REVOLUTION

A big thank you

I don't think there is anything more satisfying than this. We managed to resolve problems which is a greate thing. I wish you were here we could drink to that.

I hear people say how great Bakhtiar was, how mdern and open minded  Reza Pahlavi is, how modern and outward looking this or that Green, Secular or left wing organisation is.

My answer is ok, fantastic. Let see if supporters of Bakhtiar live up to the legacy. Let's see Reza Pahlavi's openmindedness in practice. That obviously means they have to operate in a democratic way. Let's see if others really mean what they say and if their cliam is true too. Let's see if they listen to members, if they allow members to take part in a day to day decision making of their organisations. Are they accountable to their members? Do they have a website like iranian.com to allow members to debate issues and resolve problems. They are rich enough to have such a website and have enough resources to have live debates with their members. If they do please I would like to know. I would like to join their organisation tomorrow. If not then it makes me wonder if their claim is at all true.

Check them out.

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

I agree

Dear ahoseini

I agree with you 100%

It seems that most of us (including me) still have a long way to go in order to master the art of debate and negotiation.

But as long as we are able to look back at our conducts and learn from our errors there remains to be hope for us.

In the end this would be the best outcome we could hope for from these debates

Dear Aryobarzan - I conclude by saying

Dear Aryobarzan

I conclude by saying that we have more in agreement with each other than with the likes of Mirfetros.  Perhaps we should be careful in the way we present ourself. It looks as we have the same points of views and yet we have been arguing against each other. I think we should be careful in the future.

You thought all along that I was against his right to express himself while I presume you would agree that it has been a misunderstanding.

Two things are very close to my heart.

1. I am 100% against military action and I am prepared to risk my livelihood for that.

2. For the Iranian people to decide what system of government they want  and I am  for one person one vote. Mirfetros's story in here is a just a crazy story and a complete pack of lies. If he was so much influenced by the Shah's speech then why did he associate himself with the left for years. I know people who know him very well.   

I personally believe we should go further than just voting once every four years. I think we need to have a proper monitoring system whereby the representatives are controlled and accountable at all times. The big financial lobbies are a major disaster in Western democracy and have created chaos. I think we need to be aware of that and find a sensible way of stopping them from imposing certain individuals on us. How we are going to that is a subject that we should discuss. 

I feel very sorry for the likes of Mirfetros. He was a very popular writer amongst intellectuals, particularly amongst the left. He has ruined his reputation by making these statements.

Right now China and Russia are firmly behind the IRR. The world of West have their own individuals and groups too and are very active in trying to impose a so called coalition of left to right on Iranian people. The Iranian people must try to find a way of finding their own true representatives. In my view accountibility and taking turns is the only way to test our true representatives.

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

Dear ahoseini

I think the fundamental difference between us is that you believe in all or noting.

Which means that I should either support every thing a person says or disagree and with condemn all their opinions on all subjects.

But I do not see it as to be that simple. I might be in utter disagreement with anyone in one or many subjects. I may be even angry with their past conducts and want an explanation or at least an apology, however when they are right about one point then they are right about that one point and I can not deny it and that would be mostly for the sake of my own integrity rather than shift of position.

And that is what is happening here with regards to Nori Ala Mirfetroos or even yourself.

This argument started by you accusing me of being in favour of military attack on Iran. Some thing that I totally and utterly deny and even gave you my reasons for it.

I disagree with military attack because as I stated that would damage our national interest. I did not say this in order to please you or anyone else anyone or because I was scared. I said it because I believed in it

With regards to your argument with Mirfetroos I thought the personal attack or ridicule was unnecessary. When we are right then we know we are right and all we need to do is to put forward our argument. There is no need for ridicule or insult.

And anyway the argument in this article was about the error of 1979 and they way those who participated in that error are dealing with it now or how they use Mosaddegh as a shield to hide behind him and avoid accepting their own responsibility.

Anyway,I think that by now you should know where I stand on democracy freedom of speech and the way to deal with those we are in disagreement with

But in the end it is up to you to believe it or not

Dear ahoseini

Aren't we just hair picking here, instead of discussing what matters most

From what I read even the last time we argued we were mostly in agreement.

But we can hardly conclude that we follow each other or we are ach other’s idol.

Of course if anyone makes a valuable point I have to agree with that point and that would be for the sake of truth and not because I agree to everything they say or because I worship and blindly follow the man or side with them in every single issue.

I thought that is the Meaning off democracy and fairness for all.

As I told you before I am on the side of the truth. It does not matter for me who says that truth as long as I believe it to be the truth I will defend it unless it is proven otherwise.

That is far from siding with or defending the ideology of anybody including Nori Ala as I do not know enough about the man to even be a follower let alone worshipping him as an idol.

If I agree with one or two points that you or Nori Ala or anyone else says that will not in any way mean that I am agreeing with them in any other subject. Furthermore that would not mean that I have either forgotten or forgiven their errors.

Defending someone’s right to state their mind in a democratic way is very different to siding with or even agreeing with them.

I thought that did not need any saying as you and I should already know that.

P.S. please read the rest of my previus posting as I am interested to know your input (but  please note that you are not my idol lol)

Dear Aryobarzan, please see your comments about ...

 Here is your comment (your comments are enclosed in curley{} brackets)

{You see? You are doing it again.  

Just in your last posting you stated. “Your friend and idol, Nori Ala was a stunch supporter of Khomaini.” “You are siding with him and you are apologetic of this man”.

Now! how do you know that this guy is my idol or even my friend, how do you know if I agree with any his points of view let alone siding with him.

Have you ever seen any posting by me to support what he says.

Did you even bother to read my last posting where I clearly stated: If anything I am more than anyone else angry with likes of Noori Ala, Banisadr, Ibrahim Yazdi and ... }

Howevr, please see your comments here and don't tell me you did not support Nori Ala when he was campiagning to become the leader of all secular opposition groups. It is very clear that you were supporting his campaign. It is not my fault if you keep changing your mind.

{"With regards to calling for military attack to Iran of course I CONDEMN any one including Mirfetroos who makes such idiotic request. But my obligation to democracy demands that I respect his right to say it. " }

We are not arguing about freedom of expression in here. I am challenging Mirfetros's view about military attack  on Iran. He has every right to express his opinion. But we say he is very irrisponsible for making such a statement. We don't deny his right to express himself but we have the right to challenge it. on the contrary he and Khoie deny our right to challenge him. He calls us "Saeed Emami" and "Reswani" and denys anyone challenging his awful view.

I take it as if there is a bit of misunderstanding.

{That was why I told you to condemn and attack the idea and NOT the man. }

This is what I have been doing all the time. I don't know anything about his personal life. I have been challenging his support for dictatorship of the Shah and his support for military action. By the way he telling lies when he said he was changed when he heared the Shah's speech in 1354. He should have worked with Saltanat Talaban and not the left. He was working very closely with the publication of Pishgam (Fedaee supporters student organisation)

{"Furthermore I did not accuse you to be an IRI agent but I could not help to notice that the way you are dealing with people you do not agree with has and IRI signature. " }

You are wrong in here. I have a sharp tongue but not politically incorrect. I am a bit harsh with those who ask for military attack and deny people to have the right to vote for who they want.

 You see, I go beyond just havin the right to vote every 4/5 years. This is my slogan:

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

Dear ahoseini

You see? You are doing it again.

Just in your last posting you stated.  “Your friend and idol, Nori Ala was a stunch supporter of Khomaini.”   “You are siding with him and you are apologetic of this man”. 

Now! how do you know that this guy is my idol or even my friend, how do you know if I agree with any his points of view let alone siding with him.

Have you ever seen any posting by me to support what he says.  Did you even bother to read my last posting where I clearly stated:   If anything I am more than anyone else angry with likes of Noori Ala, Banisadr, Ibrahim Yazdi and  other so called “intellectuals” who arrogantly let us to the disaster that is IRI by blindly supporting and following Khomeini without knowing who he was what we was standing for or even listening to what he was saying.   Although I have my suspicions to why they did so, as I explained in my previous articles. But that is another story for another day.   To find out more on where I stand with regards to these people, please read a few of my past articles here is a couple of good ones . 

//iranian.com/main/2012/jan/whose-closet-are-you-hiding

//iranian.com/main/2011/nov/if-we-really-want-it

  With regards to calling for military attack to Iran of course I CONDEMN any one including Mirfetroos who makes such idiotic request.   But my obligation to democracy demands that I respect his right to say it. 

“Although I utterly disagree with what you are saying, I will give my life for you to be able to say it”

And that is the essence of democracy. 

Just remember that all the dictators started with suppressing those who were the least popular and went on to tighten their grip on the society from there on.

As it was stated artin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power.

“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

That is why in order to protect freedom of speech we are obliged to protect everyone’s freedom including and especially of those with whom I am in utter disagreement.  

I do not have the luxury of picking and choosing whose right to free speech to protect and whose right to ignore. And I would like to think that when it comes to that point we would all do the same thing for each other as in the end that would be the only way we can protect our own right.

All I can and will do is to point him to the flaws in his argument (as I did several times in my previous articles). 

What I am against is making personal attacks and insulting the person because we do not agree to their view, however crazy or stupid we might think that idea is. As to my experience these things always start with insults and end with a bullet.

That was why I told you to condemn and attack the idea and NOT the man.   With regards to my argument with Aynak I was addressing what Mirfetroos raised in this article (Mosaddegh affair and its relation to 1357 disaster or how it is used by these people to waver their responsibility for their error of judjment and the disaster that followed) and Aynak’s counter argument to that.   Now Mirfetroos might have made some false claims or advocated a few stupid ideas (like military attack against Iran) in his previous articles which have noting to do with our current discussion.   If Aynak wants to bring those subjects up purely to score irrelevant points then that is up to him to do so, but I prefer to stick to the subject at hand.  

Furthermore I did not accuse you to be an IRI agent but I could not help to notice that the way you are dealing with people you do not agree with has and IRI signature.

Now this might be just a bad habit or and unwanted side effect that IRI have had on all of us (including yours truely) but by not acknowledging it will not go away.  

With regards to regime change of course it would be in the hand of Iranian people. But that will not relief us from our obligations and duties.  Furthermore at the end all of us have a personal point of view on IRI and its leaders. I was just interested to know where you stand

Dear Areyo Barzan

Most of these arguments are between older people. I am guessing in their 40's and up. We also got a number of younger people who got schooled under IRI. Therefore what we are seeing is not the result of today's schooling.

This is why the revolution turned out such a joke. Nobody was interested in different ideas. They said "Democracy" but they meant "my way". Then when it became time for working togehter they started fighting. You see it here for yourself.

Not one group will accept any criticism of their beleif. I have given up on this group. They will be praising and writing articles about their Gods forever. They ruined Iran just to have their revenge. Now sit on the ashes and have learned nothing.

Dear Aryobarzan

There is no justification for the accusations you have made here.

Why don't you make reference to the actual paragraph when you want to answer any of the points. You have the habit of talking about everything and anything when you want to argue against a point of view.

I went through some sequence of events when I argued that you were for military attack. I really hope you are not. It is my wish that no one shares Mirfetros's view. Please refer to my words or Aynak when you want to argue with us. I don't know you, VK or Mirfetros. How can I make personal attacks. We are only dealing with views as expressed in here.

Mirfetros goes as far as calling anyone who is against his dreadful views as "Saeed Emamai" and "Rezvani" who were notorious murderers

If you were against military attack why didn't you criticise Mirfetros in the firist place. This is a very important issue. Why don't you condemn him when he accuse us of being the same as "Saeed Emami" and "Rezwani.

Why do you assume that I or anyone in my camp as those who supported Khomaini. I for one took part in Ayandegan demonstration couple of months after the revolution. Your friend and idol, Nori Ala was a stunch supporter of Khomaini. You were actively involved in promoting him as the leader of Iranian opposition whe he lunched his article.

You are siding with him and you are apologetic of this man.

As for regime change, I thought it was a silly question. Look at the first paragraph in my list of comments. The answer is very clear. Who other than people of Iran have the right to choose what system they want and who to choose as their leaders.

VK says we in IC have managed to resolve many of the problems. Who are we to decide what is right or what is wrong on behalf of the whole nation. We can express our own view and that is the best we can do. IC is privately owned and the owner decides who the members are and how to arrange contents. For example he decided to remove the translation of the anti-war article signed by activists in Iran from my blog. He owns the website and there is nothing I can do. I am thankful for what I am allowed to publish.

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

Dear VPK

Thank you for your understanding and for the wise advice. It is always very assuring to hear an intelligent voice amongst the background of insane noises

I do agree with you that unfortunately as most of us have bias points of view, we will not recognize a non bias view even if it hits us right on the forehead.

The problem is that as you can see here most of us are sore losers and every time we loose an argument we resort to insult baseless accusation and unfair unfounded presumption about the person on the other side.

As you can see this was exactly what happened here. Just because our friend ahosseini could not come up with a good counter argument he accused me of being in favour of imposing a war on Iran and his analogy was that just because I came up with a reasonable counter argument against Aynak or other participant of the 1979 mayhem, using Mosaddegh to skip any responsibility for their cock up or because I believe in freedom of speech for every one including and especially for those with whom I am in utter disagreement then I must be in favour of war.

I do not know what school do these people learn their method of analysis and argument in. But it leaves a lot to be desired.

As you see I specifically asked our friend about his position on getting rid of the IRI and gave him more than 36 hours to come beck to me, but he has not yet cleared his position on regime change in Iran and to me that looks a bit iffy.

Furthermore in spite of my suggestion to attack the point of view and not the man behind it, again he started on personal attack on Mr Mirfetroos instead of addressing his argument.

To me that is the violation of the most fundamental rule of Democracy. Now I hope that I am wrong but to me and many like me such behaviour has a distinct signature and that is the IRI

Thank you and all the best

ارى ارى - شاه ميخواهد جهان

"پس از انتشار «سهند» ،من در سالگرد جنبش دانشجوئی 16 آذر در دانشگاه تبریز دستگیر و به عنوان «سرباز صفر» به جهرم و سپس به جیرُفت تبعیدشدم. در جیرُفت بود که – بار ِدیگر- دستگیر و روانهء زندان کرمان گردیدم (1352). در کرمان، امّا، بقول شاهرخ مسکوب: «زندان، مرا آزاد کرد» زیرا به همّت سرگرد «داداش زاده» (رئیس زندان کرمان) در فراهم کردن امکانات مطالعاتی، من از بسیاری دگم های سیاسی-ایدئولوژیک، آزاد شده بودم، «من که می خواستم جهان را تغییر دهم، اینک جهان، مرا تغییر داده بود!»(2). سخنرانی تُند شاه در سال 1351/1973 خطاب به شرکت های نفتی و ضرورت تسلط ایران بر منابع نفتی و... چهرهء دیگری از شاه برایم تصویر کرد که با تصویر حزب توده، جبههء ملّی و دیگر مخالفان سُنّتی ِشاه، تفاوت داشت(3)."

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

Aryo points taken

You may agree with a person on an issue but not on another. The assumption of all or nothing got us here. That is how Khomeini got "all". But some people will use this tactic to score points to "win" pointless victories. 

Now as usual I see insults and personal attacks. We are never going to see unbiased views and if we did how do we know? Maybe it is our bias that makes us not see it. Therefore we are not going to get 100% agreement. Best we get is a majority.

OH Please Sir!

Just read my posting  again and this time carefully

I am not supporting any one here. What I am looking for and analysing in here is the truth about our past an our history.

If anything, I am holding all these opinionated so called “intellectuals” to count for what they have said and done in the past and I thought that is quiet different to following them blindly.

I am holding them to count for the errors that lead us to the current dire situation.

I may agree with one or two point that you or Mirfetroos or others have said about our errors of past or present. But that does not in any way mean that I blindly agree to what ever they say and all their position.

The subject of my argument so far, has been responsibility, accountability and facing up to ones role in creating for the current mess.  

What I am against is making escape goats of some people and shifting all the blame to them, or on the other hand making a  false idol of others, beyond any criticism and then hiding behind them just to avoid facing  up our own errors and  our responsibilities for those errors.

My argument all along has been about getting to the bottom of these matters and exposing the truth.

What I want is for us to put away any Ta-assob in favour or against any ideology, party or individual and assess their actions and achievement purely on the merit of those actions. But what I am against is using these people to promote ones own agenda by manipulating or just partially referring to the truth.

What I am for is uncovering and accepting the truth the whole truth and noting but the truth as I believe that would be our only way to salvation.

I can assure you one hundred percent that I am way passed advocating a particular ideology or rallying behind an individual or a political group. I know very well that none of these people or ideologies is complete and practical on its own and in isolation but they have all got some elements of the truth right and that is why we need the collaboration of all Iranians from all walks of life and from all political background, if we are to come out of the current mess in one piece.

That is why I am an advocate of democracy.

However I know that Democracy will not be possible unless each and every one of us can express our mind without fear of retaliation, repression or manipulation.

Today if we are really serous about reform and democracy we first need to face up to our demons of the past by scrutinizing our every action and accepting our errors without any excuses or B.S.

But that does not mean that in order to be patriotic I need to disagree with all that Mr Mirfetroos says or agree with all you or Aynak say.  

There are many points that I might be in agreement with you and Aynak against Mr Mirfetroos (like his position on military attack against Iran) but on the other hand I may agree with many points he makes on those who participated in the mayhem of 1979 without knowing whom they are following and into what direction.

If we are not able to look back at our self and our past with a non bias eye and fairly asses our errors then I am afraid there would be no hope for us after all.

And that is what I am advocating here

P.S. I do not like yours or Aynak’s personal attacks on Mr Mirfetroos.

If you have got something against the message he is promoting then by all mean come up with a counter argument just as I have.

But shooting the messenger by baseless accusations and character assassinations leaves one to wonder if you or the organization  you are promoting is really in favour of democracy or just want your own version of dictatorship?

I would also like to know your position on regime change in Iran (of course in the hands of Iranian people) and getting rid of IRI for good by putting all the heads of IRI and Revolutionary Guards on trial

I welcome your position, if you are against military attack

Howerver

Let's look at the sequence of events.

1. Mirfetros write an article inviting US to attack certain strategic positions.

2. Some strongly condemn this nonsense.

3. Khoie, Nori Ala and others deny the right of anyone opposing Mirfetros and accusing critiques of being the agents of Islamic regime.

4. You have been supporting these guys all along.

How do you expect me to think otherwise.  

Our friend Aynak make some sensible comments, particularly against Mirfetros's position on war. You have given a page condemning him for things he has not even referred to. If we read history we want to learn from it. We can not change what had happened in the past. What conclusion we make is important. You have been apologetic of those who are in favour of military attack. For example, If supporters of Bakhtiar claim he was a true democrat. I don't believe it but I say, if that is the case then you shoud follow his legacy. But, they do right the opposite. Some claim Reza Pahlavi is a true democrat. When I ask, does he ever consult his sopporters when he makes decisions. The answer is always no. Well, what do I say to such a claim? It just makes me wonder what their definition of democracy is. Then it becomes apparent that we are talking about two completly different definitions, strategies and tactics. They have money and means and we don't. We need to overcome this problem.

However, I have no intention of condemning you if you change your mind and join our camp and campaign for democracy, a democracy that goes far beyond the type exercised by Wall Street and City of London and what certain leaders try to deliver.  You are most welcome if you do so.

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

What gave you that impression?

Dear AHoseini

What did I say to give you the impression that I am in favour of military attack to my beloved Iran.

In fact on the contrary.

I am and have always been very much against any military attack against Iran as I believe that the only looser of such attack would be Iranian people.

A military attack will diminish our power in Persian Gulf and  hence will empower our enemies to the south, who have for along time been  longing to change the name of Persian Gulf and steal the tree islands of Tonbe-Bozorg, Tonb-Koochack and Aboo-moosa..

A military attack will embolden America’s grip on the region and deteriorate our control over Hormoz Straight.

Most importantly a military attack will make IRI and its allies more focus and will empower them by forcing them to put aside their inner fights and unite for survival. It also will invoke the patriotic feelings of Iranian people and make them to rally behind IRI (as the Iraq war as a perfect example). Furthermore a war will give the IRI a new license to crush any opposition with a fatal force and hence will put off regime change for another 15 years.

Now! I do not understand what gave you that Idea that I of all people am in favour of Ajnaby army attacking my home land.

That goes against all my principals of self determination and my unshakable belief in personal and national responsibility for Iranian people.

Please read a few my previous articles. I am and have always been against military attack.

I still do not understand what gave you that idea.

If in any of my past article I said something to give that impression then I will apologize to you and all the Iranians totally and unreservedly as that was never my intention..

But still I do not understand.

What gave you the idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????

نه چین میخوایم و نه روس - نه امریکای دیوس

بیانیه کنشگران سیاسی، اجتماعی، مدنی و فرهنگی داخل ایران پیرامون خطر حمله نظامی به ایران

ماهیت ذاتی جنبش مردم ایران در چند سال اخیر بر این اصل اساسی استوار بوده است که مردم درون ایران خواستار آن هستند تا سرنوشت خودشان را با دستان خود و در صحنه‌ی عینی مبارزه تعیین کنند. آن‌ها نمی‌خواهند هیچ قدرت داخلی و خارجی‌ قیم‌شان باشد و برای آنان و به جای آنان تصمیم بگیرد. در نتیجه هرگونه دخالت خارجی خصوصاً از جنس نظامی‌اش با این ماهیت در تضاد بنیادین قرار دارد. تمام کسانی که به هر نام و در هر جایگاهی برای بمب افکن‌های ناتو و آمریکا کف و سوت بکشند دیگر در کنار مردم ایران جایگاهی نخواهند داشت و باید به صراحت به آنان گفت خط شما از خطِ منافع مردم جدا گشته است. آژیرهای قرمز جنگ را تنها کسانی به صدا در می‌آورند که می‌دانند در آینده‌ای که مردم ایران، بعد از پروسه‌ی مبارزاتی‌شان و به توان و نیروی خود خواهند ساخت، هیچ جایگاهی نخواهند داشت. آری. تنها کسانی از جنگ استقبال می‌کنند که به قدرت مردم برای تغییر سرنوشت خویش امیدی ندارند و حیات خود را در “بحران آفرینی” جستجو می‌کنند.

سئوال از آریو برزن: آیا ما باید تاوان اشتباهات مصدق, بنی صدر, جبهه ملی, حزب توده و اکثریت, و حتی رفقا و همفکمران خود شما  نوری علا و خویی را از طریق  تایید حمله نظامی بپردازیم؟

چند کلمه با میرفطروس

Believe in a democracy that leaders and representatives are controlled by members at all times.

Dear Aynak

I believe again you are falling into the trap of picking and choosing what serves the purpose of your argument from the writings by Mr MirFetroos and conveniently discarding the “inconvenient” rest.

This is and has for a long time been the fundamental problem with us and our method of analysis.

If you read the article again you can see that the author puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of the so called “intellectuals”, (people like Banisadr) for blindly following Khomeini to hell that is IRI (an not back yet) without knowing or even worse without paying attention to who he was, what was his mentality, what we was saying and what was his final purpose. The example he produced on the question asked by Nafalachi from Khomeini and the answer (or Maas-maali) produced by Mr Banisadr is a perfect scenario.

Now! If these so called “intellectual” want to regain the trust of our nation or even to be taken half seriously, they then need to live up to their responsibility by first acknowledging and then apologizing for such drastic mistake and error of judgment.

Furthermore trying to use Dr Mosaddegh as a shield, and to hide behind him in order to deny or skip admitting ones error of judgment and responsibility for the disaster of 1979, current mess or the shortcomings in their strategy, not only does not give them any credibility but it will also discredit Mosaddegh, who he was and what he did or what he stood for, in the eyes of our new generation.

Just remember the young people today have not been there at the time of Dr Mosaddegh and have limited access to credible sources of information about the affairs of that era.

However the arrogant behaviour of the Mosaddeg-ollahis and their attempt to skip their own responsibility for the mess they created by backing Khomeini in 1357, by hiding behind the events of 1330, only serves the enemies of Mosaddegh by discrediting and demising him in the eyes of the new generation.

Just remember that not every one thinks of Mosaddegh as a God. Furthermore, trying to portray him that way only backfires into ones own face.

It is as important for us know about and learn from his errors as it is important to acknowledge and admire his services to this country. This would be the only way that we can get a fair and complete portray of the man and the events of the time.

At the end of they day we do not want Mosaddegh just for worshipping. We want him to serve as a role model and for a role model it is as important if not even more important to know about their errors and the way they dealt with those errors to put them right. Denying those errors does not make them go away. We are living in the era of information and for those who want to know they will always get to the bottom of these cases. That is why it is better and more credible for you and I to acknowledge those errors and try to draw lessons from them rather than leaving it to the other side to analyse as they wish.

This why I prefer to think of Mosaddegh as an ordinary patriot Iranian who did some extraordinary things, like nationalization of oil industry, and for that I will always feel a debt of gratitude towards him.

But on the other hand I could never overlook his errors either and that would be for the reason of keeping his integrity and my sanity intact.

Errors like exceeding his constitutional powers by closing the doors of Majles Shoraa-ye Melli and unlawfully calling for fresh elections. That was a fundamental violation of the constitution at the time (separation of Ghovaa-ee Segaaneh). The very constitution to which he took a debt of oath.

Or errors like getting into bed with Toodeh party. A party that according to its own manifesto was aiming to turn Iran into the 16th republic of The Soviet Union. This was an error of judgment and an act that went against the feeling and mindset of every Iranian (Muslim or nationalist alike).

No one has any problem with or trying to deny a grate service like oil nationalization by him. In fact on the contrary we are all proud and grateful for it.

However when reforms turned into regime change and when collaboration with Toodeh Party turned into close relationship with the Soviet Embassy it Tehran, to an extend that toward the end he was not even agreeing to see Shah without first consulting with and approval of Soviet Embassy in Tehran (Answer to History) was the mistake that sealed his fait and to a long state empowered his enemies.  

If Mosaddegh wanted a regime change and a change of system to republic then no one had any problem with it as long as he sould  have campaigned for what he believed it when he was not yet appointed to the job of Mashrooteh Prime Minister or he should have resigned from that post before perusing that goal (although he denies being a republican in several occasions including in his letters to Shah). However while in the post of prime minister, he should have stayed truth to the oath he took.

There is no denial that by nationalizing the oil he made several enemies on the foreign oil companies and in the end it was their conspiracy that brought him down, but it was primarily his subsequent error of judgment that in the end changed the balance in the favor of his rivals and lead to the 28 Mordaad.

But does it mean that we are claiming that the 28 Mordaad codetta was not an error of judgment by those who participated and supported it? Does it mean that we do not agree to the fact that the Western Oil Cartels wanted to get rid of Mosaddegh because of oil Nationalization?

Does it mean that we are denying his services to this country?

Of course NOT!

What I am saying here however, is that I for one am sick and tired of creating false idols and turning ordinary men and women to saints they are not. I am tired of putting people above criticism and then hiding behind them to avoid facing the responsibilities for our own cock-ups.

And I am tired of hearing the same old tune of: It was not our fault

P.S. the last two sentences at the end of your posting is contradictory.

If we really want democracy and not our own version of “democracy” then we have to accept and respect people’s choice even if it goes against our personal preference that would mean if they want a constitutional monarchy they will get a constitutional monarchy.

We can argue with them we can try to change their mind we can point them into errors in their judgment but what we absolutely could not and should not do would be to impose our will upon them by limiting their choice

people who forget history

New World Order has tons of support from elites (1%) of the world, people of all the countries are more or less slaves/ peasants.

people being for war just makes the elite's agenda legitimate, think twice. or ... you know what you are doing?...

they use the brutality nevertheless everywhere in the world. a little more, every day. first others are enemy, then you are the enemy. think a little bit more! 

the fact that Ahmadinejad has satanic gestures in front of people, shared with Pope, all the US presidents, or Europian authorities does not make it desirable. they share a secrete far more complex than slave/peasant's mind! they like to think. a new world with one religion, elite's religion. kind of like Orwels "1984". 

Aynak, Great analysis of Mr. Mirfetroos article

Thanks for your response and analysis of this gentelman.  You have great insight & vision to see things through. 

مغز که نباشد جان درعذاب است

میرفطروس:" در کرمان، امّا، بقول شاهرخ مسکوب: «زندان، مرا آزاد کرد» زیرا به همّت سرگرد «داداش زاده» (رئیس زندان کرمان) در فراهم کردن امکانات مطالعاتی، من از بسیاری دگم های سیاسی-ایدئولوژیک، آزاد شده بودم، «من که می خواستم جهان را تغییر دهم، اینک جهان، مرا تغییر داده بود!"»

خوب جالب است که ما در مورد برخی مجرمین غیر سیاسی (که  در زبان عامیانه به اشرار معروفند )  شنیده بودیم که زندان بقولی "آادمشان"  می کند.   ولی هر چه حکومت اسلامی(بخوان جلاد  های اوین لاجوردی و شریعتمداری)   - و قبل از آن حکومت شاه(بخوان همین پرویز ثابتی اخیرا مدافع حقوق بشر شده)  - به افرادی که پس از زندان  و شکنجه و خدا می داند چه کار های دیگر " نظرشان تغییر یافته " و بقول این نظام --توابین-- ادعا می کردند که اینها با "اختیار خود" نظر عوض کرده اند، ما فکر می کردیم دروغ می گویند.     با تشکر از جناب میرفطروس - که برای درک واقیعت و حقیقت که به زعم ایشان لابد  هماند" حقانیت حکومت پهلوی بود"، نه با  تحقیق  و کوشش ایشان برای دریافت حقیقت -  بلکه با همت یک سرگرد!؟؟! " در فراهم کردن امکانات مطالعاتی "  موجب شد که شما بلاخره حقیقت را ببینید؟   میرفطروس محترم، آیا لحظه ای فکر کرده ای که اگر ذهن و فکر تو به خودی خود توانایی این را نداشت که بقول خودت " آزادت کند" و سرگرد اطلاعاتی در کرمان چنین کرد، (با کشیده یا بدون کشیده اش رو نگفتی) بلکه این اشکال از شیوه  فکری توست؟   بدون رو در بایستی -- شاید آنقدر که فکر میکنی با هوش نیستی؟     حالا بگذریم از این صحبت شما که نتیجه آن لابد این است که باید تمام افراد مخالف را در تبعید و در زندان توسط  سرهنگ اطلاعاتی  آدم کرد؟    آخر شما قدری حتی کوچک در مورد نوشته خود  و تبعات آن فکر می کنی؟   

میرفطروس:"با چنان تحوّل فکری و سیاسی بود که در آستانهء 1357، «انقلاب اسلامی» هیچگاه برای من جذبه و جلوه ای نداشت چرا که تاریخ اجتماعی ایران به من می گفت: توفانی که فرا می رسد، از «صحاری عربستان» است و رنگ ِخون و جنون و تازیانه و تازیان دارد."

آقای  میرفطروس-این صحبت های نژاد پرستانه مزخرف را دیگر  از کدام سیلی خوردن یاد گرفتی؟   مسئول انقلاب به بیراهه رفته  ۵۷ ملت ایران هستند نه عربستان و تازیان.   اگر با  اولین و ابتدایی ترین اصول و روش تجزیه و تحلیل آشنا بودید، قدری فکر می کردید لااقل سعی در بررسی روش --یاد گیری خودتان- میکردید که فقط در زندان شکوفا میشود.   ما  خواستیم بفهمیم حاصل این همه زحمات و پزوهش های شما چرا بیش از یک دکترای قلابی افتخار که آن هم به همان سادگی /یا دلیل که داده شد پس گرفته شد- نشد، حالا با این فرمایشات شما دیگر دنبال  دلیل نباید  گشت.     از قضا این نوشته شما مرا خیلی بیشتر با روش تحیلی شما که خواهان حمله نظامی به ایران لابد برای حل مشکلات است آشنا کرد, طبق تحلیل شما:    اگر سیلی  سرگرد محترم ارتش شما را آدم کرد، حتما حمله نظامی به ایران[2] -- ایرانیان را آدم خواهد کرد؟   مغز که نباشد جان درعذاب  است
[۱] //encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Interna...

۲]چرا حملهء نظامی به رژیم ایران!؟

//iranian.com/main/2011/nov-8

ایران برای همه ایرانیان
رای ایرانیان - دولت ایرانیان
نه ولایت وقیح نه پادشاه سفیه

Mr. Mirfetoos, Thanks for

sharing painful memory of this barbaric, backwarded Anghalab Nab e Mohamadi which has taken so many lives from Iranians especialy our greatest IRanians. 

Dawn with IRR/IRI