HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: Man Arrested For Being a SAVAK Agent (1979)

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: Man Arrested For Being a SAVAK Agent (1979)
by Darius Kadivar
02-Sep-2009
 

A man said to be a Savak agent is led off by rebels upon Revolution Victory. The Savak was the secret police unit of the Pahlavi Regime. ( Name Whereabouts of this Man are unknown, feedback appreciated) . (circa 1979)

Related Blog:

History of Violence: Lynching by fozolie 

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: Shah's Generals Executed and Imperial Army Disintegrated (1979)

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from Darius Kadivar
 
Darius Kadivar

Anonymouse Jaan That's Your Fault ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

Don't Ask Challenging questions then. Cause then You get Challenging answers ;0)

Yes well I guess we can agree to disagree. Your not entirely wrong and I'm not entirely right.

Got to go.

take care,

D


Anonymouse

DK jaan as a side

by Anonymouse on

DK jaan as a side note you need to work on reducing the length of your comments, you'll loose your audience, this one can be a separate blog on its own ;-) 

One thing I believe we should all consider, is to think beyond our own life.  You explained it in Satrapi's Perspolis and your view there.  Yes of course many of us were directly affected by revolution in a negative way.  I can argue most people were negatively affected one way or another based on what has happened by now.

The point is at the time in 1979 some were negatively affected, like you or me, some were positively affected, like those who fought all their lives to bring democracy to Iran and a chance to elect their leaders and not just appointed leaders.

Towards the end Shah said "he has heard the revolutionary voices" but it was too late by then.  It is like under current circumstances we reach a point where Khamenei would say he has heard the revolutionary voices.  Now would you ask for reform then or for a clean break?  Same thing happened during Shah.

Revolutions bring excesses and that is one reason many people are trying for reforms so as not to have a repeat of disasters, they already know what they want and what went wrong.

We don't know what would've happened if we didn't have the revolution.  The arab countries of the middle east like Egypt or Jordan can serve as examples, but we'll never know.

Everything is sacred.


Darius Kadivar

Anonymouse Jaan

by Darius Kadivar on

No I don't think that the term or qualification "Revolutionary" is a negative word.

I do think however that our knowledge of History evolves with time. That does not mean that "Facts" evolve or that we should endulge or encourage "revisionism" of well documented facts and events  in History. Something that for instance the Islamic Republic is doing in regard to the Holocaust by inviting well known Neo Nazis or KKK members and God knows what other scum and presenting them as "Human Rights Activists" : 

HOLOCAUST A MYTH: Michelle Renouf on Iranian SAHAR TV

Harry Potter Is a Zionist Hollywood Conspiracy !

However I do think that it takes at minimum a generation that is approximately 30 years distance to evaluate the history of a given event or social earthquake be it a War or a Revolution. This is something that I think most serious historians agree upon in that distance and impartiality is important when trying to understand a given period.

To want to reduce for instance the Islamic Revolution in Iran to a kind of battle between "Good" People and "Bad" people is a simplification to which I do not subscibe to.

For instance I saw Marjane Satrapi's film Persepolis and loved it and wrote about it extensivley and Yet my reading of the events and the Revolution are not at all the same on many aspects. But I don't see that as a problem or even a threat to my views or political preferences because I think that her testimony is sincere and Truthful from her point of view. That is very respectful and I have nothing to say against it. But then So is Afschineh Latifi's story which is a diametrically opposite testimony on the same events and period. Both testimonies allow us to at best conclude that what happened back in 1979 was a result of complex political, social and cultural circumstances which have had far reaching consenquences on the lives of individuals in very different ways. 

However there is something that is troublesome when we try to take a very staunch Moral and not to say Moralistic approach when it comes judging a given era. The French Revolution is considered a major event in the History of France but also of the World in that it was seen as a reference to nearly all Revolutionary movements of the 20th century. Yet we know that countires like the United States or Great Britain experienced True Democracy ( for their time ) before France beheaded its King and Queen and established a Reign of Terror ( which do not constitute the most glorious page in the history of the French Revolution).

From that point of view I think that many nations in the 20th century be it China, Russia, Cuba and particularly many Third World countries ( like African or South American dictatorships) were wrongly inspired by some of the extremism displayed during the French Revolution in that they saw it as a "Blue Print" or "How to Do It Yourself" guideline to a "successful" Revolution.

I clearly remember seeing revolutionaries in Iran claim that we need to spill as much blood to wash away the so called "corruption" of the Shah's era and saying that "if the French Revolution spilled blood then that is enough justification for us to do the same." This was a purely "Robespierre" reading of what a Revolutin is meant to be which proved fatal not only to Iran but many other Revolution's that took place in the 20th century.

I personally think that Revolutions are not always a sign of social or political progress. The phenomena in itself may be progressive in that it is like an Alert Signal that wakes up a nation long asleep in its comfort or collective amnesia as if everything we have or possess is immortal. A Good Slap on the face or on the bottom is necessary when a society loses its moral references or lets itself go to intellectual laziness or corruption. But the response Society or its prominent individuals ( be them politicians, intellectuals, journalists, unionists etc) who are capable of channeling the discontent and leading the masses in an attempt to satisfying their demands, truly depends on their own maturity and wisdom.

I truly believe that most Iranians back in 1979 were blinded by their own convictions in a very stubborn and fanatic way that nothing truly justified. True the Shah and the Monarchy as an institution are accountable for the situation and the outcome of the Revolution. They did not allow political parties and Freedom of opinion to flourish which resulted to Political frustrations in the country. On the otherhand I think that there was also a silent majority of the intelligenstia who were Constitutionalists and aspired to secular Democracy and who were best represented by someone like Chapour Bakhtiar.

pictory: Pro Bakhtiar Demonstrations (1979)

They Were Not Revolutionaries in that they did not believe in toppeling the Regime but wished a Parlimentary System where the King or Queen were accountable to the Parliament and their job would be merely a Ceremonial one.

Unfortunately Bakhtiar was not in power long enough to allow this transition. But I do think that regardless of the Shah's mistakes and clumsiness in handling the upheaval for whatever reason ( illness, bad advisors, personal naivity or shortsightedness etc ...)  That Iran did not need a Revolution and certainly Not a Religious one proned by the Likes of Gobtzadeh, Bazarghan or Sanjabi who rushed to their camp at the first opportunity.

What IRan needed was Reform ( ironically very much like today with the Islamic Republic) given the long historical struggle that had started not in 1953 ( which was not about democracy but economic independance from foreign powers) but in 1906.

We had given our country a Constitution which in itself was a major victory of arbitrary Rule. Idealy had the 1979 revolutionaries behaved like their peers or like in Poland's Velvet Revolutions they would have probably succeeded in giving their country a democratic secular government of their choice, maybe even a Secular Republic or at Worst (in your point of view) or at Best ( In my Point of View) a Constitutional Monarchy where the King or Crown Prince upon his fathers death would become a ceremonial King with no power.

Instead We collectively decided to commit suicide. That the nation should not be held responsible entirely is a fact, but to relinquish any form of accountabilty by simply blaming the Shah's dictatorship is something much too convenient in my opinion.

I truly believe that the generation that did the revolution have still to do their "examen de conscience" in order to reach some form of national reconciliation. The notion that  "perpetual revolution"  in society is a sign of social progress as some historians like Hamid Dabashi like to use in order to justify the advent of the Islamic Revolution or the continuation of the current regime in one form or another is something which I find intellectually dishonest and even criminal in that it overlooks the reality of the Monstrous nature of the regime it contributed to create. To Dabashi's credit, he at least took part just like me to the Green Protests outside Iran in support of the Iranians back home. So in My Book I won't put Dabashi in the same category as Kaveh Afrasiabi ( who is a basically an apologist for the IRI regime to this day and early contributer to our site too):

See Kaveh Afrasiabi Vs Ansary ( a prominent expert on Iran):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3ZEiVZptvw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3ZEiVZptvw&feature=related 

I would simply say that Dabashi got his priorities wrong and if his expertise on Islam and the Palestinian cause is acknowledgable, he totally misses the point when it comes to interpreting what is taking place in Iran today. No wonder he was so admirative of George Galloway prior to the Riots in Iran:

Hamid Dabashi and George Galloway

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbdohw4o02E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UE3_kEKgd8&feature=related

George Galloway Comments Iran's Presidential ( He has a talk Show on Iran's  Press TV)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOXmmBibgSs&feature=related

However my underlying argument is the same, I don't believe that Revolutions are necessarily progressive. They can and often are tragically irreversible.

My humble opinion,

DK 

 


Anonymouse

DK jaan if you think

by Anonymouse on

DK jaan if you think being a revolutionary is somehow negative, may I remind you of our support for current revolutionaries in Iran? 

I know some (not you) are suggesting being an activist is wrong and a waste of time.  How ever we think of revolutionaries they don't wait for any of us and are indeed unique and their dreams do not always come true.  Now I am not a revolutionary by any means.  I know there are many of them here at our very own i.com ;-) I think they like to call themselves more like freedom fighters!

As far as history having 2 sides, do you really think so?  Do you think of history as 20 or 30 years or 200 or 300 years?  There are always those who never agree to historical facts.  Like aren't there racists who think slavery was right and blacks are inferior and should not be equal to whites?  Or the neo-nazis who worship Hitler and such?

So yes we can argue about the history of Iran and have our own opinions but when the history of Iran is written, after we're both 6 feet under, our individual opinions won't count and won't be what are taught in schools.  I'm talking about a future democractic Iran.

Everything is sacred.


Anonymouse

Ali jaan, I plan to

by Anonymouse on

Ali jaan, I plan to write a summary of the book when the damn thing finishes!  Enshallah ;-) I may even use your summary which covers the highlights. 

Now if the "omat-e hamishe dar sahne" at i.com keep fighting each other and turn my blog into a pissing contest and run up the comments to 400 - 500 or something, I'll delete the blog and copy and paste the blog again in a new blog.  I'll have a warning in the blog ;-) 

Anyway, Ghotbzadeh was not a drifter in the real sense of the word as how we know a drifter.  I think of drifter as a hippie.  He was very disciplined and was religious and a really good politician.  His living outside Iran had made him a bit disjoined, like when he went on TV and called people "my people" which rose some hardliners eyebrows. 

His money (like Khomeini) came from bazaar and who do you think arranged to pay Air France to book an exclusive jetliner flight to Iran?  yes him.  Imagine the story behind it.  The whole book is fascinating to me since I know all the characters so reading about them from another perspective, behind a scene book, is very interesting.  It reads like a novel. 

I don't think a future review by me will do justice to the book, but I'll try.

Everything is sacred.


Darius Kadivar

FYI/The Boroumand Foundation Website

by Darius Kadivar on

Official Website:

http://www.iranrights.org/ 

The Abdorrahman Boroumand Foundation for the promotion of human rights and democracy in Iran (ABF) is a non-governmental non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of human rights and democracy in Iran. The Foundation is an independent organization with no political affiliation. It is Named in memory of Dr. Abdorrahman Boroumand, an Iranian lawyer and pro-democracy activist who was assassinated allegedly by the agents of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Paris on April 18, 1991, the Foundation believes that promoting human rights awareness through education and the dissemination of information are necessary prerequisites for the establishment of a stable democracy in Iran.

The Foundation is committed to the values enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and in other internationally recognized human rights instruments. Taking as a starting point the fundamental equality of all human beings, the Foundation seeks to ensure that human rights in Iran are promoted and protected without discrimination, whether it be on the basis of one's gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or national origin. Guided by the belief that unremedied human rights violations are a major obstacle to the establishment of a stable democracy, the Foundation is committed to the right of all victims of human rights abuses to justice and public recognition.

Based on the foregoing principles, the Foundation adopts as its mandate the promotion of public awareness of issues concerning democracy and human rights in Iran. Through its programs of research, documentation, publications, and outreach, the Foundation hopes to help restore the dignity of Iran's countless victims of human rights violations.


Darius Kadivar

For Anonmouse's Revolutionary Zeal ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

No criticism intended towards your personal convictions Anonymouse Jaan. I simply Want to say that There are always two versions or sides  to a story and No One can have the Monopoly of the Truth when it comes to History. Nor does anyone have the monopoly of the Heart ... 

I highly Recommend you to read this book: 

BOOK: EVEN AFTER ALL THIS TIME By Afschineh Latifi ( A Memoir )

Best,

DK


Darius Kadivar

FYI/BOOK:Sadegh Ghobtzadeh, The Man In the Mirror by C Jerome

by Darius Kadivar on

Here is the book Anonymouse mentioned:

BOOK:Sadegh Ghobtzadeh, The Man In the Mirror by Carole Jerome (1987)

Best,

DK


Ali P.

Anonymous jaan

by Ali P. on

I have heard of that book. It is written by a Canadian (journalist?) girlfriend of Ghotbzadeh, isn't it?

No matter what kind of political player people are, most possess a soft side that is only exposed to a few. We consider Khomeini a brutal man, but this same man used to write love poetry and had deep effectionate relationships with his grandchildren and his daughter-in-law.

 

In this book you are reading, you probably get a chance to take a look at the human side of this revolutionary, this God-son of the Ayatollah Khomeini, as he was known.

He is indeed a unique figure in Revolution. From what I know of him- and please correct me if I am wrong- he was kind of a drifter, a professional student, a rebel, looking for a cause. Spent some years in France, went to Syria, and apparently possessed a Syrian passport, then moves to the US, is supposedly close to Jebhe Melli. He never graduates, and I don't know who paid his bills.

Not particularly a religious man, he joins Khomeini's enterage`, and becomes his right hand (translates Khomeini's famous "heechee" comment when asked how he felt coming back to Iran after 15 years, into "no comment") and is appointed to run the Iran's now-Revolutionary TV, and then becomes Bazargan's foreign minister.

While trying to resolve the hostage crisis, he is reported to ask the Americans to kill the Shah (not arrest him and put him on trial, mind you, kill him!), in exchange for freedom of hostages:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1368&dat=19820920&id=LN0VAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XRIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3525,3353331

But I guess, he may have had a soft side to him.

I think the highlight of his life, as you stated, is his brave stand in the last few days of his life.

It would be great if you could write a summary of this book for us all to better know this mysterious man that came out of this Revolution.

Yours,

Ali p. 


Anonymouse

No not Bahman

by Anonymouse on

No not Bahman Mofid.  I think he maybe hossein geel, but I can't find a pic or clip of him.  He was mostly a villain in movies. got to go guys.

Let me know if you find a pic of the guy ;-) 

Everything is sacred.


Anonymouse

Ali jaan there were

by Anonymouse on

Ali jaan there were those who spoke against those executions.  They really wanted to have a trial so people would know what had happened during Shah.  But summary executions were being done swiftly and no chance of any trials.

Problem in those era, which Ghotbzadeh and Bazargan and others like them talked about, was that Khomeini would not get involved and the hardliners knew it.  They would do things and by the time Ghotbzadeh or Bazargan got around to complain to Khomeini about it, the deed was done and Khomeini would not say anything and by then it wouldn't matter what he said anyway.

I was around during early days of revolution too. I'm reading this book by Ghotbzadeh's girlfriend called man in the mirror. It is a good refresher, once I'm done with it I hope to have a review of it, but the damn thing won't end, I don't have time to read it properly, but I won't give up.  Here are couple of links, I bought it cheap on amazon.com, like 50 cent or something

http://www.amazon.com/MAN-MIRROR-INSIDE-REVOLUTION-TREACHERY/dp/004440168X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251938872&sr=1-3

http://www.iranbooks.net/pageshop/flypage&product_id=11448&CLSN_1361=1244086768136161ef6d6a77f6515dee

My book cover is different than the above.  Anyway, Ghotbzadeh and others really tried.  Regime killed him and spewed a lot of propaganda against him and put him in the same boat as bani sadr but he was much better and very different, he didn't escape with rajavi or give away his daughter to him, for example. 

They were revolutionaries and fought against shah all their life, so they had no tarof with shah and his regime!  At the time Khomeini was the only one who could bring everyone together and "deliver the mosque".  This book goes into detail and it is a very good documentary/novel.  DK jaan blogged about it too.

Everything is sacred.


ebi amirhosseini

How aobut Bahman Mofid....

by ebi amirhosseini on


ebi amirhosseini

I'll check....

by ebi amirhosseini on

The guy in picture is Bahman Mofid.Maybe I'm mistaken about the film.

Ebi aka Haaji


Anonymouse

No not shirandami, he

by Anonymouse on

No not shirandami, he is bald and no afro! here is his pic on i.com

http://iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/October/mard.html 

Everything is sacred.


Ali P.

Anonymouse jaan

by Ali P. on

I didn't pass a judgment on Ghotbzadeh, or the Islamic Revolution,for that matter, one way or another.

 I am just saying, as recorded in history, Ghotbzadeh never took a public stand against the speedy trials and executions, according to those who wrote about the Revolution(Now privately he may have screamed about it, but no one has ever written a word about his alleged opoosition, reporting it. So I guess theoritically, it is not impossible, what you are suggesting).

After all these years, now we know, there were those who were against them. Mehdi Bazargan, for example, and some of his peers, such as Sahabis (father and son) were against those acts. Dr. Yazdi, even claims to have been against them.

 

 I am in possession of all the Kayhan newspapers of the Revolution era. Just looked through it once again. Ghotbzadeh is interviewed, but not asked about executions. He does, however, have an opinion on the "ay iraan" song: It was a fascistic song that was put together by Reza khaan.

May God have mercy on his soul.

Respectfully Yours,

Ali P.


Anonymouse

Khaterkhah clip! But

by Anonymouse on

Khaterkhah clip! But no shirandaami.  It is velvety though LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDBR8XOZEeM&feature=PlayList&p=D59B4BAABD11AC19&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=7 

Everything is sacred.


Anonymouse

Vali Shiranaami?

by Anonymouse on

Maybe vali shirandaami, his name sounds familiar.  Is he the one on bottom left hand side?

http://www.iranianmovies.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=350&Category_Code=Oldies&Product_Count=18 

I can't find a picture of him. Does anyone have a link to his picture or maybe a youtube clip? thanks

Everything is sacred.


ebi amirhosseini

Hossein Gil..

by ebi amirhosseini on

Joined Sepah Pasdaran & moved up to be a colonel there.

Ebi aka Haaji


ebi amirhosseini

Darius Jaan

by ebi amirhosseini on

Late Abdolali Homayoun played Sakar Ostovaar.

Ebi aka Haaji


ebi amirhosseini

Anonymouse Jaan,your guy is....

by ebi amirhosseini on

vali shirandaami.

He played the vilian in Farsi films.The most famous one,with Forouzan & malek Motee called,"Khaatekhaah".

Hope he is your guy

Ebi aka Haaji


MRX1

scum of society

by MRX1 on

Every sociery has it's share of scum and low life's and Iran in no exception. if you end up with a political vacume, low life's usually come into to power (Which is what happend in Iran) and the low life's will treat others with savegry unscene.It's a combination of Inferioirty complex and OGHDEH. Examples are many : Iran, cambodia, afghanistan,cuba, list goes on an on. Just imagine if law and order breaks down in U.S and low life blacks and white trash come to power , how many top notch people will be killed by these people?

You will always have to keep low life's on leash or the result is always be catastrophic.


Anonymouse

Ali you say tomaato

by Anonymouse on

Ali you say tomaato I say tomayto.  He said it didn't he? Ther fact is Khomeini was a whole different animal and confronting him was not that easy.  You said it however you could.

Generally speaking I think you believe revolution was a mistake, I don't. 

Everything is sacred.


Ali P.

Anonymouse

by Ali P. on

You state:"That was what Ghotbzadeh and many in national front were screaming about."

I was there and I don't remember much screaming, especially from Ghotbzadeh.There was some whispering, but no screaming.

A few in the revolutionary leadership- if there was such thing- were not too happy about speedy trials, but we never heard a word from Ghotbzadeh regarding speedy executions.

Sorry to intrude :-) 


Anonymouse

Maybe Hossein Geel? 

by Anonymouse on

Maybe Hossein Geel?  I can't find a picture of him. 

Everything is sacred.


Anonymouse

No not shir ali

by Anonymouse on

No not shir ali ghasab, he was 7 feet tall and he did not have an afro either.  I can't see youtube now anyway.   A little like him but not him.  Again he also had some roles in Sarkar Ostovar episodes.  This is going to drive me nuts!

I'm going through this list to see if I can find him ...  Come on you know who I'm talking about, don't you?

Everything is sacred.


Darius Kadivar

Oh You mean Mohamad Ali Keshavarz

by Darius Kadivar on

Yes I think he was in Sarkar Ostevar, he also played in a film of Kiarostami " Zeereh Derakhteh Zeytoon"

This is him today:

http://www.iran-daily.com/1387/3156/html/106296.jpg

OK Got to go now !

Ciao


Darius Kadivar

Let me See ...

by Darius Kadivar on

Maybe you are thinking of the actor who played Shir Ali Ghassab ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTibUTtEsDg

LOL


Anonymouse

Of course there

by Anonymouse on

Of course there is empathy in the movie.  In the end she is reduced to living in a cell and some how "satisfied" to her fate, more like another similar life as opposed to the previous life she had as a guard.  She is old when she meets her lover who was so in love with her before.  She can't bring herself to live outside prison again, etc.

The movie doesn't explain what was her exact role, maybe they wanted to say under those circumstances in the trial we'd never have known.

Now DK jaan as a movie buff I have a homework assignment for you!  Who is the guy I'm trying to remember?  Maybe his name wasn't as famous as Mofid but you know who I'm talking about, what was his name and a picture?!  I'll look for him too and will post another comment once and if I find him.

Everything is sacred.


Darius Kadivar

Dunno ...

by Darius Kadivar on

I did not have the same interpretation of those scenes ...

What makes it troubling is that I felt she was innocent.

Not entirely of course but that the trial could not be fair given the horror of the crime ( so unique even to this day) .  For instance A film like this could not have been made in the aftermath of WWII simply because the events are too close in Time.

I don't think however that the film is trying to claim that she is innocent but it is not claiming she is truly guilty either. That is why I think it is so troubling as a movie and probably as a book ( which I have not read).

That is why I think The film is more about empathy ( as opposed to Sympathy) than anything else ...

The reason for that impression which I think was created on purpose through the acting and plot in makes us question ourselves on how we would react in the same situation given that basically as time goes by the reality of the Holocaust and its far reaching consenquences truly depend on our memory and personal convictions as the generation that truly experienced WWII are dissappearing due to age ...

The fact that we as viewers ( who have not lived or experienced the real thing) could have empathy for the character proves that the grandson of a Holocaust victim and that of a Nazi Criminal are equally innocent in regard to what happened.

This is I am afraid a dark and may unjust reality that is part of the human condition. We are all the result of past butcheries, if we had the opportunity to find out about our ancestors we would probably equally come across both victims and butchers if we dig deep back into the centuries. Mankind is a result of these contradictions.

So in the end it is about how we conduct ourselves in life. Someone once told me that History never  repeats itself but it can rhyme ...

For instance today Israelians could question themselves on their own responsability since WWII in regard to how they have dealt with their enemies that is the Palestinians. I don't believe that what happened in Gaza was anything close to the Holocaust in its intentions or in the way it was carried out (and I won't get into that long debate for which I have wrote a great deal and my opinion has not changed in this regard). But it seems to me obvious that Israel has totally lost its Moral Argument today in wanting to use the fear of a new Holocaust to justify its foreign policy be it regarding the Palestinian Crisis or even Iran.

From this point of view I think that Israel as a nation is suffering from the "Stockholm Syndrom" where a victim can become a butcher or find common ground with its former butcher. In a sense it is a spooky reality that the children of former Holocaust victims can behave like the same people who butchered their own family 70 years ago.

Given that Fact how are we to react individually or collectively in order to keep our Humanity intact ? How do we define "Responsability" in such circumstances.  

But again its a Long and complicated philisophical debate to which I do not have definitive answers but just unanswered questions ...

I suppose If any one does then he or she should become a Lawyer or Judge.  

Anyway here is a link I wanted to post irrelevent of whether it has anything to do or not with our conversation:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8231908.stm

Got to go. but I am sure we will be able to talk about this again.

Always Nice to exchange views

take care,

DK

 

 


Anonymouse

In the movie they

by Anonymouse on

In the movie they didn't spend too much time in the court room and the scene about witnesses and coworker's surprise look, they zipped through it.

But really did you notice when the co-workers were knitting and not paying attention and bored, suddenly jumped and started paying attention?  Did you see how witnesses were so surprised and denied she had no choice?  Those parts lead us to believe she did more.

She admitted she was the leader or the shift leader.  Nazis didn't need any specific skills for prison guards during war.  She liked people to read to her and that's why she kept the kids who could read.  Her loverboy read to her too and he found out she couldn't read during the trial but her illiteracy didn't come up in the trial.

Anyway, the movie does not answer all questions but does say she did more than a regular guard and she was a suprevisor too. Perhaps she was more ruthless and that's why Nazi's promoted her.

As for the savaki guy, this is going to drive me nuts!  I have to remember him.  I'm thinking Bijan Mofid, not Bahman, his brother.  I think the guy also played in Shahr-e Gheseh and also some espisodes of Sarkar Ostovar.  He played movies too.  Afro hair and thick mustache.  Who is he????!!!!!

Everything is sacred.