran decided to bar a special UN human rights reporter from entering the country. The Human Rights Committee of the Iranian Parliament decided to prevent the reporter from entering Iran, arguing that the UN does not monitor human rights violations in Western countries.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-07-18

[midas]

I don't think anyone can blame Iran for making this decision.

I think it is perfectly within its rights to be very cautious indeed about allowing ANYONE

from the international community to be gathering information within its borders particularly right now

" Robert Baer appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is "likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future."

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war." The punchline: "There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state."

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/cvn-77-ghw-bush-enters-persian-gulf-cia-veteran-robert-baer-predicts-september-israel-iran-w

[kuffki]

I don't think anyone can blame Iran for making this decision.

I think it is perfectly within its rights to be very cautious indeed about allowing ANYONE

from the international community to be gathering information within its borders particularly right now

" Robert Baer appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is "likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future."

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war." The punchline: "There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state."

http://www.zerohedge...r-israel-iran-w

so i suppose you will support it when others also refuse UN or ANYONE(as you stated) to enter the country?

[midas]

I don't think anyone can blame Iran for making this decision.

I think it is perfectly within its rights to be very cautious indeed about allowing ANYONE

from the international community to be gathering information within its borders particularly right now

" Robert Baer appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is "likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future."

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war." The punchline: "There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state."

http://www.zerohedge...r-israel-iran-w

so i suppose you will support it when others also refuse UN or ANYONE(as you stated) to enter the country?

Any country on earth who hears seemingly credible rumours that it is about to be attacked has every right to defend itself in every way possible

and from that moment on until the threat disappears should be very suspicious about any foreign visitors.

[kuffki]

I don't think anyone can blame Iran for making this decision.

I think it is perfectly within its rights to be very cautious indeed about allowing ANYONE

from the international community to be gathering information within its borders particularly right now

" Robert Baer appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is "likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future."

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war." The punchline: "There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state."

http://www.zerohedge...r-israel-iran-w

so i suppose you will support it when others also refuse UN or ANYONE(as you stated) to enter the country?

Any country on earth who hears seemingly credible rumours that it is about to be attacked has every right to defend itself in every way possible

and from that moment on until the threat disappears should be very suspicious about any foreign visitors.

Interesting position yo have taken now

So because Iran hears rumor, that in your opinion entitles Iran to do as they wish? So what should Israel position be when Iran makes a public speech openly declaring its intention to to wipe out Israel totally?

Was it not you condemning Israel for not allowing in reporters?Was it not you condemning Israel for not accepting UN reports or resolutions? Was it not you condemning and blaming Israel for pretty much everything and anything?

So please explain to me, how some rumors compared to facts somehow give concession to Iran? and also explain to me how UN Special Rapporteur is related to Israel?and how does a member of UN can refuse a visit from UN?

Iranian leader: Wipe out Israel

http://articles.cnn.com/2005-10-26/world/ahmadinejad_1_israel-jerusalem-day-islamic-world?_s=PM:WORLD

Wipe Israel 'off the map' Iranian says

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/world/africa/26iht-iran.html

[midas]

I don't think anyone can blame Iran for making this decision.

I think it is perfectly within its rights to be very cautious indeed about allowing ANYONE

from the international community to be gathering information within its borders particularly right now

" Robert Baer appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is "likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future."

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war." The punchline: "There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state."

http://www.zerohedge...r-israel-iran-w

so i suppose you will support it when others also refuse UN or ANYONE(as you stated) to enter the country?

Any country on earth who hears seemingly credible rumours that it is about to be attacked has every right to defend itself in every way possible

and from that moment on until the threat disappears should be very suspicious about any foreign visitors.

Interesting position yo have taken now

So because Iran hears rumor, that in your opinion entitles Iran to do as they wish? So what should Israel position be when Iran makes a public speech openly declaring its intention to to wipe out Israel totally?

Was it not you condemning Israel for not allowing in reporters?Was it not you condemning Israel for not accepting UN reports or resolutions? Was it not you condemning and blaming Israel for pretty much everything and anything?

So please explain to me, how some rumors compared to facts somehow give concession to Iran? and also explain to me how UN Special Rapporteur is related to Israel?and how does a member of UN can refuse a visit from UN?

Iranian leader: Wipe out Israel

http://articles.cnn.com/2005-10-26/world/ahmadinejad_1_israel-jerusalem-day-islamic-world?_s=PM:WORLD

Wipe Israel 'off the map' Iranian says

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/world/africa/26iht-iran.html

there is a fundamental difference in something that is no more than rhetoric by Iran

( And if that changes no doubt satellites will pick it up ) compared to watching the strategic manoeuvres of

US aircraft carriers as well as listening to the dire warnings of a CIA veteran and the former head of Mosad.

I mentioned nothing about not allowing reporters into Israel? As for talking about UN reports Israel itself only seems to accept them when it suits them.

These are rumours that any country should take seriously when even the former Mossad leader

describes the current Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel as acting in a crazy manner.

And as for not allowing in the UN Special Rapporteur - don't be so naive.

Maybe they will be more receptive to the UN Special Rapporteur after the aircraft carriers disappear and when the former Mossad chief

is more complimentary to the sitting Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel.

Edited July 19, 2011 by midas

[Steely Dan]

Hardly a day goes by without fresh news of an Iranian missile test, or claims of air defences, or new centrifuges for uranium enrichment comining online. Hardly a week passes without Ahmedinajad threating to wipe Israel off the map. And they suspect Israel may attack them. If it does come about it will be entirely down to Iranian actions bringing it about and should be viewed as a convenient excuse to not allow the U.N rapporteur to enter Iran, where he would undoubtably find a horrific human rights situation as the Iranian theocracy rules by intimidation and terror.

[midas]

Hardly a day goes by without fresh news of an Iranian missile test, or claims of air defences, or new centrifuges for uranium enrichment comining online. Hardly a week passes without Ahmedinajad threating to wipe Israel off the map. And they suspect Israel may attack them. If it does come about it will be entirely down to Iranian actions bringing it about and should be viewed as a convenient excuse to not allow the U.N rapporteur to enter Iran, where he would undoubtably find a horrific human rights situation as the Iranian theocracy rules by intimidation and terror.

well you don't know and I don't know if Iran would change its attitude completely towards Israel if

Palestinians get there own State. why don't we give it a try? let's try anything to avoid this conflict.Because one thing is for sure,

if such an attack occurred it would be the beginning of the end for everyone so there will be no real winners.

But maybe that's what USA wants to escape from its economic mess as people like Gerald Celente and Marc Faber have been warning for so long.

You don't think a nuclear armed Pakistan would just sit by and allow such an attack to occur?

And it's no more of a convenient excuse to Iran than it was for Israel's Big Brother to similarly

deny access to a UN Special Rapporteur when it suited them

U.N. says U.S. broke torture rule in denying access to Manning

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2011/07/u-n-says-u-s-broke-torture-rule-in-denying-access-to-manning/

Edited July 19, 2011 by midas

[midas]

and also explain to me how UN Special Rapporteur is related to Israel?

certainly Bear in mind that the proposed UN Special Rapporteur is from the Maldives.

so when Iran read this in the media

Former head of the religious committee of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Adam Naseem (BA) has said that the renewed Maldives relations with the State of Israel is dangerous.

http://www.miadhu.com/2011/06/local-news/maldives-relations-with-israel-is-dangerous-naseem-ba/

It is not surprising Iran decided this

the Iranian parliament has decided to take measures to prohibit the entry of the newly appointed United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed because Iran perceives Dr. Shaheed to be a spy.

http://maldivesbest.com/irani-perceive-dr-shaheed-to-be-a-spy-imran/

Edited July 19, 2011 by midas

[kuffki]

there is a fundamental difference in something that is no more than rhetoric by Iran

( And if that changes no doubt satellites will pick it up ) compared to watching the strategic manoeuvres of

US aircraft carriers as well as listening to the dire warnings of a CIA veteran and the former head of Mosad.

I mentioned nothing about not allowing reporters into Israel? As for talking about UN reports Israel itself only seems to accept them when it suits them.

These are rumours that any country should take seriously when even the former Mossad leader

describes the current Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel as acting in a crazy manner.

And as for not allowing in the UN Special Rapporteur - don't be so naive.

Maybe they will be more receptive to the UN Special Rapporteur after the aircraft carriers disappear and when the former Mossad chief

is more complimentary to the sitting Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel.

I see, so when it comes to Iran making public statements clearly indicating its position it becomes a rhetoric but when it comes to some rumor, it becomes a green light for Iran to do as it wishes

I guess all missile tests, military exercise, parades, terror sponsoship, arms supply to terrorists is all just rhetoric?!

Refusal to cooperate with nuclear agency's refusal to allow inspectors is also just another rhetoric?

Trying to file monkey law suits against US officials? EU Officials? refusing German PM to enter Iran airspace is all part of the Irans "Welcome Campaign"?

Though, interesting fact, for a country with such a big mouth, they sure are scared of little Israel

[kuffki]

and also explain to me how UN Special Rapporteur is related to Israel?

certainly Bear in mind that the proposed UN Special Rapporteur is from the Maldives.

so when Iran read this in the media

Former head of the religious committee of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Adam Naseem (BA) has said that the renewed Maldives relations with the State of Israel is dangerous.

http://www.miadhu.co...rous-naseem-ba/

It is not surprising Iran decided this

the Iranian parliament has decided to take measures to prohibit the entry of the newly appointed United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed because Iran perceives Dr. Shaheed to be a spy.

http://maldivesbest....be-a-spy-imran/

What is interesting is that Iran actually think Israel does not know already everything, that also includes all the rocket movement to Hezbollah and other places. Not to mention, weekly tests and parade does not help the secrecy

[midas]

there is a fundamental difference in something that is no more than rhetoric by Iran

( And if that changes no doubt satellites will pick it up ) compared to watching the strategic manoeuvres of

US aircraft carriers as well as listening to the dire warnings of a CIA veteran and the former head of Mosad.

I mentioned nothing about not allowing reporters into Israel? As for talking about UN reports Israel itself only seems to accept them when it suits them.

These are rumours that any country should take seriously when even the former Mossad leader

describes the current Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel as acting in a crazy manner.

And as for not allowing in the UN Special Rapporteur - don't be so naive.

Maybe they will be more receptive to the UN Special Rapporteur after the aircraft carriers disappear and when the former Mossad chief

is more complimentary to the sitting Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel.

I see, so when it comes to Iran making public statements clearly indicating its position it becomes a rhetoric but when it comes to some rumor, it becomes a green light for Iran to do as it wishes

I guess all missile tests, military exercise, parades, terror sponsoship, arms supply to terrorists is all just rhetoric?!

Refusal to cooperate with nuclear agency's refusal to allow inspectors is also just another rhetoric?

Trying to file monkey law suits against US officials? EU Officials? refusing German PM to enter Iran airspace is all part of the Irans "Welcome Campaign"?

Though, interesting fact, for a country with such a big mouth, they sure are scared of little Israel

yeah ....shocking....absolutely shocking and Israel would never do such a thing.......... or would it?

My expulsion from Israel

When I arrived in Israel as a UN representative I knew there might be problems at the airport. And there were

On December 14, I arrived at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, Israel to carry out my UN role as special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories

I spent the next 15 hours so confined, which amounted to a cram course on the miseries of prison life, including dirty sheets, inedible food and lights that were too bright or darkness controlled from the guard office.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/19/israel-palestinian-territories-united-nations

[midas]

and also explain to me how UN Special Rapporteur is related to Israel?

certainly Bear in mind that the proposed UN Special Rapporteur is from the Maldives.

so when Iran read this in the media

Former head of the religious committee of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Adam Naseem (BA) has said that the renewed Maldives relations with the State of Israel is dangerous.

http://www.miadhu.co...rous-naseem-ba/

It is not surprising Iran decided this

the Iranian parliament has decided to take measures to prohibit the entry of the newly appointed United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed because Iran perceives Dr. Shaheed to be a spy.

http://maldivesbest....be-a-spy-imran/

What is interesting is that Iran actually think Israel does not know already everything, that also includes all the rocket movement to Hezbollah and other places. Not to mention, weekly tests and parade does not help the secrecy

they only think they do

[Steely Dan]

Saddam also thought he would take on the US, but ended up hiding in the hole and hanging on the other end of the rope.

Iran could not do anything with Iraq for 8 years, i love to see them take on Israel

Actually the very prospect of getting their butts kicked makes Iran all the more likely to try seeing as great misfortune befalling the Shiite Muslims is a precondition for the coming of their messiah, mad as it may seem. P.S Israel is an off topic red herring used as an excuse for Iran to hide it's appalling human rights record behind, but it is at the same time central to the actions of the Iranian regime so the excuse is indeed universal.

[Scott]

It's difficult to discuss Iran without figuring Israel into the equations, however, a number of posts which had more to do about Israel and very little to do with Iran have been removed.

Let's try and stay on the topic and keep the discussion focused on Iran.

Thanks.

[midas]

Saddam also thought he would take on the US, but ended up hiding in the hole and hanging on the other end of the rope.

Iran could not do anything with Iraq for 8 years, i love to see them take on Israel

Actually the very prospect of getting their butts kicked makes Iran all the more likely to try seeing as great misfortune befalling the Shiite Muslims is a precondition for the coming of their messiah, mad as it may seem. P.S Israel is an off topic red herring used as an excuse for Iran to hide it's appalling human rights record behind, but it is at the same time central to the actions of the Iranian regime so the excuse is indeed universal.

Just to remind you this thread is about why Iran is justified in not allowing a potential Israeli spy to enter its country because it is preparing for an entirely unprovoked attack from Israel and is Big Brother USA

Edited July 19, 2011 by midas

[geriatrickid]

yeah ....shocking....absolutely shocking and Israel would never do such a thing.......... or would it?

My expulsion from Israel

When I arrived in Israel as a UN representative I knew there might be problems at the airport. And there were

On December 14, I arrived at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, Israel to carry out my UN role as special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories

I spent the next 15 hours so confined, which amounted to a cram course on the miseries of prison life, including dirty sheets, inedible food and lights that were too bright or darkness controlled from the guard office.

http://www.guardian....-united-nations

The case you cite is not comparable. Prof. Falk had already stated his views and was not visiting Israel in a neutral capacity.

- He had a lengthy history of criticizing and condemning Israel.

- His appointment was pushed through by the arab and muslim dominated UN Human Rights Council. The same council that

had Syria, Cuba and Libya as members.

- He has compared Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to Nazi atrocities and has called for more serious examination of the conspiracy theories surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks. Pointing to discrepancies between the official version of events and other versions, he wrote that “only willful ignorance can maintain that the 9/11 narrative should be treated as a closed book.”

- Prior to arriving in Israel, Prof. Falk had already passed judgement describing Israel’s embargo on Gaza, which as a crime against humanity, while making only cursory reference to Hamas’s rocket attacks against Israeli civilian centers. (source NYT)

- The American and Canadian representatives had expressed strong views against Prof. Falk explaining that his biased views and statements prior to his visit rendered the visit moot. Prof. Falk did not have broad support.

The difference between the Israeli and Iranian situations is that the Iranian investigator was appointed with broad agreement and a consensus. The person appointed for Iran is presumed to be unbiased and neutral. Prof. Falk had already stated his views and had violated his obligation to be neutral.

[Scott]

Thank you for that informative comparison between the two situations. It's helpful in understanding the current situation.

[midas]

yeah ....shocking....absolutely shocking and Israel would never do such a thing.......... or would it?

My expulsion from Israel

When I arrived in Israel as a UN representative I knew there might be problems at the airport. And there were

On December 14, I arrived at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, Israel to carry out my UN role as special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories

I spent the next 15 hours so confined, which amounted to a cram course on the miseries of prison life, including dirty sheets, inedible food and lights that were too bright or darkness controlled from the guard office.

http://www.guardian....-united-nations

The case you cite is not comparable. Prof. Falk had already stated his views and was not visiting Israel in a neutral capacity.

- He had a lengthy history of criticizing and condemning Israel.

- His appointment was pushed through by the arab and muslim dominated UN Human Rights Council. The same council that

had Syria, Cuba and Libya as members.

- He has compared Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to Nazi atrocities and has called for more serious examination of the conspiracy theories surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks. Pointing to discrepancies between the official version of events and other versions, he wrote that “only willful ignorance can maintain that the 9/11 narrative should be treated as a closed book.”

- Prior to arriving in Israel, Prof. Falk had already passed judgement describing Israel’s embargo on Gaza, which as a crime against humanity, while making only cursory reference to Hamas’s rocket attacks against Israeli civilian centers. (source NYT)

- The American and Canadian representatives had expressed strong views against Prof. Falk explaining that his biased views and statements prior to his visit rendered the visit moot. Prof. Falk did not have broad support.

The difference between the Israeli and Iranian situations is that the Iranian investigator was appointed with broad agreement and a consensus. The person appointed for Iran is presumed to be unbiased and neutral. Prof. Falk had already stated his views and had violated his obligation to be neutral.

Ok but despite his biased opinion Prof Falk must have also been appointed to his position as UN Special Rapporteur

with “ broad agreement and a consensus “? Or if he wasn't and his appointment was somehow "engineered " by powers unfriendly

to Israel then similarly some " behind the scenes " powers who are this time against Iran could have equally secured Dr. Ahmed Shaheed his appointment

with ulterior motives?

In addition no matter how distasteful Prof Falk’s criticism may have been to Israel he was just one man on his own?what could he have done?

In the case of Dr. Ahmed Shaheed even his fellow countrymen criticised his appointment and on the eve of what could be a major conflict why not wait 6 to 12 months and maybe they will let him in then? why is it so essential for Iran to allow Dr. Ahmed Shaheed to go there right now when the former Mossad chief described

the Prime Minister and defence Minister of Israel as being "dangerous and irresponsible" ?

Edited July 19, 2011 by midas

[Steely Dan]

But Iran have no problem with Dr Shaheed, so evidently they don't consider him a mossad spy.

"Iran has no problem with the individual who has been appointed as the Special Rapporteur, but the appointment of a rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran is unacceptable and Iran will not accept the decision," Larijani added.

It's quite explicit Iran has put itself completely outside international human rights scrutiny unless their own spur of the moment demands for scrutiny of other Countries is carried out first, which is obviously a non-starter.

[midas]

But Iran have no problem with Dr Shaheed, so evidently they don't consider him a mossad spy.

"Iran has no problem with the individual who has been appointed as the Special Rapporteur, but the appointment of a rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran is unacceptable and Iran will not accept the decision," Larijani added.

It's quite explicit Iran has put itself completely outside international human rights scrutiny unless their own spur of the moment demands for scrutiny of other Countries is carried out first, which is obviously a non-starter.

they can try again next year

[chuckd]

But Iran have no problem with Dr Shaheed, so evidently they don't consider him a mossad spy.

"Iran has no problem with the individual who has been appointed as the Special Rapporteur, but the appointment of a rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran is unacceptable and Iran will not accept the decision," Larijani added.

It's quite explicit Iran has put itself completely outside international human rights scrutiny unless their own spur of the moment demands for scrutiny of other Countries is carried out first, which is obviously a non-starter.

they can try again next year

...so said Saddam Hussein.

[midas]

But Iran have no problem with Dr Shaheed, so evidently they don't consider him a mossad spy.

"Iran has no problem with the individual who has been appointed as the Special Rapporteur, but the appointment of a rapporteur on human rights situation in Iran is unacceptable and Iran will not accept the decision," Larijani added.

It's quite explicit Iran has put itself completely outside international human rights scrutiny unless their own spur of the moment demands for scrutiny of other Countries is carried out first, which is obviously a non-starter.

they can try again next year

...so said Saddam Hussein.

nail on the head funny you should mention him. of course in 2000 he insisted Iraq's oil be sold for euros and the rest is history

and now

Iran Opens Oil Bourse - Harbinger of Trouble for New York and London?

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Iran-Opens-Oil-Bourse-Harbinger-of-Trouble-for-New-York-and-London.html

and the banksters definitely don't like that

Edited July 20, 2011 by midas

[Exsexyman]

Exactly Midas. Col Ghaddaffi was in the process of doing the same thing, setting up an African currency based on gold. Oil would be sold using this currency completely bypassing the almighty dollar. How dare they try and retain control of their own resources! This is why NATO have been bombing the shit out of Tripoli for nearly five months. Remember when it was all going to be over in two weeks because Ghaddaffi had no support?

[midas]

Exactly Midas. Col Ghaddaffi was in the process of doing the same thing, setting up an African currency based on gold. Oil would be sold using this currency completely bypassing the almighty dollar. How dare they try and retain control of their own resources! This is why NATO have been bombing the shit out of Tripoli for nearly five months. Remember when it was all going to be over in two weeks because Ghaddaffi had no support?

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.”

Auric Goldfinger

[Steely Dan]

Exactly Midas. Col Ghaddaffi was in the process of doing the same thing, setting up an African currency based on gold. Oil would be sold using this currency completely bypassing the almighty dollar. How dare they try and retain control of their own resources! This is why NATO have been bombing the shit out of Tripoli for nearly five months. Remember when it was all going to be over in two weeks because Ghaddaffi had no support?

Just for once I actually agree in part with the tinfoil hat brigade. Keynesian economics has been so abused that it now amounts to nothing more than a large Ponzi scheme. In order to survive a Ponzi scheme needs new members to keep joining to serice the debt incurred by the old hands. All is fine and dandy when goods are denominated in a Ponzi currency you control and can be sure will have universal acceptance. Any attempt to bypass the dollar would have a cataclysmic effect on the U.S similar to what two world wars did to the British Empire.

Wars are also great for keeping the Ponzi scheme going as they are highly inflationary and the winner so often confiscates the assets of the loser. With all this in mind I would normally have some sympathy with a Country who falls foul of this corrupt status quo, but Iran from their human rights record, to their sponsorship of terrorism, to their threats to wipe out Israel are positively inviting their own downfall therefore if it comes I will be ecstatic, even knowing the motives of their foes. The same I couldn't say of Libya, which was for the most part causing little external trouble prior to being attacked.

[midas]

Exactly Midas. Col Ghaddaffi was in the process of doing the same thing, setting up an African currency based on gold. Oil would be sold using this currency completely bypassing the almighty dollar. How dare they try and retain control of their own resources! This is why NATO have been bombing the shit out of Tripoli for nearly five months. Remember when it was all going to be over in two weeks because Ghaddaffi had no support?

Just for once I actually agree in part with the tinfoil hat brigade. Keynesian economics has been so abused that it now amounts to nothing more than a large Ponzi scheme. In order to survive a Ponzi scheme needs new members to keep joining to serice the debt incurred by the old hands. All is fine and dandy when goods are denominated in a Ponzi currency you control and can be sure will have universal acceptance. Any attempt to bypass the dollar would have a cataclysmic effect on the U.S similar to what two world wars did to the British Empire.

Wars are also great for keeping the Ponzi scheme going as they are highly inflationary and the winner so often confiscates the assets of the loser. With all this in mind I would normally have some sympathy with a Country who falls foul of this corrupt status quo, but Iran from their human rights record, to their sponsorship of terrorism, to their threats to wipe out Israel are positively inviting their own downfall therefore if it comes I will be ecstatic, even knowing the motives of their foes. The same I couldn't say of Libya, which was for the most part causing little external trouble prior to being attacked.

but we haven't had a major war where major players have a nuclear stockpile?

even if there is a winner I fear the confiscated assets of the loser will be so contaminated they will be worthless for thousands of years

Edited July 20, 2011 by midas

[Pakboong]

Exactly Midas. Col Ghaddaffi was in the process of doing the same thing, setting up an African currency based on gold. Oil would be sold using this currency completely bypassing the almighty dollar. How dare they try and retain control of their own resources! This is why NATO have been bombing the shit out of Tripoli for nearly five months. Remember when it was all going to be over in two weeks because Ghaddaffi had no support?

And, all this time I thought it had to do with Iraq, Afganistan and Libya being 3 of the remaining 7 countries that did not have a privately owned central bank.

Edited July 20, 2011 by Pakboong

[Steely Dan]

but we haven't had a major war where major players have a nuclear stockpile?

even if there is a winner I fear the confiscated assets of the loser will be so contaminated they will be worthless for thousands of years

Briefly removing my tinfoil hat, how do you explain the procrastination and inaction from Washington in the light that it didn't take a rocket scientist to conclude Iran were heading full speed towards nuclear capability? Surely better to take them out earlier than now belatedly send in the U.N rapporteur to tell everyone what they already know anyway, as was the case with the IAEA. Unless of course (puts foil hat back on) Obama is at the least a Muslim sympathiser and is doing his best to facilitate Iran's nuclear capability whilst pretending to do the opposite.

[midas]

but we haven't had a major war where major players have a nuclear stockpile?

even if there is a winner I fear the confiscated assets of the loser will be so contaminated they will be worthless for thousands of years

Briefly removing my tinfoil hat, how do you explain the procrastination and inaction from Washington in the light that it didn't take a rocket scientist to conclude Iran were heading full speed towards nuclear capability? Surely better to take them out earlier than now belatedly send in the U.N rapporteur to tell everyone what they already know anyway, as was the case with the IAEA. Unless of course (puts foil hat back on) Obama is at the least a Muslim sympathiser and is doing his best to facilitate Iran's nuclear capability whilst pretending to do the opposite.

it's more challenging to work out who are the good guys and the bad guys than three-dimensional chess how does anyone explain arming the rebels in Libya after they knew some were Al Qaeda sympathisers?personally I like the conspiracy theory that Obama is intentionally performing an awful job overall as part of a greater plan so that the next person who takes office will really be able to get away with murder because he or she will look good whatever they do

Edited July 20, 2011 by midas