
Originally Posted by
noonwitch
I know, I saw that. They blame the hostages. They do the same with the Iranian revolutionaries who held the diplomats hostage in the late 70s, and blamed America, whose president at the time was the most revered Jimmy Carter.
I found this out last week, when I told another poster that it was okay to think McCain's comment about tobacco imports and Iran was funny, even if it was tasteless. I was accused of "buying into the anti-Iran propaganda", at the very least. Also, there were strong sentiments against the late Shah expressed. I don't really know enough to defend the Shah, but I do know my dentist, who was born in Iran in a christian family, left the country long before the revolution because her father wanted his daughters to be educated and have a chance at a real life. She said to me once, "You know, they keep saying that the Taliban and al Queda are radical islam. There is no such thing as radical islam, it's all that way". Her sister, who is one of the hygenists, disagreed-she has been back to visit relatives, some of whom are muslims, and she says that there are a lot of people, muslims included, who want to have a normal country, trade with the west, and a secular government.
But whatever, technically, the Shah was our ally, even if he may have had some ruthless qualities. Even if you blame Carter for how he handled the hostage crisis, his decision to allow the Shah to receive medical treatment in the US was an act of mercy toward a dying man who had been an ally. That doesn't justify taking hostages and demanding that said dying man be turned over to an angry mob in order for those hostages to be released. The ironies of the Carter-loving, anti-death penalty mob taking this position are just amazing to me.