Amir Parviz for secular monarchy

LOL can you imagine how that would sound

in an American Accent, they already can't say Iran

Re: How do you like this phase/platform

Iranshahr: just as it once was under the Sassanids. You may add the kingdom to it if you want.

How do you like this phase/platform

For A United Kingdom of Iran

or

For A United Kingdom of Persia

which one? any alternatives?

VPK, Irony is for "the 1979 Mistake" to have been possible

the way that it happened at the hands of the people, implies that many freedoms did have to exist in 1970's Iran.  Like an increasing possibility to enhance your life, like the possibility to change your self and your view, like the possibilty to defend your reputation/dignity/character and freedom, like the possibility to create value, today these have all been diminished/supressed. Some say we can reform all this, I say "reform my ass" will be a hit song in Iran. LOL. Followed by Khameneii's favourite "democracy my ass". : ) he.he,he,he,he

Irony is that the choices made by people was based on coercion, manipulation and deceit not free and fair choices based on logic and done with a high degree of responsibility/making sure people had real accurate and non gossip info.  Because it happened this way, we may not have gained much from it too, thats irony after all the suffering for nothinging

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

You got to have a starting position and mine is similar to you. Plant the seed of reuniting Iran. This will be an alternative to the breakup pushed by Neocon. Give people an option: a powerful united Iran or weak divided.

Without any other ideas people are going to go for whatever is pushed. Remember thigs move much faster now than in the past. Thanks to the information highways ideas don't require 60 years to brew. 

My idea of a Greater Iran is based on what is good for people. Obviously we need support and that means China. They are the most likely nation to go for this. Because they felt the pain of division first hand. I would gladly give them a good deal on oil for territory. China is totally amoral and only cares about its interests. A Greater Iran will provide it with a market alternative to the West. Europe on the other hand is the worst enemy of Iran. USA is somewhere in between.

VPK regarding the important verdict of history on this matter

We know 100% of the time, such policies create fatal blows for those engaged in pursuing these idea's.  We also know that the fatal blows are never from the weak powers that are the victims of these policies, "kotackeshro as dasteh por zoorah mikhoran".  We also know that the incubation period in the past is long, it usually takes from 40 to 75 years to be fatal.  So sadly we may not see a free iran in our time, but at somepoint we know that balance will be re-established from these historical forces.

VPK Policy was wrong on 3 levels for the USA

1)  They are all competitors of each other, so they can't build a lasting alliance, not after 33 years, not ever, the oil is the key for all of them.  So betraying the shah was an unthinkable mistake in light of the fact that he was a friend and their alternative with him was sustainable.

2) History of causes of industrial age colonial turmoil, ww1, & ww2 teaches us that imperialism, militarism, extreme unbalanced political forces (either fundamentalism or nationalism) & mutual defense alliance is the root cause of huge unsustainable disasters for those benefiting  the short term.  Where is the british empire now, where are the tzsars of russia, where is Holland now, where is spain, where is turkey, the austo-hungarians?????????  Each power that went this route got painfully wiped out.  The combo of these 4 factors are deadly eventually and not sustainable no matter how big you are at one point in time.  This mistake was based not on shah's pride, but on carters hubris, not realizing that the USA is not invincible.

3) The IRI clerics are not a containable bunch, no one can change the mind of brainwashed people, not today not ever.

And we have people on this site who think the shah made mistakes LOL , NONE of the fundamental errors were his, like you said with Iranians like we have, either blamers and pahlavi haters, they are like a relgious movement actually and to me it's scary, but funny too.  I feel lke I'm walking around in a horror movie and laughing nervously.

Anglophile, good link.

where do you dig this stuff up from?  No worries, they can do what they want with the evidence and we will put up the truth scanned.

Regarding Shah

The Irony of it is that if people really beleived he was sick they may have just waited it out. Many people were willing to give Reza Pahlavi a chance to take over. Then RP would have had a clean slate and a chance to restart.

Of course there are some people who hated Pahlavi no matter what. I met a person in America who hates RP because of his father. I got in a big argument with this person who claims to be a "democrat". I said "How could you blame a man for his father?". They said "He is a Pahlavi and therefore a criminal". This is the kind of idiots we had to deal with. They got the nerve to claim to be "democrats" but blame a man for is father. Anyway the whole frigging Western policy is in shambles.

They have lost the one friend they had "Pahlavis". Now they try to scrounge up support among Muslim Brotherhood and Karzai! All due to a bunch of wrong headed policies of Jimmy Carter and his operatives. 

What to do now,

I got some very seriously valuable information, that my sources told me about what the usa knows about its research of iranians within iran and the problem it causes them.

They have conducted studies of peoples views and realize that the most supported and popular political desire for Irans clergy and irans non clergy is having a constitutional monarchy.  This puts the competing powers in a big dilemma.  When change happens in Iran (which they have been doing everything to avoid, if each power USA, UK, EU, Russia, China does not unite on backing a leader other than the monarchy, then they will Lose to the one that betrays the pack and supports monarchists, because on the ground and in realty they are the strongest.

So if USA, UK, EU, Russia support a pro-republic populist and China backs constitutional monarchists, in this scenario all will lose to china.

If USA, EU, Russia, China on the other hand support a pro-republic populist and the UK backs constitutional monarchists, all of the will lose to the UK.

This means based on the reality on the ground there are big divisions and complexities and it is only the USA that fears the mention of the idea of a constitutional monarchy for Iran.  None of them want a true democracy for Iran that has protections against them interfering in politics via using/creating corruptible yet populist candidates of the people, because this would create unity among Iranians in a way that serves Iranians to meet their needs.  Their fear of a constitutional monarchy is that by its nature without being involved in political parties or governance, it can be a force to counteract corruption and foreign manipulation of politicians.

The US goal therefore is an easily pliable system like India, but they have not been able to get the other 4 powers on their side for certain.  So this leaves the US with only one last option and that is to create internal divisions and in the name of people in various regions getting their dream of democracy to divide them up.  But for now, they can't even do that as to do that they need 2 other allies, either Russia/china or UK/EU(nato). And none of them can be coerced/arm twisted on this vital to survival issue.

We really can't do anything at this stage, but help create unity among ourselves and develop consensus.

For example, no bombing Iran, No Religion in government, no to supporting mek, restoring pahlavi era oil contracts, cancelling the horrible deal with china by mullahs, standing up for Irans former territories and its right to 50% of caspian sea rights, requesting referendums in former territories, bahrain, kuwait, iraq, afghanistan, tajik, uzbek, turkemen, azari, armenian, georgian on a united kingdom of Iran etc.  Is it realistic?  No, not at our level of strength and mind power within Iran, but they are still important positions to express.  In realty we can't influence any of these in our position or in the future iran we get a hold of. 

I don't know about after he left Iran,

cancer causes depression, depression causes sleepless nights and smoking/unhealthy behaviors so it is not impossible at a later date.

But people that were around him knew he hated the smell of smoke (his personal protocot was, people that saw him not smoke in his presence, wash their hands and not wear strong perfumes or colognes).

I am not saying it is imposible for them all to have gotten cancer at the same time naturally, I just want people to be informed of how probable it could be to happen at the same time, the likely hood for that to occur would be 125,000,000,000,000,000 if the natural occurence of for 1 person is 1 in 500,000 people. 

Every part of it is known by some as I said, who did it, where, when, how etc, the reason is because the secret services of the big powers are all enemies of each other based on their national interests.  It is them that gave rise to this issue.  I have no information except gossip myself.

What can we do??????? Not a damn thing, except to keep people aware and mindful that when the world misinforms our public with lies, they are leaving out alot of the truth to be diplomatic and be able to continue on the path they are on with out any one knowing their motives or policy in practice.

VPK this is a VERY IMPORTANT AND CURRENT ISSUE, its why if you google

Avoiding issue of shah's odium aided his downfall david owen

you will see an article that is currently important and based on lies to concel present policy of

militarism imperialism and fundamentalism

Is this your idea of Islamic scholarship JK?

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

I am basing the smoking thing on things my father told me. In 1979 Shah used to stay up all night pacing and smoking. Maybe he took up smkoing due to stress. Anyway it does not matter. 

I think there is a good chance he was deliberately made sick. Reza Pahlavi made the charges himself. I don't know because it is hard to prove. In any case here we are and what do we do.

VPK not true, Shah did not smoke at all.

Neither did Alam or Dr smoke, these I know with 100% Certainty.

Hey, Show The Goods

I don't care what any of you think of me - particularly when you don't even have the courage to use your real names.

But let's see the book, so I can show it to experts who will evaluate it.

Let's see if any of you are any good at anything except the usual bullshitting.

Responses

• Dear friends I am telling you talking to JK is a waste of time. I refuse to respond to this person and suggest you also refuse. This poster has no interest but getting people angry and spamming blogs.
• Regarding cancer there are many ways to induce it. There is a list of things a long as a book. You may get it from any medical site; US or California governments. But Shah was a heavy smoker so maybe it was smoking.

Tabarzin I agree with you, from what I heard about him listening

alone to the radio and hearing of friends being murdered (calling it executions) and their children and wives crying with them over the phone it's got to be an unimaginable level of sorrow.  I feel he had to do it though, being a good student of history and keeping in mind the lessons of history

knowing that freedom to choose was not his to take away even if people were deceived.

Knowing that mutual defense alliances, US Imperialism, Militarism. & fundamentalism.  Would all in the long run cause greater devestation to the countries that imposed these.  Looking to cause deep division among those competing for Irans resources rather than take them all on united together like a pact of wolves against Iran.

He died of grief...

He had the cancer, but I tend to believe that the grief over events and the manner in which he and his family were treated was the direct factor for his passing. And you know what, if I were him, I'd want to go...

And as for the subject of the blog: 1979 was a mistake, no ifs and or buts about it.

LOL maziar 58, google it googooli

cool now that you lost your temper and showed us your idiotic
skills and manner;I'm not going to tell you which Iranian bookstore in
maryland can get it for you and ship it to your texas address.

put your key board in your bed and go to sleep.

LOL so funny : )

he was like a drill instructor, I was thinking, yes captain I'm ready for National Service, What ever you say Sir.  LOL

Vildemose I was looking into his physician Dr Abdul Karim Ayadi

And saw a site where others were discussing the same thing we are talking about.

//www.aryamehr.org/eng/murder/1.htm

I could not find when he died, says one place 1980, also says their blood cancer could be given while taking a blood sample test.

Shah passed July 1980

those that know, know every detail, who, what, where, how etc.

The key articles I read in the media are as if made to fool their own people and us too.  That if only the west had known shah had cancer, for some reason things would have turned out dfferently, because they would have then chosen for some reason to miraculously support the 18 y.o. king and a reagent.

Thats bs and even I know why they say that,

to fool people of what their #1 goal was and is today, to support fundamentalists and mek types for the purpose of making iran weak and sending it backards.  The shah fought his entire life, inch by inch, against them directly to create progress and economic policies they fully opposed for iranians. For now you and I and others kowing this does no good.  Big oil calls the shots of US foreign policy for oil exporting egypt, tunisia, libya and syria and their power is too much for us.

 Thank you Amirparviz for

 Thank you Amirparviz for the info. It's worthwhile to investigate this allegation to further substantiate the highly elaborate plot concocted by the outside forces.

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt

Don't know when each was diagnosed for real

personal physician and speaker of parliament

when they say shah was diagnosed in 1973 I don't know if its true or not either

also what stage cancer was at in each when they died, I'm not a doctor.  So Bahmani can be happy I won't sign any of my articles doctor. LOL

I know cancer was in the air for those 4 guys.

On Alam

"Asadollah Alam was diagnosed with cancer in late 1960s. He was never told of the nature of his illness and was only informed about an 'imbalance' of blood cells in his body. In 1977, his illness worsened and he had to resign his post as the minister of court. He died in 1978, a few months before the revolution in Iran.

Alam, the Shah's best friend, wrote about every detail of his life for the last ten years of his reign. These memoirs were posthumously published several years after Alam's death. Because of the level of its detail, this book is probably the greatest source of information about the life and deeds of the Shah. Alam admired the Shah greatly and his writing is therefore not impartial, but at least he expresses the Shah's perception of the national and international politics accurately. This results in the closest possible look at the way the Shah thought and how he made his decisions.

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asadollah_Alam

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt

Jahankhalili I may be confused in your post below

"We're talking about a book. 

I have been googling it for about seven years now, and there is no example anywhere of a fully photographed or scanned book.

Why do I have to keep repeating myself? Duh."

Are you saying the book never existed or just that you have had problems getting your hands on an original copy?

I know we can get a copy, I'm just worried you are going to dispute sections of it and say that they could have been changed to suit an agenda.  That we are being fooled by iranians.

vildemouse its dangerous to discuss this crap

seriously, the source for the info started I think with people around RP and went through the grapevine, the technology was different to the type of cancer the russians used to kill their former spy that moved to the UK, because it took years to work.  The case is famous //www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490007/Rev...

It is guessed they too were poisoned not injected at one location togehter.

OK amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Let's see what you can do.

I'll be waiting to see what comes of it. 

You Don't Have To Ship It Anywhere

Just scan the damned thing.

... page by page.

High resolution. 

Then post it here. 

That's not so hard to do, is it? 

I respect your sincerity, I will get you the book

You are right we should put scanned copies up online. Not PDF

you will have to stay tuned for a response from david icke gimme 2 days to work on him, but you can email half.com and ask them to find it for you I would do that.  I think the original original is in arabic, not farsi I may be wrong.

//search.half.ebay.com/khomeini-tahrir-al-was...

 what kind of carcinogenic

 what kind of carcinogenic might manifest such a deadly disease? The individuals you mentioned must have been exposed to the same agent, no??

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt