From: arash@sunee.waterloo.edu (Arash Jahangir)
Subject: Re: Iraq combats Iranian sorties, violates peace treaty
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:54:59 GMT

I never thought I'd say anything nice about the regime in Iran, but compared to
that in Iraq, the regime in Iran is a very reasonable and democtratic regime,
which should just tell you how bad the one in Iraq really is.

In article <2522@keele.keele.ac.uk> phd21@seq1.kl.ac.uk (A. Jaber) writes:
>
>		This is How Neo-Khomeinists think...
>
>	I have received this message of hate from Mr Muhammad Taqwaa
>	Mr Black Jack at university of Nevada RENO in a private E-mail.
>	Mr Taqwaa who is either an Iranian or an Arab Shia Ne-Khomeinist
>	shows the world how he and he Khomeini gangs conduct business
>	withe the people who disagree with thyem.

If he is an Iraqi Shia then it is his right to say and do wahtever he feels is
best for Iraq.  Iraq has never had a popular base among its people with the
exception of the brief period of Abdul Karim Qasem.  No country can ever force
an uprising in Iraq if the Iraqi people had been happy with their regime.  The
magnitude of those uprising and their intensity stems from the cruelties of the
Ba'thy regime.  Assuming that your comments re. Iran's help are correct, then
Iran only helped the rebels i.e Iran did not (and never could) cause the 
rebellion if people in Iraq had nothing to rise against.

>
>	Mr Taqwaa was responding to my article in which I highlighted
>	the situation where Iran is hosting terrorist groups that caused
>	a lot of damage to Iraq specially during and after the war with
>	the USA. If it was not for the Terrorist action by those
>	criminal gangs based in Iran and now in Saudi Arabia Iraq will
>	never host the Mujahedee Khalq, it is the Terrorist nature of
>	the Neo-Khomeinists that brings the trouble to the region.
>
>	A Jaber
>

First of all see my answer above.  Secondly, what you call terorist, others
call freedom fighters.  It is the same old story, one man's terorist is another
man's hero.  You could only claim they are terorists if and only if there were
democratic avenues available to them and they had chosen to use force instead.
Perhaps you need a little memory refershment about Sadam's life, who he was,
what his political activities were which brought him to power, and how he runs
the country, to remind what terorism really is.  That is not a problem at all.
I can tell you from his illegal activities prior to Iraq's revolution, to how
him and 3 others attempted to assasinate Qasim, to how he burnt members of
Iraqi opposition alive in front of each other in the x-royal palace to force
false public confessions from them, to how he has bombed his own cities to has
terrorized the general public to ....  But I think you already know these.
Don't talk about terorism as if you are supporting a democratic or at least a
semi-decent guy.  Iraqies have lost far too much to the Ba'th party.  Perhaps
I should read you some of that parties constitution and beleifs by its 
originators to show you what a pro-facistic party it is.  But then again why
state the obvious.  You notice that none of my critisisms have anything to do
with the inhumane and beastly behaviour of your troops.  People kill each other
in a war but even then there are limits to what they would not do.  You people
have stooped lower than the lowest animals.  But that is an entirely different
story.

>>From: taqwaa@edu.unr.equinox (Muhammad Taqwaa)
>>Subject: Re: Iraq combats Iranian sorties, violates peace treaty
>>Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian
>>Organization: University of Nevada, Reno
>>
>>
>>You better shut your ... dirty nationalist.

Of course he is wrong here.  A nationalist is one who holds his nation above
all else.  Ba'thies however hold thei dirty lives and high paying positions
above all else.  So Mr. Taqwaa is wrong here; you are not a nationalist.

>>You don't have brain. At 80 iran was in very critical position 
>>after it's grate ISLAMIC rev.  and every country was supporter of criminal s
>>sadam yazid 
>

What is wrong with that.  Sadam did have a lot of supporters then, and there 
are records that show he had been preparing for war since two years prior to
his attack (which is to say as soon as Iran started to have domestic problems).
The arguement that he attacked Iran just doesn't hold.  Just as the German's
arguement that they started WWII because Polland attacked a German boarder town
does not hold.

>>now stupid sadam and you are in bad condition ready to be kiled by US
>>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>	Mr Taqwaa is threatening my life, to your knowledge Mr Taqwaa
>	your name will be handed to the police both in the UK and USA.
>

No he is not.  He just said that yourown stupidity is getting you killedby 
the hands of Americans (and not his).
	
>>(MOSLEM IRANIAN AND MUSLEM IRAQies BR.
>

That is pure bull shit.  There is no brothership between us except perhaps
with the Kurds that are suffering inside Iraq (who are Iranian anyways) and
some of the Shia's in South-East Iraq, who seem to be the only civilized people
in Iraq.

>>shut up for ever dirty BASI
>>ANd tell Rajavi shut up too.

You should listen to him.  He is right you know.  You Ba'thies are dirity.


Arash
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian