RESPONSE

shushtari, EXACTLY

 And he knew he was dying anyway and should have stayed to face realities for just a few days. Geez , this great server of country was dying anyway but couldn't just stay there. Wow!

 BEYOND  PATHETIC POLITICAL VAIN SUICIDE BEYOND BELIEF!

Anyway, I'm seriously outtahere. It's too debasing. Honestly, I have REAL problems in my life and shouldn't be spending time on has-beens, wannabe's, non-issues  and the pertinent illiterate.

"If they chew you up, they still have to spit you out "

parham...

that's YOUR opinion.....and you're definitely in the minority....other than a bunch of paid goons of the mullahs, who still try to regurgitate the same of BS....no one is buying it....and almost everyone in iran is yearning for those days prior to when these vile murderers took over our country.

I ain't no 'shaholahi', BUT the fact is had the system been left alone, he would have likely died in a year or so, and we could have had a chance at true democray vs. the crap that hit the fan afterwards 

actually, my blood my starts to boil

The audacity!

Tell me, please tell me, apart from one charity spokesperson, married into, what have you done for that country, as public servants, in the past thirty two years?

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE???!!!!???

The audacity of these never-ending attempts of rewriting history!

"If they chew you up, they still have to spit you out "

Btw Bakhtiar absolutely loathed and detested the late Shah. Personally!He had specific political ideologies, but he loathed the Shah and Hoveyda was his friend.

STOP IT. STOP LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ENOUGH , ENOUGH , ENOUGH!

Parham, aka dizzypuppy

Thank you for your posts!!! Your time!

If these people want corrections of the article, for the first one , the police report statement was: death by cocaine and barbiturates overdose.

To the author of this piece:

Should I be holding my breath?

MEDICAL EVIDENCE, please.

CORONER'S INQUEST REPORT

POLICE PATHOLOGY REPORT

PLEASE!

When will you ever learn that transparency and accountability are key?

Actually, I've only posted this post in support of Parham,otherwise this is such a waste of time.

In the REAL world

only a few nutters bother

"If they chew you up, they still have to spit you out "

Mr. Atabi: How does

Mr. Atabi:

How does Shahbanoo feel about this??

Welt am Sonntag / radius

Todays 32nd anniversary of the islamic revolution in Iran hardly gives any reason for celebration. Initially enthusiastically welcomed by many progressive people around the
world  - including the socialist countries and churches - it soon became clear that this revolution brought to the iranian people anything else than freedom from corruption or an end to a totalitarian leadership.
The last 23 years were not only hallmarked by oppression of any free thoughts and violation of human rights, but also by a growing corruptionamong the religouos, political and armed forces. An article by B.Kalnoky and C. Wergin published recently in the german newspaper “Welt am Sonntag” describes the internal battle for economic influence between these ruling forces (Translated version see here).
There is hope, however, that the strength of the people of Iran, their cultural heritage and traditional civil values will overcome the current regime.

//www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article12308394/Wie-Irans-Revolutionswaechter-nach-der-Macht-greifen.html

Where is RP's response on this issue?

When all else fails...

...

You said it Kaveh

They really have no class.

I must admit, part of my

I must admit, part of my sympathies for monarchy lies in the resentment I (or any normal person would) have toward the undignified and vulgar behavior of the "opposition" and Islamists that we have all witnessed for 32+ years. I'd be more disturbed if this undignified vulgar was on my side!

by deev on Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:54 PM PST
What's great is seeing the lackluster readership of your article, despite being an official response from an official mouthpiece it still received less than 1/3 as many readers as my article critical of Pahlavis and half as many people sharing it on Facebook, a true indication of your (and Shahbanu's) reach and popularity which should officially cement your status as "the has beens" in case you didn't know already, see for yourself...

An Iranian's complaint to the remaining Pahlavi Clan:
//iranian.com/main/2011/jan-27

PS: Tell Shahbanu 1978 called wanting the title "Her IMPERIAL Majesty" back, like they say "it's all hat and no cattle" using that title in every other sentence of her website ;)

You know what's great Mr. Atabai?

What's great is seeing the lackluster readership of your article, despite being an official response from an official mouthpiece it still received less than 1/3 as many readers as my article critical of Pahlavis and half as many people sharing it on Facebook, a true indication of your (and Shahbanu's) reach and popularity which should officially cement your status as "the has beens" in case you didn't know already, see for yourself...

An Iranian's complaint to the remaining Pahlavi Clan:
//iranian.com/main/2011/jan-27

PS: Tell Shahbanu 1978 called wanting the title "Her IMPERIAL Majesty" back, like they say "it's all hat and no cattle" using that title in every other sentence of her website ;)

Shemirani

I didn't replace anything with anything else!
But look at it this way. It doesn't matter that much for the sake of the argument that one system is more corrupt than another -- the important is that both are/were corrupt.
I'm not sure I understand the rest of what you're saying.
As for your comment about the Porsche, I think you would have appeared a lot less small-minded if you hadn't made it. Just for your information, I've never been after having a Porsche, otherwise there have been periods where I could have offered myself one, but I didn't.
The stuff one has to tell you shahollahis.

Parham

A system is not an entity by itself working out of blue but the sum of many persons.

being corrupted has nothing to do with your political opinion (your religion ...) there is no link between being corrupted and "shaholahi" or republican or leftist or this or that ... its just because of each person personality:do you have integrity or not , being honest or not, being individualist or not....no matter your political color you can be a dishonest and corrupted person !

the perfect example is that you replaced the pahlavi system by a MUCH MORE CORRUPTED system.Almost all of iranians are guilty of this corruption ! rosht farhangi mikhad ta didghah irania collective bashe na takroh !

I think you are very unfair omidvaram arezzo porsche bar deletoon namanad :)

Shushtari

I'll tell you what the facts are. They're very simple, too:
There was a revolution in our country because we had a corrupt system ruling us.
It doesn't go any further than that, and it's very simple.
Up to you to absorb that after 32 years.

Pas-e-pardeh

Please keep in mind that I'm not pointing out to someone being at a night club, but someone being so out of touch with the reality of his homeland (never mind the fact that he was the son of the Shah, who actually was --at least-- partially responsible for bringing about that reality) in the context of what you were discussing. What I wanted to say was I don't think he gave much of a hoot (at least at that age) about our fate and that made me not care much about his death either, among other reasons. And I don't think Stephen Kinzer was "dancing on" anyone's grave, compared to that.

As for your logic about Mossadegh being stubborn, etc. again, he had won the game but simply got cheated. Nothing in history will justify the dishonesty of the act. If you go, with age, by the reasoning that it was better to side with the powers as a long-term solution, you have simply become corrupt, that's all. It's not the reasoning that has any faults in it.

Dear Parham

 
I should disclaim that I spend years, if not decades, idolizing Mossadegh.  I used to think that if the Shah hadn't "betrayed" his country by helping get rid of Mossadegh, not only we would've won in the fight to Nationalize our oil, but we would've had a functioning democracy as well.  I say this in order to establish the fact that I am not a house-born servant of Pahlavis.  I am not a Shahollahi.  I have grown to appreciate the Pahlavis, just as I have grown to temper my romanticism about Mossadegh.  Mossadegh might have won battles against Western powers, but he lost the war.  He was too stubborn to capitalize on his/our gains and live to fight another day.  As I said earlier Mossadegh was a bad politician because for him it was all or nothing. He had no flexibility.  In a land of poets, we all like to believe David was just about to defeat Goliath.  But, in practice, his policies were doomed.  In my opinion, this is the part where Shah and him parted ways.  Shah took a practical decision, as a politicians, to peel off from the stubborn old man and play ball with great powers.   Opinions vary, but the older I get, the more I appreciate the cautious, long term efforts.

 
Incidently, I had a similar experience as you around 1983. While IRI was executing teenagers by the hundreds every week, I saw Reza Pahlavi at Xenon- a discoteque in Manhattan.  I was so disappointed in him.  LIke you, I said  ""mellat kojayand o inha koja"!  Right there I resolved never to support him.  Today, I think maybe I wasn't fair to him (just like I suspect you may not be fair to Alireza).  For one thing, I forgot the fact that if I saw him having a drink in a discoteque during such dark nights, then I must've been there myself. Duh!  How come it was OK for me to do what I can to escape my Iran pains but not for him?   

I read your comments ms amini

and you have some valid points; however, you have left out some important ones:

-there is ample evidence from books and declassified docs that shah's decision NOT to sign the 25 year extension of the oil consersium's contract with american and british oil companies sparked the outrage of those govts.....in fact, prior to early 1978, most iranians had not even heard of khomeini....

-he may have NOT had overwhelming support, BUT neither did khomeini- how many out of the 35M iranians actually supported the mullahs?? I bet it was less than a few million- and, in fact, even those who were supporting him, were duped by all the BS propaganda- 30000 excecutions, savak burning cinema rex, etc.

so, the point is, that you may think of all these as 'coincidences' or 'conspiracy theories', but it is impossible that an illiterate fool like khomeini had the brain power to topple the shah

THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS STORY THAT YOU MAY WANT TO BELIEVE....those are facts 

Pas-e-pardeh

I know this must have been said quite a few thousand times since 1953, perhaps even more; but since it hits a brick wall every time, here we go again:
Mossadegh didn't lose against the Brits, he actually took them to the UN and won.
Where he lost was where the sovereign of the nation allied himself with the CIA to overthrow him -- thus cheating, if you'd like to compare the whole thing to a game.

Then when it comes to "dancing on a dead man's tomb", I wonder who's guiltier:
In 1984 (or 85), I was a college student in the US and there was a war going on between our country and Iraq. The university where I was studying was full of ROTC/Navy/Marine corps due to its location. One day I overheard one of those navy people talking to a friend of his about a battle in the Iran-Iraq war where 200,000 people had lost their lives recently. That's 200,000 people Alireza and I's age back then from both sides, with a majority of Iranian lives lost. The navy person was telling his friend how he was happy and how that was good for "us" (/them) that so many people had died -- "the less Iranians, the better."

Of course overhearing that conversation appalled me and I decided to write an article in the school's newspaper about how shocking it was to hear such a thing. I'll cut the story short, the article was censored and never published in the paper, much to my dismay.

Now why I brought up this story: Around the same time, perhaps a few weeks later, Esquire magazine printed a story about Alireza Pahlavi organizing a car race at Princeton for he and his friends, for which he had bought each of his friends a Porsche!

When I read that article, the only reaction I could have was "mellat kojayand o inha koja"!

I had nothing against Alireza when he was alive, but let me tell you, I didn't feel anything much when I heard of his suicide either; this, despite the fact that we were schoolmates and he had always seemed a nice boy to me. Contrary to Mr. Kinzer, I didn't think his death was a "tragedy" of any kind. To me, he was yet another casualty, among so many others, of his father's doings (some might use the word "cowardice"). That's all.

Those are the same doings that if you and people like you didn't spend so much time denying all this time (including Reza Pahlavi and Farah Diba), and instead tried to accept, perhaps might have led to so many more people being alive, including Alireza, among others.

Mr. Kadivar

Again, my logo doesn't change the fact that the Pahlavi children killed themselves in vain, so I kindly ask you one more time to provide proof of any charity work in which Alireza or Leila were involved with instead of wasting our time on some obscure book regarding a 2000 years old Griffin and calling me a stooge, yes I'm a stooge with enough strength to battle the life your weak beloved royals couldn't battle against, and of course since you can't argue with that bitter truth you need to resort to name calling and going off tangent on the history of my avatar.

How could we believe  the

How could we believe  the CIA account of the coup in 1953 on their own manufactured coup?? Do you think CIA tells you the truth?

All of sudden the CIA has become our gospel??? why?   

I don't trust the CIA?? Do you?                                 

The truth lies somewhere in the middle after gatheing information from variety of sources who don't have a vested interest in shaping their own narrative.

             The Truth is like a broken mirror and everyone holding a piece of that mirror believes he/she is holding the Truth.                   

The Great Satan Myth

//www.tnr.com/article/world/the-great-satan-myth

Abbas Milani on his new book "The Shah"

//www.amazon.com/Shah-Abbas-Milani/dp/1403971935

Review of the book

There are so many revelations that are so well documented that one has to slow down and completely reorientate his or her conception of and attitude toward recent history. His tone is neither particularly vindictive nor is it conspiratorial. It looks at people and events and provides plausible motives and methods that are not part of the conventional awareness. For example, (fact) the British navy decided in the late 19th century to change their primary fuel source from coal to oil, thereby (objective) needing to secure access to oil reserves, basically in perpetuity. (result) British agreements for oil resources with the Sheikh of Kuwait date from 1899. (fact) Oil then comes to supplant coal as the primary energy source for all of the industrializing world, and a decade later Germany threatens to become the leading industrialized nation in Europe and (objective) needs a secure source of oil, so they begin construction on the Berlin to Baghdad railway intending to capitalize on agreements to import Iraqi oil. (question) How does Britain meet this emerging geopolitical threat. (objective) Block Germany's access to Middle East oil. (result) Curiously WWI begins with an out-of-the-way assassination in Croatia that just happens to occur near the route of that railway. War ensues and not only is the B-to-B railway cut off, but Germany loses all colonial power in the Middle East.""

Dear Ms. Amini

Your defense of Mossadegh, Kinzer (and yourself) is too sympathetic, and your attacks against the Shah, Mr. Atabai (and monarchists) is too harsh to represent a balanced view.

Regarding Mr. Kinzer: you conveniently equated Kinzer's past work and travels as his defense in this case, and the main reason he is correct.  It is not so.  His opinions are not just "constructive criticism" as you claim either.  There is an advocacy in his writings that casts a tall shadow on his scholarship. What he wrote on January 6th, less than two days after the prince's death, was disgraceful.  Knowledge without honor and respect is useless.  Kinzer danced on another man's son's grave.  Please do not excuse his depravity.

 
Regarding Mr. Atabai: Your admonishing Mr. Atabai "to read a bit of real history" is patronizing and utterly rude.  What you mean by "real" history- what you really want him to do, is to read what you read, and to believe what you believe, it sounds like.  

Mr. Atabai has been a witness to history up-close and personal for decades. He has heard many things he believes were unfair and untrue. Yet, he has kept quiet all these years with admirable dignity. Now, he is replying to an attack on a human family during the first days of having lost a dear one.   Again, he is doing it out of honor and respect, something anti-Shahis dearly need to learn about, and practice.

Regarding Mossadegh: Of course he was patriotic and incorruptible.  But, he was a bad politician.  His popularity, which went straight to his head at times, came from the same source Khomeini's popularity came from: from slapping the face of a giant power and making the humbled people of a proud country feel good about themselves without regards to consequences.  He put his foot down and said he would not deal with the British under any circumstances.  Just like Khomeini put his foot down and said he would conquer Jerusalem through Baghdad.  They both failed.  They both drank- and made their own people drink, the "cup of poison" in the end.  They were bad politicians who didn't get results.  Blame nobody else except their own individual egos and stubbornness. This is the real lesson of history in Mossadegh (and Khomeini's) case. 

 
Regarding the Shah: Of course he had his faults.  His family and followers admit it. But if you gave him a fraction of the sympathy that you give Mossadegh, you will admit that he and his father were also patriots who worked tirelessly for their country.  and they accomplished a lot in a complex society under constant and severe  foreign meddling.  Disagree with him, but don't go after his family if you wish to have credibility.  

 
I repeat what I wrote in one my earlier posts here: that if Mossadegh and Shah were both alive today, they would not spare a second arguing and would unite to save Iran from this tragedy.  That's what they would focus on. They would both realize that it was their inability to tolerate each other that paved the way for a Khomeini.  It's enough! We- Shahis and Mossadeghis, i.e., conservatives and liberals,  must unite and tolerate each other if we want to see a better Iran.  Mossadegh brought the culture of intolerance to liberalism, and Shah reacted by not tolerating liberals thereafter.  We all lost.   

Thank you Fariba Amini & Shemirani

who educated us (Me) about facts of our history.  The rest of these people are very confused and do not want to hear the factual event in our contemporary history.

conspiracy theories

I do not disagree that outside powers have an interest in Iran or for that matter in other countries and at times shape their future, but to conclude that it is the Briitsh, or the Americans, or the Russians or the BBC that topples or brings a government to power is a bit far fetched. 

What are we ?  Are we just a bunch of sheep?   Why not take some responsiblity sometimes?  

FA

A Question of

"Rumours, exaggerated claims by the leaders of the Islamic revolution and a disinformation campaign against the fallen monarchy, not to mention Western media reports that the imperial regime was guilty of "mass murders", has finally been challenged by a former researcher at the Martyrs Foundation (Bonyad Shahid). The findings by Emad al-Din Baghi, now a respected historian, has caused a stir in the Islamic republic for it boldly questions the true number of casualties suffered by the anti-Shah movement between 1963 and 1979.

In the aftermath of the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, ordered the creation of the Martyrs Foundation with the sole purpose of identifying the names of the so-called "martyrs" and provide financial support for their families as well as those who had sustained injuries in the fierce street battles with royalist troops. The necessary funds were immediately raised from the assets seized from the high officials in the Shah's regime, many of whom had been executed after summary trials. ...""

//www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.php

The Great Satan Myth

//www.tnr.com/article/world/the-great-satan-myth

Abbas Milani on his new book "The Shah"

//www.amazon.com/Shah-Abbas-Milani/dp/1403971935

Mr. Kinser: Have you ever

Mr. Kinser: Have you ever read the book by William Engdhal?
"A century of War"

.A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order [Paperback

//www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-Politics-World/dp/074532309X

"In November 1978, President Carter named the Bilderberg group's George Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special White House Iran task force under the National Security Council's Brzezinski.  Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the fundamentalistic Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini.  Robert Bowie from the CIA was one of the lead 'case officers' in the new CIA-led coup against the man their covert actions had placed into power 25 years earlier.

The coup against the Shah, like that against Mossadegh in 1953, was run by British and American intelligence, with the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public 'credit' for getting rid of the 'corrupt' Shah, while the British characteristically remained safely in the background.  During 1978, negotiations were under way between the Shah's government and British Petroleum for renewal of the 25-year old extraction agreement.  By October 1978, the talks had collapsed over a British 'offer' which demanded exclusive rights to Iran's future oil output, while refusing to guarantee purchase of the oil.  With their dependence on British-controlled export apparently at an end, Iran appeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy for the first time since 1953, with eager prospective buyers in Germany, France, Japan and elsewhere.  In its lead editorial that September, Iran's Kayhan International stated: .... London was blackmailing and putting enormous economic pressure on the Shah's regime by refusing to buy Iranian oil production, taking only 3 million or so barrels daily of an agreed minimum of 5 million barrels per day.  This imposed dramatic revenue pressures on Iran, which provided the context in which religious discontent against the Shah could be fanned by trained agitators deployed by British and U.S. intelligence.  In addition, strikes among oil workers at this critical juncture crippled Iranian oil production. As Iran's domestic economic troubles grew, American 'security' advisers to the Shah's Savak secret police implemented a policy of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.  At the same time, the Carter administration cynically began protesting abuses of 'human rights' under the Shah. British Petroleum reportedly began to organize capital flight out of Iran, through its strong influence in Iran's financial and banking community.  The British Broadcasting Corporation's Persian-language broadcasts, with dozens of Persian-speaking BBC 'correspondents' sent into even the smallest village, drummed up hysteria against the Shah.  The BBC gave Ayatollah Khomeini a full propaganda platform inside Iran during this time.  The British government-owned broadcasting organization refused to give the Shah's government an equal chance to reply.  Repeated personal appeals from the Shah to the BBC yielded no result.  Anglo-American intelligence was committed to toppling the Shah.  The Shah fled in January, and by February 1979, Khomeini had been flown into Tehran to proclaim the establishment of his repressive theocratic state to replace the Shah's government.  Reflecting on his downfall months later, shortly before his death, the Shah noted from exile, 

I did not know it then - perhaps I did not want to know - but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out.  Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted ... What was I to make of the Administration's sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? ... Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.[1][1]...the rest below:

 //www.payvand.com/news/06/mar/1090.html 

The author is still alive and his website is below. Check him out. 

//www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/

An argument never to be resolved-- reply to Mr. Atabai

I believe S. Kinzer's response to Mr. Atabai is balanced and shows maturity of a reporter and journalist who has covered decades of war in Bosnia, Nicaragua, Sudan and parts of Africa. He was the NY Times bureau chief in Turkey for years and has written numerous books on not just Iran but many other troubled areas.

I wonder how many people in this blog who make comments have dared taken the risk of going to these places, reporting with accuracy about tragedies that take place all around us.

I, as Stephen’s friend, told him that his article was not timely nor did I agree with its contents fully. However, in our culture and within our community, constructive criticism is not one of our fortes. We use slanderous comments and we make someone either a div or a fereshteh... There is something very wrong with our glorious culture.

On some historical facts:

The Shah was not a ruthless dictator but he was a dictator. There was no freedom of expression, the liberty to write and the right to assemble. The Majlis was full of Baleh Ghorbans and corruption was rampant, endorsed by the Shah himself. The "royal family" had their hands in every pot and pie. There was no democracy and books were censored even the most elementary books on social issues and questions. In fact, it is accurate to say that if the Shah's regime had allowed Khomeini's books such as Hokumat e Islami and Kashvel Asrar to be printed and distributed widely, and ordinary people had the chance to read the Lataelat, we would be in a different situation.

Nevertheless, the Shah made contributions to the society and advanced Iran economically though unfortunately always looking up and at Western powers especially the United States for advice, even until the last moments before leaving Iran.

The Shah did not stand by his elected PM when it was time to do so. He actually left hoping not to even return to Iran. Kim Roosevelt, Donald Wilbur, Robin Zahener and dozens of other agents, Iranians and foreigners, the likes of Shaban Bee mokh and the thugs around him, Kashani and his son, and all the rest made it possible.

The Shah did not have the massive or popular support as Mr. Atabai claims. Where and when? Show us the facts, not heresy.

The Shah let his twin sister dictate to him. (She interfered in all matters of State) or his long time confidante, Perron, the son of a swims gardener who was utterly corrupt.

The Shah let his brothers and sisters and his entourages live in their own world which was not the world of most Iranians.

The Shah became too engulfed in himself, even while sitting in front of
Farah Pahlavi in a TV interview; he said that women have achieved nothing
in this world. Or do we forget Mr. Atabai?

The Shah put his PM on trial for “TREASON,” an old man who had defended Iran, who had been targeted by the British, by the Americans, by agents, right and left, by the reactionary Mullahs, by the Tudeh Party, by all the corrupt and dishonest Iranians who betrayed their own country.

Few years after the coup d'etat or as your royalists say, Ghiam Melli, Ashraf Pahlavi was caught in Orly airport with 800,000 French Francs after being searched by the French customs while she had declared that she had only 10,000 FF allowed at the time. (this is just one example). (report from the French Foreign Ministry to the Embassy in Tehran)

Mosaddeq allowed free press in his short tenure and when they told him that papers were writing against him, he said, “That is the meaning of free press.”

Mosaddeq was incorruptible and uncorrupt. He lived a simple life in his place of exile ; even while there and in captivity, never being allowed to leave his house, surrounded by soldiers and Savak agents, he taught the villagers how to read and write ( brought teachers from Talleghan) with his own money. Interested in agriculture, saw that they would be informed on the details of farming.

Mosaddeq defended Iran at the UN and at the Hague against the mightiest empire and stood his grounds to save the most precious resource of Iran for the Iranian people.

But the forces of right and left did not want to see him continue with his agenda of democracy.

Mr. Atabai, read a bit of real history not the distorted one which were presented in the books of the Shah's times.

The Shah loved his homeland, no doubt, but unfortunately made many grave mistakes and at the end paid for them.

My father asked the Shah through an intermediary to burry Mosaddeq next to the martyrs of 30 Tir as he had requested in his will; the Shah refused.

The sad part is that the Shah and his father before him died outside of Iran's soil and Mosaddeq was left to rest in his home in Ahmad Abad and his beloved Iran.

Today, we are all suffering because of past mistakes.... but when a tragedy befalls a family, it does not matter whether they are a pauper or a king; it is terribly sad and heartbreaking.

FYI: Mosaddeq’s beloved daughter, Khadijeh, was a little girl when Reza Shah sent his guards in the middle of the night to take Mosaddeq and imprison him in a remote place. She could not embrace him before he was taken away. She loved her father and after that incident, she never recuperated. She never saw him again and died a lonely life in a sanitarium in Switzerland.

Oh Yeah ? Well then Get your Myths Right ...

Funny to see all you Anti Royalists like Norooz, Irandokht, Immortal Guard and other Jomhurykhah stooges use Royal Symbols and avatars to highlight your so called Nationalism but ignore or pretend to ignore their significance in our collective memory ... 

HISTORY OF IDEAS: Georges Dumezil, on Indo European languages and Myths (Apostrophes,1984)

"Like the fabled Phoenix, after 1700 years or so the Simurgh or Mythological Persian griffin will set itself on fire and become reborn from the ashes. It may be seen with copper-colored feathers. It is a messenger and sign of the divine, fertility and purification. It  alights on a person to indicate god’s approval of that person to be king and the representation of the divine on earth ..."

I have no problem with people who don't like or understand the concept of Royalty ... But then don't try and define something your clearly don't understand !

Genuine Irandokht Responds

GIVE ME BACK MY COUNTRY: Bold Poem by a fellow compatriot denounces Ahmadinejad's Iran

Words For Eternity ...

Mr. Kadivar

My sister-in-law cries for sappy movies yet that doesn't make my brother and I emotionally sensitive does it?


Miss Yasmin, whom I'm sure was brought up by lovely kind parents, happens to be a spokesperson for a charity, now can you kindly provide a charity in which Alireza or Leila were involved?


How is it that Leila's attempt at modeling for Valentino is public knowledge yet no public service record of any kind?


As for my logo, Griffin is a mythical animal, didn't know monarchy had a trademark on all myths, it's always funny to see how people resort to unrelated tangents when they can't argue with truth, my avatar doesn't change the fact that Pahlavi children killed themselves in vane.

Thank you

.....

To my comptriots Some of you blamed the Pahlavi's for his autocratic regime but you also blamed him for the choice you made after he left, when you brought an ayatollah! It"s very strange

where are your responsability ? its all shah's fault ???? making a revolution its not a kid game,its an adult decision ...when all went wrong there must be reasons and responsabilities. Come on now its too easy and childish to blame the king for all your troubles.

Be honest and fair with yourself and with the next generation. You rejected the King because your hates... ok fair enough ....BUT YOU CHOOSED A MOLLA as a successor.

isn't because your extrimaly religious believes...this" horrible" king tryed his best to make an secular Iran but you rejected. baradaran o khaharan mojahed o hezbolah  were opposed to an secular system, can we denied it too ?

An other factor explaining the mistake:at that time communist countries were the ideal to follow in lots of  youngs, they were all facinated by K.Marx theory ...thats why when the king sent iranians to study aboard many of them get illuminated by east propaganda but none of them deeply study about the consequences of such a system.

All this caused our lost ! to make progress we have to admit our errors first.

To non iranians :( like kinzer or galloway....)You have just one obsession in mind: using Iran oil's money for palestine, insulting the pahlavi for you its just a tool. your aim is to be sure mullahs keep their power in iran and  there is no other alternative for iranians and you keep stealing iranian national tresors !

kassani ke ghasde inaro nemibinand:khoob sargarmetoon kardand be hamvatane khodetoon  koli bado birah begid , por az nefrat o doroog o kineh ghezavat konid, rah baz bezarid pool naft kharje felestin o somali beshe !! "shaholahia" doshmane joonand ina adam hessabiand,dame hamatoon garm  :D