Logic, your argument about Iran not being allowed to have atomic artillery because her Sharia Law allows the stoning of women, is rather weak because many other Islamic states have such laws, as Saudi Arabia does.

Such an argument would certainly be left out of an academic discussion, and, anyhow the main reason that Iran is being locked out by the UN, is as she opposes Israel largely because Israel possesses atomic artillery, with rockets ready to go.

If there has been any violation of rules, Logic, the UN should have its sights on little Israel, which has not only its nuclear arsenal but well-equipped fighter bombers making her easily the strongest military nation in the Middle East.

With Israel being close to being the most poorly populated nation in the Middle East, any true historian would call this simply a bastardisation of the principles of power balance.

What Iran is up against mainly is the old Western elitism still carried through from the colonial days, added on, of course, by the way both the US and Britain in order to get their hands on the high quality Iranian oil, broke the decolonisation code after WW2 to devise an anti Communist revolution in Iran in the 1950s setting up the puppet Shah.

Then up came the Ayatollah, a geat many Westerners clapping their hands when the whole US Embassy was captured and held for a year.

Not satisfied, an angry US backed Saddam to attack Iran in 1982, the war finally won by a victorious Iran after eight years, despite Donald Rumsfeld dropping in to give advice, even including the use of chemicals.

Really, Logic, as many historians can vouch for, Iran can pride itself on being much more fair and honest than ever our Anglophilic allies have been.

Also these historians can feel so ashamed, the religous ones wondering what a good God up there really feels about it all ....?

Could be shades of Socrates -..... out with the Gods and in with the Good.

Firstly

Back to the petition. The following link is from article about bogus names appearing on the petition.

www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=2824#comments

Bushbred

A regime whose laws, and practices allow the unbelievably cruel practice of the Islamic form of stoning, and which encouraged children to be used in a war as human mine detectors is so lacking in morality that for it to posses nuclear weapons is a particular worry. This is a matter of commonsense, it has nothing to do with history.

Before the present clerical regime Iran (Persia) might have had a non-warlike history, but at present it has a cruel and evil disguised dictatorship. Practices from the past are no indicator of how they will behave now.

And before anyone brings up a red herring of stoning, Israel and the bible, Jewish interpretation has never given it the meaning that Sharia law has. Cruel executions are simply forbidden in Jewish law. The same applies to Eye for an Eye which never had the meaning popularly given to it by some other religions notably Christianity. Remember that the bible was written in an ancient form of Hebrew not in English, the most valid interpretations are those made by ancient scholars.

Reckon you could do with a bit of political science training, Logic.

Your mind seems eternally on religion. Please to remember that not so many years ago the Puritans were stoning women also, and European Catholics doing even worse.

Seems most of your barracking is for that American payback, Logic, or even more - both the one of Iran holding the US Embassy for a year, for which many of us gave a cheer, and the other of course, Iran winning the eight year war against Iraq which was aided and abetted again by the US, similar to the one placing in the puppet Shah in the 1950s.

Looks like you are a real American neo-colonial backer, Logic, well for that especially with George Dubya in charge you can really stay by yourself.

Bushbred

At the time when the Puritans were stoning women and European Catholics doing even worse I would have been concerned about letting them have nuclear weapons. As this was a development only possible in a post enlightenment society, that of course was not possible at the time otherwise history would have been very different (I studied physics).

But Iran now has a medieval theocracy (did you study theocracies in Political Science?). As a result it would be madness to let them have such weapons. It would have been better if UK, India France Israel etc did not have them either but at least their governments are directly answerable to their people in proper elections and their leaders do not believe in an imminent Armageddon leading to the arrival of the hidden Imman. (sorry to mention religion again but it is hard to avoid when discussing a theocracy).

Perhaps you need an update on you political theory to accommodate the new religious fanaticism, which is also present in parts of the US but at least religious dissent there is encouraged, as it is in Australia.

I would not however like to draw attention away the original topic. Lary Stillman protest is nonsense. And his petition has been padded out with false and bogus names, which show much credence can be given to his views.

Logic:

(a) It was not "Larry Stillman's protest".

(b) The most obvious thing to do with a petition you don't agree with is try to discredit it by adding names such as A. Hitler or J. Stalin. You can then imply that few, if any of the signatories are genuine.

(c) The whole thing has become a joke, anyway.

The thing has become a joke. But several of the names which appeared were of real people who didn't even sign the petition and who had no intention of doing so. The full number is not known.

That is what discredits it.

The basic statement of the petition of wanting peace with the Palestinians and two states is not an argument except by a tiny group of fanatics. There is no real opposition to that, and there was no need of that kind of petition.

I know of people who signed the petition taking it at face value and not realising the full agenda of Lowenstein. The true signatories should spend less effort claiming they are being silenced and when they get a platform such as OLO, actually telling us what they do want and why that is an alternative to the attitudes of the rest.