We are less respected by the world?

[Michael Tee]

Thanks, Cindy.  I'm not a fan of either the Shah's regime or the Islamic Republic.  They're both pretty bad, but the Republic is still a mixed bag with good and bad elements.  There may have been some innocent military men murdered by the Republic, but the military tortured and killed thousands under the Shah.  I find it hard to believe that there were many innocents among them.  Both regimes can be characterized as heavy users of torture and murder to advance their policies.

[Cynthia]

Thanks, Cindy.  I'm not a fan of either the Shah's regime or the Islamic Republic.  They're both pretty bad, but the Republic is still a mixed bag with good and bad elements.  There may have been some innocent military men murdered by the Republic, but the military tortured and killed thousands under the Shah.  I find it hard to believe that there were many innocents among them.  Both regimes can be characterized as heavy users of torture and murder to advance their policies.

But, you know, Micky....women had it a hell of a lot better under the Shah..and that was only the beginning.

If you read the few pages online in Manoutcheri's book, you will see that women were on their way to holding more than a step behind the husband.

Sally Field once portrayed the woman Moodie sp? who was left to fend for herself in Iran while her Americanized Iranian husband turned his coat and used force against her on his own turf.
That happened to me in so many words.....albeit without the child. The movie; Not Without My Daughter. The story tells a lot about the average Iranian on soil or in US country......point?

 even if and Iranian "appears" to love and work in America.....be aware that that isn't always a given as a conclusive definition of the Loyal Persian in the American way.

The depth of loyalty to the culture that is Persia....is something the Iranian will always hold tight to the vest.
We, as WEsterners can view the middle east with rose colored glasses, but we will never understand the culture that holds disdain for its own women.

More later.

Cindy

[Michael Tee]

My wife and I saw

Not Without My Daughter

, and we  both thought it was an excellent picture.  The Shah was trying to modernize Iran and improving the status of women was an obvious part of modernization, but I can see where it would receive a lot of opposition from the public.  This is one place where religion takes a prominent role in suppressing women's rights, much the same as the RCC and the fundamentalist Protestant churches in our culture spearhead the attack on women's reproductive rights over here.

I tend to see the attack on women's rights in Iran as a religious rather than a cultural movement.  I eat lunch fairly regularly at the Darband, a Persian restaurant near my home with a giant video screen, which is always showing Persian music videos, made in L.A., mostly, featuring modern Persian dance and song.  The girls in the videos are as liberated as North American women, sexy, long-haired, bare midriffs, etc.  Of course the Ayatollahs have no power in L.A. and so the Persian people of North America are free to adopt whatever cultural models, Persian included, that attract them.  It's pretty obvious to me that the Persian people, while anxious to preserve some traditional elements of Persian culture, music for example, they can blend in Western styles to modify the music and they certainly seem to have adopted the North American model of relationships between the sexes.

Of course your point would be that Moodie was just as liberal and westernized as the Persians watching the music vids at the Darband, but that deep down inside, he was still an old-fashioned Iranian.

I guess in hindsight, which is always 20/20, it probably IS better to stick to your own kind in matrimony.

[Cynthia]

My wife and I saw

Not Without My Daughter

, and we  both thought it was an excellent picture.  The Shah was trying to modernize Iran and improving the status of women was an obvious part of modernization, but I can see where it would receive a lot of opposition from the public.  This is one place where religion takes a prominent role in suppressing women's rights, much the same as the RCC and the fundamentalist Protestant churches in our culture spearhead the attack on women's reproductive rights over here.

I tend to see the attack on women's rights in Iran as a religious rather than a cultural movement.  I eat lunch fairly regularly at the Darband, a Persian restaurant near my home with a giant video screen, which is always showing Persian music videos, made in L.A., mostly, featuring modern Persian dance and song.  The girls in the videos are as liberated as North American women, sexy, long-haired, bare midriffs, etc.  Of course the Ayatollahs have no power in L.A. and so the Persian people of North America are free to adopt whatever cultural models, Persian included, that attract them.  It's pretty obvious to me that the Persian people, while anxious to preserve some traditional elements of Persian culture, music for example, they can blend in Western styles to modify the music and they certainly seem to have adopted the North American model of relationships between the sexes.

Of course your point would be that Moodie was just as liberal and westernized as the Persians watching the music vids at the Darband, but that deep down inside, he was still an old-fashioned Iranian.

I guess in hindsight, which is always 20/20, it probably IS better to stick to your own kind in matrimony.

I can see where it would receive a lot of opposition from the public.  This is one place where religion takes a prominent role in suppressing women's rights, much the same as the RCC and the fundamentalist Protestant churches in our culture spearhead the attack on women's reproductive rights over here.

Michael.. with all due respect...NO it's not the same.

I tend to see the attack on women's rights in Iran as a religious rather than a cultural movement. 

I see no difference here. The attack on women's rights in Iran are wrong -----bottom line. During the mid 70's there was hope for the very essence of the Iranian's woman's rights....under the Shah. Those possibilites are dead.

I eat lunch fairly regularly at the Darband, a Persian restaurant near my home with a giant video screen, which is always showing Persian music videos, made in L.A., mostly, featuring modern Persian dance and song.  The girls in the videos are as liberated as North American women, sexy, long-haired, bare midriffs, etc.  Of course the Ayatollahs have no power in L.A. and so the Persian people of North America are free to adopt whatever cultural models, Persian included, that attract them.  It's pretty obvious to me that the Persian people, while anxious to preserve some traditional elements of Persian culture, music for example, they can blend in Western styles to modify the music and they certainly seem to have adopted the North American model of relationships between the sexes.


Adopting the N.American model of a relationship between the sexes is not the same as viewing a video in a dining establishment, Mtee.

You can bet the farm that those women who dance even in the slightly nude, are dead if they were to dance in Tehran.  Men are men. Iranians(Persians) will never be real men when it comes to respecting life, respecting women.

The absolute mixed messages/ and honor to culture/religion that lies deep within the Iranian is like a ghost. The average person does NOT believe in ghosts, but that film portrayed the depth of fear a woman experiences when the man she loves turns on her...LET alone on her child.

That was real.

Iran is real.

Bones and Blood are real.....I still say , be careful.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Persians in LA are not typical of those in Iran. They are typical of pro-Shah, upper middle class businesspeople who were very pro-Western, even more so than the parents of Marjani Satrapi, who did the graphic novels and the film Persepolis, who, after all, did not emigrate to the US.

There is a common trait of intolerance and blind nationalism in both the pro-Shah and the current regime, and it has its roots in Shia Islam, a religion with several features that can only be described as whacko (self-flagellation being the most obvious, a worship iof martyrdom a close second).

[richpo64]

>>I don't think loss of respect for America translates into people-to-people hostility,  although as surrogate Americans, we've encountered that a few times as well. Most people are polite and in particular would never insult other guests at a private party.<<

I’ve run across religious bigotry at a person to person level here in the US. Yet I’ve never run across any anti-American hostility in other countries. Granted, I haven’t been everywhere but I’ve been around. As for parties, I didn’t mean to imply private parties, but then it’s been my experience that such gathers breed familiarity and many times thing s are said out of school, as they say. Yet never an anti-American sound. That’s not to say I haven’t had foreign policy discussions with a few Irish, Mexican, the odd French, and many Canadians. As for the Canadians I think whatever hostility you’re getting has more to do with you than Canada.

>>Next time you're meeting foreigners, just ask them whether they've been in any anti-American demonstrations. Then look up the dates of the last three such demonstrations in that city or country and how big the crowds were.<<

I’ll be sure to do that. I think I can safely say that the people I’ve become friends with or have worked with have never been to an anti-American demonstration. Never. I can’t say that about people I’ve met in pubs, or restaurants, but based on the reception we receive I‘d be surprised if they ever did. Especially in Ireland. People who do those sorts of things aren’t generally out having a good time. They’re usually locked in their homes posting lies about America on the web.


>>The criticism is largely valid and well-deserved.<<

Bullshit. Europe is free because of America. Millions have food and water because of America. Millions more are healthy because of America. The world owes a dept of gratitude to America for the lives and the treasure it’s given soother could be free.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Bullshit. Europe is free because of America. Millions have food and water because of America. Millions more are healthy because of America. The world owes a dept of gratitude to America for the lives and the treasure it’s given soother could be free.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not only are we the elect of God, but we are the salvation of Mankind.

And when we salute the flag, we give God credit for, well, being under Him.

Palestinians, of course, do not see Americans for saving them. Must be that when their homes are bulldozed, it is with bulldozers from Caterpillar or Peoria given free for the purpose to the Zionists.

[richpo64]

>>Palestinians, of course, do not see Americans for saving them.<<

They should. We send enough money to them.

>>Must be that when their homes are bulldozed, it is with bulldozers from Caterpillar or Peoria given free for the purpose to the Zionists.<<

Bulldozing the homes of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers is a justified response to the cowardly murder of women and children. It could be worse actually. Israel could show the same disregard for human life that "Palestinians" do.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Bulldozing the homes of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers is a justified response to the cowardly murder of women and children. It could be worse actually. Israel could show the same disregard for human life that "Palestinians" do.


No, it is not justifiable.

Suppose a nephew was out of work and came to stay at your house. They he want ape and bombed a bus, or more likely TRIED to bomb something.

Bright and early next morning, here comes the Ziuonist Army with a bulldozed and knocks down the only home your family has lived in for the past 100 years or so. I bet that would piss you off a hair.

Especially since the same government that forced you out of your home forbids you to rebuild another, anywhere. Even on land you own.

Did the US govt bulldoze Timothy McVeigh's home? Did it knock down the Michigan Mititia's clubhouse?

Please. This is goonish behavior. I deeply resent having to subsidize the bulldozers and crew and fuel to do such nasty things.

[richpo64]

>>No, it is not justifiable.<<

Yes, it is.

>>Suppose a nephew was out of work and came to stay at your house. They he want ape and bombed a bus, or more likely TRIED to bomb something.

AAwww .... I'm going to cry. You're going to great lengths to create a scenario of the likable, misunderstood little terrorist who has no idea his son, daughter, nephew, niece, friend is a coldblooded monster.

Riiight.

The truth is these people harbor terrorists. They are accessories after the fact. They give them safe haven. They're lucky they aren't just blown up with the terrorist they harbor. They are given warning after warning and then they are warned again so they get out of the house. Then of course the tunnels are found and the sweet little terrorist are dumbfounded that their sweet little nephew has taken them in.

Riiight.

[Xavier_Onassis]

So you would be cool with bulldozing any house where McVeigh slept? I am pretty sure you's go for that as well.


Observe that not the US nor any modern country would allow this sort of goonish behavior. It would be clearly unconstitutional to do this in the US or any European nation that has a constitution. You can't punish people for knowing other people, ony for being active accomplices.

Arabs are very hospitable people and they offer their homes to anyone who they consider a friend. Just like Bandar Bush gets free room and board at Crawford.

[richpo64]

>>So you would be cool with bulldozing any house where McVeigh slept? I am pretty sure you's go for that as well.<<

Why would that be neccessary? He was caught, convicted, and put to death. Nobody hid him, or for that matter nobody hid thousands of him.

Silly premise, silly question.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is not necessary to bulldoze the home of a dead terrorist, either, because they are also as dead as McVeigh.

If you bombed a bus, would it be in any way sane to bulldoze her house?

[Plane]

Bulldozing the homes of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers is a justified response to the cowardly murder of women and children. It could be worse actually. Israel could show the same disregard for human life that "Palestinians" do.


No, it is not justifiable.

Suppose a nephew was out of work and came to stay at your house. They he want ape and bombed a bus, or more likely TRIED to bomb something.

Bright and early next morning, here comes the Ziuonist Army with a bulldozed and knocks down the only home your family has lived in for the past 100 years or so. I bet that would piss you off a hair.

Especially since the same government that forced you out of your home forbids you to rebuild another, anywhere. Even on land you own.

Did the US govt bulldoze Timothy McVeigh's home? Did it knock down the Michigan Mititia's clubhouse?

Please. This is goonish behavior. I deeply resent having to subsidize the bulldozers and crew and fuel to do such nasty things.

Is the bombing of the bus tolerable or justified?

[Michael Tee]

<<Is the bombing of the bus tolerable or justified?>>

It better be.  We must have bombed a whole lot of buses in Germany and Japan. 

I'm convinced that if there is going to be a peaceful solution in the Middle East, the first thing that has to go is this hypocritical and short-sighted condemnation of the other guy as "evil" and the general assumption that our side is "good" or at least not as evil as the other guy.

People are people, Arabs are no more intrinsically evil than Americans, Muslims no more intrinsically evil than Jews.  If the Arabs are blowing up buses, realize that this is not done casually, for laughs - - there is a lot of rage and bitterness that went into the making of that action.  Try to understand the sources.  Not the history of "the Arabs" or "the Palestinians" or "the Jews," but the personal  histories of the guys who bombed the bus.  What THEY went through in their lifetimes before they became suicide bombers or guerrilla fighters.

All too often, the only insights into their minds are provided to us by people with an axe to grind, mostly Israelis or Zionists, "experts," to be sure, with all the doctorates and credentials necessary, but they are whores.  Try to see from the Palestinians themselves what THEIR side of it is, and then decide for yourself who has the more credible explanation.  But the Zionists have monopolized the narrative, down to the provision of explanations from "ex" guerrilla fighters, "ex" jihadis, etc.   How many people in the U.S. have even heard the other side explained by its own people is probably less than 5%.