[Cicero]

The Shah of Iran fled into exile in 1979, after increasing riots filled the country. Ayatollah Khomeini, who had thoughtfully been provided a place to stay by the French, returned and took over the country.

This was during Jimmy Carter's presidency. Most observers held him largely responsible. He did nothing to help or support the Shah, but instead he and the western press painted the Shah as a corrupt king who was better gone. Carter supported the return of Khomeini. All the liberals in America were rubbing their hands with delight that that corrupt Shah had been gotten rid of.

What was the Shah's offense? Partly that he was a big spender and a fancy liver. But mostly because he tried to modernize Iran, give rights to women, and things like that. If the U.S. had had a stronger and more capable president, the whole Iranian revolution might have been dealt with very differently.

[NY Attitude]

The thing that bothered most religious clerics about the Shah was their loss of land and power, not to mention the corruption that was throughout his organization and of course the SAVAK.

[libertyman]

Thanx for the info....I thought (???) the Shah was a brutal didctator, or so I've been told. I was in high school @ the time he was in power & didn't care too much for politics back then.

I'm not trying to make excuses for Jimmy Carter, who IMO is a despicable creature....a week-kneed socialist, he is also a member of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations.