پندارنیک

Jews didn't kill Iranians, Arabs did for 8 years

Israel didn't invade Iran nor did she kill any Iranians, but Arabs did in 1980. Iraqis invaded and all 27 Arab states supported them. So why we have to close our eyes to historical facts. However, 

The bottom line is

Forget jews

Forget Arabs

Payandeh IRAN

So, why are you here talking about it 24/7?!!!

You say:

" The very nature of question of Israel in the region, if not in the world, has nothing to do with Iran..."

So, why are you here, on this Iranian website, 24/7, talking about every single thing that happens in Israel / Palestine?  Why don't you move on to an Arab or Israeli website and talk about your object of obsession?  

Roozbeh jaan

Although I'm not a "lefty" myself (or a "righty" for that matter), and like Amir I thoroughly condemn those on the left that from the begining supported this nightmare ruling Iran, I don't paint everyone with the same brush.

While I might not necessarily agree with you on every issue, I like and admire a lot of your contribution here, because regardless of the subject at hand, you always speak up for, freedom, Human Rights, justice and against those who trample all over these rights. On top of which you obviously have genuine love for Iran.

Anyone who encompasses these attributes is exactly the kind of person Iran will need to drag out of the quagmire, and it doesn't matter if they are from the left, right or the middle. We need such like minded people to unite and bring about change in Iran, and the sooner the better.

Maryam jaan,

Ghorbanet and thank you. For what it's worth, I support a "two-state" solution within Israel's 1967 borders, but I also have no illusions that the future Palestinian state will be anything but another rotten Arab state (after all, why would this one be any different than the other 20 Arab states)? However, I see no reason why any decent Iranian or other non-Arab would wish to adopt the "cause" of Iran's modern and historic enemies (i.e. the Arabs, who have killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians during our own lives) against a country, i.e. Israel, which does not occupy one inch of Iranian land and is not killing Iranian civilians. Regards.

Like I said before, Lenin called

he wants his failed ideology back. You know, the one that resulted in the fialure of one of the sup...sup...superpowers, the USSR, and the one that China is slowly moving away from......And we have Iranians who beat their chests about communism, tudeh and their derivatives, i.e, Cherikhaye Fadayi Khalgh (eliminated by the akhunds after the Islamic takeover), etc., etc...
I can see a bright future for Iran with this kind of mindset -- NOT!
When are we going to learn?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

"Correction Please!"

I can most confidently change it to "any reading of Islam" which would still leave us with the same practical outcome/application.

Amir1973, Excellent rebuttle

Great discussion.  I agree with you all the way. I love this part:

I am an Iranian both of whose parents are Muslim, and I have no connection to Israel or to the Holy rocks, stones and sand of yet another backwards, no-good piece of Arab land known as "Palestine". If you want to worry about "cause celebre" occupations, may i suggest adopting the cause of the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus, the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, the Indian occupation of Kashmir, etc, etc. What the world really needs is one more lousy Arab state called "Palestine", because the currently existing 20 or so Arab states just are not enough. Boro, Comrade Pendar-e Neek: any minute now Comrade Khrushchev's prediction of the USSR "burying" the Capitalist West is about to come true. Oh, yeah.

Roozbeh,

That in itself can be the topic of a good blog...

It is the subject of at least two books with which you may be familiar: Khomeinism and Tortured Confessions.

And yes, the Tudeh and Fadaiyan-e Aksariat organizations, whose ranks were decimated by IRI repression, subsequently did denounce the mullah-led regime (I believe in the mid-1980s, if I am not mistaken?)

Dear Amir

You are absolutely correct on initial collaboration of Tudeh and Fadayian aksariat organisation, which indeed continued right up to the point Kianoory and the entire leadership were arrested and made to confess to their "crimes' and /or executed. That in itself can be the topic of a good blog...

But as far as this particlar - insult filled towards Iranians - blog is concerned, suffice to say both Tudeh and fadayian-aksariat , have long given up any  hope of a slice of the pie from the Islamist  regime and are in no way supportive of the fascist regime. Certainly not  the way this particular mozdoor is. 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Dear Roozbeh,

You may very well be right about our esteemed friend. And of course, it is an indisputable fact that the Islamist terrorist regime has killed thousands of Marxists. Unfortunately, it is also a fact that the Tudeh Party and the Majority Fadaiyan faction (or at least the leaders of those groups) sided with the Islamists when the regime was targeting other opponents (e.g. monarchists, Mojahedin, liberals, etc). The degree of collaboration between the Tudeh leaders and the mollahs in the initial years of the IRI was such that I believe the satirist Hadi Khorsandi (or someone else?) suggested changing the phrase "Kargaran-e Jahan Mottahed Shavid" to "Kargaran-e Jahan Mojtahed Shavid". That being said, I support and sympathize with democratic socialists, including those who oppose the IRI. Regards.

Amir1973, can you smell it?.

True Marxists, socialists and communists are enemies of the Islamic regime and have paid a very high price for this for the past 32 years. Tens of thousands of dead to be more precise. 

It is a well known fact that Islamist regime employes cyber agents on  web sites pretending to be Communists, Nationalist, Monarchists, etc. The intention is to create confusion, division and disunity amongst opposition forces.

I tend to smell the stench of a cyber Bassiji Rat from many Giga bytes away! 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Correction Please!

"...any version of Islam???"

Islam is purely versionless. It has stayed the same since the time of Prophet Ibrahim. Please make the correction. Thank you.

"[And as for thee, O Prophet,] nothing is being said to thee but what was said to all [of God's] apostles before thy time. (41:43, Quran)"

Boro, Comrade

I am an Iranian both of whose parents are Muslim, and I have no connection to Israel or to the Holy rocks, stones and sand of yet another backwards, no-good piece of Arab land known as "Palestine". If you want to worry about "cause celebre" occupations, may i suggest adopting the cause of the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus, the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, the Indian occupation of Kashmir, etc, etc. What the world really needs is one more lousy Arab state called "Palestine", because the currently existing 20 or so Arab states just are not enough. Boro, Comrade Pendar-e Neek: any minute now Comrade Khrushchev's prediction of the USSR "burying" the Capitalist West is about to come true. Oh, yeah.

Once again, cheers!

So this...

The subject of this blog has nothing to do with Khomeini, his foes or friends. The very nature of question of Israel in the region, if not in the world, has nothing to do with Iran or any version of Islam. The Issue is the "occupied land" and the legal obligation of the state of Israel to return to the borders of 67, as stipulated in the UN Security Council 242.

I'm not naive enough to believe that I can change your mind, but the growth of the number of mature and educated third-party readers, who happen to be the target of peace-advocating blogs on the net is, sadly for you and happily for me, increasing at an accelerating rate.......All you have to do is  look around and study the unbiased  public opinions... 

The time has never been this right: Get out of the Palestinian's occupied land and help yourselves survive...

Say what, Comrade?

The bitter political reality on the ground is absolutely independent from who the blogger or the interviewee is.

So the outlandish and imbecilic "observations" made by the same Richard Falk re: Khomeini are now being spun as "political reality" by our in-house Stalinist turned purveyor of "ancient Purrrrzhheennn wisdom". Run along now, Comrade, run along. Cheers!

yeah like, and like

 what about Libya and Syria and stables?

And where is my public response? Pffft, I'll tell "them"! 

P.S. You look so skinny with your current user ID.  

Of being a Khomeini groupie etc...

The bitter political reality on the ground is absolutely independent from who the blogger or the interviewee is. The character assassination tactic is grossly overused, totally outdated, and more than obviously ineffective.

PFFFTTT! I know you fancy her, but

 he's just saying what most sane analysts are saying and of course, with Egypt no longer heralding the Arab League side of the bargain, well... 

It's all just so sad. You should see the regular marches of "Jewish" and "Palestian Muslim" mothers demanding peace, which doesn't do the arms industry any good... 

If I say any more, I'm going to sound clever! 

Carry on....  

To Perrrrrrzhen Stalinists bearing Zoroastrian words of wisdom

Is there a proper Marxian, class-conscious way to say "Khar Khodeti"?

Comrade aka Pendar-e Neek & Richard Falk aka Khomeini Groupie

In February 1979, shortly after Emam stepped off the chartered Air France flight which took him from Neauphle-le-Chateau to Tehran, this same Richard Falk wrote an op-ed in the NY Times entitled "Trusting Khomeini". Below are excerpts from Falk's piece:

"[Khomeini] also indicated that the non-religious left will be free to express its views in an Islamic republic and to participate in political life, provided only that it does not "commit treason against the country" by establishing foreign connections-a lightly-veiled reference to anxiety about Soviet interference.

To suppose that Ayatollah Khomeini is dissembling seems almost beyond belief. His political style is to express his real views defiantly and without apology, regardless of consequences. He has little incentive suddenly to become devious for the sake of American public opinion. Thus the depiction of him as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false. What is also encouraging is that his entourage of close advisers is uniformly composed of moderate progressive individuals.[T]hey are widely respected in Iran outside religious circles, share a notable record of concern for human rights and seem eager to achieve economic development that results in a modern society oriented on satisfying the whole population's basic needs. 

Ayatollah Khomeini said recently, in France, that in any well-governed 
society "the ruler does not live very differently from the ordinary person." For him, to be religious is to struggle for these political goals, yet the religious leader's role is to inspire politics, not to govern. Hence, it is widely expected that he will soon go to the holy city of Qum, at a remove from the daily exercise of power. There he will serve as a guide or, if necessary, as a critic of the republic. 

In looking to the future, Ayatollah Khomeini has spoken of his hopes to show the world what a genuine Islamic government can do on behalf of its people. He has made clear frequently that he scorns what he considers to be the so-called Islamic Governments in Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Pakistan. Despite the turbulence, many non-religious Iranians talk of this period as "Islam's finest hour." Having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on non-violent tactics. Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country. If this is true, then indeed the exotic Ayatollah may yet convince the world that "politics is the opiate of the people."