Islamic attack on democracy

IRI’s supporters on misuse the democracy on the site to support the undemocratic Islamic regime in Iran


Islamic attack on democracy
by Jahanshah Rashidian

The Islamic Republic of Iran has reached the highest level of illegitimacy. The Illegitimacy is now an evident characteristic of the regime and henceforth can hardly be denied by an increasing majority of people in and out of Iran. Therefore, the Islamic regime, especially its so-called reformist factions, needs activists in the West to prop up the claim of regime’s legitimacy.

Among the various pro-regime cyber-media in the West, is one of the most read websites. Although, it has a secular character, because of its high popularity and openness to any idea cannot escape from the supporters of the IRI.  

IRI’s supporters and lobbyists and  on this site are three main groups:

--the first group consists of Islamists, either pro Ahmadinejad or not, they are the absolute devotees of Khomeini, the founder of the IRI, and his ideals for an ideal Muslim community, Ummah. Whatever their differences with each others, their writings on this site unmask their of Islamist attitudes; aggression, superstition, anti-democracy, anti- Persianism and anti-non-Muslim culture are their common attitudes. They attack, slander, humiliate and threaten any writer on the site, who rebuts legitimacy of the IRI.

--the second group does not share all traits of the first group; however support the IRI by showing their own ideological or political conviction. They side with the first group in many aspects.

The second group seems to be the teammates of the first group and fulltime staff hired and orchestrated by the institutions of the regime. They are mostly present on the site to do the job. Their job consists of attacking any other thinker who does not tolerate the regime. They incite feeling of nationalism, fear, populism to support the IRI against the “foreign enemy” while attributing feeling of self- deception, immaturity and weakness to people in order to prolong IRI’s parasitic life.

--the third group is a category of regime’s supporters who are supposed to look like “opposition”. This fake opposition consists of some lobby groups, ex-collaborators of the regime and those who have personal interests. They are supposed to neutralise all ideas and activities of the “subversive” opposition.

Although, members of this group mostly live in the West and are enjoying their western lifestyle, paint a rosy picture of daily life in Iran. They come also to the regime's rescues by ignoring or playing down the plight of people. In fact their unconditional supports for the regime go beyond that of some pro-reformists or factions within the regime in Iran. Even protest within the factions of the ruling system sparks their reactions-- Ebadi’s warning of human rights conditions in Iran can be criticised by IRI’s lobby groups in the West.  

It is to mention that a segment of the opposition mistakenly considers the second and third group “leftist”. However, the word “leftist” cannot objectively match IRI’s supporters in any circumstances because the regime is in total contradiction with the philosophy of socialism. At best, these IRI’s supporters or lobbyists are “lumpans”, sold members of an antagonistic class to a reactionary regime like the IRI, as Marxist theory of “deception” describes. In fact, they prove a “false consciousness” which irrationally leads them to support one of the most anti-socialist regimes.

IRI’s supporters, malignly or roughly, convinced or self-sold, propagate a series of pro-IRI views which deem to determine people’s passivity. Either religious or ideological, and so on, they attempt to patch up the fate of Iran and Iranians with the further survival of the IRI. This fatalism is to be imposed to all Iranians and especially on other thinkers.   

In this perspective, sensitive issues like the military attack on Iran, economic sanctions on Iran, US invasion of Iraq and precarious sovereignty of Iran (initially violated by the regime itself) and IRI’s nuclear progamme are their major issues “Ottoman’s shirt” to insist on IRI’s survival while totally camouflaging the non-Iranian, barbaric and vile characters of this regime.

The second and third group rarely raised the problem of human rights in Iran. Even so, they parrot baseless claims that human rights, democracy, and social justice are improving under the IRI. IRI’s lobbying activists argue that the main factors for economic problems, increasing gap between social classes and human rights violations are not due to the IRI’s mismanagement, class character, and Islamist brutality, but rather the pressure of the West, immaturity of people and resistance from the victims of the regime. They suggest tolerance, patience and acceptance toward the regime.  

IRI’s Achilles’ heel is its record of human rights violations. By arguing that all ills of Iran come from any factor but the regime itself, all IRI’s supporters are at the first place supposed to highlight the external factors and western coercive policies as the normal reasons of IRI’s atrocity.

IRI’s supporters on misuse the democracy on the site to support the undemocratic Islamic regime in Iran. Their message concludes baseless and dehumanising condemnation of all other thinkers on the site. They implicitly come to the following conclusion: since the West is the main enemy of “Iran’ (the IRI), any material on this site against the regime automatically parallels with a ploy of “anti-Iranian” enemy. Therefore, any protest toward IRI’s legitimacy deserves legitimate punishment of “traitor”.

Religious or secular, under original or fake name and avatar, aggressive or demagogue, these three groups attempt to blame, slander and weaken the true opposition to the ruling clerical regime.   


Recently by Jahanshah RashidianCommentsDate
Journée Internationale des Femmes
Mar 08, 2010
Stop Indian Gasoline for Mullahs’ Repressive Machinery
Feb 04, 2010
Iran Fails United Opposition
Jan 20, 2010
more from Jahanshah Rashidian
Farhad Kashani

Anonym7, you wrote: “in

by Farhad Kashani on


you wrote: “in your case from many of your writings it is very obvious that you also rarely read, period.”. And..” instead of inflicting so much stress on your keyboard, read some more.” Are we resorting to personal attacks now? Is showing class also a part of “American Imperialism right wing corporate conspiracy to oppress the working class and free nations” that needs not to be applied in our culture, just like Democracy was butchered in Iran in the name of “anti Imperialism (Whatever that means)? Also, I’m glad that you watch corporate news, but its not necessarily watching them that matters, but taking everything they say at face value. Apparently you take things at face value without the slightest effort to analyze them.  Finally, as for as Taliban goes, refer to my original posting. Taliban is an idea, not much of a movement per say, although at some point a group of them organized and took over Afghanistan, but the idea will remain there no matter what force is used against them, unless, until the source of Islamic fundamentalism ideology is destroyed, and that source is the Islamic regime in Iran. That idea is a branch of Islamic Fundamentalism worldwide movement. Other ideological and group branches are now in thousands, maybe tens of thousands, few examples are Hamas, Hezbullah, Abu Sayyaf in Philippines, Jamaat al Islmiyah in Indonesia, Ekhvan Muslemeen in Egypt, Islamic Courts in Somalia,…… Those groups and ideologies are bi product of the Islamic revolution in Iran exporting its Islamic Fundamentalist ideas. Khomeini, the fascist godfather of all Islamic Fascists, called it “exporting the revolution”. It has spread through the Muslim world like cancer. When are you guys gonna realize that?  

Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

World opinion is overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian. Its just that some people living in the West are totally out of touch with world opinion.

The position of the IRI on the Palestinian issue is irrelevant to the merits of their struggle. You appear to take the opposite to any cause that the IRI supports. I would suggest this approach is unethical and irrational.

A US aerial attack on Iran would not destroy her nuclear programme. But it would guarantee that Iran would then develop nuclear weapons at full speed. Diplomacy is the only option available.



Ignorance and extremism (a4now)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Anonymous4now says: "It is your extreme view on and dislike of America that prevents you from seeing the reality of the situation."

A4now, with minimal respect to many of you obsessed anti-Iranians, one of the main reasons I write against you guys is that I believe not only you are bad news for Iranians you are bad news for Americans at large. Absolute majority of this great nation (America) does not want to be sucked into another disaster in middle east. If like the other fellow you are allergic to corporate news (CNN etc.) go listen to NPR news and you will quickly find that out.
Regarding your baseless claims that west was "naïve"!!!!!!!!!, etc. with respect to fascist Talibans, go watch the U.S documentary frontline (about Afghan fiasco) or read S. Hersh's article published around the latest Israel-Lebanon time frame (about U.S/Islamic extremists relations).



by Anonymous4now on

While it is true that the West helped the Mojahedin to counter communism, it is fair to say they were naïve and did not know what they were getting into, which is exactly what 36 million Iranians did.  The world is 30 years wiser and has seen the true face and danger of Islamic fundamentalism.  The West believed (and some still do) Islam to be a peaceful religion and that the IRI may be an aberration and the brain child of a mad man, Khomeini.  But by now they have seen enough to know that this type of mentality is at the core of Islam and represents the mentality of the founder of the religion.   

All other ideologies, such as communism can come and go because the foot soldiers on the ground may become disillusioned with the core concepts of the ideology, but this one feeds on faith and the support of the faithful and that is what makes it perpetual and dangerous.  It is for this reason they will not yield to a nuclear Iran.  The U.S. has admitted, and said so in many words, that the foreign policies of the past were wrong and that they have learnt the best solution for global peace is to have democracy be the law of the lands where there is trouble.  It is your extreme view on and dislike of America that prevents you from seeing the reality of the situation.


Ignorance and extremism (to Kashani)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Kashani says: "I rarely watch Fox news or any corporate news for that matter, CNN or others."

Kashani_jAn, that is very obvious that you and many other extremist anti-Iranians rarely watch the news. Additionally in your case from many of your writings it is very obvious that you also rarely read, period.
I am happy to tell you that I watch/read the the American cooperate news, from the very pro Israeli, pro Bush/neocon foxnews to moderate Nation. I also heavily read the articles/books that are written by true Jewish liberals such as George Soros and Syemour Hersh.
Kashani_jAn, ignorance and extremism go hand hand, instead of inflicting so much stress on your keyboard, read some more.
BTW I said these guys (Talibans) are direct product of obsessed foreign interference (mainly by U.S, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) in another country. You quoted me with an spelling error.
Kashani_jAn, take it easy and go visit //,2933,372883,00.html to realize what long lasting damage the right wing Reaganists have done to U.S and the region by creating fascist Talibans ....


OH , I am laughing! What

by Mitra from khuzistan (not verified) on

OH , I am laughing! What does (=)means? Last time I checked , it meant equal. NO !!!!!!!!Fox News and IRI News are all THE SAME. To me, they both represent two extrems that I hate. CONFUSED is the fist name of all the IRI supporters. Down With IRI

Farhad Kashani

Anonym7, what really hurts

by Farhad Kashani on

Anonym7, what really hurts you guy’s argument is how you twist reality and change definitions. How is the Taliban “direct product of obsesses foreign interference” and I’m sure by foreign you mean U.S and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? Do you have the slightest idea about Pakistan’s internal dynamics? Do you know anything about the Pashtoon area in northwest Pakistan and Eastern Afghanistan? How their culture is and how much religious influence have grown since the Islamic revolution in Iran? They, like the Islamists in Iran and inspired by them and in many instances logistically supported by them, have rised to establish an Islamic state. It appears that you’re the one who watches and believes everything that corporate news says, not me! I rarely watch Fox news or any corporate news for that matter, CNN or others. The U.S called them Mujahedeen’s because they were fighting the Soviets, so they had a common enemy. All throughout the history countries and governments from different ideological backgrounds have come together to face a common greater enemy. Examples would be U.S and allies allying with the USSR during WWII against Nazism, and recently, the IRI regime allying with Hamas and AL Qaeda and most of other organized Sunni and shite Islamic fundamentalist groups, against U.S. The U.S didn’t call them Mujahedden so they can smash civilian airplanes into its own building (And please don’t tell me 9/11 is an American right-wing conspiracy!). and as for leaving Iranians alone, just listen to yourself when you ask people that! That would be a treason to our people to leave them alone facing a fascist and war mongering regime like the IRI. That is exactly what the regime wants, for Iranians to be left alone so they can be crushed. You think Shireen Ebadi who spends most of her time trashing the U.S instead of helping Iranians get their rights, will help Iranians get rid of this regime? Iranians outside Iran and International community need to come together to assist Iranians inside Iran who are desperate for help from outside Iranians and the world community against the savage regime. Have you ever heard the expression throw me to the wolves? We’re not gonna throw Iran to those beasts.


If a fraction of your

by Anonymous4today (not verified) on

If a fraction of your conspiracy theories were true things would've looked a lot different in! You have tried to simplify and categorize what is complex and often unfit for categorization. You are basically for regime change in Iran; we get that. You see sanctions and war as one way to achieve what you desire, no matter the cost for ordinary Iranians; we get that too. But your real mischief is trying to label anyone and everyone who disagrees with yourself as members of one of these 3 categories. Grow up. The world is not black and white.


Niloufar jaan

by Anonymous4now on

Your South African analogy to Israel does not hold water.  The world sympathy was with the mistreated blacks in South Africa.  How can the world sympathize with a rag tag band of terrorists who are calling for the destruction of Israel?  You think the world is going to displace one people to replace them by another?  The solution is to tone down on rhetoric and let the wounds heal and let these two peoples coexist. 

 But it is in the interest of the IRI to fan the flames of this animosity to enforce its own ideology and make itself dominant in the region (Look up the arguments on hegemony earlier in this thread).  


It is not up to you or me to decide whether the West will or will not hit Iran.  They will do whatever is in the interest of their nations.  Unfortunately, the IRI is not doing what is in the best interest of Iranians and is antagonizing the West.  As I mentioned before, the IRI believes that the U.S. military is stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and hence cannot attack Iran.  That is a foolish mistake they are making.  First of all the U.S., if and when they decide to attack, will not invade Iran and will destroy the “military might” of the IRI from the air.  The reason they went into Iraq and Afghanistan was to chase Saddam, OBL, Alqaeda, and the Taliban.  The early stages of both wars ware symmetric and the U.S. had a specific mission to accomplish and it did.  The remainder of the wars were asymmetric and undefined.  The fools in Iran have to wake up and realize the differences between the situations.  Second, this war will not be the U.S. vs the IRI but will be multinational in nature and will include more than likely, the NATO countries as well as others.  The delusion of grandeur has blinded the IRI.  They are digging their own graves, deeper.

 As for democracy, state of the economy, progress, and comparison of all that between the two eras, all I can say is that if you have not experienced living in both eras, then we could not possibly come to a conclusion as to how drastic the differences are.    


foxnews=mulla news!!!??? (mitra)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Mitra, you are very confused. foxnews is the most pro Bush , pro republican outlet (CNN is more moderate). Ask any of your friends who live in the U.S. :)


IRI Supporters, over and

by Mitra from khuzistan (not verified) on

IRI Supporters, over and over again show their true colors. Colors of deception. Sabotage is their motto and that is how they have been operating. When Mullahs are their idols, what can we expect from them? That is how much capacity they have! What VATAN? What PEOPLE? Vatanforosh to the MAX.

TU Ke As ghame digaran be ghame nashayad ke namat nahand adami.

Afterall we Iranians are use to traitors like that in our history. But traitors, remember we have strong roots in our homeland and we will always remain Azad in our hearts and minds decpite your efferts to undermine our fight for freedom.

Fox News = Mullahs News = Facist of differnt sort

Down with Mullahs, Wown with IRI


Islamic attack on democracy

by INO (not verified) on

Islamic attack on democracy has been going on for centuries. No government based on a particular ideology could be democratic because it authomatically eliminates a portion of the society (non-believers). This is true not only in IRI, but happened in Nazi Germany, and USSR as well. The historical fact is that no such government will last for ever. This is the foundation of separation of religion and government in the US.

It's easy being intelectuals arguing the issues in hand, but the more important question is: What can we do about it?

I believe it's time for the Iranian immigrants all over the world to start becoming active in their local civic and political societies. We need to live as citizens of our new countries while trying to help the Iranians inside Iran. This is the best way to influence policies regarding IRI. Let's face it, most of us will not return to Iran if there was a regime change today.


Ali you could not had done any better!

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Ali, you said it so brief and well! As we say in Persian "khar hamoon khares, pAlonesh avez shodes" (the donkey is the same donkey, its saddle is changed)


Jahanshah Rashidian and Hossein Shariatmadari

by Ali1234 (not verified) on

I made an interesting discovery! I have noticed that in this article, if you just change the words "Islamic Republic" or "regime" with any such words as "Taghoot", "monarchists", "Monafeghin", "Zionist"...etc it suddenly turns in to a Shariatmadari article and could easily be published in KEYHAN. All the elements of labeling, conspiracy theorizing, paranoia, false accusations and hateful tone are present.

Try it for yourself, it's fun.


a touch of reality for extremists

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Here is a touch of reality for all of you garden variety extremists: //,2933,372883,00.html

Check it out, it is from one of your favorite U.S outlets (foxnews). ... and let me remind you that these guys (Talibans) are direct product of obsessed foreign interference in another country. Let me remind you that this decapitators were once called by U.S media "mojahedeen freedom fighters". Let me remind you that these guys have moved beyond where U.S $ (including my tax money) created the religious "mad-resas" for them. Let me remind you that these "Taliban" fascists are the result of right wing extremist U.S policies....
My extremist/obsessed "opposition", if you have a shred of decency leave the Iranians inside Iran to deal with IRI. Even with best of intention you will end up making things worse not just for Iranians but very likely for everyone else (including your beloved Israelis).
Now go back to admiring each other. (learn from Kashani's expertise in this area).

Niloufar Parsi

Anonymous irani

by Niloufar Parsi on

Thanks for the total dismissal of 'any point' I made :)

Let me explain one thing first: I am not here to knock Iran's achievements at any time in its history. I am just trying to counter some exaggerations that we tend to make as a people. And we really are prone to doing that.

The Ottomans were at first the students and blood brothers of the Persians. In time, they managed to become more powerful on the western front and were very close to taking over Europe. Perhaps it was their power that got the Europeas off their backsides to get going. Once the Europeans did rise, trade routes were altered so drastically that Iran was left impoverished and weak by the early 20th century.

But the Ottomans were on the front line of the struggle against the Europeans and it took a coalition of all the great powers of the time and decades of conflict to bring them to their knees.

This started a very deep and ferocious period of reform under Attaturk. Whatever your views about their politics, a quick look at their education, longevity and health indicators will tell you that they have been ahead of Iran for a long time, even in the seventies under the Shah. They still have a higher per capita income than Iran, and they have achieved all of this without reliance on oil.

As for their political system, I would prefer theirs any day to ours (great football too btw!).

In Iran too the Azeris have been in the forefront of all modern progressive movements, including the Constitutional Revolution. Yet we sit around and make jokes about them!  

I am simply calling for more objectivity when we compare ourselves to others. 


Niloufar Parsi

Bijan jan

by Niloufar Parsi on

It is time for you to have more realistic expectations of me! Thanks for the 'hendooneh', but i find it too heavy :)

The South African state also existed and it did for longer than the Zionist one has so far. And it was removed through international sanctions of a civilian nature: people everywhere stopped buying South African goods in the market, and Apartheid was defeated despite Western government support for it. Nelsom Mandela was called a ' dangerous terrorist' by the Reagan Administration, and the ANC is still listed among the US government's terror organisations. It is true - check it out! 

The minin skirt analogy was quite sound. No matter what the claimed 'provocation' there is no excuse for foreign invasions under any condition other than what is stated under the UN Charter and the Geneva Convention. Are we for the rule of law or are we not?


Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

Thanks for the response. Of course my comments were more direct at the debate than Bijan himself, and there is no point even mentioning 'butting in' in this public forum!

Point 1 (Democracy in Iran):

Your points are valid. Let us look at it this way: when it comes to a comparison of what has been going on under the mullahs and the Shah, it is unjust to scream 'dictator' or 'evil' at one side alone. What I was pointing out was that the same is true for Iran under any regime that lasted for 2 decades or longer in our history. The decade-long period od representative democracy in Iran after WWII was foreign-imposed and fell apart. We still have not internalised the rational of 'democracy', or more simply 'live and let live' in Iran, but we are getting there even under the mullahs. As long as you wear a religious garb in Iran today (both physically and idelogically), there is quite a lot you can do and say. My humble opinion is that if Iran makes peace with the West (or rather, if the West got off its high horse and acted more rationally with Iran). the regime will Have to become more democratic mroe quickly. And btw, there are several satirical papers running in Iran today too, and its elections are more regular and free than under the Shah including at the local level.

Point 2 was also related to point 1 above. So if you agree with the second one, you cannot really be against the first! :)

Point 3: I still don't agree. The IRI knows it is playing wiht fire, and its winning card is not so much its military might (which is there for sure) as well as US military incompetence (which is there in Iraq and Afghanistan for sure) but the fact that the global economy is its hostage.

Point 4: your perspective is so dominated by the Zionist ideology that I will respectfully refrain from arguing with you in this forum that is about Iran other than to say that Zionists colonised Palestine and the Palestinians have every right to struggle for justice against racism and colonialism - same as in South Africa.

Point 5: the West can say what it likes but for as long as it relies on double standards it remains irrelevant. It has no right to talk about 'permitting' Iran. As for stopping Iran's nuclear technology, how exactly have they stopped Iran so far? If anything, they have so far ensured that Iran has had to rely on its own knowledge and know-how to the extent that it can, which makes the current programme in Iran virtually impossible to destroy. You cannot bomb knowledge.

Lat point: you mean the West should repeat their Iraq fiasco in Iran? Are you serious?


Natalia Alvarado-Alvarez

I can not believe it!

by Natalia Alvarado-Alvarez on

I just came to check any comments to me by Robin. I cannot believe the reply made by someone on this thread on the rape scenario.

I think someone has spent too much time on this thread. I suggest that you take a break, Bijan.

I am shocked!!!!


Where is Anonymuos 9,10 ...

by Mitra from khuzistan (not verified) on

Where is Anonymuos 9,10 ... to rescue anonymos 8 and 7 from the Persian gang? Bravo and khasteh nabashid yavarane Iran, and many thanks Bijan, Salar,anonymos 4now , Farhad , Dr. Pouran, Jamshid va ghayre....................


more humiliation? (Bijan)

by Anonym7 (not verified) on

Let me remind you that Israel has been humiliated twice during the past 10 years by Lebanese, last of which (the 2006 defeat) I remember vividly. U.S thugs on the other hand are stuck in Iraq and their self created fascists (Taliban) in Afghanistan/Pakistan are out of control again (U.S is desperately asking the help from other countries) . So on what basis are you making such arrogant statements? Are you following the news?

Farhad Kashani

Anonymos4now, Yes azeez.

by Farhad Kashani on

Anonymos4now, Yes azeez. Exactly. We have to be realistic with a little touch of idealism, not idealistic, with a little touch of realism. The Iranian regime has crushed any opposition movement or voice. Now, with the help of the silent majority waking up and speaking up, and with the help of globalization and the information revolution and the International community support, the Iranian opposition voice is growing. However, on the other hand, the regime is using desperate measures to stay in power, such as intensifying Islamic fundamentalism inspiring and supporting policies, which has resulted in our country, be at the threat of a devastating war. The existence of the Iranian regime has simply become intolerable for Iranians and the world community. They are one of the few, maybe the only, government in the world that its policies has not only been destructive to its own people, but to others as well. We got Myanmar or Zimbabwe for example, that their policies have been only been destructive to their own people, but Iran is different. Iran has become the trouble child of the world. And some Iranians on this site are shamefully proud of that , claiming that Iran is “standing up to Imperialism”, “support Palestinians”, “supporting anti Americanism”, “messing with America”..which offcourse none are true. Iran is not “standing up”, the word “imperialism” could mean anything, it has done great damage to the Palestinian cause, and its anti American policies has made the Iranian people become one of the most pro U.S nations in the world. They don’t even tell us what is the benefit of all this? That’s not who we are. We are not the type of people to destroy our country to satisfy a group of fascists’ self confidence thinking they stood up to the greatest power. What kind of BS is that? We have a group of fascists whom were neglected and isolated during the Pahlavi period who took control of our country and now their taking their frustration and revenge on Iran and the world. There are so many other countries that keep good relations with America, even in the Middle East, but have not lost their sovereignty, for example, Israel. Israel has influence in the U.S Middle East policy, and it actually spies on the U.S. So their argument is baseless and misguided to say the least, if not intentionally and politically and ideologically motivated.

Bijan A M


by Bijan A M on

I have to admit that my reply to Niloufar’s “rape” analogy was in poor taste and I apologize to Niloufar for that.  I found her analogy so misplaced and irrelevant that I responded the way I did. I think you understand my point but trying to twist it to make your point. I can respect that without starting a pointless argument.

 BTW, Do you know a good psychologist that you can recommend?.....





Anonymous Irani

by Anonymous4now on

Thanks for the memories.  I was one of those Iranians, who in the early 70s drive through Turkey on the way to Europe, with my parents.  My father had his Air Force uniform on to save us from being robbed.  You had to be blind not to see the contrast between Iran and Turkey.  I was hard pressed to come up with a city in Iran that was not far more advanced than Ankara, the capital city of Turkey, and I had been to Isfahan, Shiraz, Mashhad, Tabriz, and lived in Kermanshah and Tehran.  Passing through Bulgaria, we stayed at a border town, since by the time we got there the borders were closed.  In the evening, the people lifelessly walked in the streets to pass time, where as in the hotel restaurant, in this classless society, the better half was busy chomping away at steaks in their tuxedos, listening to live chamber music.  Our capitalistic presence, obvious from our clothing, so offended the opponents of bourgeoisie that they asked the waiter to guide us to the roof where the other half of Bulgaria dined.  We had so much fun laughing that we did not have the inclination to be offended. 


As a student in the late 70s, in the U.S., I interacted with many students from the Arab countries, Pakistan, India, and Turkey, and they were all in awe of Iran and its advancements.  The Westerners only had positive views on Iran as an advancing industrious nation.  Unbeknownst to me at the time, the Polish had a keen interest in Iran, because apparently, there is a fairly large population of poles in Iran.  A Polish colleague of mine tells me that in those days they had nothing but admiration for Iran and envied the fact that a country in the Middle East was more advanced than a country in Europe.  In 1978, Iran was in the last stages of being considered as a NATO member, and worldwide Iran enjoyed the respect and admiration of all.


Robert Graham, a Financial Times reporter, who had lived in Iran in the last two years of the Shah’s reign wrote a book, in 1980, called “Illusion of Power”, in which he chronicles all the economic and industrial advancements of Iran in the 70s.  It is a great book to read for those who did not live in that era, as well as serving as a reminder for those who did.        


Iranian democracy and US hypocrisy

by Jalili (not verified) on

this was a topic at Democracy Now. These words by Dilip Hiro were very enlightening. It shows the hypocrisy of the US by selectively calling whatever they want a "democracy". It's a very opportunistic and colonial mentality.

DILIP HIRO: Yes. I think let’s take Egypt. And of course, I heard the press of the country saying Egypt has the first elections in 7000 years. I didn’t know this guy was an Egyptologist. The point is that Egypt had multiparty elections from 1922 to 1952, when there were the military coups. And now Mr. Mubarak has put conditions for individuals to run. I can assure you, Amy, you can actually push through a camel through a needle’s eye than you as a Egyptian citizen can get the 350 signatures of legislators at the local level, provincial level, and the national level. And that—Laura Bush suddenly became an expert on democracy. Now, maybe you should give her a membership, you know, of Democracy Now! She should be an associate of this. What does she know about it?

You know, that’s what Palestinian people forget that the first election of Palestine took place in 1996. And the turnout was 75, Arafat got 87. This time the turnout was less than 50. And if you take all in all Mr. Abbas got only 40. Is it that Mr. Bush and Condi Rice invented democracy for Palestinians? They’ve been at it long before.

As far as Lebanon is concerned, Cedar Revolution, that has been the republic since 1927. They had elections all along, except during, you know, the civil war 15 years. And that again is a very religious division. A quick example, half seats for Christians, half for Muslims. You know, amongst half of them, the Shiites have half of the Muslim seats than the Sunnis have. The Shiites are twice more numerous than Sunnis. But they have the same number of seats as Sunnis have. Now you tell me. That is the kind of basic democracy, which Mr. Bush should be taught to say, ah, elections in Lebanon violate the basics of democracy because for two Shiites you are giving one Sunni vote.

You know, I mean, this—so much of this—basically, what I have always said, it isn’t that Iran is a democracy. What I keep saying is very simply, Iran has what I call a representative government. I don’t say they have multiparty system, you have multiple choices. Even in the case of Mr. Ali Khamenei after the death of Khomeini, Assembly of Experts met up. He only got 60 votes out of 83. One. Secondly, which not even many of us know, that is a major flaw. My book has the information. Would you believe Assembly of Experts actually has a subcommittee, which monitors the performance of the supreme leader? And clearly, they can throw him out. He is not supreme leader for life. He is only for eight years, which is the tenure of Assembly of Experts. So, some of these basic things have to be understood. Constantly, you hear, “unelected leader.” No, he is not unelected, including the C.I.A. website has got it wrong. I hope somebody pick up the phone and tell them to get it right. Khomeini was for life but Ali Khamenei is not for life.



Bijan, you need medical and psychological attention

by Anonymous8 (not verified) on

this is a rapists mentality which you wrote:

This may sound childish, but if you wear a mini-skit, come to me and flash your genital and say I dare you to touch me, then I will question your sanity and judgement. Sorry, but you bear the same responsibility in provoking me to touch you if I ever decided to touch you.

this is what all rapists say. "She made me do it." Who is supposed to decide what is provocation? The laws are clear, you can look but don't touch.

Get some help before you hurt someone or end up in jail.


Farhad Jaan

by Anonymous4now on

My experience matches yours, exactly.  My mother in law just returned from Iran and everywhere she went and everyone she talked to, from the carpet dealer in the Baazaar, to the taxi driver, to the grocery store owner expressed their desire for regime change.  The amazing thing about it, for her, was that people have become so bold in expressing their feelings but, in the lack of an apparent infrastructure for opposition, feel incapable of affecting change.  

My father in law teaches large farm animal surgery in Iran and visits here frequently.  So do some of his professor friends, all of whom talk of the dissatisfaction of the student body, which represents a very large cross section of Iranian society, and their desire for regime change. 

As for the horror stories, all you have to do is read the many books written by those who have experienced the brutality of the regime in its prisons, including ex-paassdaars and revolutionaries.  I can see how some people can be ideological and dogmatic to reject all that is so obvious, because this is exactly what people did in 1979.  You would think that Iranians, after 30 years, have learnt their lesson, and the majority in Iran have, but what is amazing, is that people living in exile, in the comfort of the various affluent and democratic countries of the West are oblivious to the pain and suffering of Iranians, and the systematic looting of Iran.   



by Anonymous irani (not verified) on

You are wrong on almost any point that you make. I only make a brief comment on the second point since detailed rebuttal will repeat a lot of what others have said.

Turkey has been ahead of Iran on most fronts since the Ottoman period.

You don't remember that iranians who were driving thru turkey in the 70s would be advised to minimize number of stops in turkey lest they would be robbed, that turks would through rocks at cars on the roads to force them to stop, that turks would through nails on roads to force cars to stop and then rob them, that police would find an excuse to put in jail unless and until you bribe them handsomely? Did we have any of that in iran?

But that aside, iran in 1979 was competing against 3 countries in particular, turkey, s. korea, and taiwan. Iran's per capita income/GNP was at about the same as s. korea, slightly behind taiwan, and above turkey. BTW, this year's estimated per capita income is estimated to be around $1800 which is almost entirely due to high price of oil; that is four times smaller than what it was in 1979 in adjusted dollars.

Bijan A M

Niloufar-e aziz

by Bijan A M on

I had a lot higher expectations from you. There is no comparison between South Africa’s situation and Israel. I am not debating the apartheid nature of the governments but rather existence of the states. At this cross section in history, Israel’s situation is unique and (in my opinion) has never existed in human history since evolution.

I was also shocked to see your “mini skirt” analogy. This may sound childish, but if you wear a mini-skit, come to me and flash your genital and say I dare you to touch me, then I will question your sanity and judgement. Sorry, but you bear the same responsibility in provoking me to touch you if I ever decided to touch you.


Niloufar Khanoom

by Anonymous4now on

Bijan jaan, I hope you don’t mind me butting in, but I think you owe me one.

“Yet the current regime's 30-year reign has been as democratic as Iran has ever been if you compare with the other regimes with this or longer periods of endurance in Iran's history. We practically invented despotism.”

What do you base this on?  During the Shah’s reign, there were very few things that were forbidden and not on the table to discuss; communism because of the obvious threat it posed,  criticism of or questioning the monarchy (tied to the first since the left was the only organization calling for the abolishment of Monarchy), and participating in armed terrorist activities (again related to the communist sell outs and in sometimes cases Islamists).    Any and all other criticism was allowed and accepted as long as the above criteria were met.  As you know the prime minister of Iran was named Hoveida, and as you know Hoveida means to be visible or to be apparent.  Tofeegh (by hadi khorsandi), a satirical and a very popular publication, would regularly have criticism of the government, ministries and the office of the prime minister himself.  In one issue, that I remember, there was a depiction of a man moving a donkey’s tail to the side, at its derrière, and another telling him not to do it because Hoveida misheh.   Octapus, a TV program made by Parvis Sayyad was a socio politically charged tv program. Mr. Shaaky, and many other TV and radio programs were all critical, of the socio-political system in Iran.  You can hardly call that despotic.  It certainly was not the feeling of the majority to feel oppressed, or under tyranny.   Referendums were held but more at the local levels and more as a practice run, and they proved to be meaningless in 1979 for a people who did not have political maturity.   Above all, progress was positively affecting people’s economical freedom and independence, and for the first time in perhaps 1400 years, Iran had an affluent middle class stratum.  The Shah still believed that the population was not ready and the most expedient way towards progress and a modern Iran in which a democracy could be established was a united front and emphasis on education.  It was with this belief that he, misguidedly, established the one party system.  

In 1953 there was a chance for Iran to begin a serious program for starting to learn and practice democracy but again the immaturity of the population and the sinister motives of the left distracted Mossadegh’s movement so much so that he himself told people that the country was at the verge of falling into communist hands.  You have to remember, Iran had come along way since the days when it was under occupation by the allied forces and the illiterate population of Iran was sheepishly wandering about looking for scarps the allied forces left behind to feed on.  My own father had frequently witnessed Iranians picking up banana peals,  that Americans discarded.   Objectively, you can be critical of the Shah for being slow in moving towards the establishment of a democracy, but he had lived through too much turmoil to believe the population may be ready and not easily manipulated.  This proved to be the case in 1979, when people were fooled and manipulated into believing the propaganda from the left and the religious fundamentalists who had been active since at least the 1940’s in Iran, and assumed that, as they saw it, intellectuals like Shariati and a religious leader like Khomeini would not mislead them, and fell for the biggest deception in their history.

Your second point is correct.  After 30 years of torment, hand in hand with the astonishing advancement of global communications, people have become a lot more educated and advanced politically, and are more mature than they were in 1979.  They will not commit themselves to the same mistake, given the same chance.

Your third point does not apply to Iran.  The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are asymmetrical wars, in which a bunch of nomadic self proclaimed warriors are fighting an organized army that is marked like a sitting duck.  It certainly came as a shock to me that a country like Iraq which I believed to be one of the most advanced Arab countries, was in fact so socially primitive and tribal, that it would turn on itself and go into self destruct mode.  It is becoming more and more apparent that, having realized they have gone into self destruct, Iraqis are now cooperating with each other and are intent on salvaging their country.  In Afghanistan, the majority wants to live a normal life but a rag tag band of thugs wants to take them back into the middle ages, again.  What is so exemplary in that, worthy of your mention?   The case in Iran is completely different.  It is the battle between two organized armies and the U.S. has twice before proven its aerial supremacy on a similar force to that of Iran’s military.  The IRI is misguidedly playing with fire and gambling on the lives of Iranians. 

Your fourth point suffers from asymmetry of logic.  In the South African Apartheid the majority, Black, population was being discriminated against and treated as second class citizens, despite the lack of provocation.  Israel is in an asymmetric war with the various factions and groups who don’t even agree with each other.  Defending a nation against continuous rocket attacks on civilian targets from the Gaza, despite a cease fire agreement, is not exactly equivalent to the South African apartheid situation.  The more apt analogy would be the South African apartheid and the IRI apartheid of the Khodies and naa-khodies.

Your fifth point is plain wrong.  The West will not permit Iran to have a nuclear bomb, under the leadership of the mullah’s.  They have all said it:  France, Italy, Germany, Great Britain, Israel and the U.S.  Knowledge can be withheld by conscientious people and there is precedence for it, in history.   In 1942 Heisenberg realized that by bombarding Uranium atoms with slow neutrons he can cause fission and release atomic energy.  Afraid what Hitler and the Nazi’s would do with the power of the atomic bomb, he withheld the release of that information till after the war.   

I am not sure what your last paragraph is addressing, but if you place IRI as the subject of the paragraph it would make perfect sense.  The International community has an obligation and a duty to stop the rape and pillage of the people of Iran by a marauding rag tag gang with a mentality from the middle ages.