Anonymouse

Proof is in the pudding yes. How one person "wants" to behave.

When you open up your comment by going straight to being vile, then there are only few choices left in response. 

Who has more "Pahlavi oghdeh"? Someone who can't take a joke and see in between and blame everyone for everything or those who are able to take a joke?

If there was a magic wand that allowed only 2 choices, Khamanei or Prince chubby as 2 supreme leader "candidates" to choose from, I'd choose Prince chubby.  Now if the magic wand gave me more than 2 choices ... 

Everything is sacred.

there's a lot of bluster here...

but the proof is in the pudding... people who hate the Pahlavis have an ax to grind... dating back to the '70's...which is sad... hatred will destroy you... they did many good things for Iran and some bad things as well...

It's not all or nothing, which is what some of you make it seem like...

but you can't call someone an 'A-hole' and then act all self-righteous and call them 'vile.'

people need to be more civil, but there's a pot-meet-the-kettle element at play here as well.

just my two bits.

Royal resume

Attending quite a few European royal weddings, sending his mother to the funeral of Yves saint-Laurent, wearing a green wristband, and watching, then repeating, FOX and CNN are among his highest achievements.

Parsal you give monarchy a bad name.

You brought up mammad reza, badbakht! Who said oil was one dollar and then three dollar?  My blog is about prince chubby and it is clear. It is about his lack of any accomplishment.  Do you know any accomplishment for him?  List them.

All these people have commented.  None are vile like you.  None!  Not even the 2 or 3 who have your monarchy view.  You think you are better than everyone else so you blame them too, yet no accomplishment (subject of this blog) by prince chubby metioned by you.

So go ahead, cry all you want! 

Everything is sacred.

My hermaphrodite

Dictatorship of the Pahlavis was abolished by one  mighty and, purely national revolution. There is absolutely neither a chance nor a need to entertain the farce idea of the restoration of that disgustingly corrupt family. This handful Pahlavist-Chalabists, who are desperately and, most predictably abusing this site as Reza's propaganda platform are well aware of Pahlavis' shelf life long expired. It's only matter of time before they will publicly admit it; then "we" will be gracious enough not to reject these poor royal orphans. I promise.          

The Pahlavis, all mullahs, and all public figures associated with the Green Movement  must disclose the source and the amount of their wealth/income.

Hamsade Ghadimi

I'm sorry if I was rude to you earlier, I was obviously wrong about your motivations. Insofar as ensuring that a future referendum is free and fair, I don't know what to say to alleviate your concerns, other than to say that it must be supervised by the United Nations. In 1979, there was no UN supervision whatsoever, and the hezbollahis used extreme fear tactics to manipulate people to vote "YES" to an Islamic Republic, not to mention the recent purges of the Shah's generals only a couple of months earlier.

Besides, after the IRI, we're going to have to choose, as a nation, which type of democracy we want, ala France or ala England? If you want the future government to truly represent the will of the entire nation, how else are you going to gauge the people's desire other than through a UN supervised referendum?

And you write, "the pahlavis, in my opinion, made it a fertile environment for the evil seed of these islamists to grow."

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to your opinion, but let me tell you this: the Shah and his father could've followed in the footsteps of the lazy and corrupt Qajars and rested in their palaces and expanded their harams and Reza Pahlavi would be king today. But the Shah and his father tried to massively change the status quo. They tried to awaken the masses who had been intentionally put to sleep by the mullahs (to dream about Imam Hussein and Behesht) so that the masses would remain in the dark, backward and superstitious, so that the mullahs could maintain their trecherous hold on people's minds.

Influence = power

The Pahlavis tried to reduce the influence of the mullahs over the people of Iran so as to reduce their power. The Pahlavi record, 53 years worth, is there to be reviewed. You can legitimately question their tactics, how they went about creating wholesale changes in Iran, but you can't challege their nationalistic intentions.

The Pahlavis tried to elevate Iran after 1,000 years of mismanagement. Did they do everything right? No way.  But at least, unlike the Qajars, they tried -- they tried, at their own peril, to pump new life into Iran. And anytime you try to bring about change, you create enemies, and in the case of Iran, the reactionary Ulama is the most powerful enemy you can make for yourself.

But again, if the Pahlavis were self-serving rulers they could've easily kissed the back of the mullahs hands, like the Qajars, and laid in their harams and they would still be in power. So, yes, the Pahlavis laid the seeds of Islamic hatred, but that's because they tried to wrestle Iran away from the grips of the mullahs. The alternative would have been borderline treason: to let the mullahs control our minds and country in the technologically advanced age of the 20th century.

yes, mr. parsa. double talk.

i never disparaged the looks of your dear crown prince reza cyrus pahlavi (rcp).  if you’re talking about his positive message, i’ve heard these positive messages through many contributors on this site and elsewhere.  perhaps rcp can get a noble peace prize for his positive words as is the case these days in oslo.

you must’ve missed at the end of my comment that i only brought up the referendum issue in passing and did not discuss it.  however since you brought it up, i will tell you what i think about it.  as we witnessed 30 years ago, the most well-organized faction of the opposition hijacked the government in the name of a referendum.  that’s what i call the “business model” of the hezbollahis.  therefore, a minority group can possibly shove their ideology down the throat of the people through a referendum whether the mighty and infallible united nations get involved or not.  this minority can get it done by their shear wealth, organization and determination.  that’s my opinion.  i think there are also others who rather have a democratic system period and not a referendum spectacle.  and yes, i’ve heard of constitutional monarchies and you need not patronize me.  btw, in how many of those countries the monarchy was violently upended and restored to a constitutional monarchy?  just curious.

did i say that this regime is “just” the palavis’ fault?  you need to heed to the prescription you’ve been giving me and go back and read my words carefully.  where did i say that the current establishment is faultless? there’s plenty of blame to go around.  the pahlavis, in my opinion, made it a fertile environment for the evil seed of these islamists to grow.  and yes there were many others who belonged to neither camp that were gullible enough to go the wrong path (that's putting it mildly).

it was refreshing to see that you can write without using slurs.  it is much more constructive to hold conversations in a civilized manner and refrain from using slurs, twisting other people’s words to score points, and repeating the talking points of ideologues.

ParsaL, you simply don't know how to behave in a public forum

Add your style of foul mouth "skills" to prince chubby's resume when asking for a UN sponsored national referendum.

Oooh oil was ONE DOLLAR in 1951 (while gasoline was $0.05/gal in US) and if he could get more for that one dollar he'd spend 80% more for himself and 20% for Iran, same deal he got from his saviors.

He had his chance and more with plenty of notice from all sides, UN included, to stop being such an ass.  He even admitted in 1978 to "his people" that he was being an ass.  But you don't listen and never listen except to run a foul mouth and blame others.

Same thing again with your beloved prince chubby.  All he wants is to be able to participate in UN sponsored referendum?  Really?  Is that all?  You sure? Speak up or forever hold your tongue because now that we have UN's attention we want to get in all of prince chubby's demands and requests.  So tezol and get him to add all of his demands on his resume for UN as soon as possible.

You are bothered by people refering to his waist line. How comforting!

Everything is sacred.

Phantom of Oprah

"Death of monarchy in Iran is a non-negotiable national fact."

Is that so, Oprah? "National fact," is it? You like to dictate things, don't you, you little petty dictator. Sadly for you, the only national fact around here is that you're a boorish, insecure, foul-mouthed ragwort, 3 brain cells shy of an illiterate dahati and the intellect of a retarded three-toed sloth.

Them's the facts, Jack. Everything else is up for negotiations. Now go curl up in a fetal position on your dirt floor and pacify your massive Pahlavi Oghdeh. While you're at it, pick up a book to read, a book on 20th century Iran preferably, instead of surfing for porn.

Just so you know, numb-nuts, the idea of a 2,500-year continuous monarchy in Iran is a myth. The institution of monarchy has been interrupted many many times in our history, at times for durations that have lasted decades, thanks to numerous waves of invasions, and yet, the institution of monarchy has always made a come back. And believe it, sloth, it will survive the second Arab invasion (Islamic Revolution) as well.

That's another "National Fact" for you, Oprah! Now go weep in your clay bowl of kale-pache and sour oghdeh.

A civil course

This is the summary of "jibber-jabber" which, due to its historical accuracy, makes any pseudo-intellectual discussion totally redundant:

a) Shah's military coup in 1953

b) People's revolution against the Shah in 1979

Death of monarchy in Iran is a non-negotiable national fact.

The Pahlavis, all mullahs, and all public figures associated with the Green Movement  must disclose the source and the amount of their wealth/income.

Hamsade Ghadimi, double-talk?

opines: "some try to hold reza pahlavi free of liability because after all he's never done anything wrong; it was his father who had made mistakes.  on the other hand, they want to credit reza with all things positive that his father (or grandfather) has done. 

Really? I seriously think that's simply YOUR interpretation of the matter. I've NEVER credited Reza Pahlavi with anything. All that I or any other legitimate monarchist has ever said on this site is that Reza's message of freedom, human rights and democracy is a positive one and needs to be considered as one of many alternatives in a future free Iran. That's it! The reason that I'm spending my valuable time on this blog is not to elevate Reza Pahlavi to the status of KING, but to defend him against asinine, PETTY and unwarranted persoanl attacks, period! I resent cowards and mercenaries who arbitrarily denegrate the man unfairly, specially when it comes to his "bulging waist-line!" 

"reza pahlavi wants democracy but he won't rule out monarchy or constitutional monarchy... does he want democracy or not?  will he for the sake of unity which seems to be his paramount goal compromise and then run for president?  i think not."

Dear sir/madam, you can think whatever you want, but Reza has repeatedly stated that he will accept the free will of the people in a UN supervised referendum. If the people choose a democratic republic, so be it, period. He has said this a thousand times, but people like you, who are biased against the pahlavis, choose not to hear his CLEAR WORDS.

Morever, you do understand the concept of "Constitutional Monarchy," do you not? You seem to think that a constitutional monarchy cannot function as a democracy. I'll have you know that Spain is a functioning democracy AND a constitutional monarchy -- they have a King/Queen and a prime minister. In fact, like Iran, they dissolved the monarchy, but later restored the institution.

The following countries: Australia, Belgium, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Japan, Jordan, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Morocco, New Zealand, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Thailand and the United Kingdom -- are all functioning DEMOCRACIES under the rubric of a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY.

"it's the people's fault that one of the most heinous government on earth is ruling iran.  the pahlavis had nothing to do with it and anyone who bashes the pahlavis must first apologize for ousting the shah (even if they had nothing to do with it)."

Again, you're not reading carefully. I defended the Pahlavis in another blog against Marge and yourself, I believe, because I was tired of people still blaming the Shah for all of our present-day miseries, 30 years after the revolution, and 30 years afer his death. All I said was, why not blame Khomeini, Khamenei or Rafsanjani? Better yet, why don't WE, the PEOPLE, who clamored wildl for this asinine revolution take some measure of blame for our miserable situation today?

Why is it always JUST the Pahlavi's fault???

My point was that if you're going to blame the Shah for the revolution, then why don't WE, the PEOPLE accept some of the blame? It's not all or nothing. All of us, including the Shah, we're all to blame. But most irrational Pahlavi haters ONLY blame the Shah for our miserable situation today -- they don't even blame the mullahs for all their corruption, thievery and violence in the last 30 years! It's INSANE!

These obtuse and mindless Pahlavi haters not only blame the Shah for the bad things that happened during the Shah's regime, but they also blame the Shah for all the bad things that have happened in Iran in the last 30 years, after his Shah's regime and after his death!

That's insane! WE, the PEOPLE, who poured onto the streets screaming for the mad mullah and his promises of free gas, free bus fare, free electricity, etc, should accept some of the blame. WE, the PEOPLE, who claimed to have seen Khomeini's face on the moon, WE should accept a share of the blame for all of our present-day miseries!

All of us who were alive in 1978 and actively participated in our national suicide exercise are culpable and must accept our individual share of the blame for bringing mullah Khomeini to power. This means that the Shah is not the only one to blame and the WE, the PEOPLE, are not blameless!

AmirKabir4u

writes: "Regrettably you compared pahlavis to romans... Romans were the first to civilize Europe... What this family has done to baffle us???? No you are wrong it was the oil money and the internationalization of Iran not them." 

Sir, you are the one who is DEAD WRONG. First of all, what do you mean exactly by "internationalization?" I would submit to you that this "internationalization" that you speak of was the byproduct of the Pahlavi Revolution. But let me get to my main point, which the good Prophet touched upon already.

As far as OIL money goes, Iran was being raped out of her resources for the better part of the Pahlavi Dynasty, mostly because of an obscenely UNFAIR contract that was signed by the Qajars and the British (Knox D'Arcy) in 1908, when the first oil well was discovered in the middle-east -- a contract that that was to be effective for 70 years, exactly up to 1978. Isn't it interesting that shortly before 1978, the Shah had famously declared (and some would say stupidly) that under no circumstances ("be hich vaj") would this contract be extended by Iran. And of course the Shah was removed in 1978/79. And some people still say that there was no foreign conspiracy to overthrow the Shah.

When Reza Shah took over in 1925, Iran only received 24 cents of every dollar of PROFIT (not production), and this incensed Reza Shah, and he complained about it endlessly to the British, who finally in 1931 relented and raised Iran's share to 33 cents. But that didn't stop Reza Shah from pressing for more. He complained so much that eventually he became a nuisance to the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and you know the rest. He was removed in 1941, under the auspices of being a "Nazi sympathizer."

In 1951, a barrel of oil on the free market sold for ONE DOLLAR, that's it! And still, Iran only received 33 cents out of every dollar! At first, Mossadegh asked the British for a 50/50 deal with the British, which was the same deal that the Americans had given in 1951 to the Saudis. But the British balked, and the rest is history.

In 1971, a barrel of oil sold for THREE DOLLARS on the open market. At this time, like his father, the Shah had already started complaining that a case of Coca Cola was more expensive than a barrel of oil. Do your own research. You will see that OPEC was the Shah's brainchild. With OPEC, the price of oil quadrupled overnight to TWELVE DOLLARS per barrel in 1973.

This sent shock waves around the world, specially in economic centers in the west. The Shah was seen as biting the hand that had fed him well for years. At this point, for the first time ever, you start to see negative news stories about the Shah in the West, and rumors of toture. The destabalization of his regime (by the West) began in earnest in 1975 under the Ford Administration.

The point is this: The entire Pahlavi Dynasty, both father and son, only benefited from 5 YEARS of OPEC fair market value for Iran's oil -- 1973 thru 1978, that's it! Before 1973, Iran was getting raped year in and year out, specially from 1908 thru 1953, but even up until 1973, a barrel of oil was tremendously underpriced.

However, the IRI and the mullahs have been the beneficiaries of over 30 years of OPEC fair market value for Iran's oil. Thirty years as opposed to 5 YEARS under the Pahlavis. Just in the summer of 2008, a barrel of oil was selling on the open market for $140 per barrel! The Shah never EVER dreamed of such obscene prices!  

So, no, the Pahlavi Dynasty was not sitting on a pile of oil money, no way, no how. However, the mullahs have been sitting on a mountain of liquid cash and what have they done with all this money?

Veiled Prophet & Barzan

Veiled prophet, I appreciate that, you're an upstanding guy, which is far more than I can say for the baseless Oprah, who makes up for his/her lack of intellect with gutter mouth jibber-jabber. I could've flagged him, but I decided to let everybody see what kind of an animal we're dealing with.

Keep up the good work. Same to you Barzan, well said. I will add that these Pahlavi haters, 30 years after the revolution, are HOPELESS, as they're cursed with a severe case of Oghdeh.

Phantom; Ravaaneh Opera

I take you for your word that you would refrain from the use of unfortunate language. I am Ramin's friend why not? I would like to call you friend as well. Just lets watch our language.

Taa mard sokhan nagofta baashad, Aybou honarash nuhofta baashad

VPK

Poozesh me khaham barayeh nadashtaneh fonteh Parsi.

VPK

متوسل شدن به پرخاشجوئی و به کار بردن الفاظ سخیف مورد پسند من هم
نیست. هر گاه ببینم که نامبرده از این روش بچه گانه دست برداشته است و
دیگر نظرات خود را با پرخاشجوئی و اهانت به مخالفین آغاز نمیکند، با کمال
میل تغییر روش میدهم. طنازی "جنسی‌"تان را هم این بار به حساب "رفیق
بازی‌" تان گذاشته و نادیده میگیرم.

The Pahlavis, all mullahs, and all public figures associated with the Green Movement  must disclose the source and the amount of their wealth/income.

maziar jan

i honestly cannot answer your hypothetical question (the first one).  if people had 20/20 hindsight vision in 1978, we wouldn't be talking about the mullahs now and instead about something else.  in other words, i would agree with your statement.

my answer to your second question is hopefully the people of iran.  although, considering our history and iran's resources, there are many foreign elements who are trying to shape the political structure of our country (for and against iri).

i'm not sure what your third question means.  i did not ask anyone to do anything for me if that's what you meant.  but for future reference, i prefer cash.

i'm all for inclusiveness.  my comment was about the mixed messages that i've heard from some (not all) royalists.  when there's cry for unity, we need to discuss some of these issues that are undermining the trust between different factions.  in no way, did i insinuate that the iranian youth (and the middle aged, and the old) do not know what they're doing and that i have a better plan.  neither did i say that their plan is to bring monarchy back and that is not a good plan.

in all seriousness, notwithstanding the comments regarding reza pahlavi's looks, i think that the blog had a sincere message: why do people want the monarchy back with reza pahlavi at the helm?  what has he done to deserve it?  is it because that they (the royalists) are "rent seekers"?  do they want they old status back?  have the pahlavis supported some non-profit organization to benefit the iranian citizens that we're not aware of?  has he accomplished anything significant other than being the spokesperson for the rent seekers?

i hope that answers your questions and that i haven't offended anyone.

The Phantom Of The Opera

Are you so desperate to resort to x-rated insults? What do you think you accomplish by your rude insults to Mr. Ramin Parsa? I hope JJ keeps your posting up for everyone to read and realize what kind of language you use. 

Instead of bringing arguments you say the most childish things. By the way, making sexual insults generally shows one's own sexual problems. So why not try reason over insults for once? Maybe that is not possible since reason works against you.

........

Hamsade ghadimi jan let's stop for a second .....If the 78 fiasco (ooh bebakshid ) fiesta was not ever to happen were we TODAY a happy living humane being in our own home land ?

ever be there any discussion in the FREE world about a BACKWARD religiouse mentality that even scares an ordinay citizen in .....

 who is going to give us back the real meanning of life we deserve ?

PLEASE STOP asking what ... can do for you ?!  

If you have better solution for desparate Iranian youth of Iran please go back home and help them, I don't have that . Maziar

Dear amirkabear4u

That's a very cheap remark

If it was just the oil money, then may I remind you that our oil revenu just in the past four years of Ahmadi Nejads presidency alone was more than total revenue from when Darsey well (the first oil well in Iran) was discovered until Bahman 1357 put together.

Well were is the result. and did his government provide half achivements

However to make such judjment one first needs to be fair minded and none bias and secondly he needs to be informed and educated about the subject he is talking about and know the recent history of his country. I do not know about the first part (being fair minded) I can only hope that you are a fairminded Person. Howwever I am sure that you do not have a clue about the history of Iran or how the ceconomic systems work and it is obvius that you do not know the value of such things as "management" and "loyality".

So my recomendation to you is to please read Iran's history of past 130 years. Learn in what state did Ahmad Shah leave Iran. and how far we came by Bahman 1357, that is socialy, economicaly and interntionaly. Finally compare 1357 with the state of our economy international relations and social developments at this moment, and then you will have your answer

Blame the people "then" but not "now".

Everything is sacred.

VPK on Pahlavis

1) I am not a Monarchist.

2) I prefer a democracy to a Monarchy.

3) I do blame the Iranian people who participated in the 1978 fiasco. Yes it was their fault for being total idiots. They need to apologize over and over. 

4) I do not blame Iranians who did not participate in the 1978 disaster.

5) I also blame M Reza Pahlavi for being a dictator; not allowing opposition and being a coward who ran away when he should have defended Iran.

6) This is not about Reza Pahlavi. But what Reza Shah did for Iran should be honored. Reza Shah did a lot for us and  deserves our thanks.

double talk

there's a lot of double talk when it comes to pahlavis.  i have no problem with monarchists or reza pahlavi.  heck, i have no problem with any iranian or his/her ideology whithin a democratic framework in iran.  that includes the most viled by all: the hezbollahis and mojaheds.  however, any individual who has committed a crime (including plundering iran's wealth) against iranians should be held accountable.

here's what i mean by double talk.  feel free to correct me and you can even use your colorful language:

1) some try to hold reza pahlavi free of liability because after all he's never done anything wrong; it was his father who had made mistakes.  on the other hand, they want to credit reza with all things positive that his father (or grandfather) has done.  by the way, no one elaborates on the "mistakes" or the "imperfections" of monarchy.

2) reza pahlavi is the only known and popular figure.  he's also an unpopular figure (refer to rajavi, mousavi, etc.).

3) reza pahlavi wants democracy but he won't rule out monarchy or constitutional monarchy.  the argument is he cannot decide for the people.  but he can decide for himself.  does he want democracy or not?  will he for the sake of unity which seems to be his paramount goal compromise and then run for president?  i think not.

4) it's the people's fault that one of the most heinous government on earth is ruling iran.  the pahlavis had nothing to do with it and anyone who bashes the pahlavis must first apologize for ousting the shah (even if they had nothing to do with it).  is being royalty or pro-royalty never having to say you're sorry?

5) reza pahlavi according to himself is fighting for iranians as an ordinary iranian.  but if someone in france challenges him in a free debate, his supporters post a blog on iranian.com crying "an iranian insults the crown prince."  is he an ordinary iranian or is he a bit (or a lot) more special?

i can keep going and talk about his ties to shady characters and his proposed referendum which i believe is following the business model of current regime (anyone remember the referendum of 30 years ago?).  but then again i'm for democracy and am intolerant for any other form of government for the oppressed people of my country.  i guess that makes me kind of dictatorial.  such irony.

amirkabear4u

I was talking about  Reza Shah the first and M. Reza Shah. Not RP.  Please do not mix things up. How could you deny what they did for Iran? It is recorded historical fact. The Islamic Republic has had 10 times the oil money and wasted it. The Phalavis were not perfect but they used the oil money much better. The Mullahs send it to Hizbollah and Hamas. The Phalavis spent it on Iran. Yes, they spent a lot of military but it did keep us safe from Iraq and was worth it.  Plus the Pahlavi's were much better at diplomacy. AIt is all recorded in history books for anyone with an open eye to see. Of course blind hater blinds people's judgment. People who hate Pahlavi's will never change their minds and frankly it makes no difference. 

As for Romans some would not be so kind to them. After all they did kill Jesus! I am not a Christian; just wanted to point out that the Romans are not universally admired. Plus much of their accomplishments trace back to Greece and Persia.

To Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Regrettably you compared pahlavis to romans. It is very sad because that is insult to humanity.

Romans were the first to civilize Europe, their achievements baffles historians. What this family has done to baffle us???? No you are wrong it was the oil money and the internationalization of Iran not them.

If J Cesar sneezed it had more meaning for his people than if RP makes a speech.

Next time we'll "buy" Prince chubby a condo in Tehran!

Everything is sacred.

areyo barzan Jaan

The hate for Pahlavi's comes from the inability by Pahlavi haters to accept their mistakes. The communists and Islamists are unable to admit their mistakes. They spent all their lives hating the Shah and working to destroy what the Phalavi's built. Now that they have had their 30 year long "Jomhoriyeh Islami" they are lost. One one hand their ideology; whole life's work is discredited. On the other hand they are too proud to admit it. A logical person would say: I am sorry I messed up and will do whatever possible to make up. But this is beyond the minds of either communists or Islamists. Believe me, I have spoken to some of them. They still insist that: It was not done right and if it was Iran would be heaven now! 

But fortunately the communists are a breed headed for extinction. The Islamists are rapidly losing credibility among Iranians. So the future looks good. Bad ideas discredit themselves in the information age. 

Pahlavi "lovers" = Pahlavan panbehs

Everything is sacred.

Phalavi haters

Remind me of Monty Python's Life of Brian. When they are discussing the Romans. There is a long discussion about what the Romans brought. Just substitute Pahlavi for Roman and it matches perfectly.

• Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Pahlavis ever done for us?
• Attendee:  Brought peace?
• Reg: Oh, peace - shut up!

Some people never learn!

Do you know "a" "better" person who can lead this nation? Yes.

Everything is sacred.

Tell me Anonymous

Where does all this hate come from?

No really mate what have you got against RP or in fact any other opposition leader.

What does he owe you?

Please correct me if I am wrong but was not it you and your parents generation who purred into the street like a herd shouting “esteglal azadi jomhoory e eslaami”?

Did they even know what was a “jomhoory e eslami”? Can they answer this question even after thirty years? well????

The fact of the matter is that I was there and I saw all of them from left to right and centre line behind Khomeini an became do-aatishe Muslims.

Thinking they can brush Khomeini aside later and get into power but the fact was that Khomeini was a bustard more deceitful than all of you put together and he beat you at your own game.

Now you are running around like wounded wolves and crying foul.

Now why don’t we turn the question around and ask the keyboard ninjas and bedroom activists like yourself, what have you done for your country besides cheap talks and attacking any body who is trying to do anything for this country?

Did you prefer him to forgrt about Iran like Ahmad Shah did and live his own comfortable life in the West. Wouldn't the profesional moaners like you start attacking him again asking where is his sense of duty???

Or may be you know a better person who can lead this nation! If so why don’t you come up with a name. come on now what are you afraid of. Whom are you proposing would MR Rajavi who betrayed his fellow countrymen by joining Saddam’s army or would it be Mr Mosavi who resided on the mass executions of 1368 while he was the prime minister and has the blood of 35000 Iranians on his hand.

Or may be it is the Toodeh party and delusional communist who still live in nostalgia of soviet Union and are trying to restore the glory that never was

What do you know about today’s Iran and how the new generation thinks?

Well sir I have got news for you today’s Iran is very different to what it was when you left it all those years ago. If any one is going to choose a leader for us it would be us, WE the people inside Iran who are risking life an limb to challenge the IRI and its murderer cronies not negative minded ghor-ghoroos like you who do not have a clue about Iran and do not even have the courage to come clean about their own past.

PS: As far as what the late Shah and his father are corserned or what they have or have not done for Iran the history is the best judge and If you are interested to know I recommend you to go to your nearest library and pick a few books.

Please notice that I emphasised on the "If" as One can awaken him to is asleep but can never awaken the one who is pretending to be asleep.