No comparison between Pahlavi Iran and Islamic Iran

by Faramarz_Fateh

A while ago a couple years into the second U.S.-Iraq war, a whole bunch of American congressmen and senators started going on political talk shows to renounce and denounce the war as a mistake.  Without exception, these sons-a-bitches who had given Bush carte blanche to attack Iraq would start their talk by saying "I fully supported and still support the war in Afghanistan but the Iraq was a mistake because blah blah blah.  Of course non of these asswipes would say anything about the fact that 17 of the 19 so called terrorists of 9/11 were Saudis not Afghans and so bombing of the Saudis (Riyadh, Mecca etc) would have been much more appropriate.

I have started to see a similar situation amongst us Iranians who live outside Iran.  Other than the Shah-o-maniacs whom are now mainly 65+ in age, every time a middle aged Iranian wants to denounce the freaking Islamic Republic, they get an urge to make an editorial about the Shah and Iran of second Pahlavi era as a preamble; as if there is even a comparison possible.

While its true that things were not all rosie during time of Mammad Reza, it is inconceivable to make any type of comparison.  From the extent of political oppression, to stealing of the oil money, to anything else.

The Islamic Republic is several orders of magnitude worse than the Pahlavi regime.  No doubt Iran and Iranians deserve better than either of the 2 and they will eventually get what they deserve. 

But enough of the comparisons.  Have enough courage to denounce the IRI without the need to piss on Pahlavis.



more from Faramarz_Fateh


by shushtari on

that was perfect.....THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH....

only if the current generation of brave iranians were in iranin way in hell would an illiterate  idiot like khomeini be able to fool anyone

the british and french got what they wanted- a backwards iran ruled by a bunch of 'forsat talab' bache akhoonds

I bet the akhoonds still pinch themselves that they were able to take over iran and rape it for so long.

I pray that swift justice is coming to them very soon- so 'jiggare hamamoom haal beeyad!' 


Shahanshah Aryamehr had a Vision!

by tigran09 on

Your commentary is written very well, and shows to well the extent to which most Iranians were brainwashed into believing that a return to "normalcy" thus a return to  - or nostalgia for tradition  back in 1979 would herald a new era or so to speak heaven on earth in Iran.

I was impressed by Shah`s initial resolve to really bring about a revolution from the top , and bring about prosperity and development to the land, but  he didn`t pay attention to the details (didn`t contain growing social and economic disparities) over time and I guess 80% of people preferred to believe that the monarchy was ONLY a US puppet out to strip Iranians of their religion, culture and impose alien western things. How wrong that was.

I find it shocking to know and see how dismissive and hysterical everyone became in 1979 ,  seemingly whipped into a frenzy by pro-Khomeini agitators, almost everyone lost their rationality blaming all ills of Iran on Shah.

There were some people, maybe 1-10% who  saw the writing on the wall, and were pleading with people to accept reforms under intelligent Dr Shapor Baktiar. I wished  for democratic reform, so that eventually Iran would have a  system like Holland or UK, with King reigning not ruling, so our Majlis doing all legislative work.

Shah`s mistake was not to appoint people like Shahpor Baktiar  in early 1970`s and co-opt the Mossadegh Nationalists in early 70`s . I reckon if did that, plus if he also used state propaganda to strongly denounce Mollas (also killing many of them)  and promote all the good that monarchy did since 1953,  the revolution would have run out of steam, nationalists would have endorsed democratic reform , and mullahs would have been isolated looking like idiots.

I read about Russian Revolution, although Imperial Russia (like Imperial Iran) was very backward compared to West in late 19 cent and early 20 cent, modernization gained strong momentum (just like under Shah), some classes gaining status some loosing,  but Russians like Iranians perceived only the elite to benefit, and were pissed off about lack of political freedom, and went for revolution instead. One plus, they had was to at least get a secular but authoritarian regime, that continued modernisation (but along socialist lines), and didn`t tell people what to wear  and eradicated religion from state affairs. Iranians truly committed national suicide in comparison.

It is sad to see what Iran  has become in 30 years, and even worse knowing the writing on the wall, there are way too many Iranians still believing in small changes here and there under the ruling theocratic tyranny in Theran, not understanding in spite all evidence (suffering and brutalisation of Iranian society since 1979), that their salvation lies in causing another revolution, ending theocratic islamic tyranny once and for all, and heralding in a parliamentary monarchy or democratic republic for Iran. 

I believe the we need someone like Korush to lead Iran out of darkness towards light and progress.

Khoda Biamorz Shahanshah Aryamehr





Nousha Arzu

It's amazing

by Nousha Arzu on

how many Iranians, TO THIS DAY, still believe in the blatatly stale revolutionary misinformation that was manufactured out of thin air and fed to us by the likes of Ebrahim Yazdi, "Mr. Green Card," and the rest of the black brigade.

As the British Ambassador, Anthony Parsons, wrote in his 1984 book, "The Pride and the Fall," the Pahlavi Dynasty was the REAL revolution, and the 1979 national suicide was a "counter-revolution."

The Pahlavis came to power at a time when Iran was a disgrace, economically and politically -- an international laughing stock. In every respect that matters, Persia was a massive joke amongst Europeans under the rule of the Qajars. Just imagine our backwardness... By 1908, thanks to the industrial revolution, the West had airplanes, automobiles and trains, but in Iran we didn't even get our first bicycle until 1903, and it was an import!

This is the Iran that Reza Shah inherited!

The mullahs, who were the real power under Qajar Iran, had intentionally kept us backward, because that's where their reactionary power lies, in utter darkness. Enlightened, rational people do not follow the teachings of koon-nashoor mullahs in cheap sandals!

Add to this twisted mess, the youth of the 1970's, who were a monumentally moronic bunch (wanna-be hippies and marxists), all too spoiled to know better. Not only did they NOT appreciate ancient Iranian history and the significance of kingship in our culture and its identity, they didn't even have a clue about modern Iranian history, early 20th century that is, when we were the Zimbabwe of Asia -- ALARMINGLY BACKWARD AND DESTITUTE, just a few decades past.

Instead of thinking about HOW FAR we had come under a short 53 years under the Pahlavis, all they talked about was HOW FAR we have to go to become their version of utopia on Earth. And mind you, the Shah only had a short 25 years (1953-1978) to modernize Iran (some of our infamous Shah bashers have been alive twice as long) -- and not the total duration of his 37 year rule. Before 1953, Iran was not only occupied by allied forces for 5 years, but also ruled by several strong prime ministers until 1953. 

Moreover, unlike the mullahs who've had the benefit of over 30 years of OPEC fair market value for Iran's oil, the Shah only had the benefit of 5 years (1973-1978) of fair market OPEC oil money. In 1971, a barrel of oil was $3, and in 1952, it was a mere ONE DOLLAR per barrel, of which Iran only got 33%, with the rest going to the British, as per the Qajar-Knox D'Arcy agreements signed in 1908. By way of comparison, just in the summer of 2008, the mullahs were getting as much as $140 per barrel of Iranian oil! That's how they can afford to steal $18 BILLION in one shipment, the one that was recently intercepted in Turkey.   

Were there problems under the Shah's monarchy? Absolutely. He was not in total control of his extended family and he was in many respects out of touch. His majesty should've known his people better and eased up on the speed of his modernization plans. While he was shooting for the rocket age at an unrealistic pace, we were still dreaming the sweet dreams of behesht, Imam Hussein and the rest the bedouin balderdash and desert fairytales.  

A wise people, with a measure of reason, gratefulness and understanding of their own recent history would've opted for reform, rather than suicide. They would've rejected an hysterical movement fueled by utter lies, propaganda and gross exaggerations, one which even boasted the sighting of mullah Khomeini's face on the moon! 

How titanically-scaled morons were we really, to ditch a nationalistic monarchy for a morally depraved mullacracy that cares more about the plight of the Palestinians than its own people? In the final analysis, until history proves different, we deserve this Islamic shit of a government. 



Here's just one example

by Iraniandudeee on

During the shah's time, we barely had any people leaving the country (2 thousand a year only) now a days, we have over 5 million Iranians abroad, and 100 thousand leaving every year!!!!!!!!

 As I said before, these islamists are a delusional bunch despised by most Iranians.



by Iraniandudeee on

Are you freaking joking? The pahlavi dynasty was one of the best things that had happened to Iran the past 1500 years. In every aspect the Pahlavi dynasty was 100% better than the islamic regime. And I'm myself a youth.

 The only people who put down the shah are the uneducated ones who don't know crap about him or what he did for Iran and Iranians... whether economically, militarily, culturally, or in terms of living standards the Pahlavi/Shah era was better than this joke of a government who's goal doesn't involve the benefit of the iranian people nor Iran, but islam.

And I'm myself not a shahi, but if I had to choose bewteen the pahlavis (Even today) and a liberal or islamic government, i would choose them without a doubt.... Cause Iranians want a nationalistic government. We want to benefit our ownselves!




by Shepesh on


Iraneh Azad

Q, thanks for offering additional examples for my list

by Iraneh Azad on

This blog is excellent. Now we can probably add number 14 & 15 statements to your anti Iranian, pro hezbollahi, Karnameh.


Don't wast your time with militant Islamist

by vildemose on

A Question of Numbers

August 08, 2003
Cyrus Kadivar

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


People why do you wast your time with an ex-basiji and a faker reformer.


salman farsi

The Shah's regime started the cycle

by salman farsi on

Long before amnesty International was founded, the cycle of torture and executions started after the August 1953 Coup de Etate, with the execution of the Tudeh Party's military organization. Later it was Dr Fatemi and then, the death machinery gained momentum with the emergnece of the MKO and PFGO (Fadaian Khalgh). There is no harm done to the defence of human rights by accepting the violations of human rights in Pahlavi regime but your argument is discredited by denying them 


Q what about figures for IRI

by Faramarz_Fateh on

Lets say, for the sake of argument the the info you posted is accurate; its not but we'll pretend.

What about facts on IRI?  The issue is whether the Shah's regime compared to the IRI, was the same, better or worse vis a vis oppression and torture.

It is my opinion (unlike Robert Friske, I am not an alcoholic and I don't make a living licking Arab rectums) that IRI is much MUCH worse than the Pahlavi era.

Normally people like you will never answer a question directly, specially if the answer is detrimental to their cause.


Nousha Arzu

Amnesty International

by Nousha Arzu on

tell me where that organization is/was based in 1975? London, by any chance???

And I'm sure you know this, but AI was a major force in the British/American conspiracy against the Shah in the mid-1970's. Exactly at a time when the Shah was implementing a more independent oil policy for Iran, the western world "suddenly" discovered political prisoners in Iran, and at an inflated, obscene scale! Like the dirty cop in Casablanca, "Oh, there's gambling at Rick's?"

Why weren't groups like Amnesty International and all the other western do-gooders bothering with such negative reports back in the '50's (when there was a massive purge against the Tudeh) or the '60's when the Shah was "their man?" My point is, exaggerations were deliberately made, not just by Islamic crooks, but by western organizations fronting for western governments and their sponsors, the oil industry, even in 1974, so as to destabalize the monarchy.

There are tons of books and sources that document this fact, even a recent L.A. Times article accused the Ford Administration of destablizing the monarchy so as to punish the Shah for its aggressive oil policies. So, yes, it started even before Carter. That's because post 1973, and OPEC, the Shah was "getting too big for his boots," as the former Brisith Ambassador wrote in a report back to 10 Downing Street.  

All of this is irrelevant insorfar as today's events are concerned. Why don't you focus on today, and not the past??? Perhaps because today's events make the IRI seem a BILLION times worse than the Shah's regime.

Have a good night, going to sleep!





Nousha jan, grow up!

by Q on

read carefully, the piece claims "total number" from 1974 (3 years prior to '77) to 1979. The book quotes Secretary General of Amnesty International.

Don't play games, or shoot the messenger. It's so lame and un-creative. Don't make ridiculous accusations, when you get desperate.

You have better sources? You can cite them and there can be a debate about it. Short of that, don't waste people's time with illogical drivel.

Just because there were SOME exaggerations (which were all much higher than this number), doesn't mean EVERYTHING you don't like is a lie. Think for just a second!

This is what I wrote 8 hours ago:

I will now go get a sandwitch before any angry denials, changing of subjects and creative personal attacks can begin! ANYTHING but acceptance of reality from the usual apologists!

Thanks for being so predictable!

Nousha Arzu


by Nousha Arzu on

"from the book The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism 1979."


That's like quoting abject lies and misinformation from someone like Khalkhali and saying, "from the book, Khaterat, 1995." That monster actually wrote a book, in which he accused Cyrus the Great of being a child molester.

I can't help laugh when I come across these selective quotes from massively biased and propaganda sources. You're just like your former master, Khalkhali, Q, what with your version of "facts," you're in real good company. I'm sure I just made your day! No need to thank me, old sport. 



Nousha Arzu

The house hezbollahi writes:

by Nousha Arzu on

"estimates of the total number of political prisoners run from 25,000 to 100,000."

Utterly asinine! There were less than 3,000 documented political prisoners in 1978, which included the likes of Khalkhali, Rafsanjani, and Khamenei! They deserved to be locked up. Relying on falsified British propaganda as "fact" is exactly what you hezbollahis are good at. Remember, you won the revolution already, through massive misinformation I might add.

What else do you want, the Shah's corpse?

Even Akbar Ghanji, a former revolutionary (one of your former buddies, I'm sure), PUBLICLY admitted just last year that the Islamic revolutionaries exaggerated the Shah's crimes so as to win the revolution. Job well done, buddy! The turbaned terrorists won -- but may I ask, what have you righteous Islamists done for Iran? How has the nation fared under your Islamic dictatorship?

All of this is misdirection, of course -- to take the focus off the real issue at hand: the monumental mismanagement of Iranian affairs since 1979. The country is in a far far far worse shape today, thanks to your Arab revolution. Aren't you Arbabized traitors happy? You screwed Iran, you accomplished your goals. What else could you possibly want, our souls?

You shameless IRI supporters are worse than your despicable masters in Tehran.




Nousha Arzu

"The Shah was just as bad"

by Nousha Arzu on

You're so vile and polluted (and shamelessly insulting) if you really truly think that.





Sorry Faramarz, looks like you CAN compare very easily

by Q on

Faramarz, crying doesn't work in argumentation. Your feelings and accusations are worthless and will not convince anybody. Attacking the messenger isn't going to help you.

Fisk's account is accurate.

Here's some more FACTS for you to ponder:

The number of officially acknowledged executions of political prisoners in the three years prior to 1977 was some 300; and estimates of the total number of political prisoners run from 25,000 to 100,000. They are not well-treated. Martin Ennals, Secretary-General of Amnesty International, noted that Iran has the "highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture, which is beyond belief. No country in the world has a worse record in human rights than Iran."

The Iranian secret police has received generous training and support from the United States, which has deluged its Iranian client with arms, "priming" it, as a Senate report noted, to serve as the gendarme for U.S. interests throughout the crucial oil-producing regions of the Middle East. When the Iranian people rose in an astonishing and completely unexpected demonstration of mass popular opposition to the terror and corruption of the Shah, the Free Press obediently described this bloody tyrant as a great "liberalizer" who was attempting to bring to his backward country the benefits of modernization, opposed by religious fanatics and left-wing students. Newsweek described the demonstrators as "an unlikely coalition of Muslim fundamentalists and leftist activists" (22 May 1978) while Time added that "the Shah also has a broad base of popular support" (5 June 1978). Citing these and many other examples in a review of press coverage, William A. Dorman and Ehsan Omad write that "We have been unable to find a single example of a news or feature story in the mainstream American press that uses the label 'dictator' to describe the Shah." There is barely a mention in the media of the facts on the magnitude of corruption, the scale of police terror and torture, the significance of the fantastic expenditures for arms-the police and military establishments are probably the only elements of Iranian society that could be described as fully "modernized"-and the devastating effects on the majority of the population of the agricultural reforms and urban priorities.

As the Shah's U.S.-armed troops murdered hundreds of demonstrators in the streets, President Carter sent his support, reaffirming the message he had delivered in Teheran several months earlier, when he stated at a banquet: "Iran under the great leadership of the Shah is an island of stability in one of the more troubled areas of the world. This is a great tribute to you, Your Majesty, and to your leadership, and to the respect, admiration and love which your people give to you."

from the book The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism 1979.


Anonymous8 I agree. Thanks for being an adult in this conversation. Let's see if these people can get past personal prejudices, pretending their own lives was the typical experience and of course attacking the messenger when they can't refute the message.


The shah was just as bad

by Anonymous8 on

why do people have to get so hysterical? The Pahlavi dictatorship was just as bad, cruel, tortorers. the only difference is that they were friends of america, so their torture was tolerated much like Saudis and Chinese today. blaming the iraq war on the mullahs is illogical.

You say there is "no comparison" but people are now comparing Shah's torture to IRI torture! why can't you condemn TORTURE and DICTATORSHIP whenever you see it?


Torture is torture! don't lose your humanity by trying to win a stupid point. nobody cares about these petty taghooti against revolutionary battles any more!

Nousha Arzu

Not to mention,

by Nousha Arzu on

TENS OF THOUSANDS of little boys, eleven and twleve years old, who were sent to the front lines of the Iraq war by the tretcherous Hendi mullah, and slaughtered in the name of Islam, all of whom had plastic "keys to Heavan" hanging from their necks. 

Comparing the IRI with the Shah's regime is so mindless, so eggregiously irresponsible, endlessly insulting, and even more ignorant. 

Have a good night!




by Behnamjan (not verified) on


Nousha Arzu

It's what you deserve

by Nousha Arzu on

for writing that the Shah's regime was "slightly" better than the IRI. That's not just an "opinion." It's a twisted opinion that floats on a massive sea of blood spilled by the mullahs over 30 years. Just consider that the mullahs UNNECESSARILy continued the Iran-Iraq war for 6 years after 8 peace offers were presented to them in 1982, all of which they rejected so that they could liquidate Iran's opposition movement and silence dissent in the name of patriotism.

Almost ONE MILLION Iranians died in that F'd up war -- and the vast majority were killed UNNECESSARILY in order to facilitate the IRI's survival -- not to mention the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Iranians that have been killed outside of war. In the summer of 1988 alone, the IRI murdererd over 25,000 political prisoners!

How dare you diminish the massive/monumental scale of the crimes of the IRI by equating them to the Shah's regime. You should be ashamed of yourself!



Nousha Arzu

One more thing...

by Nousha Arzu on

In 1980, the French newspaper, Le Monde, did a study on torture in Iran under the second Pahlavi Shah. Firstly, numerous people who were supposedly amputed by the Savak were found in Iran to be walking in perfect shape, with no missing body parts!

Others who we were told were murdered by the Savak, were found alive, and on the payroll of the IRI. In all the years of the Shah's regime, the French study came up with a total of 171 people that were tortured by the Savak, and less than 8,000 murdered under both Pahlavi kings (the majority of those killed were in minority separatist squirmishes under Reza Shah, with the majority of the rest being Marxist and Tudeh party members).

First of all, let me just say... even one "innocent" person tortured is too many, but we were told by the revolutionaries in 1978 that tens of thousands of innocent Iranians were tortured by the Savak!

Moreover, you have to realize that the monarchy was under total seige in the 1970's. The mullahs, by comparison, have it so much easier today. Firstly, the mullahs won the SUPER LOTTO when the Soviet Union collapsed. For decades, if not centuries, EVERY Persian king had to walk on pins and needles worrying about the Russians and their aggressive expansionist policies.

They had troops right on our northern borders for decades, and were always a threat to invade. Back in the 19th century, they annexed much of our territories in several humiliating wars, even bombed the Majlis during the Constitutional revolution, and finally invaded Iran as part of the allied invasion in 1941 and did not leave until 1946. And then you had the parasitic British in the South usurping Iran's Oil as per Qajar concessions dating back to 1908.

Iran was a pawn for nearly 200 years.

And the Soviet Union heavily financed subversive activities by the Tudeh. And then you had the terrorist robots of the Mujahedin, and the religious fanatics in the Fedayoon-e-Islam, then you had the despicable mullahs up to no good, their masters, the British and their shananigans -- the Shah's government was literally under seige from all corners (not to mention the usual separatist movements in Kurdistan, Baluchestan and Khuzestan).

In 1977, even the Americans and the CIA became active enemies. Of course, there had to be a secret police service. Otherwise, the mujahedin, the Soviet bankrolled Tudeh, the Fedayoon-e-Islam, and the rest of the militant groups would've eaten the monarchy alive.

So yes, even one innocent person tortured is too many, but the Shah's regime, unlike IRI rapists, was not in the business of torturing innocent people -- the vast majority of those tortured and killed by the Savak were Tudeh traitors who wanted to hand our beautiful country on a silver platter to their Russian masters, and Mujahedin maniacs, and Fedayoon extremists dreaming of an Islamic Republic!

Frankly, the Savak was either massivly incompetent or nothing more than a matarsak (strawman). Perhaps if they had killed a good number of these traitors and terrorists maybe the nightmare of the last 30 years would not have happened.





by Behnamjan (not verified) on


Nousha Arzu

Dear Faramarz

by Nousha Arzu on

Why would you open up this can of worms, giving despicable characters the forum to even compare the Shah with these IRI rapists. It's amazing there are people who describe the Savak as per the musings and utter fabrications of a known western fabricator on the payroll of the British government (ala Ayatollah BBC), and those who say that the Shah's regime was "slightly" better than the present regime. These people are either on the payroll of the IRI, or related to IRI employees, or morally bankrupt or monumentally ignorant or both.

Please go read the book, "Persian Mirrors," by the liberal New York Times writer, Elaine Sciolino, who's no Pahlavi supporter! In it, prisoners from both the Shah's Evin and the mullahs' Evin are interviewed, and it is alarming what they have to say about the Evin of the mullahs. Even Marvin Zonis, a long time critic of the Shah, has written in retrospect that the Shah's crimes, whatever they were, were "petty" compared to the massive brutality/thievery of the tretcherous IRI.

The morally depraved revolutionaries told us (lied to us) about Cinema Rex. They told us some 4,300 people were killed at Jaleh Square on Black Friday. The real number was 134 killed, many of them in the order of Neda, shot and killed by Palestinian Sharpshooters positioned atop the buildings in Meydoon Jaleh. These Palestian terrorists fired into the crowds and at the army, which naturally fired back.

As the evil Hendi Mullah had famously said, this revolution is like a tree that needs the blood of martyrs to grow. And their Palestinian terrorists gave them just that, first in setting Cinema Rex on fire, and then a month later at Jaleh Square.

To compare the Shah's regime with the mullahs gangstership, is an injustice to Iran, to the Iranian people and to Iranian history. The IRI is the most evil, barbaric, morally depraved regime in the history of Iran, since their Arab forefathers attacked us at Qadiseye. This is a regime, mind you, that gang rapes VIRGINS the night before they are to be executed, and then charges the parents for the bullets!

Honestly, there is no room for comparison! You're more than welcome to compare the IRI beasts and rapists with the Mongol invasion or the 1st Arab invasion (the 1979 Islamic revolution being the 2nd Arab invasion), but comparing them to the Pahlavi Dynasty is honestly a DISGUSTING CRIME itself!





by Behnamjan (not verified) on




by sag koochooloo on




by shushtari on

how they bring up savak....and the bs that brits write about it!

wasn't it the brits who nurtured and brought that p.o.s. khomeini to iran????

and if savak was so savage, then why the f*()k didn't they mow down all the mullahs in feizeye qom or take care of khomeini in iraq???

so cut the crap, this is the same bs along the lines of savak burned down cinema rex, or that 10000 people died at jaleh sq!!!

 you can only recycle crap so much LOL 


Dearest Q

by Faramarz_Fateh on

Thank you so much for setting us straight.

I just got off the phone with a few friends who are staying at the Evin resort.  They told me of the international buffett, the sea food bar and the traditional Iranian food section with fresh kabob.

They also said Evin just added whole body massages that are to die for.

BTW, next time, take time and quote from someone a wee bit more credible than Robert "I love Lebanese women" Friske.



khaleh mosheh

It is deceitful to quote

by khaleh mosheh on

Robert Fisk, so selectively. 

This article by Robert Fisk makes it obvious what he thinks of the the regime.


PS- Playing the victim for Islamists does not really wash- They are truly morally bankrupt. 

Red Wine


by Red Wine on

i love your comments... so true and so good.thx a lot .

good blog faramarz jan .thx



No comparison? Maybe you are right, we can decide ourselves:

by Q on

Here's Robert Fiske's description of SAVAK dungeon:

From where did this brutality come? One of the regime’s new officials said the Shah’s Savak intelligence men were Nazi-type criminals. And how could I argue with this when reporters such as Derek Ive of the AP had managed to look inside a Savak agent’s house just before the revolution was successful? “There was a fishpond outside,” he told me. “There were vases of flowers in the front hall. But downstairs there were cells. In each of them was a steel bed with straps and beneath it two domestic cookers. There were lowering devices on the bedframes so the people strapped to them could be brought down on the flames. In another cell, I found a machine with a contraption which held a human arm beneath a knife and next to it was a metal sheath into which a human hand could be fitted. At one end was a bacon slicer. They had been shaving off hands.”

Derek Ive found a pile of human arms in a corner and, in a further cell, he discovered pieces of a corpse floating in inches of what appeared to be acid. Amid such savagery was the Iranian revolution born.


I will now go get a sandwitch before any angry denials, changing of subjects and creative personal attacks can begin! ANYTHING but acceptance of reality from the usual apologists!

Good show!