www.facebook.com/iransecularii

Re: David ET

Dear David, thank you for you response.

This is what you wrote:

"it is also a historical fact that your grandfather and father made many contributions to the modernization of Iran and its progress from the 1900 to the 20th century..."

You are giving credit to them, but then you followed it with this:

"During the same time period many of the similar improvements were experienced in many oil and non-oil producing developing countries such as Turkey, India, United Arab Emirates etc."

Implying that eventhough they contributed to modernization of Iran, but so what, it happened everywhere else too, no big deal.

Why? I am sure you are well aware that Iran's rate of progress was at a much faster pace than turkey or India or UE. In fact, Iran broke records in almost all economic indicators, year after year.

So what do you mean with "similar" improvements? Those other countries were not experiencing "similar" improvements. The only other third world country that closely matched Iran's pace of progress was South Korea. Look where they are now.

You claim that there was no recourse against the Pahlavi family's wrongdoings. I agree with you.

I have also heard that Cyrus the great was a criminal dictator because there was no political freedom during his reign. However, the fact is that a society evolves and you can't possibly expect that 2500 years ago, Cyrus should have implemented a democracy similar to those found in Europe today.

The same applies to Iran 80 years ago. What the Pahalvis inherited from the Ghajars was not just a bankrupt Iran, but also many of Iran's bankrupt cultures.

Now suddenly, without any precedence, you expect the Pahlavis (or Mossadegh, or anyone else) to have implemented a just democracy among a people who didn't know the word. Let's not be shy David, Iranians were (and sadly still are) a corrupt people. It would have taken time, for both the governors and the governees to evolve into a true democratic nation.

By the way, Mossadegh was a wealthy land owner. Land that belonged to the people but was taken away by Ghagar kings. I don't recall Mosadegh ever returning those lands to the people. Is he a thief too? I think not.

You wrote, "a man [shah] who with the help of a foreign force (CIA) toppled a popular elected prime minister of Iran [mossadegh]. I assure you that you would have called me a traitor if I done the same thing! "

Let's clarify a few thing here. Why are you calling Dr. Mossadegh a "popular elected prime minister"? Where does the "popular" come from? You know well that Mossadegh was not elected in a national refrundum. He was elected by the Majles/parliament.

Since that Majles was democratically elected by people's votes, and it then elected Mossadegh as prime minister, then it is safe and correct to say that Mossadegh was a "democratically elected" prime minister.

I am not giving you history lessons here, as I am certain, you know the prevailing facts of those days. But the truth is that Mossadegh is called a "popularly elected" prime minister BECAUSE the "democratically elected" majles voted him to office.

Once that same majles opposed some of Mossadegh's important foreign policies, it suddenly became a "nokar" majles. Mossadegh ordered it shut down.

I assure you that you would have called me a traitor, if I had done the same. This is as though in the US today, Bush orders the democratically elected Senate to be shut down due to a national emergency.

According to your own definition, Mossadegh was a thief and a traitor. Or was he?

Dear David, you logic is a two sided knife and it cuts both ways. Here is my logic:

Both Pahlavi kings, and Mossadegh as well, were nationalist secular "patriots" who wanted the best for Iran and all three had their own different (flawed) methods to achieve their goals.

Isn't this a more uniting statement?

You wrote, "as for your logic of respect, then with same logic we should avoid blaming anything on leaders of Islamic Republic either because there are Iranians who " respect and happen to like the (IR leaders ) for their accomplishments."

I said what I said in the persepctive of unity. I am not planning to unite with the Islamists. But I don't mind a unity between secular democratic forces, be it monarchists or republicans.

You wrote, "Telling the facts about people is not disrespect to the ones who may believe in them..."

I agree with you. but calling people "thieves" and "traitors" are not facts, only opinions. Furtermore, these name callings don't accomplish anything constructive.

And please don't compare the Pahlavis to the IRI. If you want to include them in the same category, then you should be prepared to have Mossadegh and everyone else to be included too.

Lastly, what do you exactly mean with "shahollahis"? Do you mean to make this word equivalent to "monarchists"? You would be wrong, if you did.

Also, what about the "Mosadegholahis"? Or all other X-ollahis? Should any group be called X-ollahis just because of a few extremist idiots among them?

You wrote, "So it is best to learn to discuss them openly, democratically without allowing the slogans and emotions take over."

I couldn't agree more, and that's exactly what we are doing here!

Some seem to be confusing things

The concept of Yes we can too or Solutions for Iran is for everyone , monrachists included. Anyone who believes in those principals should unite.

At the same time "I" have the right to my view (just as monarchists and others do) to what I think the future form of Iranian government should be.

Just as I should not expect you to not have opinions , you should not expect me either!

Yet our difference of opinions should not stop us from uniting for what we agree upon ! That IS the beauty of democracy.

What part of this is so confusing?! Do you expect me and yourselves to just leave our views and opinions? of course not!

Should our different views stop us from uniting for important  PRINCIAPLS that we agree upon ? of course not!

Unfortunately we Iranians having lived under dictatorships for so long just see things black and white.

A litany of errors

Mr ET,

Your letter is so rife in historical distortions and falsities that should be ranked among the pro-Khatami publications we see re-emerging these days. All we expect from you is to put your time, resources, and efforts behind the SCE campaign and leave the matters related to history, leadership, diplomacy and politics to those who don't see the world through the hate-tinted glasses you are wearing.

I am appreciative of your work for the SCE campaign but without being condescending I urge you to refrain from commenting on the issues in which you manifestly demonstrate a biased judgment and lack of erudition.

Dear Jamshid

I wrote in the letter: "Your Excellency, it is also a historical fact that your grandfather and father made many contributions to the modernization of Iran and its progress from the 1900 to the 20th century, During the same time period many of the similar improvements were experienced in many oil and non-oil producing developing countries such as Turkey, India, United Arab Emirates etc. At the same time it is also a recorded fact that during your father's rule the freedom of expression, political opinions and parties were strongly subdued by Iran's Information and intelligence Agency (SAVAK) . A simple Google search of independent human rights organizations such as Amnesty International shows many recorded documents of political prisoners, tortures and executions during that era"

***

The intent of the letter is and was not to cause division and if you notice Farokhzad insisted on an answer to his question althogh I avoided it the first time...for the same exact reason of creating emotions based on the past rather than content of the letter.

But since successfully the subject has been distracted as usual, I might as well reply but not in summary now:

If I take away your TV , you call me a thief and you call the police and file a claim against me.

Now let me ask you this , if during Pahlavi's one of their family asked for a share in a business entity or in fact anything of you, what recourse did you have but to comply ? You could not call the police or file a claim against them. In fact that is how the extended family operated, and how they had their hand forced in to everything and If most people knew this you can not claim Shah didn't!

Also I am not sure what else you can call a man who with the help of a foreign force (CIA) toppled a popular elected prime minister of Iran. I assure you that you would have called me a traitor if I done the same thing!

Dear Jamshid, as for your logic of respect, then with same logic we should avoid blaming anything on leaders of Islamic Republic either because there are Iranians who " respect and happen to like the (IR leaders ) for their accomplishments. "

Telling the facts about people is not disrespect to the ones who may believe in them and if so we might as well keep quiet and accept every one and everything forever because everyone has followers!

Unfortunately when it comes to the revolution, the uncontrolled emotions start - usually instigated by the ones on both sides who try to antagonize the situation.

My mistake was probably to answer Farokhzad after 2nd time he asked but then if not someone else would have said why I avoid answering readers!

Anyway I usually have kept quiet on issues that divide Iranians for the same reason that we just experienced when a polite letter is turned to the same 30 year old arguments . 

I did openly say my piece to Reza Pahlavi and it was my intention to move on after writing a short piece on the "referedum".

Remember that it is very simplistic to believe that the same issues that you witness here will not come up if left to after the fall of Islamic Regime when such Shahollahi, rajaviollahi etc attitudes from different sides could lead to eventual dictatorship of one sort or another.

So it is best to learn to discuss them openly, democratically without allowing the slogans and emotions take over. 

Thank you Shahryar Pars and Anonymous123

Your attitude towards my different opinion, your choice of words and your accusation are the best proof of what I called: "divisive factor among some of the Iranians."

The same attitide that put Shah before the Country (Khoda- Shah- Mihan !!!)

The Shahollahi, Rajavillahi, Hezbollahi, etc attitudes that "overwhelming majority" of Iranians have rejected!

The same attitude that created political prisoners of Evin and still does..

The same attitude that when logics fail bring out the chomagh to attack the messenger.

..and Whatever you wish to call the events of 1979 , with any shred of logic you can not deny that it did not happen in a vacuum  . .... You are willing to blame majority of Iranians just to defend a failed dictatorial regime and now a Prince who refuse to publicly and honestly acknowledge the mistakes of the past in order to move forward...

"reality check" : There are currently so many families of former royal families and rulers of the world ...In time they all join the pages of history as the ones before them have throughout history....It usually has taken a generation or two at MOST!

Re: David ET

You believe the Shah, Reza's father, was a thief and a traitor. This is in your own words. Then you write a letter to RP and advise him on what he should do, and expect to be taken seriously?

It is a fact that this is your opinion only. There are millions of Iranians who believe the Shah was neither a thief nor a traitor. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so many who today say, "nooshe joonesh" or "khoda biamorz".

If you want to give unity lectures, you'd better start by behaving in a more positive and constructive way David. Also, you'd better respect millions of Iranians who respect and happen to like the Pahlavis for their accomplishments. Once you are able to understand and do this, then you would become a better democrat and a better voice for unity.

There he goes again!

It seems as if Little David in confrontation with his own Shadow, Guliath is ready to make use of every stone, to meet the target!
You should understand that there is no "almost unanimously"! It is either unanimously or NOT! something less than that can be an overwhelming majority, but that is not equal to unanimously!

Reading through your writing exercises reveal major shortcomings, lack of knowledge,prejudices and adherences which make it impossible for the likes of you to be clairvoyant!
30 years ago an overwhelming majority of irrationalized and perplexed Iranians in a climate of social psychosis voted for ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, evidently that 98% was fully wrong, if not criminal!
A majority has the right to commit suicide, but it has not the right to commit genocide against the resting tiny minority and still worse it has not the right to draw the lines on the wall of fate of future generation.
Your letter is written in the spirit of that criminal revolutionary generation, and it could be written by Khalkhali, khomeini or likes. But your open letter at this time is totally irrelevannt, and still worse, you should have sent that letter to the late Shah and not Prince Reza! Please look at yellow pages and send the letter to the right destination, your leaders mean to the hell, i mean to the history.

EXCUSES... EXCUSES ... EXCUSES

Divisive factor my butt. That's is the most ridiculous pretext I have ever heard to justify one's inability, poor performance and extreme incompetence. Well I guess for as long as he is alive, he will be a "divisive factor" for you guys.

I believe you guys are ONLY and ONLY scared that if and I say if there is ever a referendum in Iran where there could be a choice between Monarchy and Republic, people might overwhelmingly choose Monarchy! that is the only reason he is a "thorn" in your eyes. so to speak.

How does he prevent Republicans from uniting with one another and producing a viable platform/leader/alternative? How? Does he threaten you with his Savak? lol!

Napolean

How about leasing the car for 4 years and if is good we can renew the lease? The contract also will have clauses about cancelling the lease in case of fraud or being a lemon.

That is called democracy and presidency (and that is if people even vote for him! (and chose that car instead of another!)

In fact as a constitutional monarchy Reza Pahlavi will only have cermonial title and no power as a Royalty! and all the powers will reside with prime minister and parliament while as a potential president of a republic (if elected) he will have much more power and if he is so good, he can do much more.

If the car is so good why not drive it, than put it in the showroom and do daily commercials for it?

Why not giving people freedom of choice instead of having more life time monarchs and Imams wasting our resources. In fact for the exact reason of our culture of having been dictated for so long , it is best NOT to have a family or person permanently installed as experience has shown that it leads to dictatorship. (Pahlavi's and prior monarchies and even Velayat Faghih, ...)

Chosing one family over one nation

Reality: Thank you catching my typo. I meant to write: ""In fact past 30 years is a solid proof that as a prince he has been a failed option".

Anonymous 123: I did not blame Reza Pahlavi for the failure, he is only one of the many factors. I wrote to him: In fact, your insistence in maintaining your title as the "potential" future Shah of Iran has been a divisive factor among some of the Iranians". Its not the democracy that you are disagreeing about, just that you want to install one person and his family for life time and that has been ONE divining factor.

David...

Your intentions are good, but there are a lot of flaws in your coming to conclusion too quickly. Here are some views:

(1) If I told you that I have a top-notch Mercedes Benz, Model 2009, with retail price of $250,000, that I am willing to sell you for $1000 only becuase I care so much for you and cannot see you driving your dangerous old Honda Civic, and I exaggerate the problems of your Honda by hundreds of times, won't you get rid of your current Honda Civic to buy the Mercedes Benz from me? What if the Mercedes Benz turns out to be a Lemon, a 1984 Ford Tempo that blows up the minute that you drive out? Would you say our contract to trade the car was legitimate and binding?

That is exactly what happened with the 1979 fraud. Khomeini sold people a bill of goods that did not exist - from total freedom of speech to free electricity and free bus ride. He also exaggerated short-comings of the Shah, sometimes by multiple orders of magnitude, from 600,000 that he claimed shah had killed to $20 billion that he claimed shah had stolen (YouTube evidence is available). None turned out to be true.

The iranian people fell for that masterpiece of fraud and were naive and greedy enough to sell what they had in the exact same way that you would trade your car for a lemon had you been as naive and as greedy.

(2) Reza shah came to power with the approval (and in fact encouragement) of the parliament of the time, even though later on he saw it impossible to govern outside the influence of mullas and turned into a dictator of sort. See research by Prof. Katouzian for details.

(3) Based on the fraud in (1), RP is correct to consider the revolution a fraud and therefore illegitimate and null (as in any other contract) and therefore consider himself the legitimate leader of iran according to the iranian constitution of pre-fraudulent-revolution, until such time that people of iran have the chance to express their views in freedom when presented alternatives with total honesty, transparency, and pragmatism.

(4) There are other cultural considerations that come into play, like religiosity of people, lack of experience with democracy and its flaws and faults, their lack of respect for authority, their confusion between freedom and anarchy, etc. All played important, but destructive, roles in 1979 revolution.

(5) Do not underestimate the openness of people of iran of today to consider alternatives to IRI, even a constitutional monarchy, or leadership of RP to bring in change leading to a moderate form of democracy. Shah was viewed as terrible in 1979, but he does not seem to be have been too bad in 2008 standard with 30 years of experience with IRI in the hindsight. This view is of course not shared by either the hard-core vocal IRI supporters or outside-the-ditch revolutionary exiles of 1979 who still insist on having been right but have no courage to face the consequence of their past actions there back in iran rather than here in the comfort of LA or Landon or Paris with little or no empathy towards those who have been victims of the 1979 fraud for the past 30 years; but true of a majority of iranians within, who have to deal with day-to-day difficulties under IRI, from being worried about having food on the table tonight to whether regime agents would arrest their daughter and rape her in prison and kill her only because she held her fiance's hand in a park.

(6) Don't get me wrong, I am not blindly voting for RP to come back to power as a dictator, but I am expressing my views that we need to get help from anywhere we can to bring an end to IRI and place the destiny of the people in their hands. In fact my problem with RP is that he has not been effective in the absence of any other credible opposition leaders, as people like Khatami, Ganji, or Baghi all have dark pasts and are more like disenchanted charlatan opportunists than any true iranian nationalist. 30 years is enough waiting for a messiah, we need action from an earthly individual today no matter how imperfect he may be considered by middle-aged ideologues of 1970s with frozen-in-time minds.

To DAVID ET: Do not blame RP for your incompetence

You said:

I was referring to PEOPLE who have moved forward beyond Pahlavi's and even Islamic Republic (but being silenced just as they were during Shah

Why are they being silenced? Did Reza Pahlavi shut them up? does he have such power to do that?

See you are blaming RP for your incompetence and the incompetenc of all those who could not unite with one another and produce an alternative to IR in the last 30 years.

THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION AFTER 30 YEARS

David ET said "In fact past 30 years is a solid proof that as a prince he has not been a failed option. "

Oh! you don't say!

He is not only "not a failed option" but the "ONLY OPTION" vis-a-vis the IRI! and you can see that by the enthusiasm and the vast number of comments and incredible reaction (positive or negative) to everything minutely related to him, and on this Website alone!

Initial Response from office of Reza Pahlavi

Dear compatriot,

With many thanks your e-mail is received and has been forwarded to the attention of HRH Reza Pahlavi.

Best regards

Secretary to HRH Reza Pahlavi

(The letter was also sent to a large mailing list of activists and news organizations)

Farokhzad

- I was not referring to the backward Islamic regime. I was referring to PEOPLE who have moved forward beyond Pahlavi's and even Islamic Republic (but being silenced just as they were during Shah)

-Reza Pahlavi relinquishment of Royalty will not remove him as an option (if he wants to be one) but it actually substantially empowers him and brings him much closer to people than feeling above them by blood or relationship to a toppled dictator! In fact past 30 years is a solid proof that as a prince he has been a failed option. He has a choice between a title or what is best for his country.

As for answer to your questions:

Here are the definitions from dictionary:

THIEF: one that steals especially stealthily or secretly

TRAITOR: 1 : one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty . one who commits treason   [1953]

your short answer to both questions is Yes.

Do we even know if he reads this site? or any site?

Yes we know he reads this site. In fact, he writes in this site under a pseudonym. (wink wink)

Good letter David.

Forward, David?

"THE PEOPLE will move on forward (with or without him) as they have in the past 30 years."

Have they really moved forward? I don't see it. I see the government standing firmly in people's way. If there has been any move at all, it's been backward. Sometimes, moving forward means recognizing a mistake and returning to where you took a wrong turn.

Now, I'm not saying you should become a shahi. But, for you to say, in effect, "let's eliminate one of our few remaining options", is, to be kind, presumptuous.

BY the way, you never answered me: Do you consider the Shah a thief? A traitor? 

You are for the "Reformist" losers! Be honest!

Mr. David jaan

You indicated in your letter that 30 years ago millions of people made their choice and rejected Monarchy! I accept that disregarding the circumstances under whihc people rejected it and believe that was good for 30 years ago!

First of all, 30 years ago, Iran's population was 35 million, now it is over 70 million! a lot of people were not even born back then to vote!shouldn't they have a chance to voice their opinions? if not, then what is the difference between you and the current rulers of Iran?

Secondly, 30 years ago and by the same token, people chose the theocratic Islamic Republic! therefore, based on your logic, we have to honor their choice and live with it the same way that we have to honor their rejection of Monarchy!!!!

Then what are you trying to get at? enlighten us! Are you for Khatami, pro-IR so called reformers and the same ol' BS? ... please be honest and don't beat about the bush.

Reza Pahlavi aside, why can't Republicans unite?

Com eon people let's be honest with each other, Reza Pahalvi is an excuse for your incompetence!

Why can't those who believe in a true democratic Secular Republic unite with one another? what is the problem? For example, Jebhe Melli people and others alike, it's been 30 years and they're still fighting one another even though they claim to all believe in a Secular democratic Republic,yet they have not even produced a leader/s after 30 f...ing years!!

I wonder if Reza hates his dad? I wish i was his psychiatrist!

I bet he harbors some serious disdain for that failure of a father. Because of his dad, he can't even go to iran and see the mountains he claims to love so much. LOL. Eventhough he was there as a teen ..... whatever vatan is vatan I suppose, even for a freeloader. Maybe if his father hadn't been such a blundering idiot and dictator surrounded by more idiots who didn't have the ability to advise him properly, he could be in Iran today, eating grapes and practicing fire arms training or fencing and archery.... whatever it is lazy princes do.

Dear David ET

We Beg to Differ ;0)

Dear Dariush

Indeed "SHAH Acknowledged The Revolution NOT Abdication"

... and then he was abdicated by THE PEOPLE and that is what matters my friend :-)

This whole notion of referendum is created by the Royalists as if revolution never happened and the people have not already spoken ! 

FYI/BAKHTIAR SANGARETOH NEGAHDAR

One of the Slogans by most Patriots against the Revolutionaries was: "Bakhtiar, Bakhtiar, Sangharetoh Nagahdar" ...

Bakhtiar with the Press at time of his nomination as Prime Minister Hangs on the His Post:

PART I

PART II

Last Interview by Bakhtiar who speaks about Khomeiny's Arrival and  THE PEOPLE (and  NOT  the THUGS who are Burning and Killing to take power by violence and force it upon the Silent and peaceful Majority):

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWJc5bSSyUg&feature=related

SHAH Acknowledged The Revolution NOT Abdication !

The Shah Acknowledged the Fact that the country was in Revolution, and NOT that he was ready to abdicate. Besides he also considered himself as a REVOLUTIONARY with what he called ENGHELABEH SHAH VA MARDOM aka THE WHITE REVOLUTION.

 //www.youtube.com/watch?v=auFhnkFchuo

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K72p4OL3iY&feature=related

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MXdIzU-Dc4&feature=related

So in his vocabulary he was trying to say that Revolution and Monarchy are Hand in Hand and that he understood what were the demands of the People of Iran for a different exercise of Power ( That is that he respects the Constitution by Reigning but Not Ruling.

Here he simply said in this speach (which at the time was seen as a sign of defeat and was badly interpreted because people expected the Shah to be Firm and respond to the critics with strength.) that the Constitution will be Respected in the Future. He was refering to his eventual succession by the Crown Prince or Even Empress Shahbanou Farah until his Majority that is reaching the Age of 20.

After this speach he finally accepted to the nomination of Shapour Bakhtiar as Prime Minister ( NOT PRESIDENT) of Iran

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jKXWRzs-Mg 

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=tObnPqLfdSI

and left the country for "a Vacation" ( knowing it would be for ever given his poor health and that he would need to be operated) hoping that it would also calm the situation.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxr7n3yLXAY&feature=related

His Departure however was a seen as a Victory for the Revolutionaries who saw it as payving the way for Khomeiny's Arrival and Cried : SHAH RAFT and the Press by that time on the side of the People against Bakhtiar's government reproduced the slogan in BIG titles.

Check Last Interview given by the Shah in Panama to David Frost: He clearly says that "a King does not Abdicate but can be replaced" and he adds with an ironic smile "Or can be decapitated" ...

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoRqn52ZPMM

 Also LAST WILL OF THE SHAH Read by the Shahbanou

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxiWVXU5Z-4

To: Shahryar Pars

You wrote: "Iranians unanimously, DID NOT reject monarchy, you are not only wrong, you are simply a liar. Even the boastful ignorant reactionary Ayatollah Khomeini, was more honest than you, he claimed to have the support of 98%. and 98% is far from unanimously."

 But I wrote : "Iranian almost unanymously" !! . Now who is the liar?

Also Shah himself acknowledged the REVOLUTION, and some Shahi's deny it ???!!!

outcome is irrelevant. It happend and monarchy was REJECTED!

I did NOT say :

"he is in a unique position to unite the country"!!!

*** 

I said: "If you wish to be a true positive force in the path of this unity, I suggest that you rise to the occasion"

THE PEOPLE will move on forward (with or without him) as they have in the past 30 years.

This is more about him and HIS CHOICE OF A "PLACE IN: HISTORY" as I mentioned in the very FIRST LINE..........OR NOT as he has not and as proven so far.... I repeat: With or without him it will happen.

He can salvage himself and HELP play "A" role too by becoming A force in the NATIONAL RECONCILIATION or remain stuck in the Royalty ideology as the Islamists, communists, Mojaheds do their own way and let the history PASS THEM BY.

The choice is always ours, to BE or not to be...and that IS the question!

Solutions for Iran  

suggestion

BTW David ET,
RP might take your letter a bit more seriously if you spell "throne" correctly.

I just don't get it

I don't get it with this Pahalvichis. What do you see in this guy? What qualifications does he have to be even remotely considered as someone who could lead Iran? He is not qualified in any way, shape or form. NONE. My 90 year old granny in Iran could do a better job at leading Iran. At least she has been living in Iran for 90 years and even though a tad hard of hearing, she is as sharp as they come. She can recite Shahnameh, Hafez, Saadi and she can name every single prime minister Iran has had going back to her teen years. She has been to every corner of Iran and lived in many different provinces for extended periods of time (my grandfather worked for the government so they traveled on assignment a lot). And best of all, she never took money from the CIA, doesn't eat Faloodeh with Dick Cheney, Michael Ledeen and the rest of the AEI fascists like RP does. I will take my grandma over this clown any day to lead Iran.
So tell me you Pahalvichis, why should I not take my grandma over RP? Is it only because some sperm got lucky in the race?

This guy.... Reza.... I don't trust him saying elections

He has no experience in politics. In anything actually. Him calling for an election is hilarious. A "fair" election. LOL. One that will put him on the ballot as being bankrolled along with his family for the rest of their days. Bla hahahahaha. I would not even trust him in Secret Santa at my office.

I SMELL FISH

Maybe there is a greater plots behind this abdication and resents that once will unite the peoples inside and outside of Iran to just bring down the present criminals so they (the third wave) can ride the current so they can't be let out. just like the Islamist back then in 79.
sorry can't find the clips to attach, But here it goes like : KAREGHAR,BARZEGHAR..MA KE MOTTAHED NEMISHAVIM .....