SAVANNAH, Ga. - A quarter-century after they were taken captive in Iran, five former American hostages say they got an unexpected reminder of their 444-day ordeal in the bearded face of Iran's new president-elect.

Watching coverage of Iran's presidential election on television dredged up 25-year-old memories that prompted four of the former hostages to exchange e-mails. And those four realized they shared the same conclusion — the firm belief that President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been one of their Iranian captors.

"This is the guy. There's no question about it," said former hostage Chuck Scott, a retired Army colonel who lives in Jonesboro, Ga. "You could make him a blond and shave his whiskers, put him in a zoot suit and I'd still spot him."



http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...0/ap_on_re_us/iran_former_hostages

If this is indeed true, then way to go Iran.....


(yeah right)

UAL

DTWClipper,

Whoops, edited...sorry DTW

UAL

[Edited 2005-06-30 04:55:08]

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 1): Could you quote a source please? UAL

The link is there....

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 2): The link is there....

Yes, and I corrected my post  

And read a bit further...

Not everyone agrees. Former hostage and retired Air Force Col. Thomas E. Schaefer said he doesn't recognize Ahmadinejad, by face or name, as one of his captors.

Several former students among the hostage-takers also said Ahmadinejad did not participate.

A memory expert cautioned that people who discuss their recollections can influence one another in reinforcing false memories. Also, it's harder to identify from memory someone of a different race or ethnicity, said psychologist Elizabeth Loftus of the University of California, Irvine.

"Twenty-five years is an awfully long time," Loftus said. "Of course we can't say this is false, but these things can lead people down the path of having a false memory."

The article seems very balanced and subjective, certainly not the hysterical accusations I was expecting.

New Iranian Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says:

“Thanks to the blood of the martyrs, a new Islamic revolution has arisen and the Islamic revolution of 1384 [the current Iranian year] will, if God wills, cut off the roots of injustice in the world,” he said. “The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world."


*******************************************************

Superb news. Oh shit. More assholes to deal with.

Quoting Slider (Reply 5): New Iranian Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says: “Thanks to the blood of the martyrs, a new Islamic revolution has arisen and the Islamic revolution of 1384 [the current Iranian year] will, if God wills, cut off the roots of injustice in the world,” he said. “The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world."

Is this for real?

A criminal, murderous, crazy fanatic at the head of the Iranian government??? I'm shocked!!!  

Quoting Dtwclipper (Thread starter): Iranian captors

-
it is obvious that most of the Iranian leadership either was directly involved or did heavily approve of that action.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 1): way to go

-
to punish them for the "shocking" fact that their president a quarter-century ago may have been involved in that embassy-affair ???
-
  

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 7): fanatic at the head of the Iranian government

-
not to be exaggerated. just a dedicated conservative with restrictive theological opinions. almost like that person in the White House !�
-
  

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 11): almost like that person in the White House !�

I didn't see that coming a mile away  . Please, don't even try comparing the loonies in charge of running Iran into the ground with Bush.

I reckon a little bit of background info on Iran and what eventually led to the Iranian Hostage Crisis isn't too bad, especially taking into account the many parallels with Saddam Hussein and his pending trial.


"At the end of World War II, political unrest dogged Iran and in 1953 the nation's nationalist prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, forced the Shah to flee the country. He was quickly escorted back to power and fired Mossadegh through a counter-coup, led by General Fazlollah Zahedi, which was supported by the American CIA and Britain's SIS (MI6).

With Iran's great oil wealth, Mohammad Reza Shah became the pre-eminent leader of the Middle East, and Guardian of the Persian Gulf. He of government so that he could rule through a one-party regime (under Rastakhiz) in autocratic fashion, which he claimed was a response to the Soviet Union's support of Communist uprisings, through Iran's leftist Tudeh Party. The Shah authorized the creation of the secret police force, SAVAK, infamous for its ruthless persecution of dissidents". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Shah



"SAVAK increasingly symbolized the Shah's rule from 1963-79, a period of corruption in the royal family, one-party rule, the torture and execution of thousands of political prisoners, suppression of dissent, and alienation of the religious masses. The United States reinforced its position as the Shah's protector and supporter, sowing the seeds of the anti-Americanism that later manifested itself in the revolution against the monarchy."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/iran/savak.htm

So at the one hand we have Saddam Hussein, a ruthless dictator who killed everyone that stood up to him, awaiting trial after having been removed from power, while on the other hand there was this equally ruthless dictator, who then received ample support from two of todays' Coalition of the Willing-Members throughout his reign, and who was withhold from a trial by one of these Members, a situation which eventually led to the hostage crisis cited above.


If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually did take part in the hostage-taking, than that should not be condoned, not in Iran nor in any other part of the world. But it is equally important to at least be aware of what eventually led to the Iranian Revolution and the Iranian Hostage Crisis. The hostage taking might have been a starting point of decades of Iranian hostility towards the US in particular and the West in general, it doesn't explain what eventually led to that hostility. History does explain that. Ignoring that History is not very wise, certainly when one has the intention to achieve major changes in the Middle Eastern region.

The Iranian people are probably more proud of him, than America is of bush for being a draught dodger...

Quoting VH-KCT* (Reply 4): Not everyone agrees. Former hostage and retired Air Force Col. Thomas E. Schaefer said he doesn't recognize Ahmadinejad, by face or name, as one of his captors.

but that wouldn't make a good story would it. Not for the right wingers. Did fox mention that in their story this morning which started with ''THE LEADER OF IRAN IS A TERRORIST!!!!'' .... Did they hell as like. That guy that says he recognizes someone from twenty five years ago is just stirring the pot to gain more 'woo yeah lets go kick some ass!!' attitude. How many more soldiers do you idiots want to lose!

This comes as no shock to me. These guys in the Iranian gov't are all terrorists. The entire Islamic Revolution was run by terrorists. And someone shouldn't be shocked that eventually the low-level operatives have worked their way up the ladder after 26 years.

Quoting Schoenorama (Reply 13): So at the one hand we have Saddam Hussein, a ruthless dictator who killed everyone that stood up to him, awaiting trial after having been removed from power, while on the other hand there was this equally ruthless dictator, who then received ample support from two of todays' Coalition of the Willing-Members throughout his reign, and who was withhold from a trial by one of these Members, a situation which eventually led to the hostage crisis cited above.

Nice facts that you twist to your "own" reality.

As I recall, Iran never invaded any country or gassed its own people with chemical weapons. That said, now we have a radical Islamic regime that exports terrorism (Hezbolah for example) and is now on the verge of a nuclear program. I wonder, that's better in your eyes? Your view of history is a tad bit one sided. (Yet again)   

BTW How is the Socialist web site? You don't quote that source anymore. Why is that? Hmmmmm?

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 15): guys in the Iranian gov't are all terrorists. The entire Islamic Revolution was run by terrorists

-
they by majority are highly conservative and religiously exceedingly strict, but to call them "terrorists" in such a generalizing way is nonsense. The USA however for a long time stood behind the state terror of Reza Shah's imperial regime, and therefore, US-Americans sometimes should remember that "whomever sits in the glasshouse should not throw stones around" !�
-
  

Imagine that....the Islamic Revolutionary Republic of Iran being run by an Islamic Revolutionary terrorist....

whoda thunk it?

Anyone still ok with Iran gaining nuclear weapons?

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 17): The USA however for a long time stood behind the state terror of Reza Shah's imperial regime, and therefore, US-Americans sometimes should remember that "whomever sits in the glasshouse should not throw stones around

Is the US infallible? I don't recall being consulted as to whether the US should support the Shah or not...

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 7): A criminal, murderous, crazy fanatic at the head of the Iranian government??? I'm shocked!!!

To my knowledge, he has never murdered anyone, never commited a crime (unless you also consider the American Revolution a crime) and is actually not a fanatic at all, rather a champion of the poor (something many Americans are, unfortunately, not). What is actually shocking to me is the fact that the head of the American government is a murderous criminal fanatic

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 12): Please, don't even try comparing the loonies in charge of running Iran into the ground with Bush.

Iran has experienced a great deal of economic growth over the past decade, while Bush has raped the US economy. Who is the loony running their country into the ground?

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 15): The entire Islamic Revolution was run by terrorists.

In that case, so were the revolutions of my other 2 countries (the US and France)

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 15): These guys in the Iranian gov't are all terrorists.

Proving once again that you know absolutely nothing about Iran

787,
Your first sentence on Iran indicates you consider the former Iraq worse than Iran, but only to annul your judgement in the next sentence. Then you ask Schoenorama what he considers worse and accuse him of being biased.
Even if Schoenorama's point of view was one sided (I don't say it is); his arguments, though maybe debatable, are at least comprehensible. Your gibberish is just bizarre.

Back to the topic: after 25 years, it's probably impossible to prove Ahmadinejad guilty of hostage keeping. But I consider the man dangerous anyway. Against the background of Iran's growing influence over the region, the situation is at least disturbing.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 18): Anyone still ok with Iran gaining nuclear weapons?

Another interesting dimension if this guy is who he allegedly is.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): actually not a fanatic at all, rather a champion of the poor

Uh-huh. A man who in some likelihood is one of the barbarians who held our citizens hostage for 444 days is certainly not fanatical, just misunderstood right?

of course the US is going to "ignore" the fact the guys a "possible" terrorist, because Iran has all the oil..doesnt take a genius to figure it out.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Proving once again that you know absolutely nothing about Iran

I'm a big supporter of Iran, but this guy is a mentalist. The thing is, it's widely acknoledged that the vast majority of Iranians don't mind the US or Israel or anyone else. He appealed to the poor farmers and promised money, hence him getting elected.

Ultimately it's the same in every country - people vote for whoever is going to get them the most money.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): To my knowledge, he has never murdered anyone, never commited a crime

Holding American Citizens hostage for 444 days whilst breaking into an Embassy, which unless things have changed is a violation of international law. This was a crime by those "iranian students"

As you are only 21-25, and did not live through this, I would check your facts before making such statements.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 21): Your gibberish is just bizarre.

How so? Ask yourself this.

Pre 1979 Iran. Post 1979 Iran. What is worse?
Pre 2003 Iraq. Post 2003 Iraq. What is worse?

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 21): Then you ask Schoenorama what he considers worse and accuse him of being biased.

Accuse? No, actually he IS biased.

Thank you very much.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Proving once again that you know absolutely nothing about Iran

Well please, educate us on Iran. We'd all like to hear your vast knowledge of the Iranian Theocracy.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): In that case, so were the revolutions of my other 2 countries (the US and France)

Equating the the French and American Revolution to the 1979 Islamic Revolution is assinine. They are now where near the same. The colonist's didn't embabrk on a campaign to kill off civilisations because some nut-cases interpreted that way in book. Iran was a much more pleasant place before the revolution. Tehran was a booming metropolis before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Now it is a country and economy in tatters. These clerics that were behind the overthrow, were the most violent, crazy lunatics with this idea that anyone who is not muslim are infidels and either must convert or be killed.

Quoting Slider (Reply 22): Uh-huh. A man who in some likelihood is one of the barbarians who held our citizens hostage for 444 days is certainly not fanatical, just misunderstood right?

They considered the US an occupying power with a puppet dictator (Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi) and wanted to take control of their own country. Then again, you think George Bush is justified in all he has done.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25): Holding American Citizens hostage for 444 days whilst breaking into an Embassy, which unless things have changed is a violation of international law. This was a crime by those "iranian students"

They were students overthrowing a dictatorial regime in hopes of installing a democracy (which has only partially come). That is not a crime. Then again, what George Bush has done is a violation of International and US law and you support him.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 25): As you are only 21-25, and did not live through this, I would check your facts before making such statements.

As you are not Iranian and have no idea anything about me or my level of education, I would check your facts before making such statements.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 27): Well please, educate us on Iran. We'd all like to hear your vast knowledge of the Iranian Theocracy.

Dude, all the logical discussion in the world will not get the truth through to you, so why should I bother?

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 27): Equating the the French and American Revolution to the 1979 Islamic Revolution is assinine. They are now where near the same.

Well, lets see, all three were groups of educated people led by charismatic leaders who overthrew brutal dictatorial regimes (some more brutal than others). Unfortunately, power in Iran was taken by other undesirable characters before the people could react

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 27): Tehran was a booming metropolis before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

You mean to say a city that has grown (by a factor of 8) to the third most populous in the world is not booming? Or perhaps one that has built a successful metro system from scratch to better connect its citizens and is constantly building amazing new buildings is totally backasswards. Makes sense there   

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 27): Now it is a country and economy in tatters.

Actually, the economy of Iran has done quite well over the past decade

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Iran has experienced a great deal of economic growth over the past decade,

When you don't place it in context it sounds fantastic, but it's not the case. Growth has been decent, but it's been from a rock bottom small base due to the revolution.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Bush has raped the US economy.

You must be one of the people interviewed that felt China was headed in a better direction than the US. If by "rape" you mean maintain steady growth and low unemployment in the wake of the worst terrorist attack in history, two wars, and a post dot com recession, then yes, Bush has raped the economy.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Iran has experienced a great deal of economic growth over the past decade, while Bush has raped the US economy. Who is the loony running their country into the ground?

If you look at the IHT's article last week you'll see that there are serious concerns about the growth rate slowdown of the Iranian economy, and they really do need outside investment....and this guy will slow it down.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): In that case, so were the revolutions of my other 2 countries (the US and France)

Apples and oranges.....the US and French revolutions were about overthrowing a dictator, but after that the differences were staggering. The US grew as a democracy with a solid separation of church and state which allowed for an environment where we were able to grow and develop into what we are now. The French hit several roadblocks but did the same thing over time, albeit with a more socialist attitude towards things where government was the answer to all the issues. Iran has been a theocracy where nothing, even elections, get approved without the imprimature of the Islamic Council...a bunch of mullahs intent on maintaining their grip on power.

I think that if you would spend a school year in Teheran or Qum and see for yourself the differences between the US/UK/France and Iran.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): Bush has raped the US economy. Who is the loony running their country into the ground?

Dude, the US economy has recovered from the recession President Bush inherited in most part due to the tax cuts and fed actions, along with confidence of investors in the direction we were taking. Our economy has recovered from the doldrums, and if you'll look at those articles I told you about then you'll see what I'm talking about with the Iranian economy. It must have foreign investment to succeed and it won't get it without a stable democracy. Electing this guy was not a good idea for the stability and democracy forces in Iran.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): In that case, so were the revolutions of my other 2 countries (the US and France)

Perhaps, but the US has the unique distinction of being one of the few, perhaps only, revolutions where the replacement leadership was NOT more brutal, dictatorial, and repressive than that which it replaced.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): They were students overthrowing a dictatorial regime in hopes of installing a democracy (which has only partially come). That is not a crime. Then again, what George Bush has done is a violation of International and US law and you support him.

Taking over a foreign governments embassy and holding people hostage is not a crime were you come from? Where is that exactly?

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): Then again, what George Bush has done is a violation of International and US law

Care to show us which laws were violated?

I think everyone is forgetting this one fact about the actual topic of this thread itself:

Nothing has been proven yet.

Some say yes, some say no. We can't make assumptions that he did or did not participate in the embassy incident, it only starts battles like...well...what has resulted in this thread. The truth is, none of us, nor most people in the world, know whether Iran's President-elect was involved or not. Simple as that.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30): and this guy will slow it down.

Not at all. I really don't know where people get the idea he is such a strong theocrat. Sure, he says somethings that Iranian politicians have to say to get past the roadblocks put up for them, but he is very popular in Iran, including among the young. He is actually quite in favor of diplomacy and an increse in freedoms

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30): Iran has been a theocracy where nothing, even elections, get approved without the imprimature of the Islamic Council...a bunch of mullahs intent on maintaining their grip on power.

And that theocracy emerged because of the power gap left when a US sponsored dictator was overthrown

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30): I think that if you would spend a school year in Teheran or Qum and see for yourself the differences between the US/UK/France and Iran.

If I did live somewhere in Iran, it would likely be Tabriz. I don't think that Iran is anywhere close to the same place as the UK, France or the US. What I am saying is that people here are being quite short sighted and blinded by what they are told, while overlooking the positives in Iran and the US' involvement in the negatives

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30): the US economy has recovered from the recession President Bush inherited in most part due to the tax cuts and fed actions

Actually, he inherited one of the most healthy financial times in US history and absolutely destroyed that health through tax cuts that betrayed promises made to the Fed in exchange for rate cuts

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30): Electing this guy was not a good idea for the stability and democracy forces in Iran.

Actually, yes, it was

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 31): Perhaps, but the US has the unique distinction of being one of the few, perhaps only, revolutions where the replacement leadership was NOT more brutal, dictatorial, and repressive than that which it replaced.

As much as I disagree with many of its policies, the current regime in Iran is FAR less brutal, dictatorial and repressive than the one that preceded

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 32): Taking over a foreign governments embassy and holding people hostage is not a crime were you come from? Where is that exactly?

In the name of revolution? Disrupting commerce is also a crime, yet I completely agree with what was done at the Boston Tea Party. The US was an occupying power with a puppet dictator in a sovereign nation where the people rose up to overthrow that regime. Is that so difficult to understand?

Quoting 787 (Reply 33): Care to show us which laws were violated?

Well, we can start with the Guantanemo situation where you can take you pick of either the Geneva Convention or the US Constitution, whichever you please, because one or the other governs that.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): Then again, you think George Bush is justified in all he has done.

Once again, you illustrate your ignorance. One, Bush has nothing to do with the thread at hand. Two, I'm one of the most vocal outspoken critics of Bush and didn't vote for him either. Three, you're an idiot.

This Iranian whackjob is a radical, plain and simple. He will destabilize the country at a time when they can least afford to take a step backwards.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Well, we can start with the Guantanemo situation where you can take you pick of either the Geneva Convention or the US Constitution, whichever you please, because one or the other governs that.

Oh, so it's your interpretation of the Constitution? I see. Well, actually I don't see what laws are violated and I suspect neither do you actually since you have not offered any laws that were "violated".

Thank you very much.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): Dude, all the logical discussion in the world will not get the truth through to you, so why should I bother?

Just what I thought, you're the last person who should be talking about logic.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): Unfortunately, power in Iran was taken by other undesirable characters before the people could react

So what kind of Christmas card did the Ayahtollah Al Khomeni send you in December 1979? Because you obviously regard Bastille Day as a sad day in French History

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): You mean to say a city that has grown (by a factor of 8) to the third most populous in the world is not booming? Or perhaps one that has built a successful metro system from scratch to better connect its citizens and is constantly building amazing new buildings is totally backasswards. Makes sense there

So you're saying the building codes in Iran are on par with what we have in the US? Those brand-spanking new buildings in Bam really held up well in the last earthquake that rolled through where thousands died. It strikes me as odd, that you think the Iranians have such a robust economy, that tribes there still live in mud huts. At least the indian tribes here in the US know how to make the most of there resources. They build modern towns and fill them with casinos. They're all over the place.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29): When you don't place it in context it sounds fantastic, but it's not the case. Growth has been decent, but it's been from a rock bottom small base due to the revolution.

The fact that it's economy is nowhere near it's high-point that it reached in 1974. On the other hand, we have had over 24 months of sustained growth. 4 times during this period, the quarterly results have shown, the economy created more than 200,000 jobs when the numbers were released.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20): To my knowledge, he has never murdered anyone, never commited a crime

So do you think he's going to put his murder count in PSA or on his resume. "As a revolutionary, i've personally murdered more than 350 people before 30th birthday. I'm Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and I approve this message!"

Quoting N1120A (Reply 28): They were students overthrowing a dictatorial regime in hopes of installing a democracy (which has only partially come). That is not a crime. Then again, what George Bush has done is a violation of International and US law and you support him.

The loony left strikes again. At least the Shah, didn't impose laws such as making it a crime to hold hands in public like the Grand Ayatollah. God if that isn't sign that Islamic world is still in 4th century.

[Edited 2005-06-30 20:49:18]

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Actually, he inherited one of the most healthy financial times in US history and absolutely destroyed that health through tax cuts that betrayed promises made to the Fed in exchange for rate cuts

Wrong. During the last 3 quarters of the fiscal year 2000 (FY00) and the 1st quarter of fiscal year 2001( the last quarter of 2000), the US economy slumped due to over inflation and the burst of the tech bubble. Clintons robust economy was nose diving before Bush took office. The economy was getting back on track when 2 jetliners crashed into the WTC, one in the Pentagon, and the other in Shanksville, PA. Maybe you heard about that, maybe you didn't. That was the cause of the recession. And thanks to the Democrats, it took 5 months to get a stimulus package signed and through the House and Senate. The Fed started to cut interest rates almost immediately., and the tax cuts put money back in the pockets of the consumers, so that they would spend it to put in back into the economy.

[Edited 2005-06-30 20:53:12]

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Not at all. I really don't know where people get the idea he is such a strong theocrat. Sure, he says somethings that Iranian politicians have to say to get past the roadblocks put up for them, but he is very popular in Iran, including among the young. He is actually quite in favor of diplomacy and an increse in freedoms

The young and the students supported the other guy...this guy is in because the religious hardliners and the farmers put him in. On the word of the mullahs.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): And that theocracy emerged because of the power gap left when a US sponsored dictator was overthrown

Not quite accurate....the theocracy was self-installed by the revolutionaries led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. It did arise from a vacuum.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): What I am saying is that people here are being quite short sighted and blinded by what they are told, while overlooking the positives in Iran and the US' involvement in the negatives

I do not overlook the positives of Iran...the problems come from repression and dictatorship. Iran has a fairly well educated population with a growing middle class that is constantly being pressured to cover up its daughters and stop listening to Satans music (western music).

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Actually, he inherited one of the most healthy financial times in US history and absolutely destroyed that health through tax cuts that betrayed promises made to the Fed in exchange for rate cuts

That's completely wrong. He inherited a collapsing economy that was hurt seriously by the government ignoring the warnings of a stock market bubble due to overspeculation as well as a serious set of tax increases that were ok with the "new economy" but hurt when the tech sector stopped being able to raise money by telling the old timers they "just did not understand" that you don't need a valid business model.
The rising employment and growing economy are there because President Bush and his administration did what needed to be done, and the recession was happening as they arrived.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Actually, yes, it was

Dude, please share how this is the case. He is the selected candidate of the theocrats who run the country.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): the Geneva Convention or the US Constitution, whichever you please, because one or the other governs that

One covers US citizens and the other governs the conduct of declared wars, which we are honoring in our treatment in general of the detainees.....who should not be released until the end of hostilities, as in every other war, lest they rejoin the fight....

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): Disrupting commerce is also a crime, yet I completely agree with what was done at the Boston Tea Party.

The Boston Tea Party was an overnight hoe down by a bunch of semi-drunken patriots looking to make a point. No one was murdered, and no hostages were taken for 440 something days. The Iranian government allowed the "students" to do what they did and keep the hostages, as their first act of terrorist sponsorship.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 35): The US was an occupying power with a puppet dictator in a sovereign nation where the people rose up to overthrow that regime. Is that so difficult to understand?

The US was not an occupying power. You really need to stop using reactionary slogans and terminology. The Shah was in charge of his own country (regardless of how he got there) and the US interest in supporting him there was primarily a substrategy of the cold war. The idea of the Persian Gulf for the Soviets was that they intended to take what they needed and deny use to us, and we were planning to take over the Gulf oil facilities to deny their use to the SOviets. Supporting leaders who would go along with that was a worldwide lesser of two evils for us in the fight agains communism and the Comintern plan to expand their influence and territory. That's why we developed the STRAC then the Stratfor then Centcom.

If we were occupiers then we would have had troops and bases there, and we did not.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): You really need to stop using reactionary slogans and terminology.

That's all he'll have left if you ask him to stop using that!!

There's no substance behind his posts and even his allegations are grossly unfactual and major reaches at best.

Quoting Slider (Reply 36): Once again, you illustrate your ignorance.

Yeah, if you knew a sliver about me, you would rephrase that. Given that I am an Iranian-Franco American with a degree in Political Science who is both a JD student and a Doctoral candidate (yep Political Science again), I think I might know a smidge more than you.

Quoting Slider (Reply 36): One, Bush has nothing to do with the thread at hand.

The comparisons are quite valid

Quoting Slider (Reply 36): Three, you're an idiot.

That is all you can come up with? I guess UCLA and Tulane need to know that.

Quoting Slider (Reply 36): This Iranian whackjob is a radical, plain and simple.

Again, since you actually know nothing about him, how the hell can you make that comment.

Quoting 787 (Reply 37): Oh, so it's your interpretation of the Constitution?

No, it is what it says

Quoting 787 (Reply 37): Well, actually I don't see what laws are violated and I suspect neither do you actually since you have not offered any laws that were "violated".

The Constitution is the highest law in the United States. The Geneva Convention is a treaty to which the United States is a fully ratified party, which means that it is the highest law in the land so long as it does not violate the amendments to the Constitution, which it long ago was deemed not to have.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): So what kind of Christmas card did the Ayahtollah Al Khomeni send you in December 1979?

Al Khomeni? You want to learn his name first? I certainly know the name of one of the worst things ever to happen to Iran. Besides, the biggest holiday in Iran is Nowruz, the Iranian New Year

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): Because you obviously regard Bastille Day as a sad day in French History

No, I think it was the greatest day in French history

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): Those brand-spanking new buildings in Bam really held up well in the last earthquake that rolled through where thousands died.

Was I talking about Bam or Tehran? Was I talking about a smallish village or the Capital of the country that happens to be the third most populous city in the world?

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): So you're saying the building codes in Iran are on par with what we have in the US?

Did I say that either? New buildings in Tehran are built with similar earthquake standards as in California

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): It strikes me as odd, that you think the Iranians have such a robust economy, that tribes there still live in mud huts.

And Eskimos still live in Igloos. Poor white people still get flooded out in their beat to hell trailers. There are poor everywhere

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): the economy created more than 200,000 jobs when the numbers were released.

Which mean still a net loss since Bush came to power, along with the fact that those "jobs" are low pay, low quality work

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): At least the Shah, didn't impose laws such as making it a crime to hold hands in public like the Grand Ayatollah.

No, just made people disappear, pocketed much of Iran's wealth and completely repressed Democracy. BTW, no one was ever called "the Grand Ayatollah"

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): No, just made people disappear, pocketed much of Iran's wealth and completely repressed Democracy. BTW, no one was ever called "the Grand Ayatollah"

Regardless, he seems to be a real hero in your mind.

[Edited 2005-06-30 21:03:26]

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): The Constitution is the highest law in the United States. The Geneva Convention is a treaty to which the United States is a fully ratified party, which means that it is the highest law in the land so long as it does not violate the amendments to the Constitution, which it long ago was deemed not to have.

Again. What laws have been violated? I have not seen you answer that.

Quoting 787 (Reply 45): What laws have been violated? I have not seen you answer that.

He hasn't, Bush went to the UN, the UN cmae up resolution 1441, ratified it, Saddam violated it, we went in to get rid of him. No laws broken. He's in complete loser denial.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 31): Perhaps, but the US has the unique distinction of being one of the few, perhaps only, revolutions where the replacement leadership was NOT more brutal, dictatorial, and repressive than that which it replaced.

Really?

Post-revolutionary France after 1815 was undoubtedly better than the rapacious mess under Louis XVI, and the reign of terror between 1795-1815.

So is post-revolutionary South Africa.

As was post-revolutionary Turkey under Ataturk.

Shall we keep going?

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29): When you don't place it in context it sounds fantastic, but it's not the case. Growth has been decent, but it's been from a rock bottom small base due to the revolution.

Your cute little graph indicates that the economy was in the shits between 1975-1979. This was under the Shah. An economy that grew like crazy between 1970-1975 was faced with a huge trade deficit and rampant inflation. The "revolution" did little to affect the downward trend of the economy under our pet dictator, but it sure as hell benefited from it. Someone should have told the Shah and the lovely Farah Diba to go on a campaign of austerity. Didn't look good when Farah Diba was off to Paris to buy haute couture in her very own private Iran Air 707 while Iranians were facing an economic crisis.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 27): Iran was a much more pleasant place before the revolution.

Quite definitely - as long as you didn't piss off the Shah, his goons, and the brutal SAVAK. As Jeanne Kirkpatrick once put it "he's a bastard, but he's our bastard."

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 38): The fact that it's economy is nowhere near it's high-point that it reached in 1974.

It actually reached a high point in 1975 and declined due to inflationary pressures and the breakup of OPEC. Precious little to do with the Islamo-fascist Mullahs (as much as we'd like to hope it did).

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): Not quite accurate....the theocracy was self-installed by the revolutionaries led by the Ayatollah Khomeini.

Actually, they grabbed power in the vaccum. They led the revolution under the promise that they would return to a life of the cloth while Democracy would reign

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): The young and the students supported the other guy...

Rafsanjani? I don't think so. You are talking about the man who is probably the most hated person in Iran

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): The rising employment and growing economy are there because President Bush and his administration did what needed to be done, and the recession was happening as they arrived.

Actually, they are due to the fed's prudent work of raising interests in the face of the severe fiscal irresponsibility practiced by the bush administration

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): Dude, please share how this is the case. He is the selected candidate of the theocrats who run the country.

Rafsanjani is the number one theocrat in the country (despite what people may say about Khamnei) and was Khomeni's hand picked successor upon his death in 1989. You wonder why he lost?

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): One covers US citizens

The Constitution covers anyone on US soil, and Guantanemo Bay is US soil

Quoting DL021 (Reply 40): The US was not an occupying power.

Sure it was. Puppet regimes are not sovereign

Quoting Slider (Reply 41): There's no substance behind his posts and even his allegations are grossly unfactual and major reaches at best.

Again, you know nothing about me, and nothing about Iran

Quoting Slider (Reply 41): That's all he'll have left if you ask him to stop using that!!

Dude, given my degree of respect for Ian, you should probably stay the hell out of any conversation we have.

Let's face one fact though - the "elections" in Iran were a farce.

The candidates had to be vetted by the omnipotent Council of Crazy bug-eyed Mullahs. No pro-west, pro-secular democracy candidates were even allowed to run.

Gosh, it's beginning to seem a lot like the GOP primaries where eventually all candidates will be vetted by the GOP's council of crazy bug-eyed Fundamentalist holy rollers. Wither away those North Eastern socially progressive Republicans. What a pity.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): No, I think it was the greatest day in French history

Wrong again...the greatest day in French history...other than 22 April 1935, was the day they invented crepes. With sugar and butter. Damn, my arteries are hardening thinking about it.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): And Eskimos still live in Igloos

They are Inuits, you racially insensitive heathen.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): Poor white people still get flooded out in their beat to hell trailers

We call ourselves "Po' White Trash" Thank you very much, and its usually tornados.....we are the last ethnic variety of whom it is still legal to mock. So do it correxually! Dammit!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): There are poor everywhere

I would say with great accuracy that the percentage of poor in Iran is significantly greater, both in numbers and degree of poverty, than in the US...where most of the poor drive themselves to the unemployment office and have color television. We have very few actual starvation cases, or outright homelessness. Most abject homelessness in our country is the result of emotional distress rather than inability to get work that will pay for shelter. Harsh but true.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42): the economy created more than 200,000 jobs when the numbers were released. Which mean still a net loss since Bush came to power, along with the fact that those "jobs" are low pay, low quality work

Well, the good news is that the jobs are part of the recovery...and you don't blame Roosevelt for the millions of jobs lost when he came into power..do you?

Besides, I keep hearing about McJobs. Thats a load of crap. Reverse hysterical snobbery from the left. What people who are calling them McJobs are really saying is that they want their old $70k per year jobs back where they were doing some nebulous function at a software company designing websites for other startups, or doing the accounting for the money that was flowing in through investments and not actual revenues from sales. I was hiring people during that period and I know most of the stories. Many ancillary jobs were lost when the tech boom went bust, such as airline catering jobs when the airlines stopped serving food because businesses had to start accounting for their money, and I don't hear anyone complaining that those McJobs were lost! I simply hear those numbers bunched up with the rest for the sake of argument and point aggrandizement.