Re: I am Neda

[Predrag Trpkov]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...
> An Iranian Young Woman blogging on Balatarin
>
> " Tomorrow is a big day, perhaps I will get killed!
>
> Tomorrow I will participate in demonstrations. Perhaps the
> protests will meet with violence. Perhaps I am one of those who is
> supposed to be killed. I am listening again to all the beautiful songs
> I have heard in my life. I even want to play some LA songs and dance.
> I always wanted to thin my eyebrows as much as I can. Tomorrow before
> I go to the hairdresser I will see some super films at Hamoon. I have
> to take a look at my library. Forugh and Shamloo are worth reading
> again. I will sit and look at my family album. My friends, I should
> call them and say goodbye. I have only two bookcases in the world
> which I asked my family whom they should give the books to. I have two
> more units left to get my bachelors but to hell with a degree. My
> mind is seriously distraught. I wrote these thoughts for the next
> generation to know that we were not manipulated by the atmosphere or
> just emotional. So that they know for bettering their lives we have
> done everything we could. So that they know if our ancestors
> surrendered to Arab and Mongolian invasions, we did not surrender to
> despotism. This note is dedicated to tomorrow's children. . . . "
>
> (Translation from the original Farsi for The Field by Iraj Omidvar.)



A touching prose. Now let's hear some facts.

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22888.htm

Predrag

[Chris Hornbeck]

>http://catinfo.org/On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:17:14 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov" > wrote:

>A touching prose. Now let's hear some facts.
>
>http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22888.htm

So, she *wasn't* killed by a sniper?

Or, is this intended to make it OK that she was killed?


Chris Hornbeck

[Arkansan Raider]

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
>> http://catinfo.org/On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:17:14 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov" > wrote:
>
>> A touching prose. Now let's hear some facts.
>>
>> http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22888.htm
>
> So, she *wasn't* killed by a sniper?
>
> Or, is this intended to make it OK that she was killed?
>
>
> Chris Hornbeck

It sounds like a "Haley's Comet" response to me.

IOW, "I have nothing substantive to say, but oh look, it's Haley's
Comet!!!!"

Just because Mousavi isn't such a nice guy, and in fact bombed our
Marines in Lebanon, it then follows that murdering a 16 year old girl
who wasn't even involved with the protests is completely justified.

Arguments like this really get under my skin, especially when it's
someone trying to play lawyer and justify MURDER.

JMHSO

---Jeff

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Chris Hornbeck" > wrote in message
...
> >http://catinfo.org/On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:17:14 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov"
> wrote:
>
> >A touching prose. Now let's hear some facts.
> >
> >http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22888.htm
>
> So, she *wasn't* killed by a sniper?


I don't know and neither do you.

I can't see how the regime in Iran would be motivated to kill girls on the
streets, but can I see strong motivation of their adversaries to attribute
the killings to the regime. That, along with the synchronized effort by the
"world media" makes me highly suspicious.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22910.htm

If something like that occured in the U.S. it would supposedly be followed
by a police investigation, indictment and court trial. Facts would need to
be established, evidence collected and guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Do you see a problem here or are you fine with what you've been fed by the
corporate media?


> Or, is this intended to make it OK that she was killed?


This is a rather malicious question. Isn't every killing a tragedy? Take a
look at this and tell me what you think about it.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22909.htm

Predrag

[WillStG]

On Jun 25, 11:49 am, "Predrag Trpkov" >
wrote:
> I can't see how the regime in Iran would be motivated to kill girls on the
> streets, but can I see strong motivation of their adversaries to attribute
> the killings to the regime. That, along with the synchronized effort by the
> "world media" makes me highly suspicious.http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22910.htm

They do it all the time - with Stones, let alone bullets. The
Iranian young peeple are also saying Neda died with her eyes open, and
shame on those who chose to live with their eyes closed.

And you blaming corporate media when all the news getting out
here has been basically from cell phones makes no sense. What I
mentioned earlier is the attempts of people who beleive in Net
Neutrality to provide anonymous proxy servers for the Iranians for
communications, without having getting killed by their Government.
But you apparently disapprove of that, prefering to point the finger
at America rather than to lift a finger to help a Muslim, let along
try to solve the genocide going on right under your nose.

Will Miho
NY TV/Audio Post/Music/Live Sound Guy
"The large print giveth and teh sm

[Predrag Trpkov]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...
> On Jun 25, 11:49 am, "Predrag Trpkov" >
> wrote:
> > I can't see how the regime in Iran would be motivated to kill girls on
the
> > streets, but can I see strong motivation of their adversaries to
attribute
> > the killings to the regime. That, along with the synchronized effort by
the
> > "world media" makes me highly
suspicious.http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22910.htm
>
> They do it all the time - with Stones, let alone bullets. The
> Iranian young peeple are also saying Neda died with her eyes open, and
> shame on those who chose to live with their eyes closed.


Having nothing of substance to say Will is shifting to prose again.

To which of almost 50 million Iranian people under 30 are you referring to?
The relatively small faction rioting in the streets because they are
refusing to accept the basic principle of democracy - majority vote?

You conveniently edited it out so let me repeat:



> And you blaming corporate media when all the news getting out
> here has been basically from cell phones makes no sense. What I
> mentioned earlier is the attempts of people who beleive in Net
> Neutrality to provide anonymous proxy servers for the Iranians for
> communications, without having getting killed by their Government.
> But you apparently disapprove of that, prefering to point the finger
> at America rather than to lift a finger to help a Muslim, let along
> try to solve the genocide going on right under your nose.

[Predrag Trpkov]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...
> On Jun 25, 11:49 am, "Predrag Trpkov" >
> wrote:
> > I can't see how the regime in Iran would be motivated to kill girls on
the
> > streets, but can I see strong motivation of their adversaries to
attribute
> > the killings to the regime. That, along with the synchronized effort by
the
> > "world media" makes me highly
suspicious.http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22910.htm
>
> They do it all the time - with Stones, let alone bullets. The
> Iranian young peeple are also saying Neda died with her eyes open, and
> shame on those who chose to live with their eyes closed.


Having nothing of substance to say Will is shifting to prose again.

To which of almost 50 million Iranian people under 30 are you referring to?
The relatively small faction rioting in the streets because they are
refusing to accept the basic principle of democracy - majority vote?

You conveniently edited it out so let me repeat:
If something like that occured in the U.S. it would supposedly be followed
by a police investigation, indictment and court trial. Facts would need to
be established, evidence collected and guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt.

There's no way that the only version that would be heard is the one of the
rioters in the streets. Enough with the double standards.



> And you blaming corporate media when all the news getting out
> here has been basically from cell phones makes no sense. What I
> mentioned earlier is the attempts of people who beleive in Net
> Neutrality to provide anonymous proxy servers for the Iranians for
> communications, without having getting killed by their Government.



Net neutrality, media neutrality, what are you talking about? Any more
oxymorons?

Will Miho's neutrality? OK, that's actually funny.



> But you apparently disapprove of that, prefering to point the finger
> at America rather than to lift a finger to help a Muslim, let along
> try to solve the genocide going on right under your nose.


I apologize in advance, you know by now that I don't throw insults, but this
is plain stupid.

Predrag

[mark steven brooks]

> If something like that occured in the U.S. it would supposedly be followed
> by a police investigation, indictment and court trial. Facts would need to
> be established, evidence collected and guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Just as in the Kennedy assassination.

[Scott Dorsey]

Predrag Trpkov > wrote:
>
>To which of almost 50 million Iranian people under 30 are you referring to?
>The relatively small faction rioting in the streets because they are
>refusing to accept the basic principle of democracy - majority vote?

Nahh, they're rioting in the streets because they are suspicious of the
accuracy of the vote. We've had similar problems in the US over the
years, and it's why voting needs to be transparent and traceable, something
it isn't always.

You can blame the US for the corrupt regime that we put in power, and
maybe even for the inevitable Islamic revolution that followed, but
I think what you're seeing right now are people who are quite independent,
are justifiably suspicious of their government's handling of the election,
and who want to see proof that the election was fair. Just like anyone
in any country would want to see proof that their elections are fair.

If you want to rail against the US, pick an example like Nigeria, where
we are currently doing the sort of thing that lead to the disaster in
Iran in the seventies. Don't pick Iran, where there is an actual push
for real democracy on the part of the people and a totalitarian
government that is wary of giving it to them. The US doesn't control
their press... hell, we can't even control our own.

Incidentally, did you see the Iranian television coverage of the first
speech their president gave after the election? Was that shot with
three-tube Philips cameras? I haven't seen video that looked like
that in ages. Also the president periodically putting on big Sennheiser
headphones to hear the translations instead of having a little IFB
bug in his ear made me feel kind of nostalgic.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Richard Crowley]

Predrag Trpkov wrote:
> Having nothing of substance to say Will is shifting to prose again.

And apparently having nothing on the topic of audio to say
Mr. Trpkov is being plonked.

[WillStG]

On Jun 26, 5:12 pm, "Predrag Trpkov" >
wrote:
>
> I apologize in advance, you know by now that I don't throw insults, but this
> is plain stupid.
>
> Predrag

You are prejudiced against America Predrag. If I want to help the
young people of Iran talk to _each other_, anonymously, so the seceret
police can't kill them, you accuse me of all kinds of crap. So
consistently in fact, I think it's hardly any kind of oversight, you
are promoting the ideological position of the morally bankrupt
Govenrment that educated you.

Will Miho
NY TV/Audio Post/Music/Live Sound Guy
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Predrag Trpkov > wrote:
> >
> >To which of almost 50 million Iranian people under 30 are you referring
to?
> >The relatively small faction rioting in the streets because they are
> >refusing to accept the basic principle of democracy - majority vote?
>
> Nahh, they're rioting in the streets because they are suspicious of the
> accuracy of the vote. We've had similar problems in the US over the
> years, and it's why voting needs to be transparent and traceable,
something
> it isn't always.


The problems in the U.S. have been mainly related to the electronic voting
and the elections were tight. None of this applies to Iran. No electronic
voting, Ahmadinejad received around 62%, the same percentage as four years
ago, and won eleven million votes more than his closest opponent.



> You can blame the US for the corrupt regime that we put in power, and
> maybe even for the inevitable Islamic revolution that followed, but
> I think what you're seeing right now are people who are quite independent,
> are justifiably suspicious of their government's handling of the election,
> and who want to see proof that the election was fair. Just like anyone
> in any country would want to see proof that their elections are fair.


Fair elections is not the same as the election fraud, for which the Iranian
protesters are accusing their government and which they've so far failed to
substantiate. Declaring victory five hours before the polls close (a classic
CIA trick) and running around with "Where's my vote?" banners (clearly
intended for the foreign media) proves nothing. As it turns out, they are
just angry because their candidate didn't win.

FWIW, I know how frustrating and depressing it can be living in a country
ruled by the Right-Wing & Clergy Inc., with no fair elections and no change
in sight, but what these protesters are demanding now has little to do with
democracy, apart from the freedom of speech perhaps. They were outvoted by
2:1, end of story. Things are unlikely to change much as long as this
continues:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22930.htm
and the U.S. keeps invading their neighbours.



> If you want to rail against the US, pick an example like Nigeria, where
> we are currently doing the sort of thing that lead to the disaster in
> Iran in the seventies. Don't pick Iran, where there is an actual push
> for real democracy on the part of the people and a totalitarian
> government that is wary of giving it to them. The US doesn't control
> their press... hell, we can't even control our own.


That's because the supranational corporate elite does it. They control the
governments, it goes without saying that they control the media.

I agree about Nigeria, but I never initiate these discussions and only react
to Will's warmongering and broadcasting of the american imperialist
propaganda here on r.a.p.. I have no other ambitions apart from neutralizing
whatever distorted images he tries to sell of whatever country is
unfortunate enough to find itself in the focus of the U.S. foreign policy.
That's why we rarely discuss many sad examples of democracies that the U.S.
is happy with.



> Incidentally, did you see the Iranian television coverage of the first
> speech their president gave after the election? Was that shot with
> three-tube Philips cameras? I haven't seen video that looked like
> that in ages. Also the president periodically putting on big Sennheiser
> headphones to hear the translations instead of having a little IFB
> bug in his ear made me feel kind of nostalgic.
> --scott


Whenever I see a bunch of Sennheiser MD441s it reminds me of Franjo
Tudjman's speeches, just like a bunch of Sennheiser MD421s reminds me of
Slobodan Milosevic. None of it makes me feel nostalgic, however, or warm in
any way, which is a shame since they are very fine microphones.

Predrag

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Richard Crowley" > wrote in message
. ..
> Predrag Trpkov wrote:
> > Having nothing of substance to say Will is shifting to prose again.
>
> And apparently having nothing on the topic of audio to say
> Mr. Trpkov is being plonked.


You said the same thing years ago, Richard. Couldn't resist, eh?

Don't punish yourself now. Let me say something on topic of audio so that
you can allow yourself to continue reading my posts.

You can reverse polarity of the tweeters in the NS10s for a different, less
harsh voicing.

Here you are. Sorry for being off off topic.

Predrag

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:49:15 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov"
> wrote:

>> So, she *wasn't* killed by a sniper?

>I don't know and neither do you.

It's safe to rule out suicide, so murder seems the obvious
explanation. Why should any other explanation arise?


>> Or, is this intended to make it OK that she was killed?

>This is a rather malicious question. Isn't every killing a tragedy?

In English, "malicious" contains a strong intent to commit harm,
which is not my intent.

Please allow me to say it another way: *Nothing* can excuse the
murder of a young woman.

Have there been lots and more lots of bad politics during our
lifetimes? Yer damned skippy - got me drafted - and we're *all*,
worldwide, paying for the errors of our Fathers and Grandfathers
and GreatGrandFathers.


The worst, most dangerous, most despicable conceit is to think
that *our* children won't also have to pay for *our* errors. BZZZT.
Very, very wrong answer. No one is innocent; no one will be forgiven
by blaming others.


Much thanks, as always,
Chris Hornbeck

[Scott Dorsey]

Predrag Trpkov > wrote:
>
>The problems in the U.S. have been mainly related to the electronic voting
>and the elections were tight. None of this applies to Iran. No electronic
>voting, Ahmadinejad received around 62%, the same percentage as four years
>ago, and won eleven million votes more than his closest opponent.

Here in the US, we have been doing open elections for over 200 years now.
In that time, just about everything that can possibly go wrong with an
election has gone wrong here. The folks who manage elections in the US
have good experience with this now, which is a good thing.

>Fair elections is not the same as the election fraud, for which the Iranian
>protesters are accusing their government and which they've so far failed to
>substantiate. Declaring victory five hours before the polls close (a classic
>CIA trick) and running around with "Where's my vote?" banners (clearly
>intended for the foreign media) proves nothing. As it turns out, they are
>just angry because their candidate didn't win.

If you don't have fair elections, you don't know whether or not there is
any election fraud. Nobody really has any good proof that there is fraud
in Iran, but nobody has any proof that there isn't any either. That's why
fair elections (and that means open elections where if someone wants to
challenge an election, he can get an independent count) are important.

>Whenever I see a bunch of Sennheiser MD441s it reminds me of Franjo
>Tudjman's speeches, just like a bunch of Sennheiser MD421s reminds me of
>Slobodan Milosevic. None of it makes me feel nostalgic, however, or warm in
>any way, which is a shame since they are very fine microphones.

That is tragic, because I think the 441 is really the best podium microphone
ever made. I used three of them last weekend, with about three feet from
the microphone to the person speaking, with extremely clean pickup. And
don't forget that Saddam Hussein also was a regular user of the MD421 too,
and he wasn't exactly a good guy.

Last I saw, Fidel Castro was still using a pair of those awful RCA ice
cream cones. I hope Raoul can do better than that.

I don't know what mikes Ahmadinijad was using, but they were small electrets
on long skinny goosenecks that popped like hell.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Predrag Trpkov > wrote:

> If you don't have fair elections, you don't know whether or not there is
> any election fraud. Nobody really has any good proof that there is fraud
> in Iran, but nobody has any proof that there isn't any either. That's why
> fair elections (and that means open elections where if someone wants to
> challenge an election, he can get an independent count) are important.


Agreed, the fact that the clerics select the presidential candidates alone
disqualifies them in that sense.

Unfortunately, calls for fair elections and threats of nuclear annihilation
don't seem to work together well, especially when coming from the same
source .



> >Whenever I see a bunch of Sennheiser MD441s it reminds me of Franjo
> >Tudjman's speeches, just like a bunch of Sennheiser MD421s reminds me of
> >Slobodan Milosevic. None of it makes me feel nostalgic, however, or warm
in
> >any way, which is a shame since they are very fine microphones.
>
> That is tragic, because I think the 441 is really the best podium
microphone
> ever made. I used three of them last weekend, with about three feet from
> the microphone to the person speaking, with extremely clean pickup. And
> don't forget that Saddam Hussein also was a regular user of the MD421 too,
> and he wasn't exactly a good guy.


Saddam and Slobodan, brothers in mikes.


> Last I saw, Fidel Castro was still using a pair of those awful RCA ice
> cream cones. I hope Raoul can do better than that.


I guess that will depend on the tightness of the embargo.



> I don't know what mikes Ahmadinijad was using, but they were small
electrets
> on long skinny goosenecks that popped like hell.


Probably some cheap chinese knock-offs. That too may be the result of the
embargo.

How can you expect fair elections without letting these people buy some
proper Sennheisers first?

Predrag

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Chris Hornbeck" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:49:15 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov"
> > wrote:
>
> >> So, she *wasn't* killed by a sniper?
>
> >I don't know and neither do you.
>
> It's safe to rule out suicide, so murder seems the obvious
> explanation. Why should any other explanation arise?


I don't know and neither do you if she was killed by a sniper. Just as
nobody knows for sure who the killer was working for.


> >> Or, is this intended to make it OK that she was killed?
>
> >This is a rather malicious question. Isn't every killing a tragedy?
>
> In English, "malicious" contains a strong intent to commit harm,
> which is not my intent.


I'm glad to hear that. Don't look for irony here.


> Please allow me to say it another way: *Nothing* can excuse the
> murder of a young woman.
>
> Have there been lots and more lots of bad politics during our
> lifetimes? Yer damned skippy - got me drafted - and we're *all*,
> worldwide, paying for the errors of our Fathers and Grandfathers
> and GreatGrandFathers.
>
>
> The worst, most dangerous, most despicable conceit is to think
> that *our* children won't also have to pay for *our* errors. BZZZT.
> Very, very wrong answer. No one is innocent; no one will be forgiven
> by blaming others.


Nothing further to add.

Predrag