October 4, 2003
* Come on Siamack,
Articles by Mr. Siamack Baniameri used to be very intersting and had
a very positive and comical aspect to them, but reading this [Sick
and tired], one
feels that he is going throught a lean patch nowadays.
Come on Siamack,
up, be the positive one that you are, and stop feeling sick at things,
by the way the last thing that you felt sick upon , the Parsi speaking
kids is indeed a thing that i agree with you on.
* What are you? A chiropractor?
Roudi, Roudi, Roudi, [Dumber
What the hell crawled up your butt? Did you read what you wrote? Do
you know iranian.com printed your piece just to show how ignorant and
intelligent you really are? Do you know Siamak [Sick
and tired] has been writing
wonderful articles for iranian.com for well over a year?
Take it easy chico. Instead of Siamak, you're the one who's stressed
out and is going to have a heart attack, (inshallah).
What are you? A chiropractor? Shahi? Work for the
US Gov.? Car dealer? An older Iranian or a young one? Don't
tell me, you're one of the washed up singers!
Siamak's piece is simply a collection of observations. Very,
very good observations. He is very right. Where does he
ever say, "All" or "Everyone". He, of course,
making a generalization. Generally, Iranians are pretty much
what he mentions. Of course not all are exactly what he describes
but for the most part we are exactly how he describes us. No,
he didn't visit every chiropractor's office in the "World",
but does he need to do that to realize that a chiropractor is not a "Doctor"? Do
you realize that they are not?
At last, even though I know I'm not going to get through to you, by
saying he is sick of something, who are you to say he is not or shouldn't
These are one person's realizations and opinions. By attacking
him personally, you really made yourself look like, well, you! Incapable
of reading a piece, a good one at that, without realizing that he is
so fucking right.
Love and peace ridiculous Roudi,
* Would you rather...?
Dear Ms. Khorsandi, [Tarof
Just because someone likes to learn about your language/culture does
not mean that they are trying to be Iranian. I find it hard
to understand that an educated person would be offended or disgusted
about someone caring enough about your language or culture to try
to learn it or appreciate it. I mean, most people who bother to learn
it at all are not doing it because it advances their careers or helps
them in any way where they currently live (like learning English
does) but for the love of the culture.
Would you rather be
around those who tell you not to speak your language, go back to
where you came from or hate you because you are Middle Eastern? Maybe
you didn't move to the US around the time of the hostage crisis and
in fear for your life, you had to HIDE your identity or get beaten
up maybe killed. Or maybe you could talk to the people who
were laid-off from their jobs post-9/11 and can't find new ones.. After
they come back from interviews where people ask "where are YOU
I don't think those people would be whining
about someone trying to speak less than perfect Farsi to them. And
if a conversation with a Farsi beginner is "akward & stilted", you
are offended because they want to practice? I thought that
was how someone improved their speech, no matter what the language,
Farsi included. Were people disgusted or offended when you
first spoke "akward & stilted" English to them?
did you feel when someone looked down on you because your English
wasn't perfect? Or because maybe you have an accent? How
did you feel as a newcomer in your adopted land who didn't fit in
and people were intolerant and overly-critical?
I mean really,
aren't there so many other important things we could be concerned
about in this world, like world peace, feeding the hungry, finding
jobs, education or medicine for the poor to name a few?
* Meant to be satire
Comment on "Dumber
than me" in reply to "Sick
I think Siamak forgot to mention one new trend; I'm sick
and tired of unnecessary politically correct wannabe intellectual
Iranians who can't understand or appreciate an
article that is meant to be a satire.
Roudabeh Faghri's response [Dumber
than me] to Siamack Baniameri's
and tired" was quite nauseating.
Once again we prove to ourselves (and the world) that we are simply
not capable of tolerating dissenting thought. We show our ignorance
of a novel concept called "freedom of speech".
ourselves as a people who would attack our ideological opponents
with clubs and chains or resort to name-calling and labeling only because
they express views different from ours.
Ms Faghri's piece was replete with personal attacks, obscenities,
and presumptive hyperbole. Her approach is a sad commentary on the
of affairs for all of us Iranians.
I am reminded of the title of a book
by the Turkish writer Aziz Nesin which seems so apt; "mA Adam
* Don't take everything so seriously
Roudabeh Khanoom, [Dumber
Cool down! This article [Sick
and tired] was a SATIRE, it was
supposed to be funny. There were some truths to some of the points
and not so much truth to some, but the point is that it was a SATIRE!
So loosen up and just laugh a little!
Plus, in your
article you are doing the same thing; insulting, bad mouthing, and
being vicious in your crtiticism. So you are like the mullahs, you
give advice to others about not insulting other people, but you are
doing it yourself. Anyway, don't take everything so seriously.
* Stuff of teenage webforums
As an avid reader of the Iranian, I am proud to
see its evolution from a web forum with a semi-professional
lots of very "ordinary" postings to what has now become
a credible, fully-fledged online publication with a professional
feel. Not only has the layout adapted but the quality of contributions
appears to have improved considerably, featurng thoughtful contributions
as well as art, music, essay, politics etc.
Which is why I am writing to you. Roudabeh Faghri's contribution "Dumber
than me" is the stuff of teenage webforums where people
rant uncontrollably and where the content is by and large pretty
poor. Would Mrs Faghri's gaseous discharge not have been much better
placed in the letters section, rather than as a full feature alongside
with stimulating contributions which actually add value rather
than dragging The Iranian back to its webposting free-for-all-roots?
Mind you it isn't that I am somehow offended by her rant. It is
simply very tedious and boring and in that sense actually seems
to contravene your editorial policy.
Just a suggestion.
* Personal attacks uncalled for
I usually get a kick out of reading Siamak
I find them very funny, blunt, and to the point. I may not agree with
his point of view on many things, but nevertheless, I enjoy reading
I do agree with some of the points that Ms. Faghri made
in her article [Dumber
than me]. It is true that we should not make generalizations
about people and their professions and that every one is entitled to
their own opinion when it comes down to people's political beliefs
and national and ethnic identities.
However, Ms. Faghri negated all
her arguments by calling Siamak all kinds of names, she even went so
far as attacking his father and mother. I assume that Ms. Faghri does
not know Mr. Baniamiri personally, so how can she allow herself
to think that Siamak is uneducated and has come over to the US with "his
dead father's money".
I don't understand how some one can attack
another person for not liking the way other people think,
speak, or behave and then turn around and do the exact same thing to
For all we know, Siamak may have been having a completely
shitty day and that's why he went off the way he did in his article
or may be he was having a fabulous day, who knows, who cares.
Either way the things he wrote about are his personal opinions
and he is entitled to them.
In my opinion Ms. Faghri's personal
attacks were totally uncalled for. If we preach some thing we
should be ready to practice it, too.
* And yes he was generalizing
Um... Roudabeh khanoom what the hell is your problem!!? [Sick
and tired] I happen
to like Siamack's article [Sick
and tired] very much. In fact, I liked it so much that I
even showed it around to a couple of my friends. And yes he was generalizing!
I mean its pretty obvious, isnt it?
And who do U think you are to judge
people like that by your harsh comments? You're a disgrace to all writers
out there with your cruel words, like "asshole". Maybe you
should pick up a book and learn some manners. I mean yeah Siamack swore
too, but still he didn't specifically insult anyone!
Siamack I loved your article, and am looking forward to future
ones. Maybe on your next article you should write about Iranian writers
take a joke and have no lives and are just looking for an
excuse to start hurting people.
* Who is American anyway?
and tired... i guess that is true for almost for all the
different nationalities here in the United States, not just Iranians.
Who is American anyway? The native americans or all the foreigners
who invaded this country. This argument still continues to this
Anyway, your article is funny and sarcastic at the same time. It
was a delight to read.
* A lot dumber than me
I am amazed of the lack of tolerance or at a bigger scale, democracy
amongst us! People who talk about how good democracy is and how bad
we have been deprived of it!
But when it comes to accepting other people's opinion, or maybe just
respecting them, then we are our worst enemy when it comes to "bitching" about
not having democracy!
Ms. Faghri, I am not going to trash your article [Dumber
or your way of writing, or your lack of respect for other people's
opinion. Neither am I going
to attack YOUR value system but as a neutral Iranian, or Persian, or
Parsi, or a fellow human being, I need to explain a few things to you:
The article by Siamack Baniameri [Sick
and tired] was basically a pattern he
follows when he writes. I find it extremely entertaining and very funny
times. I may or may not always see eye to eye with him, but to me he
has always been able to bring a few laughers to me or provoke my different
way of thinking. Either way, I think he is absolutely entitled to his
opinion. Neither you, nor me have the right to call him "ignorant",
or "idiot". or "stupid". Its his opinion, I respect
it, maybot accept it, but respect it. Just like your article. I find
yours extremely on the other side of my belief, but I will never call
you names just because I disagree with your views.
2- Are YOU doing anything about all the issues that YOU complained
about? Who has give n YOU the right or how do you even know if this
guy, Baniameri is "poorly educated", and "narrow-minded"?
How do YOU know if he is poorly educated? Why are you so bitter about
someone else expressing his opinion?
3- You wrote" Who gave you the right to badmouth other people"?
Jesus, in my case, Mohammad, lady you did the exact same thing! How
bad of a hypocrite can you be? I am still laughing!
4- People have a right to disagree with you or not have the same
exact beliefs as you do, and that does NOT give you any right to call
names, or be disrespectful to them.
5- About your triple citizenship, "Iranian-Canadian-American".
What happens if you get every place ( har-jaa) citizenship? What do
we call you then? How many names of different countries would be in
the answer if someone just asked you "where are you from"?
By the way, I am completely ok with your answers! And even if you call
yourself well, whatever you like, I wont disrespect you!
4- Ms Faghri,
wake up lady, his article is what is called "tanz" in
Farsi. He is supposed to be funny and exaggerating. It just is what
it is! Why were you so upset all of a sudden? I hate those bad days
of the month when some people just are upset for no "logical" reason
except the systematically bad timing of those days of the month!!!
PS1: Just out of curiosity, you are not an ex girl friend of him
who was just dumped, are you?
PS2: If you are married, please give my sympathy to your hubby.
My heart goes out to him.
PS3: If you are NOT married, I am NOT surprised!
* Always called "Irani"
In your reply [Dumber
than me] to Siamack Baniameri's "Sick
and tired" you
base your defence of those who call themselves "Persians" on
Reza Shah's affinity to Hitler and Fascism. Regardless of Reza
Shah's motives for changing the official name of Iran from Persia
in international circles, I believe those Iranian calling themselves
Persians (and they are mainly based in the United States) do our Azeri,
Kurdish, Baluchi, Gilaki, Arab and Turcoman compatriots a great disservice.
Throughout history the peoples of the Iranian Plateau ("Iranshahr")
have been known as the Iranians and have referred to themselves as
Iranians or "Irani". I can write a long piece about the
history and links between these people, their languages (the Iranian
languages that include Modern Farsi, Dari, Kurdish, Gilaki, Baluchi,
Sogdian etc), or the unity that this sense of Iranian-ness has instilled
in our people that has allowed our Iranian culture to survive centuries
of invasions and conquests by non-Iranian powers.
The fact that the
people of Iranshahr were united first under a Persian ruler (which
resulted in the foreign label of Persia on the land by Greek historians),
should not detract from the influence of Parthians (Ashkani's
who were not from Persia (Pars) but from Khurasan) or the Turkic
rulers of post-Islam Iran that championed Iranian culture.
that those who champion the use of Persia as a label for our
land use Esfahan's glories (a City built by a Shah of Azeri decent)
the Peacock throne (a booty from India captured by the Turkic
Nader Shah) as symbols of Persian heritage?
In our languages (be it Modern Farsi, Dari, Azeri, Turcoman etc)
we have always called ourselves "Irani". Ask your grandparents
what they called themselves before Reza Khan changed the official name
of country: did they call themselves Farsis?
Let not the recent
world events make some of us shamed of our Iranian heritage and resort
to glories of "Persian" cuisine and art to raise ourselves
in the eyes of others. Only 50% of our compatriots are ethnically
Persians. The rest have made enough contributions to our history and
not to be excluded in a linguist game that is purely a result of
the negative imagery associated with modern Iran in the West.
* Parsi? No problem
Dear Roudabeh, [Dumber
Although youíre entitled to your opinions regarding Mr. Baniameriís
rather unorthodox but often true assessment of Iranian psyche, however,
you made some fundamental errors in your criticism.
The name of the Iranian language is Parsi. Farsi is an Arabic word (Letter
P does not exist in Arabic language) which surfaced after the 6th century
Arab invasion ofIran which primarily means 'the language of peasants
or the language of the lower-class.'
The German ambassador and Reza Shah story which has surfaced in recent
years is baseless and there is not a single evidence to support it. The
original name of 500 BC Iran was PARS. The name evolved to Iran around
The name 'Iran' has nothing to do with Aryan race (another
myth). If you study SHAHNAMEH or any other Iranian literature, you see
patterns which imply that the name of the country has ALWAYS been Iran.
For example, Ferdosi says, 'cho IRAN nabashad taneh man mabad.' As
you can see, he never says, 'cho PERSIA nabashad taneh man mabad.'
The third problem with your opinion is the word Iranian-American. Webster
explains the word, 'Irish-American' as: And American born
individual with Irish ancestry.
This means that you should be born in America to an Irish immigrant
family to be called Irish-American. Being a naturalized citizen of
States will not make one Irish-American. This will apply to any other
These mistakes demonstrate that your criticism of Mr. Baniameri comes
from pure rage and unstable emotions, which rubs you from credibility.
* Be more sensible and polite
I found both the article titled, "Sick
and tired" by Siamack
Baniameri, and the response to his article by Roudabeh Faghri [Dumber
than me], to
have been written very poorly and irrationally.
It is very easy to
be rude and insulting as we write or speak, but it takes a collected,
thoughtful, and rational person to communicate his/her opinions and
feelings in a way which is not offensive to others, particularly to
the innocent readers!
Even though Roudabeh did have some good
points to get across but her style was anti-productive and repulsive. She
should have maintained a rational and matter-of-fact tone throughout
her article without resorting to profanity and insulting words. Unfortunately,
she succumbed to Siamak's level, and as a result, lost her effectiveness
and credibility with her audience, who are the readers like me.
you would encourage your writers to be more sensible and polite when
they pick up the pen.
letters (October 4, 2003)