Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Israeli news propaganda, or backroom WH deals:Follow

#1 Nov 08 2013 at 7:00 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
You decide.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4451132,00.html


Quote:
The Daily beast has reported that the US administration began easing sanctions against Iran as soon as Hassan Rohani was elected the Islamic Republic's new president in June, months prior to the current round of talks being held in Geneva. According to the report, the ease in sanctions began even before Iranian President Hassan Rohani and US President Barack Obama held their historic phone call in September. Israeli officials have expressed concerns that an alleviation of sanctions would boost the Iranian economy, thus rendering the sanctions current achievements obsolete. The report was published as a new deal between Iran and world powers is expected to be announced Friday. As part of the anticipated deal, Iran would make concessions to its nuclear program in return for an alleviation of sanctions currently crippling its economy.


Quote:
According to the Daily Beast, a review of US Treasury Department notices revealed that the government has almost completely halted its "financial blacklisting of entities and people that help Iran evade international sanctions.".......This led to a constant need to update the list of blacklisted companies on the US and West's part. According to the Daily Beast, in the six weeks before Rohani's elections some 100 new people, companies, aircraft, and sea vessels were added to the offender's list. Since June, however, when Rouhani was elected, the Treasury Department had only issued two designation notices identifying six people and four companies as violating Iranian sanctions.



Interesting stuff I am sure.

(not sure what the daily beast is.)



Edited, Nov 8th 2013 8:01pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#2 Nov 08 2013 at 7:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Daily Beast is a news site that's reputable. Its executive editor is John Avlon who's a good person to follow if you're interested in US politics. Not saying you are, just making the point that The Daily Beast is a worthwhile source.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Nov 08 2013 at 7:56 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Daily Beast is a news site that's reputable. Its executive editor is John Avlon who's a good person to follow if you're interested in US politics. Not saying you are, just making the point that The Daily Beast is a worthwhile source.


Cool, I never heard of it before so didn't want to bank to much on the credentials or validity of the article.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#4 Nov 08 2013 at 8:44 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
You decide.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4451132,00.html


Quote:
The Daily beast has reported that the US administration began easing sanctions against Iran as soon as Hassan Rohani was elected the Islamic Republic's new president in June, months prior to the current round of talks being held in Geneva. According to the report, the ease in sanctions began even before Iranian President Hassan Rohani and US President Barack Obama held their historic phone call in September. Israeli officials have expressed concerns that an alleviation of sanctions would boost the Iranian economy, thus rendering the sanctions current achievements obsolete. The report was published as a new deal between Iran and world powers is expected to be announced Friday. As part of the anticipated deal, Iran would make concessions to its nuclear program in return for an alleviation of sanctions currently crippling its economy.


Quote:
According to the Daily Beast, a review of US Treasury Department notices revealed that the government has almost completely halted its "financial blacklisting of entities and people that help Iran evade international sanctions.".......This led to a constant need to update the list of blacklisted companies on the US and West's part. According to the Daily Beast, in the six weeks before Rohani's elections some 100 new people, companies, aircraft, and sea vessels were added to the offender's list. Since June, however, when Rouhani was elected, the Treasury Department had only issued two designation notices identifying six people and four companies as violating Iranian sanctions.



Interesting stuff I am sure.

(not sure what the daily beast is.)



Edited, Nov 8th 2013 8:01pm by rdmcandie


Phew, now it all makes sense. No wonder the media were given strict orders to paint the guy as the messenger of peace and basically the best thing that happened to global politics since new pope was elected. I guess they just rushed a little.

I find it particularly hilarious given that the guy is hardly a peacenik. Last time I checked, the only thing that really changed was the face; everything else remained in its old place. But hey, the pope is still pretty much the same, and everyone is celebrating because he said no to a limousine padded with gold.

I have a somewhat personal observation regarding all this, but I am not sure I can say it without coming across as a ****; bigger than usual that is.


____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#5 Nov 09 2013 at 12:19 AM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
angrymnk wrote:
[I find it particularly hilarious given that the guy is hardly a peacenik. Last time I checked, the only thing that really changed was the face; everything else remained in its old place. But hey, the pope is still pretty much the same, and everyone is celebrating because he said no to a limousine padded with gold.

Really? The new Pope makes the old Pope look like Emperor Palpatine.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#6 Nov 09 2013 at 12:40 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
I think is confused about who exactly was replaced in Iranian Government. Comparing the President of a Nation and the Leader of a Faith seems odd to me.

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 1:41am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#7 Nov 09 2013 at 4:25 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Debalic wrote:
Really? The new Pope makes the old Pope look like Emperor Palpatine.
I'm pretty sure that that is because the last pope was emperor Palpatine.
#8angrymnk, Posted: Nov 09 2013 at 7:21 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Really; did the new pope suddenly endorse gay marriage? No.He said something to the effect that it is not up to him to hate on gays. Presumably, that is God's job. Did the new pope suddenly said contraceptives are ok? No. He seems to follow JP2 on that one.
#9 Nov 09 2013 at 7:43 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
I think is confused about who exactly was replaced in Iranian Government. Comparing the President of a Nation and the Leader of a Faith seems odd to me.

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 1:41am by rdmcandie


For a moment I thought you were referring to the cosmetic operation in Iran that left the actual people in power with, apparently, more power. Just in case you did not know, the President there has some power ( more than say, the President of Germany ), but not that much. the is the US version of President that can just about anything, but fund the stuff he wants. I can only assume that is why you are a little confused, why the term president confused you.

Now, having said all that, allow me to respond to the second portion of the post.

Hmm.. the two are leaders of power structures that have been criticized for being, among other things, rigid, and, not rarely, kinda crazy. Both leaders of those organizations just underwent a barrage of feel good stories ( Pope moved to a smaller house, Pope does not want to eat on a golden plate, Pope does not want to ride a limo, Rouhani likes puppies, Rouhani doesn't silence as many dissenters are the previous guy did ).

Does it still seem odd that I feel there are several ways you can compare the two?
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#10 Nov 09 2013 at 8:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
There's lots of ways to compare them. They just aren't of any consequence.

"They both like apples! And were both born in the 20th century! Both are leaders in their organizations! They both live in the northern hemisphere! Both are able to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight! Can't you sheep SEE it or has the FEEL GOOD MEDIA blinded you?!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#11 Nov 09 2013 at 10:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Really; did the new pope suddenly endorse gay marriage? No.He said something to the effect that it is not up to him to hate on gays. Presumably, that is God's job. Did the new pope suddenly said contraceptives are ok? No. He seems to follow JP2 on that one.

I do get that people are confused because Palapatine actually meant what he said, and this one is kinda mellow, but cryst.. at least try to see things for what they are, and not just assume that the pulp you are served is full good, reliable information.


"Things for what they are" is that this pope is an unexpected mass communication genius on a scale we haven't seen in literally centuries. It doesn't matter what he can or can't change in the bureaucracy, that's not really his job or problem. His job is to be the public face of the Catholic Church, the example for others to follow, the leader of the largest religious organization on Earth. That role is traditionally played by a know it all grandfather type, speaking words that disconnect from his actions, ruling on questions of faith like a judge. This pope presents himself as genuinely attempting to bring Christ's mercy to as many people as possible and as dedicated to the message that hierarchy is less important than grace. That's different. That's amazing. He's very, very, good at it. I have no idea how he is at reform or the political side of things. Terrible, maybe. I have no clue if he really believes in the invisible man in the sky and his magic baby, or if he just wants power. I don't really care. If the primary communication emanating from the Holy See is "be nice to people" instead of "be nice to people in the manner we insist upon OR YOU ARE GOING TO HELL" that's a huge net positive.

Your whole "he's really just the same person" tirade is trite and boring. You actually have no idea, and it isn't exactly a bold prediction that the Catholic Church won't undergo sudden violent change on dogma or policy. Also: Sheep unlikely to evolve a means of flight this month. There, I saved you from having to make that post.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#12 Nov 09 2013 at 10:29 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
angrymnk wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
I think is confused about who exactly was replaced in Iranian Government. Comparing the President of a Nation and the Leader of a Faith seems odd to me.

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 1:41am by rdmcandie


For a moment I thought you were referring to the cosmetic operation in Iran that left the actual people in power with, apparently, more power. Just in case you did not know, the President there has some power ( more than say, the President of Germany ), but not that much. the is the US version of President that can just about anything, but fund the stuff he wants. I can only assume that is why you are a little confused, why the term president confused you.


Oh you are one of those people. Contrary to your grossly misled opinion the Ayatollah has no real authoritative power. Every decision he makes must clear the Guardian Council, which is comprised of elected officials. You have your politically elected officials, and you have the religious elected officials, they vote on ideas from the Ayatollah, and the Elected body. The only way something passes is if the Guardian Council agrees to it no matter who you are in Iran.

Now another common misconception about Iran is that its religious officials are not elected. This is simply untrue. Religious officials are elected by the body of religion in Iran. Similar to how the legislative branch are elected. Each congregation is part of a conference, and each member of the congregation vote to elect representatives of that conference. The members of that Conference in turn elect a representative to represent them on the Judiciary. Members of the Judiciary elect officials to represent them on the Guardian Council. (The Body of Religion elected by the people also vote on election of a new Ayatollah when the current steps down/dies)

That being said the Ayatollah can send his troops off under an executive order, and he does have the ability to dismiss members of the Judiciary (new members must be elected from the Conference that lost their representative). He also has the ability as the Religious Leader of the nation to hold people accountable under religious law. Which does allow him some leverage because he can make people who have different viewpoints excommunicated from the religious body.

But he has no real ability to do anything above and beyond what other leaders do, all of his policy must pass an elected body that represents both public and religious opinions, and the Ayatollah nor the President are above this. So if an idea the Ayatollah had happens, its because the peoples representatives on the Guardian Council felt it should, and when an Idea the President had happens it is because the people representatives on the Guardian Council felt it should.

And that is how a Democratic Theocracy works. Both the Religious and Legislative branches held in check by a combined council that is based on elections by voting members of Public and Relgious bodies. But hey its cool to be ignorant, I am sure you think that China doesn't elect their officials either. Just because they don't vote for every @#%^ing position in politics directly doesn't make it any less democratic.

(Fun fact: The US President has more power above elected legislation than the Ayatollah. and the Queen of England has more power than either the President US or Ayatollah over more nations, and isn't even part of the political process, she can dissolve Constitutions of every nation in the commonwealth and remove political bodies from governance when ever she wants.)













Edited, Nov 9th 2013 11:34am by rdmcandie

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 12:12pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#13 Nov 09 2013 at 11:16 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
NVM

**** Huffpost man..

The Ayatollah was missing for three weeks. He came back already, Huffpost was just writing a **** oped....my bad.

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 12:25pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#14 Nov 09 2013 at 12:35 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
Quote:
rdmcandie wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
I think is confused about who exactly was replaced in Iranian Government. Comparing the President of a Nation and the Leader of a Faith seems odd to me.

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 1:41am by rdmcandie


For a moment I thought you were referring to the cosmetic operation in Iran that left the actual people in power with, apparently, more power. Just in case you did not know, the President there has some power ( more than say, the President of Germany ), but not that much. the is the US version of President that can just about anything, but fund the stuff he wants. I can only assume that is why you are a little confused, why the term president confused you.


Oh you are one of those people. Contrary to your grossly misled opinion the Ayatollah has no real authoritative power. Every decision he makes must clear the Guardian Council, which is comprised of elected officials. You have your politically elected officials, and you have the religious elected officials, they vote on ideas from the Ayatollah, and the Elected body. The only way something passes is if the Guardian Council agrees to it no matter who you are in Iran.

Now another common misconception about Iran is that its religious officials are not elected. This is simply untrue. Religious officials are elected by the body of religion in Iran. Similar to how the legislative branch are elected. Each congregation is part of a conference, and each member of the congregation vote to elect representatives of that conference. The members of that Conference in turn elect a representative to represent them on the Judiciary. Members of the Judiciary elect officials to represent them on the Guardian Council. (The Body of Religion elected by the people also vote on election of a new Ayatollah when the current steps down/dies)

That being said the Ayatollah can send his troops off under an executive order, and he does have the ability to dismiss members of the Judiciary (new members must be elected from the Conference that lost their representative). He also has the ability as the Religious Leader of the nation to hold people accountable under religious law. Which does allow him some leverage because he can make people who have different viewpoints excommunicated from the religious body.

But he has no real ability to do anything above and beyond what other leaders do, all of his policy must pass an elected body that represents both public and religious opinions, and the Ayatollah nor the President are above this. So if an idea the Ayatollah had happens, its because the peoples representatives on the Guardian Council felt it should, and when an Idea the President had happens it is because the people representatives on the Guardian Council felt it should.

And that is how a Democratic Theocracy works. Both the Religious and Legislative branches held in check by a combined council that is based on elections by voting members of Public and Relgious bodies. But hey its cool to be ignorant, I am sure you think that China doesn't elect their officials either. Just because they don't vote for every @#%^ing position in politics directly doesn't make it any less democratic.

(Fun fact: The US President has more power above elected legislation than the Ayatollah. and the Queen of England has more power than either the President US or Ayatollah over more nations, and isn't even part of the political process, she can dissolve Constitutions of every nation in the commonwealth and remove political bodies from governance when ever she wants.)


Oh, you are one of those people. It is always somewhat interesting when someone insists that 1+1=3.0 because a piece of paper says so. In your defense of that, you are not alone in this. Most people automatically take it as an article of faith that what is written down, is the truth.

If you believe that queen of England has more power than Ayatollah, or the big O, then.. well, you must truly believe what you read. By the way, since you believe everything that is written down... did you know it can be be a federal offense to be in a possession of a lobster?

By the way, the idea of democratic theocracy is almost as amusing as American culture around 17th century. Get back to me if you figure out why.













Edited, Nov 9th 2013 11:34am by rdmcandie

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 12:12pm by rdmcandie



Edited, Nov 9th 2013 1:35pm by angrymnk
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#15 Nov 09 2013 at 12:44 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Really; did the new pope suddenly endorse gay marriage? No.He said something to the effect that it is not up to him to hate on gays. Presumably, that is God's job. Did the new pope suddenly said contraceptives are ok? No. He seems to follow JP2 on that one.

I do get that people are confused because Palapatine actually meant what he said, and this one is kinda mellow, but cryst.. at least try to see things for what they are, and not just assume that the pulp you are served is full good, reliable information.


"Things for what they are" is that this pope is an unexpected mass communication genius on a scale we haven't seen in literally centuries. It doesn't matter what he can or can't change in the bureaucracy, that's not really his job or problem. His job is to be the public face of the Catholic Church, the example for others to follow, the leader of the largest religious organization on Earth. That role is traditionally played by a know it all grandfather type, speaking words that disconnect from his actions, ruling on questions of faith like a judge. This pope presents himself as genuinely attempting to bring Christ's mercy to as many people as possible and as dedicated to the message that hierarchy is less important than grace. That's different. That's amazing. He's very, very, good at it. I have no idea how he is at reform or the political side of things. Terrible, maybe. I have no clue if he really believes in the invisible man in the sky and his magic baby, or if he just wants power. I don't really care. If the primary communication emanating from the Holy See is "be nice to people" instead of "be nice to people in the manner we insist upon OR YOU ARE GOING TO HELL" that's a huge net positive.

Your whole "he's really just the same person" tirade is trite and boring. You actually have no idea, and it isn't exactly a bold prediction that the Catholic Church won't undergo sudden violent change on dogma or policy. Also: Sheep unlikely to evolve a means of flight this month. There, I saved you from having to make that post.


My apologies, I did not realize I was supposed to give predictions. Do I have an idea? Do you? I don't pretend to know everything, but I am not exactly in the cheer-leading squad either.

No offense, but I honestly do not think that this particular pope is a genius of mass communication. If mass media wanted to, they could just as easily be printing out stories about how many pedophile priests this pope protects by doing the equivalent of nothing. The wind has changed, but it has little to do with his skills, or lack thereof.

Next thing I know it will turn out that the pope personally uses twitter, and everyone around will scream in delight... amagad.. he uses social media... he is like the best pope ever. In case you are wondering, I do not see it as an improvement.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#16 Nov 09 2013 at 12:46 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
Jophiel wrote:
There's lots of ways to compare them. They just aren't of any consequence.

"They both like apples! And were both born in the 20th century! Both are leaders in their organizations! They both live in the northern hemisphere! Both are able to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight! Can't you sheep SEE it or has the FEEL GOOD MEDIA blinded you?!"


Yes, there are. Both are subject to a great amount of renewed scrutiny by the media, and both are subject to the same amount of misrepresentation.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#17 Nov 09 2013 at 2:54 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
Quote:
Oh, you are one of those people. It is always somewhat interesting when someone insists that 1+1=3.0 because a piece of paper says so. In your defense of that, you are not alone in this. Most people automatically take it as an article of faith that what is written down, is the truth.

If you believe that queen of England has more power than Ayatollah, or the big O, then.. well, you must truly believe what you read. By the way, since you believe everything that is written down... did you know it can be be a federal offense to be in a possession of a lobster?

By the way, the idea of democratic theocracy is almost as amusing as American culture around 17th century. Get back to me if you figure out why.


Oh so because someone wrote it down I shouldn't acknowledge. I should acknowledge some hyperbole someone else wrote down instead because obviously them writing it down is different. The System is designed to effectively have a religious input into the civil discussion. If the people don't want it...they have the power to remove change anyone in either office.

The religious branch allows for members to vote no confidence in their representatives (elections held every 6 years), the congress has the power to vote no confidence in their elected members, and the Elected Religious officials have the power to vote no confidence in the Spiritual Leader. The legislative branch allows for the public to vote no confidence in any of their elected officials all the way up the tree(held every 4 years).

Its no different than Americans ability to vote no confidence in their leaders, or any democratic nation really. The only person who can't be voted out that has power is the Queen of England. She is the most powerful person in the world in terms of political strength. She can at any time revoke Constitutions of 54 Nations, and strip us of rights and freedoms. She has the authority to deploy the entire Commonwealth Forces at any time, and is the figure head of 1/3 of the worlds population.

She can at anytime dissolve parliaments of a nation or adopt industry as a crown corporation. She has total authority...but she delegates responsibility to the representatives each of the nations chose (our elected officials). Why worry about running most of the world by yourself. Queen Elizabeth II is the most powerful person on the planet today, She has multiple members and votes in UN, NATO, she has multiple members and Votes in BRICS, she has 4/5 members of Five Eyes Organization. She has more availability to every resource on this planet than any other leader in the world. And you can bet your *** she delegates. She isn't a dumb lady. While Obama goes bowing to other world leaders, Everyone bows to the Queen. Everyone, and she lowers her head no one. She is top *****. The number 1 mother.

As for Democratic Theocracy. If Iran wanted American style Democracy, they would have kept the one you imposed on them in the 50's. The people however decided they wanted to preserve their culture and they did. The system is very sound, and is dependent upon how the populace elects their representatives. It is much more effective representation than the US was in the 17th Century. Since anyone in the nation over 18 can vote. White/Arabs/Blacks/Christians/Jews/Islamists/Women/Men.

About the only people in Iran who don't have rights are Gays. But its more of a DADT kinda thing. If they find out your gay...your gonna have a bad time. But hey its not like Gays have equal rights in "Murika...they got better rights, but better isn't equal. But hey lets hear more about how Iranian politics works I am learning much.














Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:57pm by rdmcandie

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:59pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#18 Nov 09 2013 at 4:57 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
Oh, you are one of those people. It is always somewhat interesting when someone insists that 1+1=3.0 because a piece of paper says so. In your defense of that, you are not alone in this. Most people automatically take it as an article of faith that what is written down, is the truth.

If you believe that queen of England has more power than Ayatollah, or the big O, then.. well, you must truly believe what you read. By the way, since you believe everything that is written down... did you know it can be be a federal offense to be in a possession of a lobster?

By the way, the idea of democratic theocracy is almost as amusing as American culture around 17th century. Get back to me if you figure out why.


Oh so because someone wrote it down I shouldn't acknowledge. I should acknowledge some hyperbole someone else wrote down instead because obviously them writing it down is different. The System is designed to effectively have a religious input into the civil discussion. If the people don't want it...they have the power to remove change anyone in either office.

The religious branch allows for members to vote no confidence in their representatives (elections held every 6 years), the congress has the power to vote no confidence in their elected members, and the Elected Religious officials have the power to vote no confidence in the Spiritual Leader. The legislative branch allows for the public to vote no confidence in any of their elected officials all the way up the tree(held every 4 years).

Its no different than Americans ability to vote no confidence in their leaders, or any democratic nation really. The only person who can't be voted out that has power is the Queen of England. She is the most powerful person in the world in terms of political strength. She can at any time revoke Constitutions of 54 Nations, and strip us of rights and freedoms. She has the authority to deploy the entire Commonwealth Forces at any time, and is the figure head of 1/3 of the worlds population.

She can at anytime dissolve parliaments of a nation or adopt industry as a crown corporation. She has total authority...but she delegates responsibility to the representatives each of the nations chose (our elected officials). Why worry about running most of the world by yourself. Queen Elizabeth II is the most powerful person on the planet today, She has multiple members and votes in UN, NATO, she has multiple members and Votes in BRICS, she has 4/5 members of Five Eyes Organization. She has more availability to every resource on this planet than any other leader in the world. And you can bet your *** she delegates. She isn't a dumb lady. While Obama goes bowing to other world leaders, Everyone bows to the Queen. Everyone, and she lowers her head no one. She is top *****. The number 1 mother.

As for Democratic Theocracy. If Iran wanted American style Democracy, they would have kept the one you imposed on them in the 50's. The people however decided they wanted to preserve their culture and they did. The system is very sound, and is dependent upon how the populace elects their representatives. It is much more effective representation than the US was in the 17th Century. Since anyone in the nation over 18 can vote. White/Arabs/Blacks/Christians/Jews/Islamists/Women/Men.

About the only people in Iran who don't have rights are Gays. But its more of a DADT kinda thing. If they find out your gay...your gonna have a bad time. But hey its not like Gays have equal rights in "Murika...they got better rights, but better isn't equal. But hey lets hear more about how Iranian politics works I am learning much.


Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:57pm by rdmcandie

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:59pm by rdmcandie


See.. again I am not absolutely sure whether you are joking or not. I have to admit, you got me there. It takes special kind of mind to so completely misunderstand and/or misrepresent simple facts of life.

Queen of England is a figurehead. The entire royal family is. In theory, you are correct. In practice, however, commonwealth realm is ,well, independent.

Now, allow me to repeat this.. she is a figurehead. If you want the most powerful person in the world, you can look to a source more reliable than me. Queen does not make the first 50. I am not sure she would make the first 100. I am not sure I completely agree with it, but at least that list measures actual power and not power on paper.

I will leave with a wisdom of Uncle Joe S who said something to the effect of: huh? him and what army? Think about it, and then lets talk about power.

*******

Btw. why are you getting so defensive about it? Last time I checked, the "American imposed democracy" you seem to have referenced was not a democracy, mkay? It was a lot of things. Coup comes to mind, but I don't think a person with a functioning brain would call it a democracy.

******
Quote:
Oh so because someone wrote it down I shouldn't acknowledge. I should acknowledge some hyperbole someone else wrote down instead because obviously them writing it down is different. The System is designed to effectively have a religious input into the civil discussion. If the people don't want it...they have the power to remove change anyone in either office.


Lol. No, but when someone tells you white is in fact blue, you might want to, and this is important, think before you tell me that queen controls the world. But who knows, I may be wrong. It has happened.


____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#19 Nov 09 2013 at 5:30 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
Oh so now we are taking Forbes opinion as fact... Quite Rich.

Im sorry you don't know what a Constitutional Monarchy is. Its also funny you think the Queen is a Fugurehead...despite being the top Official to most of the World. Its cute that you think Military might has any value in a discussion of power. But hey lets all fear Khomeini because he is a democratically elected Cleric who is in a power share with a democratically elect President!.

Give me a break man.

Im out for the weekend, you should brush up on your knowledge of political systems in the world, and learn why Armed forces are largely irrelevant in this day and age (ill give you a hint, it has something to do with this topic.) See you Monday!




Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:30pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#20 Nov 09 2013 at 5:53 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Oh so now we are taking Forbes opinion as fact... Quite Rich.

Im sorry you don't know what a Constitutional Monarchy is. Its also funny you think the Queen is a Fugurehead...despite being the top Official to most of the World. Its cute that you think Military might has any value in a discussion of power. But hey lets all fear Khomeini because he is a democratically elected Cleric who is in a power share with a democratically elect President!.

Give me a break man.

Im out for the weekend, you should brush up on your knowledge of political systems in the world, and learn why Armed forces are largely irrelevant in this day and age (ill give you a hint, it has something to do with this topic.) See you Monday!

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:30pm by rdmcandie


Prolly later, but yeah.. weapons are useless these days and age. I mean Pakistan, China, Israel, India all got them for their novelty value. And sure, their populations in the face of an armed conflict is completely irrelevant. Unless you want sh*t to grow afterwards that is. I thought we are well past Carthage.

So now tell me, how many buttons can the Queen press?

Btw. why do you think the rest of the world puts up with the US -- the winning smile, and polite manners?

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:56pm by angrymnk
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#21 Nov 11 2013 at 7:57 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
angrymnk wrote:
So now tell me, how many buttons can the Queen press?
I'm sure Richard Simmons hasn't aged enough to be unable to press play a few more times yet.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#22 Nov 11 2013 at 4:12 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
angrymnk wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
Oh so now we are taking Forbes opinion as fact... Quite Rich.

Im sorry you don't know what a Constitutional Monarchy is. Its also funny you think the Queen is a Fugurehead...despite being the top Official to most of the World. Its cute that you think Military might has any value in a discussion of power. But hey lets all fear Khomeini because he is a democratically elected Cleric who is in a power share with a democratically elect President!.

Give me a break man.

Im out for the weekend, you should brush up on your knowledge of political systems in the world, and learn why Armed forces are largely irrelevant in this day and age (ill give you a hint, it has something to do with this topic.) See you Monday!

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:30pm by rdmcandie


Prolly later, but yeah.. weapons are useless these days and age. I mean Pakistan, China, Israel, India all got them for their novelty value. And sure, their populations in the face of an armed conflict is completely irrelevant. Unless you want sh*t to grow afterwards that is. I thought we are well past Carthage.

So now tell me, how many buttons can the Queen press?

Btw. why do you think the rest of the world puts up with the US -- the winning smile, and polite manners?

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:56pm by angrymnk


1) Exactly military strength is largely irrelevant today, as well as its weapons.

2) About 700 in total assuming she rescinds the Westminster Statutes of course (how she stakes claim to the Commonwealth for those interested.) Without she has sway over about 500 Directly (she can dissolve British Parliament while leaving Commonwealth Nations intact). (but anything over 5-6 really is irrelevant wouldn't you agree.)

3) They don't really and haven't for some time really the last time the US Military was actually a relevant political tool was the Vietnam war. Since then economic sanctions(or benefits see Iraq~Iran war) have been the tool. But now the US doesn't even have the strength or international support to enforce those. Europe/Russia and China mostly all want access to Iran's rich oil reserves and other resources, and you can bet your *** the US does too. Imagine the position of the US and allies if Iran had been selling oil in USD to Europe and USA for the past 30 years..

Resources define power...not military. If you don't have resources people want, your nation becomes irrelevant. (which is why Queen E would be the most powerful person in the world if she reclaimed her families Empire.)

Exception!

North Korea. No one cares about it, it truly is removed from the world , but even then NK despite decades of economic sanctions, and isolation still +1'd a nuke in the Worlds face. But you can bet your *** if NK could make a delivery system that worked, they would have a seat at the big boys table faster than Kim could eat a Big Mac, and the world economy would happily invest in the Trillions of $'s worth of rare earth metals.








____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#23 Nov 18 2013 at 10:49 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
Oh so now we are taking Forbes opinion as fact... Quite Rich.

Im sorry you don't know what a Constitutional Monarchy is. Its also funny you think the Queen is a Fugurehead...despite being the top Official to most of the World. Its cute that you think Military might has any value in a discussion of power. But hey lets all fear Khomeini because he is a democratically elected Cleric who is in a power share with a democratically elect President!.

Give me a break man.

Im out for the weekend, you should brush up on your knowledge of political systems in the world, and learn why Armed forces are largely irrelevant in this day and age (ill give you a hint, it has something to do with this topic.) See you Monday!

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:30pm by rdmcandie


Prolly later, but yeah.. weapons are useless these days and age. I mean Pakistan, China, Israel, India all got them for their novelty value. And sure, their populations in the face of an armed conflict is completely irrelevant. Unless you want sh*t to grow afterwards that is. I thought we are well past Carthage.

So now tell me, how many buttons can the Queen press?

Btw. why do you think the rest of the world puts up with the US -- the winning smile, and polite manners?

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 6:56pm by angrymnk


1) Exactly military strength is largely irrelevant today, as well as its weapons.



You either do not read, or extract only that what you want to read. If it is all so irrelevant, why oh why the race to the top of the molehill continues?

Resources are merely vehicles that allow this race to go on.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#24 Nov 19 2013 at 10:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
angrymnk wrote:
You either do not read, or extract only that what you want to read. If it is all so irrelevant, why oh why the race to the top of the molehill continues?
Same reason why people go out and buy expensive cars, or spend too much on the latest clothes. It's all a measuring contest.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#25 Nov 19 2013 at 10:35 AM Rating: Good
angrymnk wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
Oh, you are one of those people. It is always somewhat interesting when someone insists that 1+1=3.0 because a piece of paper says so. In your defense of that, you are not alone in this. Most people automatically take it as an article of faith that what is written down, is the truth.

If you believe that queen of England has more power than Ayatollah, or the big O, then.. well, you must truly believe what you read. By the way, since you believe everything that is written down... did you know it can be be a federal offense to be in a possession of a lobster?

By the way, the idea of democratic theocracy is almost as amusing as American culture around 17th century. Get back to me if you figure out why.


Oh so because someone wrote it down I shouldn't acknowledge. I should acknowledge some hyperbole someone else wrote down instead because obviously them writing it down is different. The System is designed to effectively have a religious input into the civil discussion. If the people don't want it...they have the power to remove change anyone in either office.

The religious branch allows for members to vote no confidence in their representatives (elections held every 6 years), the congress has the power to vote no confidence in their elected members, and the Elected Religious officials have the power to vote no confidence in the Spiritual Leader. The legislative branch allows for the public to vote no confidence in any of their elected officials all the way up the tree(held every 4 years).

Its no different than Americans ability to vote no confidence in their leaders, or any democratic nation really. The only person who can't be voted out that has power is the Queen of England. She is the most powerful person in the world in terms of political strength. She can at any time revoke Constitutions of 54 Nations, and strip us of rights and freedoms. She has the authority to deploy the entire Commonwealth Forces at any time, and is the figure head of 1/3 of the worlds population.

She can at anytime dissolve parliaments of a nation or adopt industry as a crown corporation. She has total authority...but she delegates responsibility to the representatives each of the nations chose (our elected officials). Why worry about running most of the world by yourself. Queen Elizabeth II is the most powerful person on the planet today, She has multiple members and votes in UN, NATO, she has multiple members and Votes in BRICS, she has 4/5 members of Five Eyes Organization. She has more availability to every resource on this planet than any other leader in the world. And you can bet your *** she delegates. She isn't a dumb lady. While Obama goes bowing to other world leaders, Everyone bows to the Queen. Everyone, and she lowers her head no one. She is top *****. The number 1 mother.

As for Democratic Theocracy. If Iran wanted American style Democracy, they would have kept the one you imposed on them in the 50's. The people however decided they wanted to preserve their culture and they did. The system is very sound, and is dependent upon how the populace elects their representatives. It is much more effective representation than the US was in the 17th Century. Since anyone in the nation over 18 can vote. White/Arabs/Blacks/Christians/Jews/Islamists/Women/Men.

About the only people in Iran who don't have rights are Gays. But its more of a DADT kinda thing. If they find out your gay...your gonna have a bad time. But hey its not like Gays have equal rights in "Murika...they got better rights, but better isn't equal. But hey lets hear more about how Iranian politics works I am learning much.


Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:57pm by rdmcandie

Edited, Nov 9th 2013 3:59pm by rdmcandie


See.. again I am not absolutely sure whether you are joking or not. I have to admit, you got me there. It takes special kind of mind to so completely misunderstand and/or misrepresent simple facts of life.

Queen of England is a figurehead. The entire royal family is. In theory, you are correct. In practice, however, commonwealth realm is ,well, independent.

Now, allow me to repeat this.. she is a figurehead. If you want the most powerful person in the world, you can look to a source more reliable than me. Queen does not make the first 50. I am not sure she would make the first 100. I am not sure I completely agree with it, but at least that list measures actual power and not power on paper.

I will leave with a wisdom of Uncle Joe S who said something to the effect of: huh? him and what army? Think about it, and then lets talk about power.

*******

Btw. why are you getting so defensive about it? Last time I checked, the "American imposed democracy" you seem to have referenced was not a democracy, mkay? It was a lot of things. Coup comes to mind, but I don't think a person with a functioning brain would call it a democracy.

******
Quote:
Oh so because someone wrote it down I shouldn't acknowledge. I should acknowledge some hyperbole someone else wrote down instead because obviously them writing it down is different. The System is designed to effectively have a religious input into the civil discussion. If the people don't want it...they have the power to remove change anyone in either office.


Lol. No, but when someone tells you white is in fact blue, you might want to, and this is important, think before you tell me that queen controls the world. But who knows, I may be wrong. It has happened.


Don't quote some huge wall of text just to say one thing.
#26 Nov 19 2013 at 10:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
rdmcandie wrote:
Europe/Russia and China mostly all want access to Iran's rich oil reserves and other resources, and you can bet your *** the US does too. Imagine the position of the US and allies if Iran had been selling oil in USD to Europe and USA for the past 30 years..

Iran is part of OPEC. The effect of Iran selling oil on the global market would have been a decrease in production spread across the other OPEC nations in order to not flood the market and negatively affect oil prices.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 453 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (453)