Hi Mary Anne,

Thanks for your very thoughtful reply.
Comments interspersed...


<SAVAK may have been brutal in its treatment of fundamentalist extremists - but not nearly as brutal as the extremists were when they seized power.


So it's OK merely to break a man's arms rather than his neck? Please.

Summary execution is generally worse than torture. I am by no means a proponent of torture, but if you look objectively at the west - you see that we went through our torture periods during the inquisition and on into the religious persecution here in the US during the 17th century.

This is what you have to remember Mary Anne: These middle eastern nations still live under laws conceived thousands of years ago and are as barbaric as the laws the west lived under during the 11th century. For all intents and purposes, they have never had their middle ages, renaissance or reformation.

Imagine you are a time traveller carrying the US constitution, and modern technologies back to Britain or France in 1074. How on earth do you expect to get these barbarians to suddenly value freedom, free speech, religious freedom, etc?

Being a woman, you would have an even tougher time. Gender prejudice is still alive in the middle east. The men genuinely believe women are inferior and placed to serve man. They can stone a woman without cringing, they keep women like uneducated pets.
That horrifies me.


The Shah seems to have started out all right, but years of government corruption took its toll on the monarchy's popular support. No longer sure of his people's allegiance to his regime, he fell back on the most repulsive weapon of dictatorships everywhere.

Yes the Shah was very imperfect, but he had noble intentions of liberating his nations women, educating the masses and bringing them out of the dark ages. He was fighting age-old religious doctrines and extremism. Like Peter asking the men to cut their beards and dress modern - and the Orthodox faith fought back until supported by Peter's police forces, the Shah faced an equally religious opposition in Islam, and rhetorical debate and persuasion is often lost on the illiterate. The debate we are having here...simply couldn't take place for most of the Shah's subjects. Your post to me would look like: fnajkvb sjff ufwbf 9rsj; ndnjn -and vice-versa.

What makes you think that the extremists would have seized power if the Shah's government had not undermined its own authority by using brutality against its dissident citizens? Why do you claim that SAVAK was only deployed against fundamentalist extremists?

Because the same folks are around today...in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, etc. We have modern day examples of the anti-western folks that live and breath martyrdom and hate to examine and see exactly how fanatical and disruptive they are to any sort of perceived "western" progress.

The "domestic dissent" was religious fundamentalist dissent. They were the troublemakers and the plotters. They hated what the Shah was doing and wanted to tear it down. I was wrong about Peter the Great being the archetype. I think Akhenaten is a better comparison - since Akhenaten, like the Shah, was only successful until the "religion dispensers" sought to reclaim their lost prestige and power over the masses.

In a perverse manner an argument could be made that the Shah, like Tsar Nicholas II, was too nice.

The last Tsar only exiled Lenin - Lenin returned and had not the same moral qualms about ordering his and his families execution. The Shah, by letting many of his opponents live, left them in the wings awaiting to swoop back in - like the Ayatollah Khomeni waiting in Paris.

However, with western education comes humanity and mercy - two principles or beliefs that made the Shah and Nicholas II better than their replacements.

Look at Russia now though. Even though they went through 70 years of hell-on-earth, they now embrace similar beliefs as the west. So too will be the case with Iran. Fast food, western ideas are taking root among the peoples' consciousness. Eventually the fundamentalist controls will be shaken off for good. Where political modernization failed - cultural and economic forces are slowly fulfilling the same goals.


And suppose our government had a secret police that kidnapped and tortured fundamentalists in this country. Would that be bad because our fundamentalists are primarily Christian rather than Muslim (or Jewish, for that matter)? It's true: the First will be the First To Go.

Believe me...if the fundamentalist Christians became militant they would be dealt with harshly. Look at Waco and the Branch Davidians. They are a good example of religious fanaticism and anti-government dogma. Where are they now?

If you rebel against the government and have arms you can expect our "police" forces to be especially brutal. Our politicians grab at power too and don't like anyone inciting or serving as an example to others or being off the reservation, so to speak.


Kidnapping, torture and murder are not legitimate means of promoting a political agenda featuring adversarial debate and free speech. That is not only necessary for Western democracy, but for a vigorous scientific community as well.



Ask Galileo. I'm sure you knew him.

Time travellers and those with past lives hardly ever grew up as serfs.



Well, not me. I have often lived as unremarkable folk. Being a monk, a priest or a soldier is not that glamorous. However each life has indirectly helped shape the views I hold today. The inquisition - the plague and the constant wars and violence live still in my consciousness. The terrible horror and the stench of death still linger. In turn, I have more compassion for all. If I could give each child a loving family..and each family an education. I would do it in a heartbeat.

However, I know why I shouldn't and can't - because each soul must learn and grow at their own evolutionary rate. I can't force them to evolve or take away the misery that life often entails. Misery, suffering all are part of the learning process.

When any of these men like Akhenaten or the Shah fail - they fail because too many in their populace are not yet ready for the changes. Too much - too fast.


Peter the Great was a remarkable man for his time. In his travels, he met the child King Louis XV of France. You remember him: after he grew up, he observed, "Après moi, le déluge." Après him, also, the American and French Revolutions. Russia finally made it to the party in 1917 for about half an hour. That's because the great reform Tsars -- Peter, Catherine, even Alexander -- were interested in making the Russian state a Western military and economic power, not in encouraging the liberties that are the true underpinnings of Western progress.



You want democracy? You want freedom? You want an open society? Peter the Great wouldn't like that. Peter the Great crushed rebels like elephants crush peanuts. Peter the Great executed his own son. Peter the Great would be a disastrous anachronism in a Western democracy, but you're right: in a world of absolute dictatorship, he would fit right in.

As the old saying goes, with friends like these, who needs enemies?

What kind of people do you want us to become? What difference will it make if we "win", only to discover that we have done so by turning into what we thought we were fighting against?

You horrify me, you know that? Why don't you go talk to the mothers of the disappeared in Argentina to discover the brave new world you advocate?

Still shuddering--
Mary Anne



Peter the Great was successful because he merged the brutal with the advanced. He was both and so he could act as an intermediary between both.

I am not advocating "Peter the Greats" in the west or anywhere that society has not fallen into stagnancy which in a progressing world is really regression.

However, in nations where society is still barbaric - Peter the Greats are an improvement. Many of these nations are not ready for the values you and I share. Freedom, democracy, compassion and mercy are considered weaknesses, not strengths. They are exploited and snickered at by the primitive minds who cannot yet fathom living in peace, showing mercy upon those who break the law, etc.

We do not ever "win". It is each man, woman and child who must "win". The US, the west - are all symbols, eventually meaningless aside from what the symbols stand for.

Freedom.
Compassion.
Justice.
Education.
Progress.

These are our values. The eagle is strong and free - so we stick him on our coins and other symbols.

I don't want to dominate the middle east. I don't want a drop of oil from their wells. I want everyone to live and learn in freedom. I do not want terror imported to the US. I do not want to terrorize these primitive and simple minds in the middle east. I want them to have the same opportunities to learn, to school and to live and believe as their mind so guides them.

I am not some horrible person, advocating torture and slaughter - but I am a student of history and know the stages of growth politically and culturally most regions have gone through to get to the comparitive "enlightenment" we now hold dear.

I know that our western weapons will decimate the region if they are obtained by minds still steeped in religious fanaticism and unremorseful absolute hatred. A Palestinian, 18 year old, illiterate, martyr with an a-bomb is a prospect I do not like to contemplate.

We lived in blissful dispassionate observation of the middle east until 9-11 but as you can see from the link I posted earlier, the intellectual elite of the region are convinced we are all Zionist conspirators living to oppress the region and Islam.

Hate dies hard. Learning is not just book learning - but is tempered by countless experiences and countless lives. One has to be persecuted and persecute others to more fully understand it and the motivations that sponsor it.

As we move forward in our goals we must do so with balance, with compassion and without prejudice. We must balance each action against the consequences of inaction and come to an equitable course of action.

Life offers us endless learning experiences. I am learning something new everyday. Perfection is unattainable in an infinite universe. We must resign ourselves to the joy of perpetual growth and greater understanding of our fellow souls, brothers and sisters who are also treading this infinite pathway of experience.

Have a good weekend Mary Anne!

(Trying not to be so horrifying)

;-)

SDAI-Tech1