News Flash: UK Government are "evil"

[edesignuk]

The Foreign Office is to make a protest to the Iranian ambassador in London after his country's supreme leader called the UK government "evil".

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made the comments as he appealed for an end to protests about election results.

He said Western nations were showing "their enmity against the Islamic Republic system and the most evil of them is the British government".

Ambassador Rasul Movaheddian has been summoned to a Foreign Office meeting. BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8109303.stm).

What a big fat pain in the pooper Iran is.

[iShater]

Big Brother is not eeeeeeeevil! :p

[.Andy]

What a big fat pain in the pooper Iran is.
I would have thought it was quite an astute observation.

[arkitect]

Ah well, makes a change for the poor ol' US. ;)
Unless of course the US has been escalated to a degree of damnation beyond evil…

[Jaffa Cake]

To be fair, the Ayatollah's got a point.

[remmy]

I'm surprised the UK and Iran don't get along more. They both have questionably unelected leaders and dislike people protesting.

[WinterMute]

Damn, someone's been posting videos of the weekly cabinet goat-sacrifice and mullah burning!

It's a fair cop.

[BoyBach]

It's good to see that Uncle Napoleon is still blaming Britain for everything!

[Jaffa Cake]

Damn, someone's been posting videos of the weekly cabinet goat-sacrifice and mullah burning!I think the British public generally don't have a problem with the sacrifices, until those involved try claiming the goats as expenses.

[Eraserhead]

I'm surprised the UK and Iran don't get along more. They both have questionably unelected leaders

Unless you're talking about the Queen, the Labour party were democratically elected - and there wasn't widespread electoral fraud.
I think the British public generally don't have a problem with the sacrifices, until those involved try claiming the goats as expenses.

I have to admit I'm fairly outraged by the expenses the MP's have released, take a look at the following claim from the Oxford East MP - Andrew Smith.

177857

And its for a reasonable amount of money as well - and you can't see WTF he's claiming for - for all I know it could be a hot-tub, or flights to America or something.

[opinioncircle]

Unless you're talking about the Queen, the Labour party were democratically elected - and there wasn't widespread electoral fraud.


How do you know that by the way? Ain't there any electoral manipulation in the UK like there is anywhere else in the world (France,US,Germany...)?

[Jaffa Cake]

Eraserhead - I think the 'unelected leader' comment is in reference to the fact that Gordon Brown was elected PM by his own party, he's never actually been Labour leader in a General Election.

[skunk]

Unless you're talking about the Queen, the Labour party were democratically elected - and there wasn't widespread electoral fraud.Gordon Pasha was not elected. As for being part of the Axis of Evil, how can we possibly (a) object to such terms of endearment when we aligned ourselves to US leaders who described Iran as such, and (b) have taken over 40% of the world's land surface without being a tiny bit evil?

[Eraserhead]

How do you know that by the way? Ain't there any electoral manipulation in the UK like there is anywhere else in the world (France,US,Germany...)?

There is some electoral fraud, but its all about the scale. In the UK probably an average of one seat (out of 700 odd) is contested on fraud grounds each election - this has no effect in the overall makeup of parliament in even the weakest UK governments. Whereas in Iran the presidential vote almost certainly was completely made up, and in Singapore for example if your seat elects an opposition MP your rubbish doesn't get collected.

Eraserhead - I think the 'unelected leader' comment is in reference to the fact that Gordon Brown was elected PM by his own party, he's never actually been Labour leader in a General Election.

I suppose that's true...

Gordon Pasha was not elected. As for being part of the Axis of Evil, how can we possibly (a) object to such terms of endearment when we aligned ourselves to US leaders who described Iran as such, and (b) have taken over 40% of the world's land surface without being a tiny bit evil?

Thinking about the OP some more I'm not too bothered if Iran wants to call us evil - they are exercising their right to freedom of speech after all. And we are evil some of the time too.

[remmy]

Actually not sure if Gordon was elected by his own party. Some of those who did want an election in the party got into a bit of trouble.

I think the Ayatollah is trying to distract people. No nothing to discuss about the elections, and by the way more importantly Britain is evil.

[opinioncircle]

There is some electoral fraud, but its all about the scale. In the UK probably an average of one seat (out of 700 odd) is contested on fraud grounds each election - this has no effect in the overall makeup of parliament in even the weakest UK governments. Whereas in Iran the presidential vote almost certainly was completely made up, and in Singapore for example if your seat elects an opposition MP your rubbish doesn't get collected.


I agree that the scale isn't important . However I think this is just a flat lie to see our democracies as widely fair and square when it comes to election. This also can be extended towards censorship as well in my opinion.

[Queso]

I have to admit I'm fairly outraged by the expenses the MP's have released, take a look at the following claim from the Oxford East MP - Andrew Smith.

*pic*

And its for a reasonable amount of money as well - and you can't see WTF he's claiming for - for all I know it could be a hot-tub, or flights to America or something.
Never trust anyone with a name that generic. He's obviously up to something ;)

I love the fact we're all evil again BTW. Just as the world was getting used to us being irrelevant too :cool:

[peskaa]

Unless you're talking about the Queen, the Labour party were democratically elected - and there wasn't widespread electoral fraud.


I have to admit I'm fairly outraged by the expenses the MP's have released, take a look at the following claim from the Oxford East MP - Andrew Smith.

177857

And its for a reasonable amount of money as well - and you can't see WTF he's claiming for - for all I know it could be a hot-tub, or flights to America or something.
Woohoo, Oxford East.

His expenses are pretty shocking to be honest.

[Schtumple]

Leave big brother alone.

(Please spare my life, I am doubleplusgood at erasing the past, like the Iraq war ;))

[mbpnewbie]

it is truely sad when we can make these jokes about big brother and them be true... Who wants to go and take over madagasgar and start a fresh?

[neiltc13]

Eraserhead - I think the 'unelected leader' comment is in reference to the fact that Gordon Brown was elected PM by his own party, he's never actually been Labour leader in a General Election.

I'm sick of hearing this "unelected" crap. I don't support GB but I do live in his constituency and he is very popular here. It pains me to hear people saying that he was unelected because he got into the position in the same way that every other prime minister gets into office - by being the leader of the party with the most seats.

[remmy]

I'm sick of hearing this "unelected" crap. I don't support GB but I do live in his constituency and he is very popular here. It pains me to hear people saying that he was unelected because he got into the position in the same way that every other prime minister gets into office - by being the leader of the party with the most seats.

So when the country went to vote, were they voting for the Labour party, Tony Blair who was Prime Minister at the time, their local MP or Gordon Brown who might be Prime Minister is a while. The system is no good.

[djellison]

Unless you're talking about the Queen, the Labour party were democratically elected - and there wasn't widespread electoral fraud.

At the last general election, Tony Blair said he would see out his last term. Thus, people voted Labour with that in mind.

He's since turned out to be a liar and quit - giving us Gordon Brown. A man that no one in this country voted to be the Prime Minister.

You vote for a party, and the leader of that party becomes PM.

If that leader quits - the RIGHT thing to do is to call a general election.

Gordon has only not done so, because he knows he would fail.

If he had any decency, he would call a general election TODAY.

[edesignuk]

If that leader quits - the RIGHT thing to do is to call a general election.

Gordon has only not done so, because he knows he would fail.Perhaps, but would a change of gvt in the middle of a global disaster really be a good idea anyway?

[Queso]

If he had any decency, he would call a general election TODAY.
Not yet. I want all those guilty of expenses fraud to be deselected as candidates before another election is called. No way are they getting the chance of another term in office.

[Zombie Acorn]

At least its not America this time.

[remmy]

Perhaps, but would a change of gvt in the middle of a global disaster really be a good idea anyway?

The US went from Bush to Obama.

Ok, were going to get, Brown to Cameron :o

[djellison]

Perhaps, but would a change of gvt in the middle of a global disaster really be a good idea anyway?

Put it this way- it couldn't make it any worse.

[Peterkro]

Put it this way- it couldn't make it any worse.

Bad as it maybe I can assure you Cameron has the ability to make it much worse..

[Schtumple]

The US went from Bush to Obama.

Ok, were going to get, Brown to Cameron :o

Dumb n dumber...

[djellison]

Bad as it maybe I can assure you that I think Cameron has the ability to make it much worse..

I changed that for you.

It'd be nice for the people of this country to be allowed to have some influence - a general election is so far overdue it's not even funny anymore.

[Peterkro]

I changed that for you.

It'd be nice for the people of this country to be allowed to have some influence - a general election is so far overdue it's not even funny anymore.

I'm sure you'll correct me again but don't UK parliaments last for five years unless the government calls one earlier, I would have thought that meant the next election would be called in May next year to take place in June unless the government wants it earlier.

[BoyBach]

I'm sure you'll correct me again but don't UK parliaments last for five years unless the government calls one earlier, I would have thought that meant the next election would be called in May next year to take place in June unless the government wants it earlier.


The Queen can dissolve Parliament. C'mon Liz, you know you want to!

[djellison]

unless the government calls one earlier,

It should have called one when Blair stood down.

Legally, we are not due one till next year.

Morally, we're damn well due one now.

[Peterkro]

The Queen can dissolve Parliament. C'mon Liz, you know you want to!

If only she would not only would we get an election but probably the abolishment of the monarchy as well.

[Peterkro]

It should have called one when Blair stood down.

Legally, we are not due one till next year.

Morally, we're damn well due one now.

Do the words "I think" ring any bells at all?

[CRAZYBUBBA]

To be fair, the UK is aligned with America and did conspire with the CIA to take down the most beloved democratic leader the country has ever known (mossadegh) in order to protect their oil interests.

[BoyBach]

If only she would not only would we get an election but probably the abolishment of the monarchy as well.


A win-win situation.

[skunk]

I changed that for you.I think you should change it for yourself if you want, rather than misquoting someone else.

[SydneyDev]

The UK govt are not evil, they have just been in power a bit long. Anyway, hopefully they are stirring the pot in Iran. If a revolution can be "helped along" that would be rather excellent. With Iraq pretty much pacified and an revolution in Iran, that would just leave AfPak, and Obama is getting serious about that.

[skunk]

The UK govt are not evil, they have just been in power a bit long. Anyway, hopefully they are stirring the pot in Iran. If a revolution can be "helped along" that would be rather excellent. With Iraq pretty much pacified and an revolution in Iran, that would just leave AfPak, and Obama is getting serious about that.Astonishing. Stirring the pot in Iran? Helping along a revolution? Do you not know that the UK and USA have already done both those things? Did it help before? I don't think so. The first time it brought a corrupt and self-serving autocrat to absolute power by destroying the elected government, the second time it brought about a radical theocracy. As for Iraq being "pacified", what do you mean exactly? There are almost daily bomb attacks with large numbers of dead, and the puppet government is terminally corrupt. You really think things are being improved?

[CRAZYBUBBA]

sydney, it's precisely that kind of thinking that helped make the world even worse than it already was.

[SydneyDev]

You really think things are being improved?

I think in the long term yes. You are saying the governments there are corrupt, but as we are seeing in the UK, governments always become corrupt. The important thing is to have in place a system that lets them be completely kicked out periodically. That is what will the allies are giving them. That is what will ultimately improve things.

[skunk]

I think in the long term yes. You are saying the governments there are corrupt, but as we are seeing in the UK, governments always become corrupt. The important thing is to have in place a system that lets them be completely kicked out periodically. That is what will the allies are giving them. That is what will ultimately improve things.The Iranian system allows that, too. For the US in particular to be pontificating about "democracy" seems especially ironic in view of the probability that at least the 2000 if not the 2004 elections there were far from squeaky clean. "Stirring the pot" really does not help anyone, as countless efforts by the "allies", as you fondly call them, have consistently shown.

[SydneyDev]

The Iranian system allows that, too. For the US in particular to be pontificating about "democracy" seems especially ironic in view of the probability that at least the 2000 if not the 2004 elections there were far from squeaky clean.

Ok, but after the close 2000 election in the US, were there violent protests in the streets? No, a few people dressed like Darth Vader and carried placards outside the Supreme Court and joked with the media.

That is because Americans know the difference between a fundamentally corrupt system and a simple close election. Maybe the Iranian people protesting today know the difference too.

"Stirring the pot" really does not help anyone, as countless efforts by the "allies", as you fondly call them, have consistently shown.

Wait and see - it's a long term effort.

[skunk]

That is because Americans know the difference between a fundamentally corrupt system and a simple close election.Oh really?

[SydneyDev]

Oh really?

Yes, I think only the people that live in a place really know what it's like. Outsiders can only look at their reactions to see. The extreme different reaction to the close election in the US compared with in Iran makes me wonder why the people are acting so differently. Maybe the Iranians know more about their system that you do. And the Americans too.

[skunk]

The extreme different reaction to the close election in the US compared with in Iran makes me wonder why the people are acting so differently.The Iranian result was apparently not close at all.

[SydneyDev]

The Iranian result was apparently not close at all.

I guess the people protesting don't trust the system.

[skunk]

I guess the people protesting don't trust the system.Or perhaps there is a lot more "pot-stirring" going on that we don't know about.

[SydneyDev]

Or perhaps there is a lot more "pot-stirring" going on that we don't know about.

I don't know, I don't live there. I suspect it's just paranoia on their part. Most of those countries have extremely powerful state security services, that would make it very hard for the allies to do much stirring at all. The best we can do is offer moral support, which Obama unfortunately seems reluctant to do.

[BoyBach]

The best we can do is offer moral support, which Obama unfortunately seems reluctant to do.


If Pres. Obama becomes too critical of the situation in Iran the shouts in Tehran will quickly turn from "Death to the dictator" to "Death to the USA". His relative silence is excellent foreign policy.

[skunk]

I don't know, I don't live there. I suspect it's just paranoia on their part. Most of those countries have extremely powerful state security services, that would make it very hard for the allies to do much stirring at all. The best we can do is offer moral support, which Obama unfortunately seems reluctant to do.Referring again to "the allies" is tendentious and inappropriate: we are not at war with Iran. Besides which, the US has been actively encouraging and financing efforts to destabilise Iran for some time.

[Macky-Mac]

Referring again to "the allies" is tendentious and inappropriate: we are not at war with Iran. Besides which, the US has been actively encouraging and financing efforts to destabilise Iran for some time.

well it looks like the regime in tehran will soon be able to produce testimony to back up your claims of foreign plots and intervention.....from a report by The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/26/iran-election-protests-mousavi);

Iran opposition alleges plot to implicate Mir Hossein Mousavi

Jailed Iranian reformists have been tortured in an attempt to force them into TV "confessions" of a foreign-led plot against the Islamic regime, it was alleged today, as the country's guardian council buried hopes for any significant revision of the disputed presidential election.

According to Iranian opposition websites, the "confessions" are aimed at implicating Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, the defeated reformist candidates, in an alleged conspiracy.

Mostafa Tajzadeh, Abdollah Ramezanzadeh and Mohsen Aminzadeh, all Mousavi supporters, are reported to have undergone "intensive interrogation" sessions in Tehran's Evin prison since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed re-election.

They are among several hundred activists, academics, journalists and students detained in a crackdown coinciding with the brutal suppression of street protests.

Prisoners reportedly heard screams from Tajzadeh and Ramezanzadeh in Evin's section 209, which is reserved for political prisoners and is run by the hardline intelligence ministry. Aminzadeh, a former deputy foreign minister, was heard shouting: "I am not going to give interviews."

Amnesty International said the reports came from "very credible sources"....

[skunk]

You'll have to leave the official protests about such despicable techniques to countries which have not used them.