Saxby Chambliss is an idiot. Or a dangerous demagogue.

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8zV8diLyeE

Basically he claims Iranians don't remember the US overthrew their elected government in 1953 and put a brutal Shah in power for 25 years.

I ask you, my fellow Americans, do you know who the President of the US was in 1953? Do you know how he got to be President?

Is Chambliss just such an plain out idiot that he really believes this?
Or is he using it for political points to criticze Obama's not getting strongly involved in the controversy in Iran because Obama knows that US support would work against the Mousavi supporters?

So is Chambliss an idiot or demagogue?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.
Looking in the mirror again, PJ?

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.
So you assume they are an illiterate mob who have neither read their own history, nor been told by the mullahs why they have a grievance against the "Great Satan".

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.
You do realize that many of those political prisoners were the mullahs and other Islamic revolutionaries? Did they all execute themselves?
Of course, the Shah never tortured or executed any of his political opponents and didn't have a secret police so bold they even operated in the Persian student communities here in the United States...
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.
Looking in the mirror again, PJ?

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.
So you assume they are an illiterate mob who have neither read their own history, nor been told by the mullahs why they have a grievance against the "Great Satan".

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.
You do realize that many of those political prisoners were the mullahs and other Islamic revolutionaries? Did they all execute themselves?
Of course, the Shah never tortured or executed any of his political opponents and didn't have a secret police so bold they even operated in the Persian student communities here in the United States...

About the only one who knows nothing about history is....ProfJohn!
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Hopefully even the people of Georgia will know they elected a demagogic idiot, if a Senator from an even remotely liberal state tried that kind of logic, there would be multiple in State comments denouncing that kind of stinking partisan thinking.

Even with all the multiple thread on the Iranian election protests with the consensus being, that the USA should not get involved, its hard to defend a Chambliss trying to goad
Obama into a stupid action that will hurt the USA and aid the Mullahs.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,599
4,698
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.

Wow, the ignorance of your post is truly astounding.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.

Wow, the ignorance of your post is truly astounding.
Incredibly astounding since he obviously has internet access and can easily determine how enormously ignorant he is.

 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,599
4,698
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

What, so you went and got a shovel to dig yourself in deeper?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
You want to use your brain and figure it out for yourself.

Do you think the people of Iran look at the US flag and think about what happened in 1953??

Only 20 years ago we were engaged in a cold war with the Soviets and Warsaw pact. Today many of the eastern Europe countries are among our strongest allies.

Do you really think the people of Iran watch a speech by Obama and then reply "but what about 1953?"
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
... The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power...
It appears you do realize that the mullahs continue to use the 1953 coup and the United States' support of the Shah as an important part of their indoctrination of the Iranian population against the "Great Satan". Not so ignorant after all, eh?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

Off the top of my head:

In 1953, Iran had a democratic government, not a theocratic government. Britain had, at the point of a gun, earlier set up exploitaive oil agreements - if I understand, returning only 12% of the value to Iran. When a new Prime Minister came to power, he announced the oil deals would be changed to be more fair to Iran, returning 50% of the value of the oil. The British appealed to new US President Eisenhower for help to 'deal with' the 'problem'.

Eisenhower responded by having the CIA perform its first covert action - this is the operation which resulted in the term "blowback" being coined for the unanticipated negative reactions of such covert actions - and Theodore Rooselvelt's grandson Kermit Roosevellt led the CIA operation, which approached the Shah in exile, after he had attacked the constitution in 1950, allowing the Shah to disband parliament; the Shah was reluctant to accept the Americans' offer to seize power, he was basicall fearful.

The Americans figuratively slapped him and told him to grow a pair and said they would provide him with a secret police force to protect his rule, and pressured him. He agreed.

The American successfully organized the coup and put the Shah in charge; the Shah'spolicies were ones of oligarchy, building some new industry and making a few people very wealthy, while in the 1960's Iran had 80% illiteracy and only 1% of Iranias had access to medical care.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

You are surprisingly not that far off the mark, at elast on the main point that the Iranian people are surprisnigly friendly to the US despite having extremely good reason to hate the US for its destruction of their democracy, installation of a dictator, and allowing a repressive clerical regime to seize power that could not have without the US policies - and oh by the way, pressuring Saddam to invade them in a decade-long war in which Iranian schools were gassed and causing a million casualties.

The regime's propaganda - some justified, some not - against the US has been surprisingly ineffective at making the Iranian people oppose the US.

In other words, they are nothing like ProfJohn, who has no such forgiving attitude, and who has no such resistance to his government's messages demonizing other people.

The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

pssssssst it was a tactic of Bush and the Noecons, of Reagan, and others. Good to see you recogize them as tyrants.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,213
5,794
126
The dudes an Idiot. I'm not fully convinced the Election was stolen. I hope it was and somehow it gets reversed, but just because some feel it was doesn't mean it was.
 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

Which is why the supreme leader in his speech yesterday referred to UK as the great satan.



 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
One of the reasons I fear for America's future is people who know absolutely nothing about history except what they hear on Fox News.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

Which is why the supreme leader in his speech yesterday referred to UK as the great satan.
He must be getting his satans mixed up. I think he meant to say the US is the great satan.
But the point is valid. The Iranians are barely 25 years from overthrowing 26 years of US sponsored tyranny, torture and pillaging.

 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
60
91
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.

I was born in 1941 so I do remember that Dwight D. Eisenhower President of the United States in 1953. Even if you're not old enough to remember and you failed U.S. history in middle school, anyone can search Google to find out who was the U.S. President in 1953.

Would it suprise you that, like us, Iranians are a very well educated, informed and tech aware society with Internet access? Of course, they're aware of their own history and OUR history of meddaling with their government, including the fact that the CIA was instrumental in overthrowing their democratically elected leader to install the Shah's brutal dictatorship.

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.

Uh-huh. That's the same kind of diversionary bullshit as claiming your mercifully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal were only guilty of a little bit of torture. Once a government crosses the threshold to commit heinous acts of oppression and torture, there's no going back. Learn something about SAVAK, the Shah's National Intelligence and Security Organization.

SAVAK (Persian: ?????, short for ?????? ??????? ? ????? ???? Sazeman-e Ettela'at va Amniyat-e Keshvar, National Intelligence and Security Organization) was the domestic security and intelligence service of Iran from 1957 to 1979. It has been described as Iran's "most hated and feared institution" prior to the revolution of 1979, for its association with the foreign intelligence organizations such as the CIA and its torture and execution of regime opponents.] At its peak, the organization had as many as 60,000 agents serving in its ranks. It has been estimated that by the time the agency was finally dismantled in 1979 by the Iranian Revolution, as many as one third of all Iranian men had some sort of connection to SAVAK by way of being informants or actual agents
.
.
Operations

During the height of its power, SAVAK had virtually unlimited powers of arrest and detention. It operated its own detention centers, like Evin Prison. In addition to domestic security the service's tasks extended to the surveillance of Iranians abroad, notably in the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, and especially students on government stipends. The agency also closely collaborated with the American CIA by sending their agents to an air force base in New York to share and discuss interrogation tactics.

SAVAK agents often carried out operations against each other.[citation needed] Teymur Bakhtiar was assassinated by SAVAK agents in 1970, and Mansur Rafizadeh, SAVAK's United States director during the 1970s, reported that General Nassiri's phone was tapped. Mansur Rafizadeh later published his life as a SAVAK man and detailed the human rights violations of the Shah in his book Witness: From the Shah to the Secret Arms Deal : An Insider's Account of U.S. Involvement in Iran.

According to Polish author Ryszard Kapuscinski, SAVAK was responsible for
  • Censorship of press, books and films.
  • Interrogation and often torture of prisoners
  • Surveillance of political opponents.
.
.
Victims

Sources disagree over how many victims SAVAK had and how inhumane its techniques were. Writing at the time of the Shah's overthrow, TIME magazine described SAVAK as having "long been Iran's most hated and feared institution" which had "tortured and murdered thousands of the Shah's opponents." Federation of American Scientists (FAS) also found it guilty of "the torture and execution of thousands of political prisoners" and symbolizing "the Shah's rule from 1963-79." The FAS list of SAVAK torture methods included "electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails." According to a former CIA analyst on Iran, Jesse J. Leaf, SAVAK was trained in torture techniques by the CIA.
.
.
(continues)

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

Of course. That would be Saxby Chambliss. :light:

If you were implying that it was the OP, or you agree with Chambliss, it would be YOU, as well. :p

Originally posted by: techs

One of the reasons I fear for America's future is people who know absolutely nothing about history except what they hear on Fox News.

People who know absolutely nothing about history except what they hear on Fox News know absolutely nothing about history. :roll:
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think we all know who the idiot is around here.

70% of the Iranian population is under 30, that means that the majority of the country was not even alive during the 1979 revolution. To them 1953 is ancient history.

And calling the Shah brutal is idiotic. He may have been repressive, but compare what he did to the people who took over for him and there is no comparison. Case in point, the US complained about the number of political prisoners held by the Shah, the mullahs took over and just killed all those prisoners.

Oh really? Go ask a Native American if they have any knowledge of, or feelings about, the treatment of their ancestors by the American government (and that was much more than 50 years ago).

Go ask a young Jew if they know anything about WWII, or harbor any ill-will towards Neo-Nazis.

Oh, and point being that if the US had stayed the hell out of it completely there would have been no brutal shah, and no evil mullahs to follow.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

That is YOUR opinion, and is tied in to why you have the beliefs you do...however other people aren't wired that way. Some are, sure. But for every one that thinks like you there is at LEAST one that is DEEPLY aware of, and impacted by history.

You're the kind of student I will more or less have to flunk once I start teaching history. If you don't see the point and importance you're hopeless to me.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only does Non Prof John flunk history, he flunks math, 60 years ago was 1949 and the defeat of Japan and Germany had been both accomplished in 1945.

The notion that a given nation does not know its own history is totally false, and the fact that many in the USA and Iran want to improve Iranian US relations should be a cause for new optimism. An unthinking person like Chambliss sadly only acts to extinguish hopes for a better day.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
60
91
Originally posted by: Lemon law

Not only does Non Prof John flunk history, he flunks math, 60 years ago was 1949 and the defeat of Japan and Germany had been both accomplished in 1945.

The notion that a given nation does not know its own history is totally false, and the fact that many in the USA and Iran want to improve Iranian US relations should be a cause for new optimism. An unthinking person like ProfJohn sadly only acts to extinguish hopes for a better day.

Fixed it for ya. :light:
 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok... what can all you brilliant people tell me about 1953 off the top of your head.

I am sure the people of Iran know about what happened in 1953, but I am also sure that they don't care. Anything that happens before you are born might as well be ancient history because it has the same impact on your lives.

60 years ago we were war with Japan and Germany and totally devastated those countries, today they are among our strongest allies.

To the people of Iran what happened in 1953 is history and irrelevant to what is happening today. The only people talking about 1953 are the mullahs who are trying to find an outside enemy so they can use that enemy to keep their hold on power. It is a tactic of tyrants every where.

Which is why the supreme leader in his speech yesterday referred to UK as the great satan.
He must be getting his satans mixed up. I think he meant to say the US is the great satan.
But the point is valid. The Iranians are barely 25 years from overthrowing 26 years of US sponsored tyranny, torture and pillaging.

No he was not getting it mixed up. UK is hated more than the US among the kind of people who would support Ahmadinejad. Don't forget it was the UK who was primarily responsible for the overthrow of the prime minister in 1953 - to save the interests of the Anglo Iranian Oil Co (now evolved as BP). The CIA played its part at the behest of the UK and US got involved after Dwight Eisenhower came to power.

I read somewhere there is even a school of thought in Iran that it is UK which is the brains behind the evil actions of USA.


 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The other thing to point out, despite the wild remarks Achmadinejad is reputed as saying, he is by no means a dumb man. Achmadinejad is far more aware of the meaning of the current rebellion than Khateimei, and when the Iranian and the Brits were in a big snit over the captured British sailors, Achmadimejad was the one who out thought Tony Blair, and when Blair tried Iran bashing after their release, it was Tony Blair that came out looking like a monkey. Shortly thereafter, Blair was replaced by Brown.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
You have to wonder how it looks to Iranians that a Presidential candidate who got 47 percent of the vote and who sang, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran came out and threw his support behind Mousavi.

That's sort of like Bin Laden coming out in support of Kerry or Obama.
And just how would that have helped Kerry or Obama?
It wouldn't.
And that's how Grampa McCain opened his incredibly stupid mouth and fucked over the pro-Mousavi supporters.
Seriously, Grampa, you just fucked up big time. And proved why you should have never been elected President.
 

ZeGermans

Banned
Dec 14, 2004
907
0
0
this is why it's particularly insulting to Iranians for anyone in the U.S. to decry the complexity of their government or the legitimacy of their elections.