Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

You would make a lot more sense if instead of posting you kept your mouth shut, or better still keep to your ,,,halal pork kebabs

You should heed your own advice Ronnie Corbett, because other than foul language the best you can ever muster is misinformation.

[miltiades]

You would make a lot more sense if instead of posting you kept your mouth shut, or better still keep to your ,,,halal pork kebabs

You should heed your own advice Ronnie Corbett, because other than foul language the best you can ever muster is misinformation.

Who the fuck is Ronnie psycho ?
In defence of a relative?
Psycho, do me a favour, fuck off you plonker !
By the way LONG LIVE THE WEST, TIME FOR YOU TO FUCK OFF AND JOIN YOUR FAMILY !!

[Get Real!]

Who the fuck is Ronnie psycho ?

Your twin.

[miltiades]

Who the fuck is Ronnie psycho ?

Your twin.

Oh I see, just as your twin, Lordo the...brains.
Re kolopedo, san esena maso tous che ftino tous exo chillies fores to lepto. Ai gamisou malaka !

[Lordo]

Come now Robin, I was never ...present at a public hanging so I take my info from various on line
news media, what everyone else does.
"Iran executes hundreds in brutal crane hangings at mega-prison outside Tehran
Ludovica Iaccino By Ludovica Iaccino
July 2, 2015 15:34 BST
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iran-executes- ... an-1508986
Here is another
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iran-executes- ... an-1508986
And another
https://www.asafeworldforwomen.org/glob ... ution.html

" Criticism In Iran Over Children Attending Public Executions"
"Iran has the second-highest annual rate of executions in the world, after China.[1] According to the regime, those executed are criminals convicted of felonies such as murder, rape and drug trafficking; human rights activists say that some are regime opponents.[2]
Moderate conservative circles in Iran recently criticized the Iranian public's enthusiasm for attending public hangings, particularly the practice of bringing children to watch them. Jafar Mohammadi, editor of the moderate conservative website Asr-e Iran, wrote in an article that the public's appetite for this activity was a sign of social sickness. He also warned that allowing children to watch executions could cause them irreparable damage, and urged the authorities to intervene to keep them away."
https://www.memri.org/reports/criticism ... executions

What a ...wonderful culture!!

you still dont get it the batchoyero. iran was a secular democratic place till the yanks and the brits decided to overthrow the govrnment remove the prime minister and replace him with a dictator. you will burn in hell for your ignorance.

You would make a lot more sense if instead of posting you kept your mouth shut, or better still keep to your ,,,halal pork kebabs

npw let see if we canwork it out shall we.

why did these islamofascist come to power. oh i know it was the shah that did it.

and hwho put the shah in power, oog i know that too it was the yanks and the brits. so how the hell can we we bpame the yanks and the brits for the iranian situtation when they were never there, they were on the other side of the world bombing the asians when they were setting up the shah in power. i mean how stupid you know what i mean

now was that with or without arsenic sos you say

[Paphitis]

Over the years, I have encountered quite a few secular-minded Iranian exiles, and they do indeed hanker after the days of the Shah as opposed to the Islamofacism of today's Iran. On the other hand, I am sure there are plenty of religious fanatics in Iran nowadays who support the way things are.

I too know a few Iranians. One, a journalist born in Tehran and who works as a print journalist.

Yes that is what i am saying. Most of us would prefer to live under the Shah than under the Islamist Iranian Government of today, especially women.

there is no way to compare the 2 Administrations. Whilst the Shah had zero tolerance for political disobedience as you correctly pointed out, there was at least social freedom and a secular society.

Women could wear bikinis, head bang to rock n roll, and take drugs. They can't do that now, but I bet the men have a lot more liberty than their female counterparts.

many Iranians actually regret the Islamic Revolution against the Shah. They also believe Iran would have been a better and more liberal society, which is true.

it's the old argument of comparing political freedom with social repression and non-secularism.

Shah was actually 100 times better. We would all prefer the Shah in a heart beat.

[Paphitis]

My own views on Iran.
A nation that carries out public executions with crowds enjoying the macabre spectacle is a barbaric nation. Cranes are used for hanging those sentenced to death by sharia courts.

Long live the west and long may our culture continue to thrive.

But you are a big supporter of Iran and Hesbollah!

Have you changed again?

[Paphitis]

My own views on Iran.
A nation that carries out public executions with crowds enjoying the macabre spectacle is a barbaric nation. Cranes are used for hanging those sentenced to death by sharia courts.

Whereas injecting them with poisons while strapped to a gurney with a smaller audience of around 50, is civilized and preferred!

You pitiful spaghetti-brain…

True, but a differentiation needs to be made between countries which publicly execute individuals because of their sexuality and also executes women by stoning for adultery to the USA which executes convicted criminals in this equally gruesome way (lethal injection).

It's true that the means of the executions are equally deplorable and worthy of condemnation.

Which brings me to the 13,000 political executions by the Assad regime. I bet the scoundrel never said anything about that!

[Paphitis]

Over the years, I have encountered quite a few secular-minded Iranian exiles, and they do indeed hanker after the days of the Shah as opposed to the Islamofacism of today's Iran. On the other hand, I am sure there are plenty of religious fanatics in Iran nowadays who support the way things are.

The only time I have ever been threatened by an'Islamofascist' was in Saudi when I was marched of by the customs man in Jeddah Airport for having a CTO poster of a priest painting an Icon! The only word I could understand was 'Christian' ..... and he spat on the floor every time he uttered the word. But .... hey this is the world your mate Paphitis idolises and admires!

Given the choice of either Iran or Saudi ..... Iran wins hands down. A much more educated and cultured people.

100 % agree with the above.

Yeh but what you numb-skulls are doing is saying it is ok for Iran but not Saudi Arabia.

I never endorsed Saudi Arabia's political system and no one does, but they are considered a friend and Iran isn't. Anyone know why? Hezbollah anyone?

Your hypocrisy shines through all the time. Plus Iran is a big supporter of Hezbollah and international terrorism. Fact!

And in the same breath, you would all jump the minute anyone says anything about the Shah which was clearly and undeniably better than the current Islamists in Iran purely for the reason that the Iranian People had social freedom and equality in the eyes of the law which they don't now. Why? because as you all say, the Shah was supported by the West. Yes of course it was. Why wouldn't the West support him?

No apologies there either. We would support the Shah 1000 times over and we would also support an alternative in Saudi Arabia provided there was one that could also control the country and still keep it friendly towards us. We love friendlies! Even if they are of the House of Saud variety.

I mean duh! you blokes are just so simple!

It aint a perfect world.

Saudi Arabia will change slowly and metamorphose into an UAE or Qatar. That is another thing you all ignore. All the success of these pocket rocket Gulf States which is nothing short of astounding. And they are EXACTLY the same as the Saudis.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

I too know a few Iranians. One, a journalist born in Tehran and who works as a print journalist.

As you have never been to Iran, he must be an exiled Iranian? Read my previous reply to TD.

Yes that is what I am saying. Most of us would prefer to live under the Shah than under the Islamist Iranian Government of today, especially women.

Who is saying that, you or your journalist?

If it is you then the comment is irrelevant because it is hearsay. If it is the journalist, he assumes to speak for ALL Iranians, especially women? Be sensible, under any regime there are those that prefer the regime and those that oppose it. You have only to look at the US/UK/EU to see that.

Under the Shah’s dictatorship, as you point out, those that supported him saw benefit, the majority were opposed to him and paid a heavy price for it. That is why the return of Khomeini was welcomed.

You are the one that extols the Saudi regime and yet their women are far worse treated than Iranian women. OK, as I tried to explain, they would like more freedoms than they have with a Government that has an Ayatollah as The Supreme Leader, that is obvious, but unless these reforms are introduced gradually could they cope with a western type society?

there is no way to compare the 2 Administrations. Whilst the Shah had zero tolerance for political disobedience as you correctly pointed out, there was at least social freedom and a secular society

.
Iran has always been secular in its structure and still is today. There is far more tolerance of other faiths in Iran than almost anywhere else in the Middle East. The country is not run like you would like to see Syria run, under an oppressive Sharia Legal system. Sharia is the governing principal but nowhere near as strictly enforced as it is in many Muslim countries. Example: When I was there we wore sports shirts, with short sleeves and got the disapproving looks. Iranian men always wore long sleeved shirts, within a year the locals were wearing sports shirts with short sleeves, you could even buy them in the market.

They changed through example and freedom of choice, and this is a rolling process of social development. Their strict morality laws driven by their religion would never allow miniskirts, certainly not bikinis and public sex is a definite no-no.
Supplying drugs will get you the death sentence, using them, a caning, which when you see the harm being done in the west by drug abuse, sounds like a good idea to me.

But that is their choice, not something imposed by people driving around in cars with the Koran open on the dashboard, then leaping out and beating men and women with sticks, who offend them, as they do in Saudi. Never heard of the Religious Police? ........ I saw them in action just once ........ now they really are serious fanatics!

Women could wear bikinis, head bang to rock n roll, and take drugs. They can't do that now, but I bet the men have a lot more liberty than their female counterparts.

They did not wear bikinis walking down the street or in public, even in the Shah’s days. Men in Muslim countries always have more freedom than women. Even in Cyprus men have far more freedoms than women, although not as strict as a Muslim country, but Greek Orthodoxy still carries a lot of weight even here, which you could consider a free country.

many Iranians actually regret the Islamic Revolution against the Shah. They also believe Iran would have been a better and more liberal society, which is true.

I am sure they do .... many British regret the Brexit vote, many Americans are trying to destroy the US because they don’t like Trump ..... many French want to leave the EU ..... many in the Eurozone want out of the Euro .......the list is endless. Name one country where the population live in perfect harmony and have it all the way they want it. The problem is that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence! You have to take the rough with the smooth ... within reason!

it's the old argument of comparing political freedom with social repression and non-secularism.

You are misrepresenting facts! The Iranians have political freedom, they have Jewish and Christian members of Parliament ..... do the Saudi’s? It is not social repression, it is having control over the excesses that too much freedom can result in. Looking around me I don’t think that is such a bad thing.

Shah was actually 100 times better. We would all prefer the Shah in a heart beat.

Depends which side of the socio-political fence you were on at the time! The ‘WE’ I assume is you, so that is just your unsupported personal opinion speaking?