Iran earmarks $20 million to support militants

Sun Nov 29, 2009 3:54 pm » by **Proto**

Iran earmarks $20 million to support militants
11/29/2009 11:04:44 AM
AP
http://onenewsnow.com/AP/Search/World/D ... ?id=790048

Iran's parliament passed a law on Sunday earmarking $20 million to support militant groups opposing the West and investigate alleged U.S. and British plots against the Islamic Republic.

The legislation is widely seen as a response to Western criticism of Iran's violent crackdown against protesters following the disputed June presidential election. Lawmakers started debating the outline of the bill in August when Iran's hardline leaders were fending off allegations that security forces had tortured opposition activists detained during the demonstrations.

The text of the legislation says the money is to "support progressive currents that resist illegal activities by by the governments of the U.S. and Britain." Iranian officials often use such terms to describe militant groups.

It was not immediately clear which groups would receive funding from Iran, but Tehran already backs the Islamic militants Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The bill also taps funds to "confront plots and unjust restrictions" by the Washington and London against Tehran and to disclose "human rights abuses by the two countries."

A committee with representatives from Iran's intelligence services, the elite Revolutionary Guards, as well as the Foreign Ministry and the communication and culture ministries will mangage the funds.

Iran's constitutional watchdog must still approve the bill before it takes effect.

The move comes as Iran also faces increasing international pressure over its disputed nuclear program.

On Thursday, the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, passed a resolution demanding that Tehran immediately stop building its newly revealed nuclear facility and freeze uranium enrichment. The IAEA resolution criticized Iran for defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment _ the source of both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

Iran's parliament speaker, Ali Larijani, warned on Sunday that Tehran could scale back its cooperation with the IAEA if the West continues to pressure Tehran over its nuclear program. That follows similar threats from other Iranian officials in recent days.

To that end, lawmakers asked the government on Sunday to begin drawing up a bill to reduce cooperation with U.N. nuclear agency.

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:06 pm » by **Lowsix**

The implications are clear.

Again, you are denying the influence of cause and effect.

Because America and Britian have no history whatsoever in the covert involvement of infiltration and involvement of the overthrow of Iraqi and Iranian governments.

Britian's occupation of Iraq in the 40s and 50s was a lie,
we didnt topple Saddam and hand him to his enemies,
and we played no part in overthrowing Mossadeq
to replace him with the Shah, and Iran isnt really purchasing
the Sa-300 missile systems to counter Isreal's threat
to blow up their reactors as they did with Osirak in '81?

Their material and monetary assistance to those groups and desire for defensive capability is simply a manifestation of their completely unjustified paranoia?

You're a sharp tack with no tendency for oversimplification.

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:23 pm » by **Proto**

LowSix wrote:The implications are clear.

Again, you are denying the influence of cause and effect.

Because America and Britian have no history whatsoever in the covert involvement of infiltration and involvement of the overthrow of Iraqi and Iranian governments.

Britian's occupation of Iraq in the 40s and 50s was a lie,
we didnt topple Saddam and hand him to his enemies,
and we played no part in overthrowing Mossadeq
to replace him with the Shah, and Iran isnt really purchasing
the Sa-300 missile systems to counter Isreal's threat
to blow up their reactors as they did with Osirak in '81?

Their material and monetary assistance to those groups and desire for defensive capability is simply a manifestation of their completely unjustified paranoia?

You're a sharp tack with no tendency for oversimplification.

me ? i just posted a news piece from the associated press ...

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:26 pm » by **Lowsix**

Yes the "who, me?" ploy.

Ingenious.

**edit: misspelled ingenious

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:34 pm » by **Mep630**

LowSix wrote:Because America and Britian have no history whatsoever in the covert involvement of infiltration and involvement of the overthrow of Iraqi and Iranian governments.

lol, but Brittan and USA are the good guys, right?! we dont infiltrate or overthrow others!

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:42 pm » by **Lowsix**

Mep you dipshit..
what do you think i was saying?

I'll give you a hint:
Google: Sarcasm..and irony.
Now put your dick back in your underoos.

lol jesus..

Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:48 pm » by **Proto**

mep630 wrote:
LowSix wrote:Because America and Britian have no history whatsoever in the covert involvement of infiltration and involvement of the overthrow of Iraqi and Iranian governments.
lol, but Brittan and USA are the good guys, right?! we dont infiltrate or overthrow others!

i don't think anyone arguing that , but mep how can you really be so sure
that iran is absolutely not a threat at all ?
i've seen many times you say stuff like don't believe the propaganda,
the west want war with iran since 2000 something and such .

so im asking what makes you think iran is not dangerous ?

only because the west had it shares of involvements and overthrows does
that mean that iran is all good ?
cant you consider the option that iran is fucked up just as much .