ETERAZ

Conversation with Mammad

My friend: I had left Fanni the summer of 1972 after about 6 years as our graduation was delayed because of strikes and Fanni's class closures. I think Hamid was 2 or 3 years my senior and returned to Fanni for a very brief time in 1969 or so. We were curious about the new student faces that showed up and then disappeared from the classes. When I asked later who they were: I was told Hamid Ashraf and some others I can not remember. None of this was very important at the time. As an FYI I shared chemistry lab with Nastaran Al-Agha because of the alphabetical order of our names. So between two of us we know some very brave young people who made up their minds to defend their "people" by armed struggle. The damage they managed to inflict on others around them did not seem to concern them too much. Please do not interpret my comments as pro this and against that, because it is not. I wish you well.

Aziz khan

To my knowledge, once Hamid Ashraf got involved with armed struggle against the Shah, he never made it back to Daneshkadeh Fanny of the University of Tehran (I could be wrong, since this was nearly 40 years ago, but I doubt it). I was a freshman at Fanny in 1351 (1972), and by then Hamid Ashraf was deep into armed struggle. By then, he was already a legend. Those who have been to Fanny know that there is a huge piece of stone right at the entrace (it is still there). Because the stone has a lot of metal in it, it is extremely heavy. The legend had that Hamid could move it.

Some - and this is only a partial list - of my contemporaries (some were friends and classmates as well) at Fanny, or people who were there just before I arrived there, who were killed later were Razi Taban, Mansoor Farshidi, Mahmoud Namazi, Anoushirvan Lotfi, Hamid Aryan, Hossein Khazraei, Hasan Dashtara, Sasan Tabrizi, Ali Zarkesh, Ali Mihandoust, Mohammad Ali Bagheri, ..... All good, brave people. Some were murdered by Shah, some by the IRI, such as Lotfi (whose murder is well-known and buried in Khavaran). Zarkesh became the military commander of MEK in Iran after Rajavi left Iran, and was killed during Operation Forough Javidan in 1367 (1988). It is said that he had turned against Rajavi, and probably was killed by MEK during that operation.

Another contemporary, friend, and classmate was Saeed Hajjarian, who is now a reformist. Many of the present reformists now are also either friends of that era, or Fanny students during the time I was there.

Enjoy the Hell

To all who sold iran cheap to the lowest bidder, let it be islam, mullas, marx, lenin, Mao, etc. May you all rot in Hell along with Khomeini, Khalkhali, Lenin, Mao, Pal Pot, Changiz, Taymoor, Omar, Saddam, Alexander the great, russian tzars, and the rest of bloody islamists and end-less permutations of leftists and ideologues.

These people thought they had all the answers and destroyed iran in just under 30 years as soon as they got the chance. The main problem of the shah was that he was totally unaware of how nasty these traitors were.

question for Mammad

Mammad- If you can verify this I appreciate it:
I think Hamid was back in Fanni (from his forced military service) for a short time before going into hiding.

If this not the case I would like to know.

Which years was he at Fanni??

Thank you for your comments

Aziz

don't believe the kidnapping charge

Jamshid jan, this was a SAVAK fabrication. Nobody believes trumped up charges from IRI or Russia either. We cannot take either governments word at face value.

I don't think Palestine is very relevant to Iran.

Golesorkhi was an authentic iranian hero. He was aware that it did not matter what the charges were and what he said in his defense.

Re: Sadegh

You are forgetting that many of those who attack Golsorkhi in this thread may have been brutalized by the current regime, and since they link him to others who brought us this regime, they are simply reacting from the depths of their pain when they attack golsorkhi.

As exactly Golsorkhi did by reacting to the previous regime, to the point that HE wanted to kidnap and "murder" members of the Shah's family.

As Palestians today are reacting to Israeli's to the point that they are willing to "murder" citizens of Israel, as Iraqis are reacting to the US to the point that... Need I go on?

You cannot be sensitive to people's pain in a selective way.

Re: Ben Madadi

I agree with you. Killing is wrong. However, I must remind you that he was executed for planning to kidnap and murder members of the royal family, not for his ideology. This is a serious crime in any country. Also he was given a chance to repent but he rejected.

But even then he should not have been executed. He should have been allowed to sit at a round table with others to speak, and then be countered by the other participants at that table. The same should have been done with Khomeini.

Instead, the Shah's regime banned Khomeini's books (instead of openly countering them) keeping us in dark, paving the way for idiots like me to end up supporting the revolution and ultimately destroying our country.

Wow!

Iranians accepted Islam as their religion...

You need to re-review your history:

When people of Fars [Estakhr] rebelled, the 4th Caliph [Emam Ali] ordered them put down until no rebellion remained. [Tarikhe Balami].

For islamists, iranians welcomed islam, the same way that they welcome rule of vali-e-faghih today; for realists, islam was force-fed down iranian throats. The choice was between death or accepting islam.

shahollahis never have respected life or freedom

that has been a fact in iranian history up to the present.

Aziz, Sadegh, and Afshin

Aziz Khan:

I absolutely do not mean any disrespect, but Hamid Ashraf could not have sat next to you two years before his death, unless you were either a sympathizer or member of Cherik haa-ye Fadaaee Khalgh. Ashraf was in hiding for years. His brother Pirouz was a friend and contemporary of mine at Fanny, University of Tehran, and he went to jailed for one year ONLY because he was Hamid's brother. For years, if any leftist student from my school was arrested, he would be told, "Hami-detoon raa ham migirim," which goes to show how obssessed the SAVAK was with Hamid Ashraf.

Sadegh Jaan:

I was going to say what you said when your comment appeared. I agree with you exactly. The diehard monarchists have one set of standards and morality for themselves, and one for their foes. Most of them are blood thirsty. They supported a fascist regime. So, they shed crocodile tears for lack of democracy in Iran. What bothers them is not that there is no democracy in Iran, rather that they are not in power.

Afshin:

True, the charges against Golsorkhi and Karamatollah Daneshian, Golsorkhi's friend and cohort, were planning to kindnap. However, there was no fair trial, or any trial. There was only a military show trial. In the US, if one is convicted of the same, he will get a maximum of five years in prison. And if Golsorkhi and Daneshian had asked for clemency, and agreed to work with the system - the way Parviz Nikkhah and other former Maoists and Toodeeei did - everything would have been forgotten. But, these men believed in their cause and stood by their beliefs. Regardless of whether one agrees with them or not, there is, in my opinion, little doubt, if any, about their bravery and courage.

To all:

Golsorkhi and Daneshian were Marxists not Islamic Marxists. But, they respected the religion of the vast majority of Iranians, and they also respected the courage and justice of Imam Hossein and Imam Ali. That is all. I wish that some people who comment in this site learn from these two brave men about how to respect the beliefs of others.

Facts only...

It needs an impartial researcher to dig into each and every one of these cases to see what kind of judgment they deserved. It is therefore difficult to fairly judge the ones that were executed. But it is somewhat reasonable to assume that the hardcore ones were eliminated and softer ones survived and released from prison.

However, according to baghi, some 370 souls were killed in various ways during the entire shah's regime. A lot more survived his prisons.

Amongst the softer ones who survived were likes of rafsanjani (the architect of hanging thousands by cranes), khomeini (the architect of iraq war and prisoners' mass murders, with blood of some 550,000 innocent iranians on his hands), khamenei (the brutal dictator who has killed as many as 100+ souls in a soft year in the name of allah and islam, who does not believe that iranians have no right to decide how to dress let alone have any other basic rights), and masoud rajavi (no need to list his crimes).

Now in the hind sight, wasn't iran better off if all these were also eliminated. The only conclusion is that shah was way too soft with those who were intent on bringing iran to its knees and turning it back to medieval days.

These bunch have been screaming about freedom and people's right, and when they got the chance, what did they do? Murder from day 1 followed by total destruction of iran that we knew. Those who still call shah's regime fascist, must be either islamists/leftist, or indifferent to what is going on in iran today, or permanently imprisoned in their ideology.

Everything is relative in this world, and now that in the hind-sight we know what kind of nasty people we had amongst us, shah cannot be viewed as anything but a saint in the eyes of impartial people who love iran and are void of any religious or ideological beliefs and are void of any agenda or ambitions. Sigh that savak was way too incompetent to identify those enemies of iran and distinguish between them and those very very few who may have been imprisoned by mistake; although such mistakes routinely occur even in free western countries.

Ultimately, had all those revolutionaries had any good intentions, shah was willing to give then freedom, as bakhtiar has said. They did not want freedom, they wanted control of power and wealth to bring down iran to the disaster that we see today, only to serve their personal ambitions.

//uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tObnPqLfdSI&feature=...

//uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rWBPH_CSfoU&feature=...

//uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VQxcTT9hgCo&NR=1

//uk.youtube.com/watch?v=f1gso1XSWpQ

I find it incredible that

I find it incredible that many here who pour scorn on the mullahs for their lack of respect for human life, are so bloody thirsty, vicious and unforgiving, when it comes to murdering those to whom they are ideologically opposed. These people don't believe in human rights, they just are sore because they're no longer in power, in a word, they're hypocrites. They apply one standard to themselves and another one to others. This is the definition of 'human rights qua ideology'. How can you expect mercy from your adversaries when you're absolutely devoid of mercy when it comes to engaging those whom you dislike or disagree with. Those of you who said that the Shah should have killed more 'men like this' are confirming this view beautifully, if somewhat disturbingly, thank you. The Shah was a tyrant and the velayat-e-faqih is equally tyrannical. So many Iranians have proven themselves to have such a short memory and so readily welcome the next tyrant with open arms...Like I said, we replaced one elite with another, both believe they possessed the truth and both thought they were right in depriving others of their lives and freedom in order to realize their objectives...Those who live by the sword die by the sword, it's perhaps a cliche but nevertheless for the most part proves to be true...Recpect and coexistence are the only way forward, when all is said and done 'Iran' and by extension the world, belong to none of us and all of us....

Kind regards, Sadegh

According to the logic of IR

According to the logic of IR propagndists on this site, Revolution is necessary and justified given the barbaric mullahs' track record, which is a million times worse that the Shah's.

Such a brave but confuse man!

I have not seen this back then and I am so glad to see it now. It made me so sad,beyond imagination! Idealistic men like him ,so brave but absolutely confused between being a Muslim and a Marxist ,brought IRI on a bloody silver platter to our dear land . We deserved better than this !!!!!
Shah was wrong to kill him, because he should have been alive to see the result of his thinking , I am sure he would have repented and kissed shah's hand.
His execution was not fair, neither killing of our innocent youth by thousands in IRI slaughter houses.
Because of people like him we are in this Jahanam,may god have pity on his confused soul,since I am sure he is feeling really guilty somewhere between 72 virgins and nothingness!!!

What about now?

hey agha Q, now is much worse isn't it? People are condemned to death and executions by 'jaresaghil' scales take place all over the land with 'trials' were one filthy akhoonds sits and judges. All over the land. According to what you said, a new revolution is justified. Are you for a revolution to topple the akhoond regime?
Why do you always defend this regime if that is so?
Huh?

oops-correction

In case my earlier comment is posted, the dates I meant were early 1970's (1972) not 1982.

Aziz

I have to agree with Afshin

Afshin's perspective appears to be reasonable and fits the events as I recall them. Was Shah's regime repressive? My classmate Abolhassan Khatib was arrested in # 1972 after return from his training mission in red China. He was sent to military service to cool down and returned to technical school only to garduate and then be executed after regime change by IRI. This is what Afshin postulates for Gol-e-Sorkhi had he been spared. Was Shah's police brutal? I still recall Hamid Ashraf's sitting next to me in a classromm after his first release by Shah's police and about 2 years before his death during street gun battles with security. Most "opinion"s expressed in these blogs are romantic day dreaming by those who were not there. I do not claim I know anything,nor ask that anyone should read my input- and I keep it short- but I know most comments I read are hot air. Afshin makes a good point.

delusional

Golsorkhi  is truly delusional, confused between fundamental Islamic ideas and backward socialism, both of which are not the answer to social problems. Let’s not make another martyr out of a lost cause.

To : Q

Dear Friend:

 You brought up Takhti. I do not know if he committed suicide, or he was killed, but don't you think his own family would be at forthfront of getting the truth about his death?

 Don't you think his son, Babak Takhti, would call his Dad a martyr, proudly, if there were even some question that his death was a murder?

 To this day, his family has been silent about it . The same reaction Khomeini family showed, when the public tried to announce their son, Mostafa, as a murder victim. If the families don't see a murder, who are we to keep insisting it was a murder?

  There are some, on this site, who have made up their mind, and want to exonerate the Shah's regime, at any cost; and there are those, who want to condemn it, at any cost.

 But the silent majority, believe me, are those who are just after the truth, no matter where they end up.

:-)

Ali P. 

Golsorkhi was an idealist

Golsorkhi was an idealist who truely believed in Socialism and was prepared to go to the extreme for his ideals. I don't believe that he was a toodehi. There is a big difference between a true socialist and a traitor toodehi.

Javid Shah

Kangaroo court

This was a sham court and Golesorkhi did not deserve to be killed. Many of the commentators are mistaken. You can't kill someone just because he doesn't deny a crime. In a real judicial system the crime has to be proven beyond a doubt. Why didn't he get a jury trial for this supposed capital offense. We should recognize a kangaroo court when we see it.

He knew he was going to be killed anyway no matter what he said. Savak never cared about justice before, why would they start with him? He chose to make a political stand instead. That is what makes him a brave man.

Thank you Sadegh, this is what the Shah's Dicatatorship was

all about. For those who can't understand the revolution, they need to watch more of these videos. If you were in that courtroom, you came out a revolutionary.

Imprisonment and torture for the crime of forming a group, and then later killed for "conspiracy". American puppets carrying out CIA policy while sucking the blood out of the Iranian nations. They all got what they deserved for their crimes.

Add Golesorkhi's name to Jahan Pahlavan Takhti and others murdered by the Shah.

What is mind-boggling is the sheer number of brainwashed Monarchists and Monarch-worshippers still running around like parrots making excuses for the brutal dictatorship of the Shah.
Last time we had this discussion, "Colonel Hemayat" said this about Golesorkhi:
"Gholsorkhi was a big "Koskhol", a second rated poet who wanted to get murdered to draw attention."

And now, sadly people here are defending the murder and blaming the victim. This is the warped mentality of the ideological Shah supporters then and now, and it explains perfectly the justification for the revolution.

Courageous Man Helps Reveal True Colours of Some

Some people are showing their true colours here. Hindsight is always 100% correct, and a beautiful thing. A comparison with the present state of affairs in Iran is also instructive.

(1) Those who attack Golsorkhi savagely have forgotten that he was a product of the fascist regime of the Shah. Nobody is born with any particular tendencies. We are all the product of the social and political environment in which we grow up.

Similarly, the brave men and women who struggle in Iran today for democracy and respect for hunman rights are the product of the society and the political environment in which they live.

(2) In a democratic Iran, Golsorkhi and friends would have formed their own political party and would have tried to take power, but would have failed because Marxist-Lenninist ideolgy could not have been sold to the masses. Disagree with Golsorkhi's ideology, but dismiss his right to believe in anything he wanted to.

Similarly, if Iran were democratic at present, all the religious and secular groups could form political groups and compete. Groups like Hezbollah would not succeed at the polls due to their reactionary reading of Islamic teachings and their intolerance.

(3) But, the Shah had created a fascist political regime. He had eliminated all the peaceful opposition, from National Front, to Freedom Movement, to other groups. Golsorkhi's "trial" happened just a year before Shah stopped even pretending that there were political political parties in Iran, dissolved Iran-e Novin, Mardom, and Pan-Iranist "Parties," announced to the world establishment of the fascist Rastakhi Party, akin to what the world has seen in all dictatorship/fascist regimes, and declared, "those who are not happy with this can get their passport and leave Iran."

This is completely similar to the present state of affairs. Just as the Shah could not tolerate peaceful National Front, Freedom Movement, etc., the present system cannot tolerate Freedom Movement, National Front, Mosharekat, Religious-Nationalists, etc.

Completely similar to what the Shah declared, another fascist - this time a religious one - Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi, said recently, "those who are not happy with the Islamic Republic can get their passport and leave Iran."

(4) Golsorkhi had not been put on trial. There was no trial. All the honourable judges in Iran during the Shah's regime were not willing to preside over political trials. Therefore, Shah used military SHOW trials.

Similarly, the honourable judges are not willing to punish the present political activists of today. When Ali Bakhshi, a judge in Tehran, exonerated Akbar Gangi, he was quickly dismissed. All the "trials" in Iran are also done in section 1410 of Tehran judiciary, the equivalent of the Shah's military trials. These show trials are just as bad as what we had during the Shah, because in both cases the final result has already been decided even before the "trial" has started.

(5) Just as people like Gangi, Emad Baghi, Hashem Aghajari, Abbas Abdi, Nasser Zarafshan, .... are told in the IRI to ask for clemency from Ayatollah Khamenei (the new Shah or Soltan), people like Golsorkhi were also told to ask for clemency from Shah. But, just as Gangi, Baghi, Aghajari,.... refuse to do so, so also did Golsorkhi and friends.

(6) Those who lament about what happened 1400 years ago are no better than the present fascists in the IRI who lament about the lost days of revolution when they could kill anybody in the name of defending the revolution.

What Arabs did to Iran 1400 years ago is almost nothing compared with what Europeans did to native people of the Americas, Australia, and Africa. Iranians accepted Islam as their religion, but preserved their culture. We speak the same language as Ferdowsi. We still celebrate our 5000 years old Nowrooz tradition. We still hold our heads up, as we should, and talk about the first universal declaration of human rights in Iran during Kourosh. In fact, Iranians invented Shiism precisely to distinguish themselves from Arabs.

But the people of North, Central, and South America witnessed the take over of their lands by foreigners 400 years ago, and in the process close to 1 million of them were killed, and their culture destroyed. In fact, Europeans did more destruction to these lands than Arabs ever did to Iran. Similarly, Aboriginals saw the take over of their lands by European immigrants in Australia, who committed too many crimes there in order to get rid of the Aboriginals. Africans witnessed the take over of their land in South Africa by the Boers, who established an aparteid regime there.

So, those who are in love with the West, and hate Islams (expressed in terms of hatred for Arabs) do not know what they are talking about.

Gol-e Sorkhi...

Going through comments that have been posted here I did not come across a single entry where his crime was mentioned.  That part of the trial was conveniently left out of this current broadcast that came out a few years ago.  Aside from being a self proclaimed Marxist-Leninist, Mr. Golesorkhi was placed on trial for a multitude of charges.  When he was arrested many of his comrades were in jail serving time for a string armed robberies that were committed throughout Iran.  Their group, much like other terrorist groups needed money to function.  And armed robbery was one of the most effective ways of supporting that.  Mr. Golesorkhi and his cohorts had carefully planned and conspired to kidnap and hold for ransom Reza and Farah Pahlavi in order to secure the release of his friends in jail.  They were arrested before the plot unfolded.  When placed on trial Mr. Golesorkhi instead of mounting a defense, which he couldn't have possibly had one, went on a diatribe of nonsensical pseudointellectual rants talking about the oppressed masses and farmers in particular and condemning the burgoise.  Typical of the now defunct leftist ideologies of the time.  Mr. Golesorkhi barely had a high school education and when you listen to his comments that fact is painfully transcendent.  He was a criminal and a terrorist.  Not because he opposed the Shah or the monarchy system.  Because he joined hands with foreign collaborators (Communists of all stripes) and raised arms against his country.  While standing on trial for his life for terrorism he tried to mitigate his crime by talking about feudalism and land reform.  When pressed to restrict his comments to his defense, he clearly had no more to say, and chose to sit down.  And make no mistake about it.  Had he survived that trial, or was even set free on that trial, he would have surely been one of the first to be executed in 1979.

May he rot in hell along with the rest of his commie

comrades. If anything, the Shah should have killed more of these bacheh muslim-kommonists.

Brave but Misguided !

Iran 1st ! Not Ideologies. that,s the problem with our elitists.

A traitor like most Marxists

Golsorkhi was put on trial and dealt a sentence for capital offenses he committed, which would yeild the same sentence in any other judicial system in the world.  He like his master(s) who took over iran were the followers of the Arab ideology which most Persians have fought off or rejected for 1400 years.  We have temporarily lost this battle, but the day Pesia would be free and the Arab Cult we call Isam be removed or at least relagated to only one sector of Society is close at Hand.  We have realized Islam, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, leninisim, and other isms including the right flank form of Capitalism which is being practiced in the America of George Bush are numberd.  We need to take our Persia back from lunnies like him.

what a baby

what a baby. he is no fighter! At the end "gar kardan" might be tragic but showed lack of fighting spirit. This is what you get from empty ideology.

As others have suggested, the degree of punishment is a specific to each country. There are places where possession of illicit drugs will condemn you to capital punishment.

He didn't do a thing to defend himself and wanted to become a "shahid". So he got what he asked for. He could have asked for clemency he could have denied the charges, but he didn't.

As for his retarded ideology, because of the likes of him we got the current regime. With more lives ruined.

Perhaps the tragedy here is that there are still idiots worst than him that want to become "shaids" for the MEK. Looks like we haven't learned anything.

one of shah's biggest

one of shah's biggest mistakes, not killing more like this traitor. The fact is, it was people like him that brought upon on us the current regime. These guys paved the way for mullas and islamic fundamentalists that we have in Iran, and look where Iran is 30 years after. You want to blame someone for Iran's current state, blame Golesorkhi and his likes.

Compared to the current regime in Iran, Shah was too nice to his opponents and his Savak was merely a joke, if he and his Savak were that mean, they would have killed all these mullas and mojaheds back then.

Not a good defense.

Armed struggle in "any" system of government is illegal and punished, sometimes quite severely as in western democracies. Why should iran be an exception because islamists/leftists view it as legitimate, same was that families of some criminals view them as innocents. He was accused of planning crime of armed kidnapping of valiahd (a child at that time). If someone attempts to kidnap YOUR child for his ideology, do you equally praise him for HIS ideology? A crime is a crime no matter how one spins it. Crime against innocent is a crime if it is done by monarchy in the name shah, by khomeini in the name of islam, or by golsorkhi in the name of marx or lenin.

He did not put any defense against the accusations and rather lectured about regime policies. If he was not guilty, then it was his responsibility to at least deny the accusation and reject the evidence. He did not. In "any" legal system that leads to a defeat.

So the only question is if attempted kidnapping deserves capital punishment. That is a matter of country's laws. I can only say that kidnapping a child, no matter whose child it is, is a very serious matter.

Now we also know what would have happened to iran had likes of him succeeded, a mix of what we have (islamic) and leninist (failed soviet/cuba/n.korea). That would have been really wonderful to see anything worse than islamic republic.