Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 325 325

1941? 1944? I see it has escaped you that the discussion was of events circa 1953 , and that I am correct. I suggest that you go back and reread the thread starting with PopeRatzo's message. Other than having written about events in the wrong decade and on the wrong topic your post was a triumph.

Comment: Re:They are looking forward (Score 1) 325 325

Carry wounded and material for depot level repair to maintain the war effort?

It wasn't rail cars coming from the front that carried Jews to the extermination camps, but I trust you already knew that.. The Germans sacrificed some of their ability to supply their troops in order to kill more Jews. It was a vile hatred that came back to bite them. Maybe you should consider that.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 325 325

Based on your links it's true. From Wikipedia:

1953 Iranian coup d'état

A referendum to dissolve parliament and give the prime minister power to make law was submitted to voters, and it passed with 99.9 percent approval, 2,043,300 votes to 1300 votes against.[60] The referendum was widely seen by opponents as a dictatorial act, and the Shah and the rest of the government were effectively stripped of their powers to rule. When Mossadegh dissolved the Parliament, his opponents decried this act because he had effectively given himself "total power". Ironically, this seemingly un-democratic act by a democratically elected prime minister would result in a chain of events leading to his downfall.[6][8]

99.9% in a national election? That seems to be a bit much.

IRAN: 99.93% Pure

Hitler's best as a vote-getter was 99.81% Ja's in 1936; Stalin's peak was 99.73% Da's in 1946. Last week Premier Mohammed Mossadegh, the man in the iron cot, topped them all with 99.93%.

This is the way he did it. Having unconstitutionally dissolved the Majlis, Mossadegh ordered a national referendum to judge his act, crying: "The will of the people is above law."

The Shah was head of state both before and after the coup restoring him to power. The dictator Mossadegh had caused the Shah to flee the country after refusing the Shah's power as head of state to remove him as head of government.

Comment: Re:Respect has to be earned (Score 1) 325 325

Thanks for the links, saved me some trouble. From Wikipedia:

1953 Iranian coup d'état

A referendum to dissolve parliament and give the prime minister power to make law was submitted to voters, and it passed with 99.9 percent approval, 2,043,300 votes to 1300 votes against.[60] The referendum was widely seen by opponents as a dictatorial act, and the Shah and the rest of the government were effectively stripped of their powers to rule. When Mossadegh dissolved the Parliament, his opponents decried this act because he had effectively given himself "total power". Ironically, this seemingly un-democratic act by a democratically elected prime minister would result in a chain of events leading to his downfall.[6][8]

My goodness, 99.9% in a national election? This is extraordinary.

IRAN: 99.93% Pure

Hitler's best as a vote-getter was 99.81% Ja's in 1936; Stalin's peak was 99.73% Da's in 1946. Last week Premier Mohammed Mossadegh, the man in the iron cot, topped them all with 99.93%.

This is the way he did it. Having unconstitutionally dissolved the Majlis, Mossadegh ordered a national referendum to judge his act, crying: "The will of the people is above law."

Comment: Re:Respect has to be earned (Score 1) 325 325

Bollocks. The Iranian PM (and democratically elected government) ....

"democratically elected government" eh?

IRAN: 99.93% Pure

Hitler's best as a vote-getter was 99.81% Ja's in 1936; Stalin's peak was 99.73% Da's in 1946. Last week Premier Mohammed Mossadegh, the man in the iron cot, topped them all with 99.93%.

This is the way he did it. Having unconstitutionally dissolved the Majlis, Mossadegh ordered a national referendum to judge his act, crying: "The will of the people is above law."

That is a bit backwards before you get to the question of improbable election results.

A "Prime Minister" ruling by decree after dissolving parliament and then justifying it with a faked election isn't really much of a democracy, is it?

The Shah was head of state both before and after the coup restoring him to power. The dictator Mossadegh had caused the Shah to flee the country after refusing the Shah's power as head of state to remove him as head of government.

Why do you omit this history? Why pretend that the Shah only held power after he was restored to power and not before as well?

 

Comment: Re:Iran is not trying to save money (Score 1) 325 325

It's insane to think Iran would open up its military facilities for inspection. No country has ever willingly done that except those that have surrendered unconditionally after defeat in war (such as Imperial Japan). It would essentially mean Iran gives up its right to exist as an independent sovereign nation. . . .

. . . Those insisting that Iran open up its military sites are insisting on something they know Iran won't do so as to derail the deal. Their intentions are not sincere.

Do tell.

U.S. Missile Base Braces for Soviet Inspectors
SOVIET INF MONITORS COMPLETE FIRST U.S. INSPECTIONS

Have a great day Comrade.

Comment: Re:They are looking forward (Score 1) 325 325

Unlike ISIS, Iran is a country that has existed continuously for 2500 years.

The people of Persia have existed for thousands of years. The Islamic Republic of Iran has only existed for a few decades, and has fostered suicide bombings and Islamic revolution around the world.

I highly doubt they would self-immolate just for a chance to 'nuke the infidel.'

Much as Germany wouldn't self-immolate just for a chance to kill a few million Jews? Oddly enough there is another country so inclined to attempt that feat. Any guesses on that? You should look into the question of Germany's use of railway shipping to send Jews to death camps versus sending supplies to the fighting fronts.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1, Flamebait) 325 325

Horse shit.

Iran was a pro-Western, pro-American country until we sent the CIA to overthrow their government in 1953 and installed the Shah. If you're going to quote an Israeli PJMedia/Fox News propagandist, you might want to find one with more credibility than Barry Rubin.

The "Horse shit" prefix wasn't needed, at least some of us could identify the content of your post without it.

The government of Iran had been overthrown by the Prime Minister who faked an election, dissolved parliament, and was ruling by decree while ignoring the Shah as constitutional monarch. (You know, the traditional head of government being responsible to head of state?) Not even Stalin faked elections as brazenly as the Iranian PM. The Shah fled for his own safety. The US and UK helped restore the Shah to power, not install him.

Iran was also an ally of Israel but that changed with the Islamic revolution and Iran's turning on the Jewish state as well as the US. The bad blood between Iran and Israel is Iran's doing.

Comment: Re:Knew it was too good to be true. (Score 1) 155 155

... considering that every Chief Justice since the act of Congress that created it in 1978 has been a conservative (Republican), that may tell you something about the mindset of the FISC. It's certainly not a place to find diverse opinions.

So in your mental map of the universe you wouldn't find a justice appointed by a Republican president voting for something like ... say .. "gay marriage" or Obamacare? Perhaps even casting the deciding vote? There may be a gap between your thinking and current events / history.

...it really should come as no surprise that the Court continues to rubberstamp the same stuff they approved before.

If the court found it legal before what would have changed? Nothing. Easy decision for them.

You should probably look into the question of the court forcing the Justice Department to alter applications for warrants. That is far more common than outright rejection. Applications for those warrants are inches thick. Do you think they like to redo them? Do you think they'll just slap some nonsense together just to see if they can slip by? If you think that you probably don't have any insight into the legal system, or the professionalism of judges and lawyers as officers of the court. Why would those jobs be highly competitive and credentialed if you can just slap some nonsense crap together and get by?

Comment: Re:The founding documents present a path... (Score 1, Troll) 155 155

So are you thinking constitutional amendment, constitutional convention, a vigorous letter writing / lobbying campaign, or ... cough *armed insurrection* cough?

Is the straw that broke the camel's back for you Citizens United, Obamacare, gay marriage, NSA collecting phone records, or warm beer?

Comment: Re: Above Congress? (Score 0, Redundant) 155 155

... CIA people ... spy on Congress ... secret kangaroo courts ... overseas executions ... behind closed doors ... spies ... blackmailing ... Congress or other high elected office ... military-industrial complex ... secretly ruled by spooks ... banksters.

BINGO!!

Without life, Biology itself would be impossible.

Working...