It all started with the Shah of Iran.

President James Carter is the reason we are at war

September 10–September 11, 1976: Croatian Freedom Fighters hijack a TWA airliner, diverting it to , , and then to , demanding a manifesto be printed. One police officer was killed and three injured during an attempt to defuse a bomb that contained their communiques in a train station locker. Zvonko Busic who served 32 years in prison for the attack was released and returned to to a heroes welcome in July 2008.

This was the kind of crap we had to deal with before the flood gates opened.

When the stopped supporting we lost a valued ally in the region. When President Carter allowed his people to engineer the fall of the Shah of Iran to please his humanitarian base of nuts, we opened up a can of worms that is still messing with us today.

While a Muslim himself, the Shah gradually lost support from the Shi'a clergy of , particularly due to his strong policy of Modernization and recognition of . Yes, this evil dictator did the unthinkable. He allowed women to have the same rights as men, as written in the Quran, he recognized as a state and said they deserved to live. American and international human rights groups said that he had 100 thousand political prisoners over his 39 year dictatorship. These sweet innocent political prisoners did minor things to get arrested like try to kill the Shah, his family, overthrow the country and install a theocracy and with the help of President James Carter the terrorist took power.

From the Shah of Iran on The role of the : I did not know it then – perhaps I did not want to know – but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out. Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted... What was I to make of the Administration's sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran?... Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.

November 4, 1979 Iran Hostage Crisis takes place. Iranian Muslim students take over the American Embassy, taking 52 diplomats hostage for 444 days. (Ended January 20, 1981) This was the thanks we received from the grateful nation of after we helped free them from the Shah’s brutal dictatorship. further thanked us by forming and funding a small diplomatic and peace loving organization called Hezbollah. Their stated goals are to bring about love peace and harmony throughout the world, by the destruction of , the , the , and to do this all they want is world wide Islamic rule.

December 1979 a rumor was started that the president of was going to switch sides and kick the Soviets out. Soviet forces invaded and assassinated the president and installed another leader. It has been suggested that President Carter and his administration started the rumor in order to get the soviets to take the news off of the hostage crisis he was dealing with. It is just a suggestion and I have no proof that this was true. Either way this was the start of the Islamic terrorist group the base. Also known as Al Qaeda.

June 3, 1980 a bomb destroys most of the exhibits in the Statue of Liberty story room. No one is arrested, but Croatian separatists are suspected. Notice that Muslim groups are attacking us.

October 6, 1981, Muhammad Anwar Al Sadat was assassinated during the annual 6th October victory parade in . A fatwa approving the assassination had been obtained from Omar Abdel-Rahman, a cleric later convicted in the for his role in the 1993 bombing. In doing this Islamic terrorist successfully destroyed the only two Muslim leaders that recognized and stopped the war on . Providing an object lesson to all other Muslim leaders.

August 11, 1982 a bomb explodes on Pan Am Flight 830, enroute from to , killing one teenager and injuring 15 passengers.

April 18, 1983 United States Embassy bombing takes place. A stolen van carrying 2,000 pounds of explosives slammed into the U.S. Embassy in killing 63 people including 18 Americans. Hezbollah Islamic terrorists responsible, you know that peace loving organization from .

October 23, 1983 Marine Barracks Bombing occurs. A truck carrying 2500 pounds of explosives crashed through the gates of a US Marine barracks in killing 241 American servicemen and wounding 81. Hezbollah responsible. 58 French troops from the multinational force are also killed in a separate attack. Hezbollah also responsible, and did you know that they were started and funded by .

November 9, 1983: U.S. Senate bombing. A time bomb consisting of several sticks of dynamite explodes at the United States Senate in response to the invasion of . No one was injured, a group known as the Armed Resistance Unit claims responsibility.

April 14, 1985 — military aircraft, acting on President Ronald Reagan's orders to “pre-empt and discourage” Libyan terrorism, struck the North African nation Monday night.

June 14, 1985 TWA Flight 847 skyjacking, Hezbollah, terrorists take passengers of an Athens-Rome flight hostage, murdering US Navy Seaman, Robert Stethem. Just another peaceful demonstration by our friends in .

October 7 – October 10: Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacking by Palestinian Liberation Front, a group started and funded by the , during which passenger Leon Klinghoffer, a 69 year-old wheelchair-bound Jewish American citizen, is shot dead and thrown overboard.

April 5, 1986 discotheque bombing. A Berlin discotheque frequented by US servicemen was bombed, killing 3 people--A Turkish woman and two US servicemen--and injuring 230 including over 50 US servicemen. was held responsible for this act. At this point the president let loose the dogs of war. If the DIA will get off their butts and allow me to tell the story you will find that we were very busy from that time on.

October 11 1986 – President Reagan walks out of the summit with Grobachev, refusing to give up the strategic defense initiative missile defense in exchange for more worthless communist promises. Grobachev himself has cited this as the moment that won the cold war.

June 12, 1987 Berlin Germany- President Reagan gives his “tear down this wall” speech at the gate. He said that communism will rot from within and with a little help he was right.

April 12, 1988 Japanese Red Army terrorist Yu Kikumura was arrested at a rest stop on the turnpike in possession of pipe bombs on his way to . For those that don’t remember the Red Army they were also funded by the .

December 21, 1988 a bomb blows up Pan Am flight 103 in flight over . is responsible and they paid for it in more than one way.

February, 1989 Soviets complete their humiliating pullout from , leaving one million dead after ten years of fighting.

August 2, 1990 Saddam Hussein invades .

February 27, 1991 the United States Military and its Allies crush Saddam Hussein’s vaunted “million man army” in 100 hours.

December 21, 1991 the collapses just as President Reagan said it would.

August, 1992 President George H. Bush deploys the military to to prevent a humanitarian disaster and mass starvation. One of his orders was never to take a side or perform police actions. Only make sure the food goes to the people.

November 4, 1992 Governor Bill Clinton wins the Electoral College and the presidency with 43% of the popular vote.

February 26, 1993 when a car bomb was detonated below Tower One of the in . The attack was planned by a group of conspirators including Ramzi Yousef, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Abdul Rahman Yasin and Ahmad Ajaj. They received financing from Khaled Shaikh Mohammed, Yousef's uncle. In March 1994, four men were convicted of carrying out the bombing. Though it was known by intelligence officials that they belonged to the group Al-Qaeda nothing was done to hunt down the group or its leader. People were arrested and convicted so the case was closed.

April 19, 1993 the administration assaults the Branch Davidian compound in and burn 76 people including 21 children to death. President Clinton blames it all on Attorney Genera, Janet Reno.

May 28, 1993 President Clinton passes the largest tax increase in world history.

June, 1993 President Clinton expands his mission to feed the hungry into nation building and police action but does not properly arm and equip the troops.

June, 1993 Failed New York City landmark bomb plot. When allowed the FBI can do some great work.

October, 1993 Al-Qaeda linked terrorist attack troops in . 18 soldiers die in the “Black Hawk Down” scenario. But take out thousands of Somali terrorists. President Clinton responds by pulling out US troops. Bin Laden later said this event convinced him that the American soldier is a paper tiger and inspired the 9/11 attacks.

April, 1994 the Rwandan genocide begins. Despite systematic rape campaigns and ethnic murders, President Clinton and his administration do nothing to stop the slaughter.

October 21, 1994, the and signed the "Agreed Framework", whereby agreed to freeze its plutonium production program in exchange for fuel, economic cooperation, and the construction of two modern nuclear power plants powered by light-water reactors. Eventually, 's existing nuclear facilities were to be dismantled, and the spent reactor fuel taken out of the country.

December 11, 1994 a small bomb explodes on board Philippine Airlines Flight 434, killing a Japanese businessman. Authorities found out that Ramzi Yousef planted the bomb to test it for his planned terrorist attack to blow up a dozen planes over the in one day. This plan was later changed to the attacks of 9/11.

October 17, 1995 President Clinton says, “Probably there are people in this room still mad at me at the budge because you think I raised your taxes too much. It might surprise you to know that I think I raised them too much, too.”

In conjunction with several other Islamic militant leaders, bin Laden issued two fatwa in 1996 and then again in 1998 that Muslims should force the and its allies to withdraw their military forces from the , by attacking American military and civilian targets.

February, 1996 ’s religious leader Hassan Turabi, writes President Clinton offering to turn over Bin Laden. (Think about this not in hindsight but in actuality. A man with a paramilitary organization publically states that he is going to attack US interests abroad, and soon after the chief mullah of the country this man is living in is offering him to you.)  President Clinton refuses, fearing the has no legal reason to take custody of him. (Bin Laden is now linked to two terrorist attacks on Americans)

In May 1996, the Sudanese capitulated to pressure and asked Bin Laden to leave, despite their feeling that he could be monitored better in than elsewhere.

June 25, 1996 Terrorists bomb the military’s barracks in . This has now been linked to Bin Laden. President Clinton does nothing at the time.

August, 1996 Hassan Turabi again offers to turn over Bin Laden. President Clinton does not accept the offer again. (Bin Laden is now linked to four terrorist attacks on Americans)

November 5, 1996 President Clinton wins reelection but falls short of winning half the votes cast.

April, 1997 President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir of Sudan “offered the arrest, and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed in Egypt’s Islamic Jihad, Iran’s Hezbollah, and the Palestinian Hamas,” According to regional expert Mansor Ijaz. President Clinton ignores him. (Bin Laden is now linked to three and one suspected terrorist attacks on Americans and just maybe Sudan knows something we don’t know, and being or wanting to be a friend to us is trying to help us.)

February, 1998 ’s intelligence chief, Gutbi al-Mahdi wrote directly to the FBI to offer Bin Laden. (Bin Laden is now linked to three terrorist attacks on Americans and just maybe knows something we don’t know and maybe they want to be our friend.)

Bin Laden left for Afghanistan, taking with him Ayman Zawahiri, considered by the U.S. to be the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks; Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, who traveled frequently to Germany to obtain electronic equipment for Al Qaeda; Wadih El-Hage, Bin Laden's personal secretary and roving emissary, now serving a life sentence in the U.S. for his role in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya; and Fazul Abdullah Mohammed and Saif Adel, also accused of carrying out the embassy attacks.

August 7, 1998 hundreds of people were killed in simultaneous car bomb explosions at the embassies in the East African capital cities of , and . The attacks, linked to local members of the al Qaeda terrorist network headed by Osama bin Laden, brought bin Laden and al Qaeda to international attention for the first time as far as the news media are concerned. Bin Laden was then indicted in federal court for his alleged involvement in the 1998 embassy bombings in , and , and is on the US Federal Bureau of Investigation's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list.

August 20, 1998 someone in the administration discovered that Osama Bin Laden might be in the . With great decisiveness the President ordered the immediate bombing of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant. The plant had no connections to Bin Laden and the had been trying to give Bin Laden to us for years. Oh by the way, in a totally unrelated story, Monica Lewinsky testified in front of the grand jury the next day. Who needed as a friend anyway?

August 21, 1998 President Clinton in another bold decisive move ordered missile strikes against Al Qaeda terrorist training camps in . A little too late since Bin Laden and his troops had moved to and were now moving to after he was kicked out of . The camps were mostly empty but they did get 34 people not members of AQ, But as a presidential hopeful suggested doing the same thing may I remind all that Pakistan screamed its outrage at the US violation of its airspace, wonder if they will get mad when President Obama invades their country? Is that not an act of war from a man that wants peace?

After the missile attacks Osama bin Laden pledged to attack the again. Ayman al-Zawahiri made a phone call to a Newsweek reporter, stating that "The war has only just begun; the Americans should now await the answer."

December 16, 1998 President Clinton attacks . In a totally unrelated story the House leaders delay the impeachment debate until the dust settles from the preemptive war started by the President.

December 14, 1999 Ahmed Ressam is arrested. His plan to blow up international airport on New Year’s Eve. Look up the “Millennium bomber.” Though the administration tried to claim credit for stopping this terrorist attack it was later discovered that a customs agent busted him when he tried to cross the border from into the .

October 12, 2000 Al-Qaeda terrorist detonate a dinghy packed with explosives into the USS Cole, killing 17 Sailors. President Clinton did almost nothing. The investigation said AQ was to blame but no action was taken. Where is a Lewinsky testimony when you need one?

December, 2000 President Clinton receives Intel about Osama Bin Laden’s location. Military advisors urge a strike. The President refuses.

September 11. 2001 terrorist hijack four airliners. They fly two of them into ’s world trade towers, another hits the pentagon. Passengers aboard the fourth jet give their lives to stop the hijackers. President Bush tells Vice President Cheney, “We’re at war, Dick. We’re going to find out who did this and kick their ass.” The democrats in congress asked, he had 8 months on the job why didn’t he stop this from happening? They seem to ignore the seven years of attacks from the same terror group prior to Mr. Bush taking office.

September 12, 2001 Saddam Hussein is the only world leader to praise Bin Laden and the attacks. Even who we don’t have diplomatic relations with was offering help and Intel.

September 14, 2001

Mr. DASCHLE (for himself and Mr. LOTT) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed (This was written by Senator Daschel)

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

September 18, 2001 the first in a series of anthrax mail attacks targets government and the media.

October 7, 2001 after being criticized by the democrats for not having attacked anyone yet, President Bush authorizes the invasion of and the destruction of Al-Qaeda’s safe havens. Liberals claim we can’t win. Why in the world did they scream we should bomb people if they don’t think we can win?

November 12, 2001 the ruling Taliban is driven out of the capitol city of . Wait, it can’t work and we will lose is what we are told yet in over a month we took the capitol city?

December 9, 2001 the Taliban collapses baffling liberals around the world who said it could not be done. After all the Soviets fought for ten years and lost badly and we did it in 2 months. The war is not over but the enemy is in retreat and is forced to fight only in summer months and in small pockets of the country.

January 29, 2002 President Bush identified , , and as an “Axis of Evil” and pledges to deny them WMD. We were told that the president should not have done that, it will make these people angry at us and they might attack us. has been attacking us since 1979, has been messing with us for 50 years, is the new kid on the block with only 11 years of messing with us.

October 2, 2002 Congressional resolution in part states:

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

November 8, 2002 the United Nations Resolution 1441 demands Saddam disarm or face “grave consequences”

3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual declarations, the Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the Council, not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other delivery systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on aircraft, including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological, and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to weapon production or material;

March 19, 2003 the US and dozens of allied nations restart the war that had been on hold since 1991 while we waited for Iraq to comply with the deal it signed. We were told that we should not have gone in there and we should not have gone in alone. The war was illegal. Congress approved it, the UN approved it, and more than a dozen nations joined us in the fighting. To the political enemies of the president this is going it alone. We were told to expect ten thousand dead troops the first day of battle and it would take years to take .

April 9, 2003 falls to US troops. Less than 30 days, good job troops!

December 13, 2003 Saddam Hussein is pulled out of a rat hole by members of the 4th ID so much for fighting to the death to keep from being humiliated by being captured.

October 8, 2006 Thanks to President Clinton giving North Korea a nuclear power plant, the beloved leader, Kim Jong Il detonates a nuclear bomb while his people starve and he demands we supply him with more food or else.

January 10, 2007 President George W. Bush orders a troop surge in to quell the violence. Democrats declare the policy and our troops doomed to fail that same week.

If you notice since 2001 we stopped being attacked by any and all organized terrorists on our own soil, the only terror organizations out there fighting at all are , , and the PLO or whatever name they are running under now. If you recall, President Bush said that , , and were an axis of evil. Now we have Iran and North Korea as an axis of evil, Iran is not helping terrorists anymore, Iran is sort of bogged down and can’t seem to make any good hits either in Israel or the US and North Korea is starting to conform to international requests to play nice.

Every time we as a nation try to be nice to our enemies before we defeat them we are attacked. The terrorists that we are dealing with were started and funded by the under the KGB chief Yuri Andropov, as a way to counter the success of freedom and the decline of communism around the world. This was done because of the arrogance of the soviets who believed that they could control what they created. Once the monster was out of the cage they rapidly lost control and the advanced training they provided the terrorists was passed on to others completely out of their control to the point that now Russia is battling the terrorists tactics they once taught. No one is safe until the enemy is fought and defeated. Only one country is doing this successfully and that is the .

166,421 views 134 replies
Reply #1 Top
I could not put it all in the article but that will just leave room to discuss with anyone that disagrees with my conclusions.
Reply #2 Top

Excellent layout of ther history.

Oh yes - the peaceful people of Iran - of Islam. Very similar to the peaceful people of Vietnam. I read a book by one of our POWs.

They explained it this way: In Vietnam you have your medical problems and your political problems. Vietnam takes care of the political problems first.

Good old Carter - it's been open season on Americans ever since.

+1 Loading…
Reply #3 Top
Good old Carter - it's been open season on Americans ever since.


yup, and the funny part is that even the democrat party wanted nothing to do with him when he left office. Now he is beloved becasue his ideas have been forgotten and are new again.
Reply #4 Top

Obama, the second generation of Carter.

Reply #5 Top
Obama, the second generation of Carter.


That is my great fear about Obama - Domestic issues will be tempered by congress, foreign ones are totally at the presidents discretion.
Reply #6 Top

Yes, this evil dictator did the unthinkable. He allowed women to have the same rights as men, as written in the Quran, he recognized Israel as a state and said they deserved to live.

Don't forget that he was also an ally of the US and Britain in World War 2 and allowed them to send goods and food to the Soviet Union so it could withstand the German attacks!

Without him, the Soviet Union might have fallen and the Nazis could have won the war in Europe.

 

Reply #7 Top
Don't forget that he was also an ally of the US and Britain in World War 2 and allowed them to send goods and food to the Soviet Union so it could withstand the German attacks!
Without him, the Soviet Union might have fallen and the Nazis could have won the war in Europe.


This is very true. The oldest monarchy destroyed by religious zealots. Kind of makes you wonder why have a monarchy if they only last 2500 years or so?
Reply #8 Top

This is very true. The oldest monarchy destroyed by religious zealots. Kind of makes you wonder why have a monarchy if they only last 2500 years or so?


And the left were actually HAPPY when women's rights were taken away, when the secular state was destroyed, and when a 8-year war with Iraq was about to start.


The destruction of the Persian monarchy is still ongoing. See this reply to an article in the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.savepasargad.com/~New-050508/01.General-News/Newss-Pages/Professor%20Kaveh%20Farokh-E.htm
Reply #9 Top
And the left were actually HAPPY when women's rights were taken away,


Woman’s rights only matter during election years, and only when there is a republican president. The rest of the time it is okay to rape, beat, murder, and humiliate women around the world.

Remember the reason President Carter got rid of the Shah of Iran was because of his human rights record. So in letting the islamafascist take over, because they were supported by communists or so people thought, Iran would have a better life. Any enemy of America is a friend of liberals.

when the secular state was destroyed, and when a 8-year war with Iraq was about to start.


No one cared for those 8 years of war until it was found out that President Reagan was selling faulty weapons to Iran and helping Iraq as pay back for invading our embassy. Then it was a bad thing.
Reply #10 Top

Woman’s rights only matter during election years, and only when there is a republican president. The rest of the time it is okay to rape, beat, murder, and humiliate women around the world.


Women's rights certainly don't matter during the current election year. The Democrats dropped the woman candidate as soon as a man was found who would do the job.



Remember the reason President Carter got rid of the Shah of Iran was because of his human rights record. So in letting the islamafascist take over, because they were supported by communists or so people thought, Iran would have a better life. Any enemy of America is a friend of liberals.


A liberal is a feminist who becomes a chauvinist when abroad.



No one cared for those 8 years of war until it was found out that President Reagan was selling faulty weapons to Iran and helping Iraq as pay back for invading our embassy. Then it was a bad thing.


The war is almost forgotten anyway. That's why we are in the "Second Gulf War" now rather than the third.

Reply #11 Top

Tee hee!

I chortled a great deal throughout this article. The Shah as a good man? I guffawed at that one. Perhaps you are not familiar with the many unarmed civillian 'terrorists' that his Savak secret polic caused to disapear in the night, never to be seen from again?

And for the record, it was not Jimmy Carter that caused the Shah to be overthrown. It was the people of Iran who rose up after decades of oppression and his military and police (those that stayed loyal to him) killed almost 300,000 civillians during that uprising.

Also for the record, the Shah was installed into power by the U.S in the early 50's in a CIA operation led by Kermit Roosevelt. President Eisenhower (one of my favorites, in all honesty) decided that it was time to replace a democratically elected leader, Prime Minister Mossadegh, with a ruthless dictator, in this case the Shah. How's that for spreading freedom and democracy??? Also, this operation proved so succesful that the CIA used it as their template for fomenting coups in nations around the world for the next 50 years. Indonesia was another 'big hit', Cuba was attempted (and failed) and in fact, even Saddam Husein was at one time on the U.S payroll in several coup and assasination attempts against Qassim in Iraq.

But I especially love how you've boiled all of this down so simply. In one camp, Paladin, you've stated "the good guys" the white knights who are the saviours of the earth. In this camp reside the U.S, Israel and friends. In this camp of good guys are all the republican presidents, who clearly can do no wrong. Then there's the "bad guys" who all wear black hats and want nothing but to destroy our freedom and way of life!!! (I like how you continually stated that Clinton was helping and enabling terrorism all along, as well as all other liberals and democrats too, right?) It's all so simple now. I get it. We're good, and they're all evil terrorists not worthy to be designated as human beings.

There are so many things I can disagree with here but so little time. Let's start with a few gems:

December 9, 2001 the Taliban collapses baffling liberals around the world who said it could not be done. After all the Soviets fought for ten years and lost badly and we did it in 2 months.

That's funny because the Taliban are still present in Afghanistan and still carrying out effective attacks on NATO forces. By my count the fight there will soon be into it's 7th year?

February 27, 1991 the United States Military and its Allies crush Saddam Hussein’s vaunted “million man army” in 100 hours.

Well actually it was more like several weeks of round-the clock bombing followed up by the 100 hour ground war you mention. The constant airstrikes did most of the dammage and the ground campaign was the hammer that shattered the softened up Iraqi units (many of whom surrendered)

Also of note was that  the bulk of the Iraqi army units in Kuwait were Shia conscripts. While Saddam did have some Republican Guard present, the bulk of the Guard got out unscathed and was around to crush the Shia uprising that would occur when President Bush urged the Iraqi people to rise up and then sat back and did nothing while they were slaughtered.

A little too late since Bin Laden and his troops had moved to Afghanistan and were now moving to Iraq after he was kicked out of Sudan.

Please provide your source on this. Saddam hated AQ and was a secular leader. He also always had to be top dog in his yard, which is why he never would allow a potential competitor onto his soil. I have never seen or heard anything that ever stated AQ had substantial operations in Iraq that were condoned or supported by Saddam.

September 11. 2001 terrorist hijack four US airliners. They fly two of them into New York City’s world trade towers, another hits the pentagon. Passengers aboard the fourth jet give their lives to stop the hijackers. President Bush tells Vice President Cheney, “We’re at war, Dick. We’re going to find out who did this and kick their ass.” The democrats in congress asked, he had 8 months on the job why didn’t he stop this from happening? They seem to ignore the seven years of attacks from the same terror group prior to Mr. Bush taking office.

Yes, and just where exactly is mr. Bin Laden now hmm? Bush has had 7 years to get him now, one would think that getting the leader of the organization that plotted the worst attack on American soil would be the # 1 priority? Nope, apparently Saddam was a bigger threat??? Also, 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, so why didn't we go after Saudi Arabia hmmm? Oh wait, George Bush says they're our friends. I got it now.

The terrorists that we are dealing with were started and funded by the Soviet Union under the KGB chief Yuri Andropov, as a way to counter the success of freedom and the decline of communism around the world.

wtf?!? Sooooo, the Soviets are actually responsible for starting and funding the mujahideen that then killed them in Afghanistan? (elements of which later turned into AQ?)

Reply #12 Top

Also for the record, the Shah was installed into power by the U.S in the early 50's in a CIA operation led by Kermit Roosevelt. President Eisenhower (one of my favorites, in all honesty) decided that it was time to replace a democratically elected leader, Prime Minister Mossadegh, with a ruthless dictator, in this case the Shah. How's that for spreading freedom and democracy???


And liberals do not even see the irony in the claim that a "ruthless dictator" who ruled Iran during World War 2 allegedly came to power in the 50s.

For the less liberal and more fact-inclined (and quoted from Wikipedia):


During the subsequent military invasion and occupation, the joint Allied and Soviet command forced Reza Shah to abdicate in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He replaced his father on the throne on September 16, 1941. It was hoped that the younger prince would be more open to influence from the pro-Allied West, which later proved to be the case.


End quote.

Mossadegh was Prime Minister under the Shah. And the Shah was obviously at liberty to remove him from power.

And don't tell me he was "democratically elected". Although the evil Shah had moved the country towards democracy for quite a while, half the population could still not vote.

It was at the end of the Shah's rule that Iran became really democratic, and THAT triggered the revolution because "the people" (i.e. communists and Khomeini's lot) DIDN'T WANT democracy.


It was the people of Iran who rose up after decades of oppression and his military and police (those that stayed loyal to him) killed almost 300,000 civillians during that uprising.


You see, and that is what I don't get about liberals. You worry about every single prisoner of Guantanamo, but you make up numbers when it suits you as if human lives count nothing.

For your information, and per Wikipedia, I would like to introduce you to the official numbers, released by someone who probably hates the Shah even more than you do, but who has decided to remain more honest:


Ayatollah Khomeini stated that "60,000 men, women and children were martyred by the Shah's regime,"[90] and this number appears in the constitution of the Islamic Republic.[91] A member of the Iranian parliament gave a figure "70,000 martyrs and 100,000 wounded who fought to destroy the rotten monarchy." [90] More recently, a former researcher at the Martyrs Foundation (Bonyad Shahid), Emad al-Din Baghi, estimates the number of casualties suffered by the anti-Shah movement between 1963 and 1979 at only 3,164, with 2,781 killed in the 1978 and 1979 clashes between demonstrators and the Shah's army and security forces.[90]


End quote.

I suppose the source for the 300,000 victims is some "study" done by "scientists" who always find exactly 300,000 victims when they look at something? Who cares, right? Who care if a number is inflated by a factor of 100, if it makes the bad guy look bad! And if he doesn't kill, we'll just invent victims. Because some people are evil and history has to record their misdeeds, even if they haven't committed them.

The "people of Iran" rose up after the Shah introduced universal suffrage. It broke up the family, the religious nutters claimed, and the stupid followed them.

The Shah made Iran democratic and the revolution happened because of that and turned Iran into a dictatorship.

And you celebrate that as an end of oppression?

That's why you are a liberal.

And that's why you have to make up numbers to justify your stance.

Yes, the Shah killed people. But today we know why that was necessary.

Iran today kills over 300 people a year and that's only the official death penalty list. That's about 9000 victims of the revolution since 1979. Three times as many as the Shah killed between 1963 and 1979. And Iran's current victims are certainly not rebels or terrorists.

Carter's role in all this:

http://www.aryamehr.org/eng/carter/sold/cart.htm

You are slandering a great man, a man who helped beat the Nazis, a man who helped save the Soviet Union from Hitler's attack, a man who introduced civil rights and universal suffrage in an Islamic country. The Shah does NOT deserve being attacked by you.

And guess what, when the Shah fled, he fled to Egypt where Anwar al-Sadat welcomed him. That's the same Assad who flew to Jerusalem to make peace with Israel. Carter would later take credit for Assad's initiative and be friends with the Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas), the group that murdered Sadat.

The Shah was a great man, as was his friend al-Sadat. But Carter was and is a nobody.


Reply #13 Top
I chortled a great deal throughout this article. The Shah as a good man? I guffawed at that one. Perhaps you are not familiar with the many unarmed civillian 'terrorists' that his Savak secret polic caused to disapear in the night, never to be seen from again?


Well gee is that like the hundreds of supposedly unarmed terrorist that are sitting in Gitmo? The religious sect wanted to get rid of the man because he allowed women to wear makeup, wear western style clothing and even show their face in public. He allowed women freedom to learn to swim in public. For this they wanted his death, the death of his family, and the destruction of his nation. oh yeah he also recognized Israel as a state and did not make war with them. Then when his security forces arrest people suspected of terrorism it is a bad thing. Did it go over the line? Sure. One of my dorm mates told me how it is to live there and he was from a rich family and he did not love the Shah. Too bad because after the revolution he went back home and was murdered by those peace loving people in that bastion of civil and human rights we call Iran. Funny how getting rid of the shah only accomplished one thing that I can think of. Instead of people being put in jail they are now killed. This is much better because instead of being locked up for years they are free to talk it over with God. A woman was caught wearing lipstick so that made her a prostitute and they cut her lips off. Sounds like freedom and democracy there is much better than the monarchy they had.

And for the record, it was not Jimmy Carter that caused the Shah to be overthrown. It was the people of Iran who rose up after decades of oppression and his military and police (those that stayed loyal to him) killed almost 300,000 civillians during that uprising.


Iran was an ally of the United States, a valuable ally. Because of the human rights record the president cut him off of the intelligence of what was happening. He relied on that intelligence from France where the coup was being planned and set in motion. Did we stop it? No! Did we tell our friend he was in a world of trouble? No! Because the people that were going to over throw the Shah were going to be great citizens of the world and respect human rights. Well not so much.

Also for the record, the Shah was installed into power by the U.S in the early 50's in a CIA operation led by Kermit Roosevelt. President Eisenhower (one of my favorites, in all honesty) decided that it was time to replace a democratically elected leader, Prime Minister Mossadegh, with a ruthless dictator, in this case the Shah. How's that for spreading freedom and democracy??? Also, this operation proved so succesful that the CIA used it as their template for fomenting coups in nations around the world for the next 50 years. Indonesia was another 'big hit', Cuba was attempted (and failed) and in fact, even Saddam Husein was at one time on the U.S payroll in several coup and assasination attempts against Qassim in Iraq.


Okay it is easier if you bother to learn your history. The Shah was in power since his father died in 1939 or 41 I can’t remember off the top of my head right now. The monarchy had been the longest continuous monarchy in the world spanning 2,500 years. This makes it hard for the CIA to install someone into power when he was the Shah of Iran before there was a CIA or an OSS. What you are talking about was the removal of the prime minister. Operation Ajax if I recall. Dust off your law books buddy. The monarch has the power to remove the civilian head of government at will. Don’t believe me ask her majesty the Queen of England. If the prime minister does not leave office that is treason which is why General Roosevelt asked for and received a copy of the letter of dismissal before they put the plan into action. The letter made it a legal operation. If the Shah was not in already in power the letter would have been worthless and the actions taken illegal. It took two tries before they got him out hardly a text book case. And just for the record operation Ajax was a British operation with an assist from the CIA. You can tell by operational name. Buddy you have to stop believing Wikipedia they don’t have all the information on any subject but they can lead you in the right directions if you actually want to know the truth.

But I especially love how you've boiled all of this down so simply. In one camp, Paladin, you've stated "the good guys" the white knights who are the saviours of the earth. In this camp reside the U.S, Israel and friends. In this camp of good guys are all the republican presidents, who clearly can do no wrong.


Never said that, never even hinted at it. Back to that reading comprehension thing. the republicans kept their eyes closed all the way up to a point where they said enough and then struck back. They did not start striking back until the 80’s where it might seem that the republicans are the good guys and the democrats are the bad guys is because the republicans were supporting the Shah and other dictators because they were the lesser of two evils. President Carter screwed up because he saw the Shah as evil and deposed him thinking that just because the people replacing him were religious they would be easier to deal with. When the hostages were taken that was an act of war. He did nothing. When Mr. Reagan took office he did nothing as Iran and others seeing the weakness in America escalated the violence against Americans until he lost his temper and frowned. People started to die in rapid succession on the terrorist side. Mr. Bush that succeeded him continued this covert action. Mr. Clinton closed the operation allowing the terrorist breathing room. These were not deliberated acts to foster terrorism, they were short sighted acts and acts of omission that gave our enemies the misguided belief that America was weak. These people believe that weakness must be destroyed.

(I like how you continually stated that Clinton was helping and enabling terrorism all along, as well as all other liberals and democrats too, right?)


I am glad you liked it. All I did was report what happened and sometimes added my own comments to the cut and paste job. If you studied history you will see that most of what I put in the article were from news sources from mean right wing groups like the new your times, CNN not one entry that I cut and pasted came from any real right wing news outlet. I specifically avoided them just because I knew I would hear the claim that I was just passing on propaganda from the right. All but a few of my comments were at the end of the piece some were at the end of each piece that pissed me off. But the stuff from the news was unedited and in context. For brevity I omitted the credits but since this is not a publication I doubt I would get charged with plagiarism.

That's funny because the Taliban are still present in Afghanistan and still carrying out effective attacks on NATO forces. By my count the fight there will soon be into it's 7th year?


Reading comprehension helps. I did not say they were defeated I stated they collapsed they are no longer a cohesive military force if they ever were one they are not now. They are in scattered pockets in the country and they need to communicate by sending runners with messages that we sometimes catch reducing their force each time.

Well actually it was more like several weeks of round-the clock bombing followed up by the 100 hour ground war you mention. The constant airstrikes did most of the dammage and the ground campaign was the hammer that shattered the softened up Iraqi units (many of whom surrendered)


You can fly bombing missions all day and all night till the second coming but until you put a boot on the ground and say, this is mine now, you don’t own the land.

Also of note was that the bulk of the Iraqi army units in Kuwait were Shia conscripts. While Saddam did have some Republican Guard present, the bulk of the Guard got out unscathed and was around to crush the Shia uprising that would occur when President Bush urged the Iraqi people to rise up and then sat back and did nothing while they were slaughtered.


Yup, sucked to be them. Since we were forbidden to attack Saddam in Iraq that was the best we could do. It failed. It was a hail marry pass that did not make it. If someone had gotten on the radio and said they killed Saddam and invited us into the country we could have done much more but since the other Arab nations threatened our oil flow we had to sit back and wait for Saddam to screw up.

Please provide your source on this. Saddam hated AQ and was a secular leader.


Each time you say this same tired old line. Where are you getting this crap from? Saddam’s people had meetings with AQ, Saddam allowed wounded people from Afghanistan to mend in his hospitals. Saddam allowed AQ to practice the 9/11 attacks in Iraq. Saddam allowed AQ training staff to live in Iraq. They were in Iraq when we invaded where do you think AQ came from that started the insurgency? The 9/11 report states that Iraq had more than just a few dealings with AQ so hate is too strong a word to use.

I have never seen or heard anything that ever stated AQ had substantial operations in Iraq that were condoned or supported by Saddam.


Sure you have, you just dismissed it each time I bring it up instead of looking up the information on your own.

The Observer, December 19, 1999
"This time last year the U.S. claimed that another delegation had met Osama bin Laden, the alleged terrorist mastermind and tried to woo him to Iraq."

United Press International. November 3, 1999
"The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee."

U.S. Newswire, December 23, 1999.
"Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks ... (author Yossef) Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein"

The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland), wrote in December 28, 1999:
"Iraq tempts [Osama] bin Laden to attack West; The world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq if his worldwide terrorist network succeeds in carrying out a campaign of high-profile attacks on the West ..."

These reports were all from 1999, during the Clinton administration, before Mr. Bush was even nominated to be president. Furthermore, after 9-11, there were more reports of a bin Laden/Hussein relationship:

May 2003, a federal judge, a Clinton appointee, ordered [O]sama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and others to pay nearly $104 million to the families of two Sept. 11 victims, saying there is evidence - though meager - that Iraq had a hand in the terrorist attacks. (The judge in this case was a Democrat.)

June 2003, Federal appellate Judge Gilbert S. Merritt of Nashville, a Democrat, who was selected by the U.S. Justice Department to help rebuild Iraq's judicial system, The Tennessean newspaper that he had seen evidence of Iraq-al-Qaida links. Here is an excerpt: ?"Through an unusual set of circumstances, I have been given documentary evidence of the names and positions of the 600 closest people in Iraq to Saddam Hussein, as well as his ongoing relationship with Osama bin Laden. I am looking at the document as I write this story from my hotel room overlooking the Tigris River in Baghdad." The liberals and their servants in the media have been complicit in distorting the facts about a controversial war for the benefit of one political party. They have attempted to make Mr. Bush into a Hitlerian dictator.

This reprehensible propaganda campaign worked for liberals during another controversial war: the Vietnam War. Times have changed. The American public does not need to rely on the big three networks, CNN, the New York Times, USA Today and other media sympathetic to the Democratic Party or which are dogmatically liberal.

The lies of the Left will not work this time.

See the evidence is out there but you refuse to even consider it because of your dogmatic beliefs in your political party would never allow you to believe they lied to you.


Yes, and just where exactly is mr. Bin Laden now hmm? Bush has had 7 years to get him now, one would think that getting the leader of the organization that plotted the worst attack on American soil would be the # 1 priority?


Let’s take a look at that one shall we? According to the New York Times. We were 24 hours behind him. This is good right? They also reported in the same article that we were tracking his cell phone and slowly closing in on him. Sounds great! Only problem is that more than just Americans read the times. We lost his signal and later found out that he ditched the phone when someone called to say how he was being tracked.

The New York Times then reported that we were only 3 days behind Bin Laden. They knew this because people in the know told them that we were tracking his computer usage. Yes after months of searching American intelligence finally narrowed down what computer he was using to send e-mail orders to his people around the world. Bin Laden must have been shocked to get an e-mail telling him his computer was helping us.

He stopped using it and a year later the Times reported that American intelligence had finally tracked down which satellite phone Bin Laden was using and we were only a few days from getting him. He gets a phone call and the sat phone goes the way of the laptop he was using. So there are three times we were very close and he slipped by thanks to his intelligence sources called the American media. If he was not getting help from the New York Times he would be dirt temperature by now. So don’t blame the president because the Times and some jerk with a security clearance can’t keep a secret.

How about this one. The Saudis in a move to get Bin Laden for us, secretly, provided him a dialysis machine that was slowly feeding him poison. I know this because I read it in the New York Times! Can’t these idiots wait until he is dead and then tell the story?

The Times also reported that we have yet to capture Bin Laden and wonder at the competence of the administration. Suddenly readership of the times dropped and has been dropping ever since.

Nope, apparently Saddam was a bigger threat???


As long as Bin Laden is on the run he can’t mess with us. That means the next threat moves up on the list.

lso, 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, so why didn't we go after Saudi Arabia hmmm?


Using that faulty logic I will ask you why we have not gone to war with Mexico, Canada, Great Briton, and France. Their citizens have murdered Americans why has Mr. Bush not attacked them? You can’t let your racist views cloud your judgment.

Sooooo, the Soviets are actually responsible for starting and funding the mujahideen that then killed them in Afghanistan?


In a way yes, they did. Once they trained their Muslim friends to do terror that information went out beyond the groups they had trained. AQ is an offshoot of the Mujahideen. The Mujahideen was made up of Muslims from around the world not just Afghanistan. That training was used to fight the people that trained them. We did not provide terror training, we provided weapons. They fire off so many and bring back the empties and we replace the empties only. This is why we know to within 5 how many stinger missiles they have and the shelf life of those missiles are a decade past useful life. Sure some might even work but you can’t count on them any more.
Reply #14 Top

The Shah does NOT deserve being attacked by you.

That's why you are a liberal. And that's why you have to make up numbers to justify your stance.

You see, and that is what I don't get about liberals. You worry about every single prisoner of Guantanamo,

For the less liberal and more fact-inclined

Leauki, did I touch a nerve hmm? First off, why must you always boil everything down to liberal vs conservative? I hope that one day you will realize there is no such thing as white hat good guys fighting black hat bad guys. In fact, typically if you see two people fighting they're usually both bad. Only on odd occasions (like WW 2) will you have the actual true good vs. evil battle. And even then it gets a little shaky as to who is good and bad, we did fire bomb Dresden after all. But anywho. That's getting off topic. Let's just say I find it very amusing that you obviously have a cookie cutter image in your brain that you apply to everyone who does not hold your beliefs (we're all liberals, apparently, who have no sense of logic and are all hate filled!)

Now, getting on to actually replying to the substance of your post;

Mossadegh was Prime Minister under the Shah. And the Shah was obviously at liberty to remove him from power.

Well, you see this kinda illustrates your lack of understanding on the issue. I do appreciate that you went to Wikipedia, but you might also want to read a few books to really understand what happened. And btw, I didn't make up any numbers, I read them in several books on this topic, the titles of which I will post later on.

The Shah didn't technically have liberty to remove Mossadegh from power at the time. He was more like a figurehead monarch, and had been for some time. It would be kinda like if the Queen of England decided she didn't like the democratically elected prime minister and so decreed that he and all of Parliament were criminals and had to go. Same thing. If you actually read up on the subject, you may be surprised what you find!

I suppose the source for the 300,000 victims is some "study" done by "scientists" who always find exactly 300,000 victims when they look at something? Who cares, right? Who care if a number is inflated by a factor of 100, if it makes the bad guy look bad! And if he doesn't kill, we'll just invent victims. Because some people are evil and history has to record their misdeeds, even if they haven't committed them.

Again with the assumptions! I will find the books that I read this number from and cite the passages, if it will make you happy. I am sure you will then reply by shouting "lies, all liberal lies!!!" or some such thing.

The Shah made Iran democratic and the revolution happened because of that and turned Iran into a dictatorship.

uh, no. The Shah made Iran into a dictatorship by deposing the democratically elected Prime Minister and installing himself as the unelected supreme monarch. He ruled with an iron fist, and anyone who questionned his rule disapeared or was tortured. This is nothing new, typical strong arm tactics. After decades of oppression, the Iranian people had enough and overthrew him. Yes, in the ensuing power struggle after he was deposed the Ayatollah did take over, but that does not justify the monster that he was! 

Reply #15 Top
The Shah was a great man, as was his friend al-Sadat. But Carter was and is a nobody.


I loved your reply, although I am shocked that you would slander nobodies. Other than that I learned something from your post. Thanks!
Reply #16 Top
Post script.
I was asked why after 7 years we had not gotten Bin Laden. I was reading the news story about the person responsible for the anthrax attacks on September 18, 2001. Almost 7 years to the month we finally found the person responsible. He killed himself saving us the cost of a trial and execution. It took 6 years to find a person who lived in the US and worked at a lab where we knew the stuff came from. Yet we are expected to be able to locate Bin Laden half way around the world hiding in one of three countries protected by the locals. Think about that. I bring this up because it was the anthrax that caused people to worry about WMD and the fact that the only world leader that had WMD and supported the attacks on 9/11 was Saddam. Even looking in retrospect I can’t fault the administration for going after the guy.
Reply #17 Top

Leauki, did I touch a nerve hmm? First off, why must you always boil everything down to liberal vs conservative? I hope that one day you will realize there is no such thing as white hat good guys fighting black hat bad guys.


I was a student at the University of Haifa when Hizbullah fired rockets at it; at the university, at schools, at kindergartens, at everything but military targets.

Hassan Nasrallah called on all Jews in the world to come to northern Israel to die before he intensified the rocket fire that had been going on for five years.

The entire population of northern Israel was evacuated to the south and because of that Israel escaped the war nearly unharmed. The Lebanese, whom Hizbullah forced not to flee, were not that lucky.

I can assure you that there are good guys fighting bad guys. I have seen them both.



In fact, typically if you see two people fighting they're usually both bad. Only on odd occasions (like WW 2) will you have the actual true good vs. evil battle. And even then it gets a little shaky as to who is good and bad, we did fire bomb Dresden after all.


Be my guest. The people of Dresden had a choice. The people of London did not.



I am sure you will then reply by shouting "lies, all liberal lies!!!" or some such thing.


Well, let me put it this way: I trust Khomeini more than you.

If he says it was less than 100,000 victims and you claim it was more, I believe HIM.

He has absolutely no reason to lie to make the Shah look better, but you have every reason to make him look worse (as did Khomeini).

You claim that 300,000 people died during that revolution? How long was the revolution? How did the Shah dispose of the bodies? Do your books mention that?



The Shah made Iran into a dictatorship by deposing the democratically elected Prime Minister and installing himself as the unelected supreme monarch.


We have been through this. The Shah came to power in 1941, replacing his father. It was indeed a British and American (and Soviet) coup, but it was not "Operation Ajax".

Operation Ajax KEPT the Shah in power, it didn't bring him to power.

You really need new history books.

Reply #18 Top

It took 6 years to find a person who lived in the US and worked at a lab where we knew the stuff came from.


And you didn't even have to invade his country first.

But seriously, liberals believe in super heroes. For them Obama is the Messiah, so Bush is obviously a superman of some kind. He _should_ have found Osama a few hours after the attacks with his magic flying cape.
Reply #19 Top

Leauki, did I touch a nerve hmm?


You did.

I contrast to non-caring liberals I actually admire the history of Iran and its ancient monarchy. I have seen what replacing kings with new governments does to countries and especially the human rights situation within. The American revolution was the exception, not the rule. American liberals tend to forget that (and what the American revolution stood for).

For me replacing a monarch who introduces universal suffrage with a totalitarian religious fundamentalist regime that forces a dress code on women and discriminates against minorities and funds militias that attack other countries is NOT a good thing.

Gee, even Khomeini's grand son calls for the overthrow of the current Iranian regime and says it is worse than that Shah's:


The grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini, the inspiration of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, has broken a three-year silence to back the United States military to overthrow the country's clerical regime.


End quote. And:


The cleric returned to Iran at his family's insistence and was protected from retribution by his grandfather's widow, Batol Saqafi Khomeini.


End quote.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1521633/Ayatollah%27s-grandson-calls-for-US-overthrow-of-Iran.html

Khomeini (the grandson) also met with the Shah's son.

That's the reality of your revolution. If it wasn't for Ruholla Khomeini's widow, it would eat the family of its leaders.

And you find it weird that I admire the Shah, whose son even Khomeini's grandson turns to?


Reply #20 Top
Incidentally, it's in my Liberal Dictionary:


"Shah"
title
The one-time CIA-supported (see "CIA") ruler of Iran who ruled since 1941 after being put into power in a CIA-initiated coup in 1953.


"CIA"
abbreviation
The symbol of all evil and the incarnation of the capitalist satan. Showing the involvement of the CIA in an incident proves beyond a doubt that the incident was inhumane and caused by greed, usually for oil.


https://forums.politicalmachine.com/81628
Reply #21 Top

I loved your reply, although I am shocked that you would slander nobodies.


:-) Sorry.



Other than that I learned something from your post. Thanks!


Most people know little about the history of Iran because Europe (and America) took pride in its own history. That's why we learned to side with the Greeks (despite the fact that they were a culture of slavery and pedophilia).

Over the last 15 years or so I have learned to side with the Persians and Phoenicians rather than the Greeks and Romans.
Reply #22 Top
It would be kinda like if the Queen of England decided she didn't like the democratically elected prime minister and so decreed that he and all of Parliament were criminals and had to go.


She does not have to decide they are criminals. She has the right to dispand parliment. Best if you actually research your analogies before using them incorrectly.

p.s. She can do the same thing in Canada - legally.
Reply #23 Top

She does not have to decide they are criminals. She has the right to disband parliament. Best if you actually research your analogies before using them incorrectly.

p.s. She can do the same thing in Canada - legally.


Indeed. And something like that actually happened several times.

During World War 2 the King decided for a prime minister without asking parliament.

In Australia the Governor General once fired a prime minister and called for new elections.

In Rhodesia the white apartheid government was fired by the Governor General and Rhodesia turned into a rebel colony because of it. Rhodesia later declared itself a republic. (They had their own Mossadegh who was elected by parts of the population and resisted the monarch.)

During the Thatcher years there was the possibility that the Queen would refuse to sign a poll tax law because it could be seen as limiting voting rights to tax payers.

It's part of the checks and balances.

I guess liberals have to learn that the republican system they are trying to dismantle in the US is not the only government system that works.
Reply #24 Top
I think it should be mentioned again how ridiculous the number 300,000 is for deaths during the uprising against the Shah.

Bodies don't just vanish.

Khomeini claimed that the total number of the Shah's victims was less than 100,000. I guess he couldn't find the mass graves or furnaces either.

Maybe the Shah had access to the Bush machine, a similar device that George Bush used in the last few years to vanish an alleged 600 bodies a day in Iraq.

It's just too bad that the Nazis or the Khmer Rouge or the Sudanese government or really any of the people conservatives think of as evil never seem to have that machine. They rely on furnaces or mass graves or ghost villages or mountains of skeletons when they, presumably in defence of equality, cause a similar or greater number of deaths.

Reply #25 Top
I think it should be mentioned again how ridiculous the number 300,000 is for deaths during the uprising against the Shah.


Is that any thing like the 600,000 deaths of Iraqis in this war? All of them verified innocent civilians but no bodies have been found to back up the claim.