EDITOR’S NOTE: On January 5, 2012, I posted a video entitled “Disturbing images from Iran you rarely see” to my personal Facebook profile, not on a venue public for all the world to see as David Stein later claimed. My personal settings allow only my “friends” to view my posts unless otherwise specified. I have since opted to make this specific post public so that you do not have to be my “friend” in order to read the entire exchange.
My purpose in posting the video was to humanize Iran. After a decade of America at war in no less than three countries, Americans have lost their sense of humanity regarding the physiological, psychosocial, and socioeconomic tribulations which both American military families and those abroad must endure as a result of perpetual warfare. I posted the video with a one-word comment, “Scary.”
David Stein chose to debate me about how afraid of Iran I really should be. The less I bought into his interventionist propaganda, the more impatient, irate, and “perturbed” he became. In fact, he was so stewed by my refusal to subscribe to his pro-war doctrine that 10 days later, he chose to publish a ridiculous, highly monocular, sleazy 3,000 word ‘expose’ which made lousy, unfounded and outrageously false claims about me on his personal blog site.
The next day, Joseph Fein chose to bobble-head Stein’s tabloid muckraking on his own personal blog site.
Below is the dialogue that birthed the bologna propaganda, which I assume is meant to instill fear in my fellow Central Committee members and Republicans alike about ‘crazy constitutionalists’ like me.
For the sake of brevity, I have deleted one poster’s (Bill P.) dialogue simply because it is superfluous to the issue of Stein’s public attack on me. If you would like to see the post in its entirety, please visit my personal Facebook page and scroll down to January 5 into January 6, 2012. David Stein’s selective out-of-context quotations, included only those which would promote his race card-pulling, Alinsky-tactical propaganda that would put 2008 Obama supporters to shame. I have provided the full exchange below.
David Stein: With all due respect, Dani, I’m not entirely sure what this video is supposed to mean. I could have put the same type of video together in 1940 about Nazi Germany. The Nazi devotion to aesthetics is legendary. I could have made a slideshow with images of its beautiful parks, art galleries, symphonies, the majestic Black Forest, the stunning Ammersee, the beautiful cathedrals, and lots of happy, playful people who were not Nazis (as the majority of Germans were neither in the Nazi Party, nor had they voted for Hitler).
In fact, I guess the only difference would have been that in the 1940 video of Germany, the women would not all be wearing compulsory hair coverings, as they are in this video.
So yes, I could have done a video like this in 1940, but so what? What would it have had to do with whether or not military action against Germany was justified? What would their parks or their forests or their ski slopes have mattered in that particular discussion?
January 6 at 1:01am • Like
Dani Rascon: David, I think the intent of this video is to give people an idea of what Iran looks like. The subject of Iran has become so oddly impersonal the more we discuss attacking them. Iran is not some 3rd world tribal nation like Afghanistan. It is a thriving, industrialized nation with splits within their political system much like ours has. Given, theirs is not as advanced as the U.S., but industrialized none the less.
I’m wondering if you have ever spoken with a woman who wears hijab? I have, and they wear it proudly. It is part of their culture, and denotes modesty. Look at the women’s faces in those photos. They are not some cave-living neanderthals. They are wearing sporty sunglasses, make up, designer jeans, and Nikes. Hardly the idea of “repression” that most Americans would prefer we believe to help justify bombing the hell out of Iran.
If we are discussing Nazi Germany, we had best draw the parallels in recent intrusions to our Constitution like the passage of the latest NDAA bill before pointing the finger at a country that most Americans know nothing about. At least Iran follows their Constitution.
It’s about time we start humanizing peoples in other lands before we jump on the war machine. When is enough enough?
David Stein: ”I’m wondering if you have ever spoken with a woman who wears hijab?” Actually, Dani, my cousin has an Iranian-Muslim father and a British-Jewish mom. When her mom died of cancer when she was a child, she went to live with her father in Iran, a year before the Ayatollah came to power, and she grew up knee-deep in the hell of “modesty police” patrols and abuse, before fleeing back to London, and, later, settling in Tel Aviv. So yeah, I HAVE spoken with someone who’s been forced to wear the hijab…in fact, we had a wonderful family Hanukkah together at my home.
“At least Iran follows their (sic) Constitution?” Really? Really, Dani? Umm…so did Nazi Germany (I return to my original analogy, which you didn’t address). The Nazis followed the Nuremberg Laws rather fanatically. So the hell what? Repressive countries now get points for following the repressive laws that were passed by dictators? Wow.
January 6 at 1:56am • Like
Dani Rascon: It was just a question. So there is no need to get angry. I am not nearly advocating that Iran is an ideal home for Jewish people, being the Islamic Republic it is. I have a Jewish friend who fled Iran during the Revolution. He still has family there.
I am glad you enjoyed your holidays with your family. There is nothing more important than family and I TRULY believe that 99% of people in the world believe so also. There is very little most people would not do to protect their family or to avenge their untimely and unlawful deaths perpetrated by a foreign government.
Nazi Germany suspended its court system and the Constitution. I did address it and I did so clearly. The biggest threat to Americans at this point in time is our own government. We need to clean our own house before we go destroying the lives of people in other lands. Even then it is immoral and puts the American people in greater danger.
So what is your #1 argument for hoping to go to war with Iran?
January 6 at 2:32am • Like
David Stein: A couple of things.
I am perturbed by your defense of the hijab, as it is worn by the women in the video you posted. Those women in Iran have NO CHOICE but to wear it. Therefore it is, by definition, repression, which you claim it isn’t. That’s troubling to me.
Nazi Germany did not “suspend” its court system and constitution. A new governing force took over and rewrote the laws, just as the Islamic revolutionaries did when they seized power in Iran. The Nazis didn’t “suspend” anything; they REWROTE and RESHAPED the laws, just as the Ayatollah didn’t “suspend” Iranian law from the days of the Shah – he rewrote and reshaped the laws. Same thing; same exact thing.
So, here’s my question to you. If we assume, as the historical evidence rather clearly shows, that the Nazis were not in any way planning to invade the U.S., but, indeed, they were attacking our close ally, England, why was it okay to go to war against Germany to help our ally, but (according to Dr. Paul) it’s NOT okay to take action against Iran even though Saeed Jalili, the head of Iran’s nuclear program, has quite clearly stated that his “main priority” is to “fight Israel,” which, like England, is an ally of ours?
Why, in the case of Germany, was it okay to go to war with a country that was not, at the time, directly threatening us, in order to protect an ally (England), but, when it comes to Iran, a country that has actually DIRECTLY ATTACKED US in the past, and has clearly stated its intentions to obliterate a close ally (Israel), we should (in the words of Dr. Paul) “not get involved” (his statement from the FNC debate several months ago)?
January 6 at 3:06am • Like
Dani Rascon: I made no claim about repression either way. I simply stated a fact about women who I know that wear it with pride. How is Iran’s requirement any different than Orthodox Judaism’s requirement that married women cover their head?
I am not going to waste time arguing the meaning of “suspended” with you. The point is that the Nazi regime circumvented the court system, denying the German people their rights to due process. NDAA has done the same to us. The progression of the suspension of our natural and Constitutional rights contained in the Bill of Rights have been stripped from us.
We had been attacked by Japan, we declared war on Japan, Germany declared war on us, we declared war on Germany. It was justified for us to go to war with Germany because a.) we had already been attacked by an axis power, b.) Germany declared their intent to harm us as well. We did not go to war with Germany because England was our ally.
Are you going to answer my question about why you hope America goes to go to war with Iran? Is your reasoning simply because Israel is our ally, or do you have some evidence that nobody else has seen which states that Iran intends to harm America?
This is the problem with you Zionists. You are willing to sacrifice the safety, well-being, livelihoods, futures, families, economy of over 300 million Americans to fight in wars that have nothing to do with us. And then you get rabid with those of us who stand up for the safety, security, and CONSTITUTION of AMERICANS.
WE’VE BEEN AT WAR FOR 10 YEARS. NO MORE. I support your right to volunteer your life, your fortune, and your honor to fight in others wars if you so choose. LEAVE ME AND MY FAMILY AND MY COUNTRY OUT OF IT.
January 6 at 4:20am • Like
David Stein: Good God, are you THAT ignorant of history? FDR, for all of his faults (and lord knows, I’m no fan of his domestic policies) began offering aid and support to England long before Pearl Harbor, and long before our declaration of war against Japan (and Germany’s concurrent declaration of war against us), because he sincerely opposed German fascism. Please show me your evidence that “Germany declared their intent to harm us” (and would you PLEASE stop using “their” when referring to the actions of a country? The proper term is “its,” as in “Germany declared ITS intent to harm us”). Please show me your historical evidence that Germany declared ITS intent to harm us on our soil. Have you actually READ Germany’s declaration of war in December 1941? They phrased it defensively, not offensively (Google it; I’m too damn tired to do it for you). So show me your proof that Germany declared an intent to harm us on our soil, on our shores. Thanks.
January 6 at 5:20am • Like
Todd K: I think Dani’s viewpoint, which I share, is that the vast majority of Iranians are like the vast majority of Americans, or people anywhere in the world. They want to work, raise children and just live their lives. They are not monsters. They are not evil. They are human beings just like the rest of us and the constant portrayals by our politicians and media of them as a threat to us are false.
In fact, before Bush and his axis of evil speech, Iran was headed to increasing domestic freedom and the youth of the nation were pushing for change. The minute they were presented with an external threat though, in the form of the US, they did what anyone would do and circled the wagons.
It’s a sad fact that our leaders and theirs are very much the same, using each other as an external boogieman to distract from and justify repressive measures at home.
Despite whatever rhetoric some may claim Iranians throw around about attacking Israel, the fact is that Iran’s only war in recent times was a defensive one against Iraq, one in which we encouraged and supported Iraq. The US on the other hand has been engaged in constant warfare for most of its existence. Iran isn’t the one with bases and soldiers in hundreds of nations around the world. Iran seeks a nuclear weapon for safety and I don’t blame them when the only nation in the world to use a nuclear weapon on human beings is constantly threatening them and not only has their country surrounded but is also engaged in acts of war in the form of sanctions.
January 6 at 8:17am • Unlike • 1
Todd K. <stupid enter posting instead of adding a blank line>
Iran is not a threat to the US. They couldn’t hurt us militarily if they tried, they don’t have any weapon systems capable of reaching the US. If we left them alone, their people would work to increase democracy in their nation.
If Israelis feel Iran is a threat to their security let THEM deal with, along with the consequences. If Zionists in American clothing feel so strongly let them go and fight for Israel instead of trying to drag those of us who put America first into their quarrels.
January 6 at 8:21am • Unlike • 1
Dani Rascon: David, do you distinguish between US Foreign Aid and sending our men and women to another land, putting their lives, the future of their families, and their honor on the line?
I agree that we sent Aid before we declared war. I adamantly disagree that going to war and sending aid are the same thing.
Are you denying that Hitler declared war on America?
On an added note, you are not doing anything positive for your Zionist cause by getting rabid with me. Calm down. This post was intended to humanize the people with which America intends to engage war. You have no cause to attack me. Your demeanor is not justified.
January 6 at 2:54pm • Like
Dani Rascon: Todd, thank you for making several reasonable, logical, and pro-America points.
January 6 at 2:56pm • Like
[EDITOR’S NOTE: “Dave S.” below is a different person than David Stein.]
Dave S: Hmmm …lots of name calling here. The Iranian president has repeatedly threatend to wipe Israel off the map. I guess I side with the “Zionists”. Iranians called the days before the hardliners took over Iran the “golden age”. Islam is a creeping infection in this country and it’s un-American in my opinion.
January 6 at 3:59pm • Like
Dani Rascon: Dave, I have heard that propaganda quite a bit; that Ahmadinejad said he would wipe Israel off the map. There is quite a bit of contention about the translation and context of his statement. He was quoting the early Ayatollah and experts disagree that he meant it the way American media is portraying it.
I am not convinced he said that.
January 6 at 4:16pm • Like
Dave S.: So what you are saying that unless you have a translator sitting right there, you don’t believe it? Go ahead and defend Iran and Islam all you want. It’s pretty obvious that you and some of your others in your “group” are anti- Israel. I think you forgot about the embassy getting taken over and held for over a year and the Reagan came in and the Iranians were intimidated enough by him to release them. Sorry but I can’t buy you bill of goods.
January 6 at 4:40pm • Like
Dani Rascon: No, that is not what I am saying at all, Dave, my love. I am saying that I am open to the information, but so far I am not convinced. I am saying that even if he did say that, it still does not justify putting America at greater risk and continuing perpetual war that tax-paying Americans and American families cannot afford.
I am speaking in defense of AMERICA. Nobody else.
Have you read Blowback yet, Dave? The embassy was retaliation for our intervention in Iran’s affairs.
This is the part I really don’t get. Israel BEFORE America?? I don’t think so. I don’t understand how AMERICANS can justify attacking me when I am standing IN DEFENSE OF AMERICA.
I won’t be bullied into a pro-war agenda that puts me, my freedom, my family and our futures at risk. It’s not rocket science. It’s self-preservation.
January 6 at 5:02pm • Like • 2
Joe S.: Iran is not a threat. No matter what they say. Most Iranians want the western lifestyle. Even on that note I will not travel there anytime soon.
January 6 at 6:32pm • Unlike • 3
Todd K.: As Dani mentioned, that often used “quote” by the Iranian president is in great contention. Many language scholars claim that what he actually said is that Israel will disappear off the map, not that Iran will, or wants to be the one to do it. Simple demographics seem to indicate that is correct, eventually Arabs will out-breed the Jews there.
Even if he DID say he wants to wipe Israel off the map, so what? We’re now to go to war over words? John McCain sang “Bomb Iran“, if he had won the presidency would Iran have been justified in preemptively striking out against us?
To take the what ifs even further, even if Iran wanted to attack Israel and did, why is it our fight? How does war with Iran make Americans safer? What justification is there for putting American lives at risk at home and abroad?
On the other hand, we are currently committing acts of war in the form of sanctions against Iran.
Bill, you may not view governments attacking governments war but it will invariably lead to what you do view as war. Citizens will pay the price for acts of war like assassinations and sabotage.
Dave, I’m not a supporter of Iran, I’m a supporter of America. War with Iran is will not make Americans safer and Iran is not a threat to us. Nor am I supporter of Islam, or any other religion, particularly the Abrahamic ones. I think they’re all a negative influence on society but I do support the right of anyone to believe what they like. I do not support those believers waging war because of those beliefs, dragging the rest of us into their mess.
January 7 at 11:37am • Unlike • 1