[Peace-discussion] Re: [usgp-dx] Human rights in Iran

Fri, 08 Jun 2007 19:57:37 -0400

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090502050207060008020703
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Scott McLarty wrote:
> > No, Scott, I never suggested for one moment that "all the other
> > reports" are false and I have no idea where you would get such an
> > idea.
>
>  Scott: Then why bring up the fabricated case of the two hanged
>  Iranian teenagers, unless it was to discredit other accounts of human
>  rights abuses & brutality against Iranian gay people?

To point out that true advocates of human rights in America need to be 
especially skeptical and cautious when considering the human rights 
records of the 'official enemies'. Unless, of course, they are somewhat 
indifferent to the fundamental basis of all human rights--life--a life 
free from American, bombs, bullets, and domination. I mentioned the two 
Iranian teens ("fabricated" is your word, not mine) in my very first 
entry in this discussion thread, responding to Art Myatt's assertion 
that "while the abuses of human rights they ['Bush and company'] mention 
are real. " In fact, they are not all "real"--some are fabrications and 
some are distortions--and Americans need to think critically, 
particularly when it comes to the human rights claims of "Bush and company."

>  Several times below you insist that your purpose is not to deny or
>  ignore reports of serious human rights violations in other countries.
>  So why the barrage of insinuations that I was serving imperial US
>  designs or that I was ignoring violations in the US because I had
>  posted a few articles about abuses in Russia & Iran?  Surely you
>  don't believe that merely passing on information of interest to
>  Greens constitutes a 'feeding frenzy.'

There was no such "barrage of insinuations" but, having now reviewed 
some of the GPUS press releases mentioning Iran in the last two years I 
do believe that the party has repeated some questionable, at best, 
propaganda that does indeed serve "imperial US designs." I used "feeding 
frenzy" to refer to media barrages of the type exemplified by the 
execution of the two Iranian teens in 2005. The GPUS clearly engaged in 
this when on 1/18/2006 it "condemned President Ahmadinejad's belligerent 
call for the destruction of Israel and statements denying the Jewish 
Holocaust." Neither of these two claims is well-founded in fact but they 
certainly do serve to help make the case for hostile action against 
Iran. I note that the thrust of the press release is against an attack 
on Iran but that is significantly undermined by the parroting of 
mainstream anti-Iran propaganda. There is also the uncritical repetition 
of arguments that the US has variously employed to justify war in 
Afghanistan and Iraq. Here, I am referring to the line that "Greens have 
no illusions about the current government in Iran, which under the rule 
of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khameini has suppressed 
the rights of women, tortured and murdered gay people, and brutally 
crushed student demonstrations and political dissent."

>  What's clear to me, and to other Greens reading this thread, is that
>  you really DON'T want Greens to recognize that these abuses are
>  taking place in certain other countries.  Otherwise, there would be
>  no need to criticize the posting of such articles.

If by "recognize" you mean that the GPUS should publicly pontificate 
against human rights abuses in other countries that are in the literal 
or metaphorical gun sights of the US gov't., then, absolutely--with very 
few exceptions--I don't want the GPUS to "recognize" those abuses. I 
think it is a travesty for people to argue the party's "obligation" to 
speak out about such human rights abuses when there is every indication 
that by doing so it could help justify war or attacks short of war, 
resulting in far greater violation of human rights. The best thing 
Greens can to do promote global human rights is to work to stop the war 
machine based here and to make this country a sterling example of human 
rights practice. And one doesn't do either of those by uncritically 
mouthing the hollow human rights complaints of the "cruise missile left."

Michelle J. Kinnucan

--------------090502050207060008020703
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
 <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Scott McLarty wrote: 
&gt;&gt; No, Scott, I never suggested
for one moment that "all the other 
&gt;&gt; reports" are false and I have no idea where you would get such
an 
&gt;&gt; idea. 
&gt; 
&gt; Scott: Then why bring up the fabricated case of the two hanged 
&gt; Iranian teenagers, unless it was to discredit other accounts of
human 
&gt; rights abuses &amp; brutality against Iranian gay people? 
 
To point out that true advocates of human rights in America need to be
especially skeptical and cautious when considering the human rights
records of the 'official enemies'. Unless, of course, they are somewhat
indifferent to the fundamental basis of all human rights--life--a life
free from American, bombs, bullets, and domination. I mentioned the two
Iranian teens ("fabricated" is your word, not mine) in my very first
entry in this discussion thread, responding to Art Myatt's assertion
that "while the abuses of human rights they ['Bush and company']
mention are real. " In fact, they are not all "real"--some are
fabrications and some are distortions--and Americans need to think
critically, particularly when it comes to the human rights claims of
"Bush and company." 
 
&gt; Several times below you insist
that your purpose is not to deny or 
&gt; ignore reports of serious human rights violations in other
countries. 
&gt; So why the barrage of insinuations that I was serving imperial US 
&gt; designs or that I was ignoring violations in the US because I had 
&gt; posted a few articles about abuses in Russia &amp; Iran?&nbsp; Surely
you 
&gt; don't believe that merely passing on information of interest to 
&gt; Greens constitutes a 'feeding frenzy.' 
 
There was no such "barrage of insinuations" but, having now reviewed
some of the GPUS press releases mentioning Iran in the last two years I
do believe that the party has repeated some questionable, at best,
propaganda that does indeed serve "imperial US designs." I used
"feeding frenzy" to refer to media barrages of the type exemplified by
the execution of the two Iranian teens in 2005. The GPUS clearly
engaged in this when on 1/18/2006 it "condemned President Ahmadinejad's
belligerent call for the destruction of Israel and statements denying
the Jewish Holocaust." Neither of these two claims is well-founded in
fact but they certainly do serve to help make the case for hostile
action against Iran. I note that the thrust of the press release is
against an attack on Iran but that is significantly undermined by the
parroting of mainstream anti-Iran propaganda. There is also the
uncritical repetition of arguments that the US has variously employed
to justify war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Here, I am referring to the
line that "Greens have no illusions about the current government in
Iran, which under the rule of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and
Ayatollah Khameini has suppressed the rights of women, tortured and
murdered gay people, and brutally crushed student demonstrations and
political dissent." 
 
&gt; What's clear to me, and to other
Greens reading this thread, is that 
&gt; you really DON'T want Greens to recognize that these abuses are 
&gt; taking place in certain other countries.&nbsp; Otherwise, there would be 
&gt; no need to criticize the posting of such articles. 
 
If by "recognize" you mean that the GPUS should publicly pontificate
against human rights abuses in other countries that are in the literal
or metaphorical gun sights of the US gov't., then, absolutely--with
very few exceptions--I don't want the GPUS to "recognize" those abuses.
I think it is a travesty for people to argue the party's "obligation"
to speak out about such human rights abuses when there is every
indication that by doing so it could help justify war or attacks short
of war, resulting in far greater violation of human rights. The best
thing Greens can to do promote global human rights is to work to stop
the war machine based here and to make this country a sterling example
of human rights practice. And one doesn't do either of those by
uncritically mouthing the hollow human rights complaints of the "cruise
missile left." 
 
Michelle J. Kinnucan 
 
</body>
</html>

--------------090502050207060008020703--