December 2004
December 3
December 4 | December 15 | December 16

How the hell did this happen?

In respose to Leila Farjami's "Fil-e pelaastiki":

I came across your poem on Iranian.com. I was quite intrigued. Thankfully, you have a site with your poetry published.

I admire your keen sense of obseravation of the Iranian Diaspora. I commend you indeed. I have lived in Canada for the last 30 years. I can say fortunately the city I live in Canada (Edmonton), is not a magnet for Iranians. It is too cold, hence I do not see any of what you have described. However I travel to Vancouver and Toronto a lot, and I do see what you mean.

What the hell is happening to the Iranians? They are trying to be more American than the Americans. They are so proud of their assimilation ability. They are so proud that they are Chameleons!!!

And you watch the TV channels with their "nejade aria" and am ready to vomit.

How the hell did this happen? Is this the reaction to the Revolution? The still mourning period of what was lost? A re-inactment of what Iran and its "beatiful people class" would have been like if Pahlavi dynasty was in power?

What are they hanging on to? And what are they denying? They hang on to this glorious pat, but have nothing to show for it. For God's sake even their skin color is mostly dark and far from the Arian ideal of what the hair and the complection of an Arian should be like. I forgot hair dye, and as mentioned blue contact lenses and bleaching can overcome that.

It is so sad that this inferiority complex is so prevalent. You are right, you do not see that among the Arabs. The Morracans in France have made an indelible impression on the French culture. Morracan food, music, culture is a alive and well and accepted in France. Morracans have not tried to be French.

The irony is that the Americans do not take notice of our restaurants, our cheesy music videos that try so hard to be like the MTV stuff. We are not noticed. And god forbid if someone call us Arab. We say we are "Persian" because that sounds exotic and romantic. That is if we do not claim that we are Italian or Spanish....and heaven forbid if some poor soul thinks that we are East Indian or Pakistani. Then all hell breaks loose.



Is democracy what is rammed down our throats?

In response to Alidad Vassigh's, "pUNy":

After reading your commentary, analysis, or whatever name you would choose to assign to it (actually i gotta good one for you: Report by a Fact-finding individual, very catchy ha?) I could not help but be amused by such ludicrous assumptions that you seem to make about those who disfavored your candidate and his proposed strategies and policies.

It is amazing the tendency you show to shoot yourself in the foot, and defeat your own purpose when you apparantly claim respect everyone's right to express an opinion, yet at the same time you maintain that one is not obliged to respect every "silly" opinion. This must be one of your highest achievments in the field of objective assessment in the political arena. why is it all of a sudden vindictive and a sign of character assasination, when someone would make an attempt to reveal a very small portion of what really occurs in our governing system and how policies that are supposed to benefit us are created and decided upon.

But it is totally a rational and well-justified act to gather and round up bunch of innocent people for the crimes they have not committed, without saying a word on what their fate will be? And if the latter is part of a more extented battle of some unknown giant, why don't they at least given their democratic right of a fair representation? Is democracy what is rammed down our throats, or is it what gives us the right to express our dissent as it always has been.

The only crime that you are charging that spanish or swedish ladies with, is excercizing of their rights as normal civilians, who have their eyes open and are smart enough to search for the truth on their own and not just believe whatever garbage they are fed as some lame form of rationalization, for horrendous conducts. the same goes for hans blix, for exposing the facts and telling you something you did not wish to hear at all.

Why would there ever be desire to resort to actions such as ramming a bus to a police stations, if indeed there were no policies in effect to push the civilians to the edge and would leave them no choice to make their voices and wishes heard. Why this is so hard for you supposedly intellectuals hard to comprehend, is well beyond me.

Would you like to even acknowledge at least, how those countries came into possession of such technologies? Does it even matter to you? Maybe you should do your homework on that, before you embark on a massive campagin of spreading irrational and biased remarks.

Kyle Saghafi


Sounds real

In response to Siamak Baniameri's, "The bartender":

Baniamer's story of Iranians living here in Los Angeles sounds real. I do not know if his real job is a bartender or not,
but for sure he knows what is going on in the Iranian community in Los Angeles. I hope he put these stories together in book.

H. Jam


Today's world is different

In response to Paul MacKinnon's letter, "Skipping the Reformation":

Dear Paul,

Thanks for you comments. I agree with your points. If you review the conclusion of my article, "The art of separation", I said the same thing. Reforms in Islam are needed as it worked in Christianity. My point is that modernity, economic growth, secularization, democracy were not all parts of Christianity, these were imposed on the church, of course not easily.

Reformation was a new interpretation of Christianity imposed on Catholic church. What caused Reformation is a disputed matter. I included a long passage from Max Weber to clarify his point on Reformation. He sees a kind of capitalist development as the pretext of Reformation.

Today's world is different. The presence of industrial capitalism as well as the global agencies in a peaceful manner will help reformist Muslims to interpret Islam differently and overcome the traditional and fundamentalist Islam.


Kazem Alamdari


The answer

In response to Heresh Rezavandi's "We never win":

You wrote: "Oh yeah, pleeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssse Someone tell me what the deal is when you get a gorgeous Irooni girl with a damn ugly, looser white guy? Is it because you have such a problem with your Iranian identity and want to 'fit' into Western society by getting a non-Iranian boyfriend or husband?"

Dear Heresh, the answer to your question is simple, go read your article, listen to yourself talk and look in the mirror for at least 5 minutes, and then if you still didn't know why Iranian girls prefer non-Iranian guys give me a call and I'll try to help you out with your confusion!

Anna S.


Aimless hatred

Regarding responses to my article "G.I. Farrokh":

Just as I had expected, I received a substantial number of hate mails from a bunch of Iranian.com readers after I divulged my feelings about my country, the United States of America, and the fact that I am an active duty member of the United States Army.

One in particular, made sure that I knew he was pissed and proceeded to line up and lob an exotic assortment of profanities at me. Amongst other things, he called me a sell-out and, as he reminded me of the American death toll in Iraq and asked me why I wasn‚t down range amongst the "occupiers," and wished that the insurgents would "crawl up my ass," and said "Long lives the insurgency!"

It was immediately obvious to me from his English that that he was another American of Iranian heritage, or one who had to have been immersed in an American environment for a good while.

It pained me, ... no... fuck that,

I was outraged that an asshole like him who has enjoyed all the amenities offered to him due the sovereignty of the USA, stands up to challenge me who has sworn to defend his civil rights and to ensure his right to enjoy the ability to excrete all the expressive diarrhea he wants!

Fuck that ingrate bitch!

And then also, was another one of liberal camp. One who seemed to be sold to the idea that "If we play nice, the muzzies will play nice too." He tried unsuccessfully to denigrate my whole concept and existence of being an American soldier by no factual terms at all!

He went on for a stretch about "doing what a soldier thinks is right," forgetting that soldiers do what they are ordered; not what what they think they should do based on personal beliefs. Notwithstanding the exemption of when some orders may be, by all commonsense and conventional wisdom and applicable laws, unlawful!

All he managed to do was to spew aimless and unsubstantiated hatred and convey to me his confusion and immaturity!

My advice to him for now is more manual self-gratification and deeper self reflection, and of course research!

Let me say this to all who can understand my verbiage well, but who want to still be a rebel without a cause :

First of all, I don‚t, and don‚t see why I should, owe anything to a land that once was Iran.

The United States took me on when I was a kid, and despite all my aberrations and fuck ups, still afforded me and my offspring a chance for a decent living.

Yes, I can not deny that corruption and corrupts do exist at any level of the US society, or any fucking-where in the world for that matter.

But I am whole heartedly convinced that, by virtue of the constitution of the United States, upon which my country stands, good will and the good citizens of the US will always triumph, and I have promised to pay the ultimate price to ensure that it will be so.

That may be the reason why, being the youngest, the United States is the strongest nation in the world; and why so many like me will always volunteer to make sure it stays so!

Farrokh B.


What if you're deployed to Iran?

In respose to Farrokh B.'s "G.I. Farrokh":

So, what was the reason for you joining the wonderful killing machine, we all know as the US Army? The fact that you were so fucking (I take liberty in using this word, since you and your "comrades" are so in love with the word), incompetent to provide for your wife, whom you shouldn't have had, or your child, which you were and are too immature to have?

Or was it because your Dad wouldn't let you play with guns with the Shah's army and that created a huge mental tumor that you had to get your rocks off and join some army to have a gun and kill. Jesus, you listen to yourself? Or was it because the US Constitution, which I'm sure you haven't read or if so, do not understand it?

What is it GI? What?

You mean to tell me that 17 years ago there was absolutely no legitimate job, where you could put in a days hard work and come home with your head held high? Instead you joined the Army where you make "easy" money, do a half decent job, for the most part and are hated by billions of people across the globe.
You picked one occupation where they pay you to kill. You will tell your child that Daddy was too stupid or lazy to go look for a real job and joined a toothless, group of people to kill and destroy in the name of "freedom".

Well, you are to be commanded. You are the best of the best trying to defend this country, while offending millions of others.

Just one question, Mr. Soldier, what if you're deployed to Iran? Will you shoot anyone, hating America that comes in your cross hair of your beloved gun? If yes, will you still do it if that one is your cousin or old buddy from high school?

Your Mother, whether it is your biological one or Iran, should be proud. I, as an Iranian and an American, think you're a complete idiot and a fucking moron.

I will stand in front of your lousy gun and bet that you'll miss. After all you are a dumb American Soldier, kiss my hairy, Iranian ass.

H.B. (human being)


Evrybody is Iranian

In respose to Arash Emamzadeh's "A simple question":

Anyone who has been born in iran and has finished the elementary school in iran and married to an iranian woman who also fits the same criterion is cosidered iranian regardless of what citizenship that person has taken up later on in life. This of course is a general principle with subtheme and variation as it is to be adjusted with particular circumstances.

Being born in an iranian hospital in syria is still being considered born in iran


Abol (Mage) Hassan Danesh, Ph.D.


What is wrong with us?

In respose to Amir N's "Persian (traitors) gulf":

I totally agree with you Amir! What's wrong with most of us? What did the mollahs do to us? They took a lot from us, but not all!

Even though at the time of the revolution I was not living in Iran, all of my family did! They were all out fighting the Iraqis in different capacities such as soldiers, nurses and doctor! Even my mom who had lost his young Iranian boxing champion son during the revolution was at war feeding the fighters! My mom did not allow me to go back, and she said: "You can and must fight for Iran from abroad!" She did not mean a destructive fight, she meant a constructive fight! The same kind that many Americans of different descends are engaged in by helping their ancestral lands and people, by being in positions of power!

Why are we forgetting our people and land? If we do not care for our ancestral land, would we ever care for our adopted countries? Yes, As long as everything is rosy, but as soon as things turns sour, we would pack up and go in search of another pasture. However, if we love our motherland, we definitely could love and care for our adopted land as well! Once a traitor to the mother land, always a traitor to other lands! I have a lot of respect for Mr. Ala for not forgetting our beloved motherland and putting up a constructive fight to preserve anything that belongs to us, whether the name Persian or anything Iranian!

What is wrong with us? Nothing! The American, Israeli, and perhaps the Arab governments' plan worked, and damn mollahs helped them to destroy Iran and Iranians! After the revolution, they were afraid of Iran becoming another Persian empire, so they colluded to stop and destroy our country by creating and maintaining the war, followed by the economic sanctions! They made sure that the revolution would fail and Iran destroyed, so other countries in the region would not follow Iran as a good example to follow! The weaker the Iran, the happier Israel, US and the Arab dictators! After all the hardship that Iranians went (still going) through, a lot of people worked only for their survivals! They felt betrayed by the mollahs and didn't see any other alternatives. This resulted in having many (not all) exhausted and hopeless people who would not care about names, culture and a lot of great characteristics that makes us proud Persians/Iranians!

Amir, don't lose hope! There remains many good Iranians who would do anything to save their beloved land, people, and yes, the Persian gulf and the Caspian sea and her oil! We are not dead yet, and as long as we are alive and breath Iran with every breath that we take in, we'll defeat our enemies in a battle field or in the media! The mollahs are eventually would fade away, even though the GB and US would like them to stay, since they like dictator buddies! As long as we love Iran we'll be alright! Good things would come our way sooner than later!

Long live our beloved motherland Iran and the Iranian people!



Skipping the Reformation

In respose to Kazem Alamdari's "The art of separation":

I read with interest Kazem Alamdari's piece on the respective influences of Islam and Christianity on the advancement of culture. Much of the historical material he sets forth cannot be disputed, but I do believe that he ommitted what has had arguably the greatest social and economic impact in the last two millennia; the Protestant Reformation.

After the time of Constantine, the Roman church developed into a very powerful and sophisticated political machine, whose attitude to temporal government was essentially no different to the current administration in Iran. During the Middle Ages, all secular powers in the West were subserviant to Rome. (It is ammusing to note how paintings of that era depicting the Pope and the king together always show the Pope as being a good six inches taller!) The dominance of the clergy in secular affairs which stifles advancement in the East was also the West's reality for the best part of a thousand years.

The question then is, How did the West manage to free itself from clerical dominance? Mr Alamdri seems to suggest that the dominant strain of Christianity was forced by naturally developing forces to change it's philosophical place in society. This completely overlooks what was the greatest upheaval the West has ever undergone, the Reformation which had it's beginnings with the Waldenses and the Albigenses in the early thirteenth century, and which finally broke the back of Rome's power in the time of Luther. It is quite true that the rise of nationalism and economic individualism was a reality that was confronting the status quo in the West, but these things were not sufficient in themselves to force that necessary sepatation. Consider Italy, Ireland, Spain, the Balkans, where the same social pressures were present, but where the Reformation was either ignored or successfully suppressed by Rome. These countries remained poor and technologically backward. In recent years, the power of the church in those places has finally been relingquished to the state, not because the church adapted itself, but because their populations have become godless under the influence of secular humanism.

With the motto, "Sola Scriptura" (The Scripture alone), the Reformers in Europe were able to set the Bible in opposition to the authority of Rome, showing among other things the rightness of a dualistic system in which the church and temporal governmant are quite distinct, God-ordained authorities. In other words, they were able to show from the founding document of their religion that the system that had stifled Europe was a deviant system. There was also the added bonus that the New Testment was perfectly harmonious with developing capitalism, so that to this day people in the West still refer to a "Protestant work-ethic".

I do not pretend to be an expert, but I submit that these are the only two possibilities if the East is to undergo that same process of separation. Either: a) a generation of fiery Reformers must arise from within Islam to show that this present languishing state of things is a corruption of what God intended (in which case an ocean of blood will probably be spilt as the price of freedom, as it was in Europe) Is there sufficient scripural basis in Islam to accomplish this? Or, b) The population of the East will simply become secularized to the point where Islam is marjinalised. If Iran is any indicator of the way things are headed, the latter would seem more likely. [Alamdari's reply]

Paul MacKinnon


The train has left

In respose to Abjeez advice column "She loves me, she loves me not":

First I'd like to say, when someone says I don't deserve you or you are better off with someone else, they really mean it. They are simply putting it in a more acceptable way. What they are saying is I am better off with someone else and so are you. I don't deserve you simply means you are not my choice anymore, expressed in a nice way.

When she argues with you why you don't stand up for yourself is first a feminine need. They need a man who takes charge and can make decisions and act on their own and in time. Secondly, in this case since she has been in the 50-50 zone with you or now more towards 60-40 and rapidly dissipating, she is telling you what she thinks is one of the reasons she has moved on or is about to move on.

At this point in a relationship, where the female is not after you anymore and the train is leaving, I would say it takes too much and generally won't work if you try to stop the train, nevermind making it turn. As the abjeez suggested, you have done your part now, she needs to decide to come back to you on her own. So let her make her choice. And if it is not going to be, don't feel bad. Any love relationship is a blessing in itself that we were lucky enough to enjoy even if short lived.



In your misinformed view

In respose to Persia Lover's "Bad thoughts, bad words, bad deeds":

Dear Pretending Persian Lover,

It is surprising to read that you have selected the highly controversial, even by 21st Century standards, subject of homosexuality to demonstrate your convoluted view of religious intolerance by a faith, which is more than 3,000 year old.

It has been said, that Zoroastrianism is the father of all other religions, specially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. That is a discussion for another time. In his infinite wisdom, the Prophet Zoroaster, who could not speak of the concepts of safe sex, and dangers of horrible diseases such as AIDS, explained to his followers that the unnatural sex was an act of the devil (Ahriman) and warned them to refrain from it at all costs.

In today's society, it is inconceivable that one would drink from the same cup used by another person, same religion or not. Drinking after strangers from the far away lands and questionable hygiene is tantamount to inviting disastrous health results, even in our highly mobile and informed world. Yet, in your view, it was wrong for the followers of Zoroaster to refrain from drinking after the primitive natives of Arabia, Africa, and other societies that existed at the time of the wise Prophet.

You will be well advised to view the pictures of the Chinese, other Asian nations, and Canadians of last year with their mask-covered faces trying to avoid the effect of sneezing by the SARS infected population. Prophet Zoroaster could not talk about viruses, infections, and fever. Instead, he told his followers about the fiend (i.e. Virus) in our bodies which causes sickness predominant over humankind. He also told his followers the fire (i.e. Fever) is the result of the virus seriously infecting the sick body. They were instructed to, when exposed, to say prayers and cleanse themselves by the germ killing fires at the temples. What an ingeniously simple and effective idea in that simply magnificent world!

In your misinformed view, the Iranians who yearn for the pre-Islamic past and the glory of the Persian Empire are wrong and should be made right by thinking that the barbarous Arab invasion was for their own good! I recommend you read the book titled "Pas Az Hezar-o Chehar Sad Sal" (After Fourteen Hundred Years, What Every Iranian in the 21st Century Should Know About the Events of the Past Fourteen Hundred Years of Islamic History in the Country) by Dr. Shojaedin Shafa, before further attempts to help other Iranians in their fight for a brighter future!

To insinuate that the Iranians of pre-Islamic era were somehow supportive of the disastrous Arab invasion is utterly insensitive and misguided. "Among all the myths during the last 1400 years, as related to the Arab invasion, that have been fabricated, none is more baseless than the fiction that Arabs did not face serious resistance from Iranians, and the new religion was warmly accepted by the people who were disaffected by their religious and political leaders". "This myth has been repeated and emphasized by the Islamic historians and by the religious establishment of the past 1400 years to gradually become accepted as a historical fact by many, as well as a large number of Iranians, who may not have full knowledge of the events." 1

"In Tarikh-e Tabary it is indicated that in the span of thirty years throughout the country there were continuous and multiple Iranian uprisings. The following cities had two to five repeated uprisings with untold number of casualties: Bokhara, Samarghand, Kharazm, Soghd, Faryab, Sarakhas, Marv, Kosh, Bikand, Nishaboor, Toos, Gorgan, Ray, Hamadon, Ghazvin, Deenoor, Qom, Sirvan, Halvan (Ghasre Shirin), Esfahan, Shooshtar, Estakhr, Darab-Gard, Shapoor, and in many cases the entire states (Ostans) of Tabarestan, Gilan, Dilmestan, Azerbaijan, Fars, Kerman, and Sistan." 2

How dare you to talk about the cast system in the Sassanid Iran and believe that the treatment of Iranians by the Arab invaders was more tangible and more humane? "In spite of the financial windfall that they were receiving from Iranians, as stated in Aghdolfarid: The conquering Arabs treated the Iranians with utmost humiliation. They would not walk with them in the same line, and would not sit with them in the same room for meals. In wars, would not allow them to ride horses, and forced them to travel on foot. They would deny them the soldiers' rations and armaments. They believed that only Arabs were true warriors and the Iranians were created to perform menial jobs. They were forced to sweep the roads in front of their masters, repair their residences, and sew their clothes." 3

"Tazians (Arabs) would slaughter the prisoners of wars and would sell their wives and children as slaves. The slave markets of Koofeh and Baserh were continuously filled with such slaves throughout the rein of Omavian Dynasty."

"When the Prisoners of War were brought to Ghatibeh, the Arab commander, he sat on his chair among his people and uttered this command: Kill one thousand prisoners in front of me, one thousand on my right, one thousand on my left, and one thousand behind me. The killings continued until the swords no longer would cut. Molhab, the storyteller and eyewitness, says that my sword was taken and used to behead more prisoners, and it worked so well that some of Ghatibeh men became jealous of the quality of my sword. One of them told the executioner to tilt the sword slightly. He did, and the sword struck the victim's teeth and tore through it" 4

You had better believe that our brave ancestors fought and fought and foughtÖ for their freedom and dignity. They did yearn for return to their old religion and when it did not happen, molded their blood-sucking conquerors in their own image by running the empire as grand viziers and political leaders. We have come a long way in our tortured history and should be rightly proud of our past. Our duty is to regain that glory and rightful place among the civilized nations.

Khosro Nourollahi

1. Pages 399-400 "Pas Az Hezar-o Chehar Sad Sal"
2. Page 401
3. Page 417
4. Page 403-404


Moderate your anger

In respose to Amir N's "Persian (traitors) gulf":

I wrote NG a simple letter saying this act is in direct support of Arab nationalism whose supporters are beheading westerners, so national geographic is inadvertently supporting it.There are many in the West who under commerical pressure from Arabic countries have dropped Persian Gulf. They are fuelling the divisions in the Middle East.

In addition to British Airways, the biggest abuser is Worldscale Association (they are on the internet) repsonsible for publishing the yearly freight rates for the entire shipping world and its associated shipping brokers (you can find the list on the Persian Gulf Task force site). Same goes for the US Navy, Pentagon and CENTCOM. With regards to BA and Worldscale it's driven purely by the profit motive.

I think targeting National Geographic so intensely may backfire, unfortunately not all our compatriots are polite. I have seen them call National Geographic, "National Jew-ographic" on Internet newsgroups (soc.culture.iranian) as well as other unseemly language. This sort of approach and abuse is not at all helpful.

The answer is not to impose our nationalistism but to register our opposition to western organisations supporting Arab Nationalism (knowingly or unknowingly). I really could not care less about the name but supporting divisions in the Middle East and Nationalist causes is very dangerous and must be opposed.



Blinded by racism

In respose to Amir N's "Persian (traitors) gulf":

You are so blinded by racism that you neglected to mention the fact that the iranian government raised OFFICIAL protests with national geographic over its name change and went so far as to ban them from iran.

and what the HELL does the iran-iraq war or something that happened 1400 yrs ago have to do with iranians wishing to vacation in dubai (a MAJOR international tourist destination) or wanting to visit the pyramids in egypt or archeological treasures in jordan and lebanon?? what about the 200,000 iranians living and making a good living in the UAE? would you call them traitors as well??

see the problem with scum like you is that you claim to be iranian nationalists and yet you are NO different than people like Jean-Marie Le Pen or members of the British National Party, or better yet, neo-nazis. your patriotism is defined by your animosity and racism towards others. people like you are fascists, because in effect you cannot separate nationalism from racism.

yeah, i have a big problem with "Arabian Gulf" too, and many Arabic customs I don't agree with. that doesn't mean i hate all arabs. nor does it mean that i'm so presumptious and feeble-minded to call other iranians who happen to go to arab countries "traitors".

so please, spare us your bullshit. keep your inflammatory views to yourself because we don't need iranians like you misrepresenting us.




In respose to Setareh Sabety's "The anti-shah":

It is sad that Ms. Sabety cannot find herself an Iranian hero or heroine among the many men and women who have lived and died for our country...

Zeh sheer-e shotor khordano soussmar
Arab raa beh djaayee resseedeh ast kaar
Keh taajeh kiaani konad aarezou
Tofou bar to ey charkheh gardaan, tofou...

Azita Ardalan


Mideast peace plan

Regarding the Persian Gulf & Arab-Israeli conflict:

I'm no expert on the matter but as far as I know the most ancient designation of the Persian Gulf is "Sinus Persicus" which is the Latin word used by the Romans and not the Greeks. So I am inclined to agree on the fact that the National Geographic has truly blundered or is doing this on purpose to call the Persian Gulf the Arabian Gulf.

But lets be honest on one point and that is regarding the three Islands of the Persian Gulf that is the small and larger Tumbs (or Tombs depends how you pronunce it) and Abu Moussa. Now isn't it strange that the IRI is deeply attached to Islands as part of Iran knowing that they were taken back or conquered (depending of your point of view) by the Shah of Iran in December 1971 that is nearly more than a month after the Persepolis Celebrations of the Iranian monarchy. What a "Bilakh" the Shah gave to the West, particularly the British and the Arabs with the US benediction.

I still find it hard to understand why the IRI whose leaders have so often been claiming to be anti Imperialist and so concerned by the plight of the Palestinians choose to support the ONLY Imperialistic invasion EVER undertook by their staunchest foe the former Shah of Iran. As for Abou Moussa hasn't it come to anyones mind that "Moussa" means literally in Arabic "Moses" the Jewish prophet. So by all logic both the Iranians and Arabs should consider the Island of Abou Moussa as a property of the State of Israel.

I suggest the Israelis to take advantage of this fact and leave the Gaza strip and other occupied territories, establish peace with the Palestinians and send any Israeli Zealot including Sharon to inner exile to Abou Moussa. We can on the otherhand send the Hamas leaders and Zealots to the Tomb Islands. With some luck they will end up fighting eachother basically outside middle eastern territory. What do you think of that as a new solution to end the Israeli-Arab conflict ? ;o)



Aryan fixations

In respose to Tuff Wild Chick's" Iranian guys suck":

Though your article was quite rude, you hit on a lot of truths on Iranian males' sexual fixations. I must agree with you as Iranian males - most, though not all - are grease-balls, just like Arabs, Italians, Greeks, blacks, Mexicans, etc.

Anyway, since you use bad words, I'll do the same and say that Iranian women are also fixated - most, though not all - on having sex and going out with niggers. I have seen such an incredible amount of this form of bestiality, that it boggles the mind.

As greasy as Iranian men are, almost none of them date only niggers, exclusively. On the other hand, Iranian women have a large amount of nigger-lovers.

Iranian for Aryans


Americans are changing

In respose to J. Javid's "The solution":

Thank you. It was a great little photo essay that I already sent to many of my American friends. It is so hard for most my friends to understand why the conspiracy theory about everything and why doubt everything. They are an incredibly trusting people, Americans are... although things are changing ever so slowly.

Sima Shahriar


Uncle Napoleon regrets

In respose to J. Javid's "The solution":

I enjoyed your essay on Iraj Pezeshkzad. About ten years ago, I had the good fortune to have dinner with him in Chicago. He sure is one to listen to! He didn't seem to appreciate the fame of Daie Jan Napoleon in those days. He said he sometoimes even regrets having written that because now it is unanimous with his name! That many people only know him for that and don't bother to read his more serious works.

All said and done, I gave him two copies of Uncle Napoleon to autograph. One in Persian for me, the other in English for my daughter!

Thank you for the essay.



Effective and accessible

In respose to J. Javid's "The solution":

Dear Mr. Javid,

Just wanted to commend you for your professional journalism and creative genres you use to reach people. This photo essay on Pezeshkzad, for example, is a very effective and accessible way to pass on an important enlightening message.

Bravo and keep up with the excellent work.

Nayereh Tohidi


Mard-e bozorg

In respose to J. Javid's "The solution":

Thanks for Pezeshkzad report. I know it takes time. che baa saligheh. damet garm aziz.

mamnoon ke MARDE BOZORG ra khoob arzeh kardi.

Hadi Khorsandi


Trashy truth

In respose to Tuff Wild Chick's" Iranian guys suck":


Iraj Pourmirza


Why settle?

In respose to Zariah Behesht's "Between kabob and sumac":

I try hard not to waste my time reading articles written by "high powered executives" that are truly disgrace to women genders. Why? Aren't the high powered executives supposed to be smart, wise and most importantly have self-respect and self esteem?

I read the article to see if there was anything new in the familiar plot but I was disappointed. As a human being, I feel bad for anyone who is hurt by someone else however, the beautiful Persian expression "khalaeyegh anche layegh" which means people get what they deserve comes to my mind every time.

The last week the site published several articles about "Irooni men" being terrible. Here is a perfect example why some of them behave that way. Did it occur to anyone that some of us women are to blame?

Why would any woman with an ounce of pride would settle for being the second best? Perhaps because she really does not think she is worth more or deserves better?

We are supposed to think this lady is very smart because she is on her way to become a lawyer. Guess what? The real intelligent people can see right through her writings. She is insecure, lacks confidence and feels she is better than the other " sister" because the other one is just a teacher and she can cook khoresh.

How stupid and ignorant that remark is? I have news for you.

One of my best friends is a housewife (she had her own business in Iran but when she moved to the US she stayed home to raise kids and help her husband) well this housewife has two daughters graduating from Law school (one in December and one in May) and a son in college. She manages to help many Iranian causes and generously gives to the poor in Iran so don't you ever dare put other women down because you are trying to make yourself feel better.

Take a good look in the mirror because you are not so lucky after all. You accepted his way of treating you so you got what you deserved. I bet there is just another one of those Iranian brothers in the card next. You will fall for him and tolerate his abusive behavior of "playing" two women.

I bet you my bottom dollar that your love, treats the "teacher" like gold and uses women like you to boost his ego and do things with the teacher may not be willing to do.

How do I know that? I have seen women like you since I was in college and even now one of my best friends who is successful (but lacks confidence because she grew up in a household that did not have much respect for women) is with a man who dates women in the entertainment industry (good old Iranian boy). I refuse to listen to any complains from her because I told her from the moment I laid my eyes on that full of shit Iranian man that says all the right thing and buys his way to everyone's heart (except for me of course).

Just like you, she justifies his behavior by saying things like "she is uneducated and sings in the clubs in LA" or some other crap like that. I simply cut her and say you deserve him.Unlike what you stated, it does not make any sense because you are this person who thinks she is high and mighty yet she lets men treat her like shit. Wake up and learn that men from any nationality (or women for that matter) absolutely admire and respect a women who have pride and dignity and demand to be treated as a human beings and would not settle for anything less.

Your degree and how much money you make does not matter because let's face it most Iranian women are educated and make money. That is only to be independent and self sufficient and not to think they are a better human beings. You need to learn a lot about being a person and by the way remember the Persian expression: the fuller the tree, the more it bends. Simply put, it means the more you have (looks, education, talent, wit, compassion, etc.) the more humble you should be. It works like a charm every time.

Take my word for it.

Azam Nemati


Good for America

In respose to Hossein Bagher Zadeh's "A Christian Revolution":

You compare Bush to Khomeini? You compare the U.S election to the disgraceful and radical Islamic revolution. And you think this election was won on the basis of religion? No my friend... It was lost by John Kerry who spoke on ten different sides of each issue. He lost because he had no convictions... or at least having the honesty and balls to tell the American people what those convictions were. He said what ever would get him elected. In other words, as smart as he may be, he displayed no character and consistency. And I don't know about you. But even the so-called "spineless" Americans value character and clear and resolute convictions (even if they disagree with some of them).

And in regards to your comments about how poorly the American economy is doing, I guess a socialist Iranian living in England must derive pleasure out the current economic problems of the capitalist U.S. This must surely satisfy most non-American's who are envious of the high American standards of living. If I am wrong, then why do immigrants flock by the millions to this country every year for jobs and high living standards (and yes... .this includes Iranians). But please don't be as stupid to even suggest that the faith of the U.S economy will be that of the post-revolution Iran being run by the one of the most corrupt and brutal regimes in the world. That comparison is just ludicrous and is made only by the extreme left, communists, and anarchist (ie: anti-capitalists).

Even with its share of problems, the U.S economy is still the envy of the world and will be operating on all cylinders shortly. Just wait and watch it happen. And I seriously doubt that your friend John Kerry would have reduced the deficit, increased jobs, fixed social security, and got us out of Iraq any way. The democrats have the same if not a worse record in this area.

As far a fall of the Dollar is concerned, don't be so naïve to think that it is necessarily a bad thing for the U.S. If anything it is bad for where you live. But, In fact the weakening of the dollar was promoted by the Bush administration to boost U.S exports by making them cheaper overseas and decrease the imports by making them more expensive in the U.S. I.e.: He wants American not to buy the now-expensive foreign products and spend their vacation dollars in Europe but instead in the U.S. And conversely, he wants the Europeans to buy the now-cheap U.S goods and spend their vacation Euros in Florida and Hawaii, not the south of France. So, although the fall of the dollar has some negative consequences as far as attracting foreign investments in the U.S financial markets, it does wonders for trade here in the U.S. We do presently have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world (around 5%).

Your article really amuses me. An Iranian living in England analyzing the presidential election in the U.S. Unless you are an American resident and in the midst of it all over here, you should really keep your views and assessments to yourself. Americans are doing what they feel is good for America. Not what pleases European and Arab countries or people like you.

B. Pezhman


Hateful and unreal

In respose to Setareh Sabety's "The anti-shah":

It is hard to believe that you could come up with this article of yours supporting Mr. Arafat. Mr. Arafat was so hateful and he poisoned people's minds and created unsafe zone between Jews and Arabs. Please know that Israel always wanted to share a peaceful land with Palestinians, but instead Mr. Arafat and his followers never stopped terrorizing Israeli people. All we did was to defend our holy land nothing else.

In some cases we had no choice to retaliate, all because they did not leave us any choice. Please deeply review and study the real personalty of Mr. Arafat and his terrorist group and see what they did to us too. Right now in Iran, the hateful govt. of Iran has spent millions dollars of poor Iranian people to develop long range missiles to target Israel. The poverty in Iran is unbelievable but those fat Mullahs do not care and all they think is to spread hateful and unreal words against the people of Israel.

Please be kind and pick a right sort to defend.

Menashe Amir


Let go

In respose to Tuff Wild Chick's" Iranian guys suck":

Just wanted to tell you that I was surfing the web and came across iranian.com for the first time ever. I must say I was shocked by the article and the little image about Iranian men that you wrote.

Firstly, I understand your frustration of not finding a discent iranian guy but I don't think it's a good idea to generalize like that. Just remember insult to Iranian men like that can backfire and become an insult to you as an Iranian woman. A lot of men are the way you describe no matter where they're from.

As a woman my advice to you is to let go. If you think iranian men are like that then stop dating them and go after other men. It's not good to obsess over it. remember that if something happens to Iran as a country, iranian men are the ones protecting it, so they're needed as human beings. describing men just by their genital is just plain wrong especially now that Middle Eastern and Muslim people are being discribminated against.

start dating other guys from other countries, you'll find that they are all the same. there are good guys and dirty guys, obviously you've been hanging out with the wrong ones.

I've seen a lot of great iranian guys and a lot of losers. same goes for iranian women. there are a lot of iranian women who are as dirty as men.

Hope you find the man you're looking for soon.

Amber F

PS: I'm surprised that the site web master would publish such angry and insulting article about Iranian men on the internet. so much self-hate...


No mean feat

In respose to Paul Kriwaczek's "In Search of Zarathustra":

This is remarkably accurate writing for a non-scholarly book that reads almost like a novel. This is no mean feat, given the complex issues dealt with, from Zoroaster to Mani and the Cathars, the changing opinions in scholarly circles about Zoroaster's place and date of birth, the influence of the Gathas on other religions, and many more issues. And it succeeds in avoiding the trap of boring didactism and self-righteous partiality. I am delighted that Jahanshah Javid has done justice to it and hope that many Iranians and non-Iranians will learn from it.

Fatema Soudavar Farmfanfarmaian


Complaining about laws of nature

In respose to Tuff Wild Chick's" Iranian guys suck":

I am wondering where you live? (perhaps LA?) Regardless, what you are saying is mostly true. And I am saying that being an Iranian guy. Most Iranian guys are shallow and want to get laid as quickly as possible and then will label you as a "whore" and won't marry you (the key word being "Most"). But from my experience most Iranian women that I have come across in this country (and I have lived here for 28 years) are game-playing bitches that are not worth marrying. They do not make good mothers and wives. So, I think that it is not only the Iranian men that are assholes. The entire Iranian community as a whole is screwed up. This includes the single guys and girls and their parents. This is what happens when you mix a Western culture with an Eastern culture such as ours. Iranians that move to the U.S. have an uncanny ability to pickup all the bad traits of Americans, retaining all of the bad traits of being Iranian, while losing all its good traits. So, what is left is "garbage".

In reading your article, in all fairness, while your side of the picture represents a pretty accurate generalization of the Iranian single men in this country, there is a reason for this behavior. And it goes as follows: Any single man, be it Iranian or non-Iranian wants to get laid. So in that respect what you have noticed isn't that Iranian guys are "assholes". From your perspective all guys are "assholes" for that reason. But if you think about it, since the dawn of civilization, that's the way it has been: men want to screw women, and it is up to women to decide if and when to give it up. And if you give it up way to early, you are labeled as a being "easy" or a "whore". And no guy wants to marry an "easy" woman. Like it or not that is the way it has been as long as history has been documented. Indeed more so in some cultures than others such as ours ... .but never the less it is universal. So, what you are complaining about is a law of nature.

From an Iranian male perspective, I can tell you that I would be willing to wait to have sex with an Iranian woman if I think she is "marriage-material". By the way, I limit that waiting period to no more that one or two months if I think there is potential. More than that, and you are playing games. At some point you need to enter into the sexual part of the relationship to see if you sexually compatible. The problem with the whole picture that you are disgusted with is that some Iranian women do put out right away and some don't put out at all ... and the one's that don't put out at all usually can't sell themselves to their dates as being marriage material either. So, if you are a guy, which one would you pick? Well ... if I can't screw that non-marriage material girl who won't have sex with me, wouldn't I pick the whore? At least, this way, I get some benefit out of the situation (of course the benefit is sexual only).

But don't fool your self for a minute. Most Iranian guys do want to get married and have a family. I don't think that in comparing to day's dating and marriage market to our parents' generation, Iranian men have changed much. It is more the change in the women that has upset the equation that we had in our parents' generation. Guys are and have always been after the same traits in a wife: good in bed, respectable in the community, good wife, and good mother. So when they see a woman that for example cares mostly about fashion, jewelry, or other expensive and useless shallow things and thinks that she can have a super carrier, spending most of her time outside of the house working, while the Mexican maid raises her children, they don't want that type of woman as a wife. So they keep looking and in the mean time, being that they are guys they would not say "No" to some one who is willing to put out for them.

By the way, the decent Iranian men that you are after, or men in general, also don't consider marrying the type of girl that uses the word "fuck" seven times in a one page article. Perhaps there were less crude ways to make your point as a lady. And with a name "Tuff Wild Chick", what decent Iranian guy want to marry any girl that is "Wild". And they don't want to marry a "chick". They are looking for a "lady". So while the point that you make are mostly valid, perhaps, when it comes to your own experiences with guys, you should take a look the your own "package" and figure out how guys perceive you. That is the other half of the equation.

Tuff Non-Wild Man.
Aka Babak


Shallow & stupid

In respose to Tuff Wild Chick's" Iranian guys suck":

AH! I'm offended! ... but hey, I'll go out with you if you want an honest guy who can cuddle. But I must warn you that I am an Iranian man and will cheat on you if deny my right to coitus! Get a life. Your article was terribly cheesy and probably inspired by the same impulses that led to your involvement in various dysfunctional relationships. I confidently claim every quality that you denied Iranian men in your stupid little rant.

You made no progress in trying to find a solution to your problems since, as your article suggests, you're not even willing to wonder if it's you who's mistaken. I would guess that you're as shallow as the puddle of drool on your pillow. Don't attempt to categorize us in some bullshit, pseudo-psychological article. If you are aware that not all Iranian men are like that, what was your point in writing all of this? Surely you weren't trying to warn other Iranian women against your own countrymen!? Just get a diary and keep your trap shut.

With deepest love and warmest cuddles,

O'meed Entezari


IRI is not pan-Arab

In respose to Amir N's "Persian (traitors) gulf":

Dear Amir,

In your article you showed how ignorant and naive you really are.

You claimed that the Islamic Republic of Iran has bowed to Arabs, and serves Arab interests. If this was the case, then why is it that when the Islamic Republic found out what the National Geographic did, they threw out all the National Geographic journalists out of the country and banned the sale of the magazine?

Why is it that they still haven't conceded even though National Geographic gave a legitimate reason why they did this.

If the Islamic republic was serving "Arab interests", then why is it that it was this regime that fought Saddam Hussein (the enemy of Iran and Islam) for 8 years trying to destroy his "pan-Arab" movement, while the wife of the Shah of Iran (Farah) met and SHOKE hands with Saddam (lanat-ullah)

If Iran was serving "Arab interests", then why has it tried to topple ever single Arab regime in the neighboring the past 25 years. Do you remember the massive protests they caused in Saudi Arabia in 1988 where a lot of Iranians were massacred by the Saudis during hajj? Did you protest against this GENOCIDE and TERRORIST act of the Saudi regime killing your HAMVATAN? Or did you stay silent?

What about when Iran fermented revolution in Iraq in 1981 and again in 1992 to try to overthrow the regimes in Iraq, Kuwait and Bahrain, all of which are PAN-ARAB governments?

Since when has Iran served the ARAB cause? Don't mistake the cause of Islam with the cause of Arabs. Most Arab leaders of the betrayers of Islam therefore an enemy to Iran.

Get a clue. You are the traitor to Iran by living in the West and not working within Iran (by any means possible) to help your hamvatan by ANY means possible.

Stop saying "What can my country (Iran) do for me?" and ask yourself "What did I ever do to help my country"

Khodah negah-dar,

Dariush Abadi


Pro-khatami, and pissed

In respose to Mahmoud's cartoon "Antar, Mantar & Rahbar (1)" and "Antar, Mantar & Rahbar (2)":

I am pro-Khatami and tell you stupid he is in 22,000,000 voters hearts and you are in my rectum. Shut the fuck up, get lost.


REPLY: Thanks for letting me know about your intolerance! I don't expect everybody to like my cartoons. Some like them, some don't. You can disagree without using Fohsh-e Rakik! which shows weakness. Your elected president likes to see his followers respect other opinions. Follow him. -- Mahmoud


Empty cream puffs

In respose to Leila Farjami's "Fil-e pelaastiki":

Leila aziz,

Yes, these empty cream puffs need to be reminded of their characteristics thru the mirror of a good poem like this. After 25 years of having being exposed to the decent components of this culture as well, you would think they would decide to have some respect for themselves? I wish at least they were cute... interesting.... novel... something!

Mohamad Navab


LA Iranians are unbearable

In respose to Leila Farjami's "Fil-e pelaastiki":

H. A.


More letters in December >>> December 4 >>> December 15 >>> December 16
>>> All letters

Copyright 1995-2013, Iranian LLC.   |    User Agreement and Privacy Policy   |    Rights and Permissions