HYPOCRISY

Dear JJ,

After reading the reaction by "Q" about the number of times Fred had written about Islam, I found out that someone had used the pseudonym,"Killjoy" that I have been using to write following and several other reactions under a Photo Essay by "talieshah" called, The Party.

Today was the first time ever I saw the Photo Essay in question and I assure you I have never written such comments. I only know a few of the people in the photos.
I hope you will print this, so those who were affected by the comments will know I wasn't the writer.

I personally have much respect for Mr. Bahmani. At the time the Photo Essay was posted I didn't know much about Ms.Souri and I don't know some others who have been upset by the following comment.

I DO NOT KNOW anyone by the name "Setareh Sabeti" or "Daiee" to even talk about them, let alone spend time attacking anyone in their defense.

Needless to say, I have despised Abdolkarim Soroush all my life for his role in the so-called, Cultural Revolution. Two of my sibilings and I were victims of HIS purges!

I would stand by any statements I have made using the pseudonym, "Killjoy." However, this filthy business of posting comments such as the ones I have mentioned came as a shock to me.
I don't want to guess who was behind this filthy business. All I can say is that it is certainly the work of a sick individual who simply wants to get decent people upset!

I also hope, if possible, you will delete the reactions posted in there.
Respectfully,
Killjoy

Here's the comment. Others can be found under the Essay.
Those who were missed out!
by killjoy. (not verified) on Sun Apr 27, 2008 02:28 PM CDT
Was there any mention of those early contributors who are no longer with us? The likes of Daiee and a few more whose early writings attracted so much attention but they are not alive to see the fruit of their support.
How about all those political writers, like Setareh Sabety whose firey writings provoked such massive response each time she wrote? How about Sadri Brothers whose ideas may not have appealed to many of the organizers or participants in your party but they made and all the difference.
How about all those letter writers whose numerous response put JJ out of breath each time he had to do the Letters section? They were the engine of the Iranian.com.
How about all those faceless commentators whose comments, politically correct or incorrect, are the reson d' etre of the Iranian.com?
How about all those famous names, whose works were sometimes directly posted and other times copied and pasted: Freydoun Hoveyda, Nader Naderpour, Abdolkarim Soroush and many more.
All of the above received only a passing mention, if any at all - no quotations, no tributes, nothing. Oh, I am sure there are always good excuses: lack of time, or too many to be counted, etc. But this WAS the time. The only time.
The selection of tributes was done extremly unprofessionally, with haste and subjectively.
The last but not the least, why the entire show was conducted in English? This is a site called Iranian.com and NOT Iranian-American.com. There was not a single quotation in Farsi.
Thank you Bruce Bahmani for doing it in your own biased and non-objective style. As always!
Thank you Lale Welsh for reminding us our mother tongue language is English.
And thank you Jahanshah for allowing your pals, turn you Magnum Opus into a yet another cash strapped dotcom story.

On Patriotism, the right to question (and on Islamism and Islam)

To ask pertinent questions, to question all that has been set in stones, especially regarding figures that are always prone to be deified by absolutist followers is not unpatriotic. It is actually the only way forward for a free society. On the other hand, labeling anyone who disagrees with you, and charging them with irrelevant and false allegations is the prime hallmark of a totalitarian mind in fear of light.
Period.

On a side note:
Whenever there is an outcry against the by now common horrendous atrocities committed under the banner of Islam, by extremist muslims, the only response one gets from the muslims community is that such acts are attributes of Islamism, and not Islam. Islamism is understood as a modern ideological movement that is to be differentiated from the religion of Islam, and as such Islamists from muslims.
Now we get the following from an apologist:

`What is an "Islamist" other than someone who might associate themselves with the religion Islam? The only distinguishing feature of an Islamist is their association with Islam.`

I don't agree and I do recognize the difference between Islamism and Islam. But no problem. Since you insist on this point, are you willing to accept and acknowledge the consequences of such identity, including all the bloodshed that has been going on under this banner? Suicide bombings and terrorist attacks like 9/11 in Israel and the West, threaening to annihilate an entire nation from the face of the earth, mass executions and torture in Islamic Iran, beheadings in Southeast Asia, the treatment of women by Taliban, in Arabia or the mullahs...etc etc etc?

Dear Participants

Thank you for your participation in this dialogue.  Please go back to discussing the topic at hand.  Personal attacks and insults on other commentators will have to stop if this thread is to be left open for further discussion.  Thank you.

Hey People, See the Truth...

For all those interested in truth: Dr. Ehsan Yarshater with the help of a large group of people have completed translation from arabic to english and publication of "Tarikhe Tabari", which is considered one of the most reliable documents describing history of islam.

There are a couple of volumes about iran and one fascinating volume about conquering of iran by Omar and his atrocities in various parts of iran. It unbelievably resembles the rule of khomeini as if he copied confrontation of Omar with dissent line by line.

Please read to know why we are where we are and what those Caliphs that a large portion of iranians (as well and afghans, kurds, and central asians) praise (same way that some still praise khomeini and his dark revolution) really did to their forefathers. It is not so difficult to see that 1979 was a rerun of 641 with the same tactics and same methodology.

Wow! Our Kalimi friend has some Chutzbah!

Fred jan, ghorboonet beram, we might believe in Islam but don't take us for fools, I know it's tempting.

You absolutely degrade Islam on a daily basis in most of your comments.

You use the word "Islamist" as a derogatory adjective, frequently saying "islamist anti semites". You use "Islamist" as a put down and you are actually brainwashed enough to think this makes no commentary on Islam itself? Jews are (understandibly) upset when terms like "Neocon Zionists" or "Jewish media" is used because they stereotype all followers of the religion with conspiratorial labels. Yet, remarkably, you have no qualms about doing the same with Islam.

What is an "Islamist" other than someone who might associate themselves with the religion Islam? The only distinguishing feature of an Islamist is their association with Islam. If you have made up a convinient definition like "Islamist means terrorist", you are still not entitled to use it because you do not get to define your own association on behalf of other people.

Either you are making the idiotically absurd claim that YOU Fred, never insult Islam, but any follower who wishes to call themselves Islamist; OR you are saying that simply by associating yourself with Islam, you are bad, nazi, fascist, retarded and many many other deplorable adjectives you have used to describe such people.

Why do you call NIAC a "twin Islamist lobby"??? Is it not to make the point (falsely in this case, but that's way too common for you), that associating yourself with Islam alone entitles cowardly individuals to concoct vicious attacks and criminal associations?

Why should "Islamist" be a put down? Lest you think you can fool us into saying that you are only talking about "certain" indivdiuals and not any follower of Islam, who wants to be called "Islamist", these points refute you directly:

1) You call people "Islamist" whom you cannot possibly know or understand their religious practices or even their politics. You degrade the religion as a common, generic put down

2) You have similarly demonized "ideas", "sense of humor" and other non-person things with the label "Islamist", so you are definitly not talking about individuals when you say "Islamist tactics" or "Islamist mentality", you are talking about Islam.

I know for a fact (Because of your own protestations) that you reject similar labels about Judaism, but why do you have a different standard for Islam? Even your ideological brethern use "Islamic extremism" and "islamic radicals", in other words, even many openly Islamaphobic people feel like they have to use words like "extremists" and "radical" to distinguish between regular Muslims and the sub-catageory of people they are attacking. You do not make this distinction.

Here's about 300 instances of such degradation:

You're not fooling anybody. Your rhetoric, attacks and insinuations are every bit as insulting to Islam and Muslims as antisemetic remarks are to Jews

//www.google.com/custom?domains=www.iranian.c...

Re: Mammad

Mammad, you writing gives the reader a sense that torture was like noghlo nabaat in Iran. I have told you before that "torture" under the previous regime was just as exagerated as everything else, such as:

Khomeini's claim that the Shah had killed 600,000 people since June of 1341. (exagerated by 150 times, actual number 3500 to 5000)

Claims that there were 350,000 political prisoners in prisons at the time of the revolution in 1978. (exagerated by a factor of 100 times, actual number: 3000)

Claims that 10,000 people were killed in the Jaleh Square incident. (exagerated by 100 times, actual number: 97)

Claims that the Cinema Rex incident was caused by Savak. (It was caused by misguided Islamists.)

The list obviously goes on. It should be easy for you to understand why I believe that "torture", among many other things, was exagerated as well.

The number "100" is not by coincidence. Nazi and the Leninist Communists propagandists believed that it is the magic number that can be used to inflate (or deflate) numbers and events in order to entice the populace without rendering the false reports incredible and unbelievable in their eyes.

It was used masterfully during the Islamic revolution.

By the way, the "actual" numbers I provided are the numbers reported by "IRI's" own archivists such as Emaad Baaghi.

You wrote about one of your friends an a then cherik. Let me write a few lines about couple of my university friends who were held by Savak. In both case, they were yelled at, slapped around a few times, threatened, later given a good meal, and then released two days later. This was the extent of the "torture" they received.

Once released, they were encouraged to exaggerate the treatment they received, which they did. This was common back then.

So whom are we to believe? I strongly and firmly believe that "everything" was exaggerated during the revolution, including and specially torture.

ONE IS ONE TOO MANY: 

Furthermore, I don't buy into your argument that even if one person is killed is one too many. There is a BIG difference between 600,000 and 3500. Do the math to find out what the difference is.

Any government in charge in Iran, including a hypothetical Mosadeghi government, or even YOUR government, would end up killing in a country like Iran. Let's face it, Iran is no France or Japan. For crying outloud we have people among ourselves that still stone a human being to death in the 21st century. How do you deal with this kind of savages? With chelo kabaab?

SCHOLARS: 

You can't dismiss scholars that have a different opinion than you by simply calling them "revisionists". So according to your logic, I can consider you a revisionist as well.. We are all revisionists. I have read Mirfetros's work and I do have high respects for his work. You don't. That is your problem, not his.

You wrote Monarchists are willing to use charlatans to discredit Mossadegh. Again, it is only YOUR view that they are charlatans. It is MY view that the people you named are true reputable scholars. The point I want to make is that your or my opinion is just that, an opinion.

However, it would have been more "scholarly" and "academic" of you, if you had just stated that your opinion differs from them and that they are just presenting another persepective which you disagree with. Calling them "charlatans" is unscholarly and unacademic.

BAKHTIAR: 

I didn't say that you fabricated your Bakhtiar story. I said that I disagree with it and that it must be false since I prefer to believe what Bakhtiar himself had to say about it than a discredited and humbled individual such as Bazargan.

Bakhtiar was a firm man. He did not directly negotiate with khomeini because khomeini wanted him to first resign. Something he would never do, and rightfully so.

Anonymoushaha

what part of Soraya's article was the "outrageous arguments" that you're referring to? was it the part about Dr Mossadegh not deserving the insults or the part where she said some of the iranians that call themselves "patriot" want Iran to be under attack?
Why is everyone here attacking one of the people in the comment section and letting go of the outrageous behaviour of these blood-thirsty iranians?
are you all after mammad for personal reasons?

Here we go again with Mammad the Muslim Victim

Mammad,

We have had this discussion before when it appeared that you tried to make yourself the Muslim victim when you were attacked for your views. It really does not work in your case and I think it hurts your position when you have a good argument.

I also think that you are acting as Soraya's White Knight by coming here and changing the subject of her outrageouse arguments.

Mammad, this is America. No one (except a minority of bigots) cares what religion you practice at home. 

Hope you had an easy fast!

P.S.

If Fred had any ill intent against you as a Muslim, he could have exposed you by revealing your identity. He was kind enough to ask for permission to show the video. I know of at least one instant here that someone exposed you without asking and that was wrong.

الحشرات و الشركاء النظام القادسيه . في اللغة العربية الخاص بك

. وهذا هو عراك بين النظام القادسيه وايران. الكلاب الخاصة بك لن يساعدك ايران هي بلدكم العربية المحتلة العقبان        رستم  لكم اننا سوف الصراصير الى البحر يوم واحد الحشرات و الشركاءالنظام القادسيه پان امتيست اذهب الى الجحيم                                 to Qadesiyeh regime in it,s mother tongue   

Mammad

Out of curiosity, where do you find all this time to write pages upon pages of comments on this site, write political essays on other sites, and teach science courses at a university?

I was a college professor for a short period of time, and I found that to require an enormous amount of time in research, preparation, interactions with students, etc. Where do you find all this time, especially if you have a family, which in and of itself a full time job? And if I am correct, you are in the science field, so the political stuff does not even overlap with your field, and therefore you have to set up a whole extra chunk of time for your political research. How do you do it?

Let me correct a misunderstanding here

First and foremost, I am a pacifist and a human right advocate. I do not wish any harm to come to anyone and I do not advocate any war. I however can not understand why it is okay for a bunch of Mullah's to butcher the people and force their will on the society and have no responsibility toward anyone. I also believe in some ways that the Iraqis are probably better off today than before during Saddam era. At least now they might have a future.

On another post someone mentioned that the Mullahs are good at building. I am not so sure about that if you look at Abadan and Ahwaz. Pretty much if you are out of Tehran things are not that great.

On the last post I meant "medieval" and not medical.

‫‫چند بیت از ناصر خسرو برای خانین

For all dummies who dream on the destruction of Iran, I have a bad news for you: it would never happen. Hey guys, don’t take your dreams for reality, weak up, read news around. You people sit on your fat a.. outside Iran and write dari-varis holding this shameful statement. I’m so sorry for you, don’t know if you still understand farsi, but this is for you.................
نه عجب گر نبودشان خبر از چرخ و ز كارش
كز حريصي و جهالت همه در خواب و خمارند

چون درختان ببارند به ديدار وليكن
چون به كردار رسد يكسره بيدند و چنارند

جز كه آزار و خيانت نشناسند ازيرا
به بدي‌ي فعل چو موشان و چو ماران قفارند

Dear Marmad, Please Stop the Diversions

1) No I do not see the irony of respectfully addressing you as Mammad and describing a state of mind which you may or may not have by saying you are Oghdei. You are making an issue out of nothing. I think its another diversion to avoid the issues like complaining that you have been called a Haji and attempting to claim that its your religion that is being attacked.

2) You are claiming that you are being attacked as Mammad the MUSLIM. When you claim as such, you are playing the victim. You are being attacked here as Mammad who supports lefist ISLAMISTS Iranian philosophers and politicians- a subject Which you totally avoided in responding to!!!!

3) I don't understand what you are trying to say in your Point No 4. All I can say is that if you expect higher standards from Zionists than others or if you disproportionately subject them to more criticism than other nations, then yes, this is anti Semitism. I am not saying that Zionists should be immune from the brutal way they treat the Palestinians. However, for example, to support an academic boycott of Israel for when there is no same attempts to do the same for the Russians (for Chechneya) for China (in Tibet) for Sudan (in Darfur)............. and many more injustices commited by other nations.....then yes this is pure anti semitism.

4) As to your 5- I defended Fred as far as you claim that all the names callings by him where done to you to attack you as a Muslim. You are playing a victim to divert attention from your support of ISLAMISTS.

5) you say "Your statement, "Judaism and politics do not mix," is too absurd and unreal to even pay attention to, let alone respond to, given that Judaism and Zionism are the basis for Israel."

Oh really? Is the State of Israel governed according to the laws of the bible/torah/Talmud???? Is the state of Turkey, a nation of Muslims, being governed according to the laws of Sharia? Iran is currently governed according to Sharia and Islamic Jurisprudence. And the fear is that leftist Islamists, such as your self, will introduce these Sharia into your "secular IRI state". This is what I was talking about. Another diversionary attempt by you (mixing apples and oranges).

The "Christian Fundamentalists Sara Palin", as much as you may dislike her, can not make her brand of Christianity the religion of the land! There is a constitution that limits her powers. She may have wacky religious ideals such as being anti abortion which she wants to make the law of the land (You as a proud practicing Muslim must be anti abortion as well like Sara), but she is no Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, Rafsanjani or Khatami. She is a million times better than these IRI characters and the American Constitution is a billion times better than that piece of trash that is called the IRI constitution which the likes of Bazargan sold to the people.

Lastly, no one asked you to leave here. Did I? Has Fred? I enjoy reading your angle actually and I learn your side of the arguments. Its good to learn it so we can avoid a disaster if Iran is liberated from the Mullahs.

You are playing the Muslim victim card because people do not like Islamists. You support Islamist Leftist and people to not trust Islamist Rightist or Islamist leftists- As much as you dislike to hear that. Stop the diversions.

Fred

(1) I absolutely positively do not remember anything - and I have thought hard and long about this - about referring to MYSELF as a "world renowned scientist." But, let's say that you are right, and you actually have a video in which I said so. Then,

(a) If I said it in anyway other than a joking, self-mocking way, it was wrong of me because, as I have always said, my scientific peers should make the judgement not me (and certainly not you). I know where I stand there, because there are objective scientific ways for measuring the impact of one's research. Just to avoid any negative comment by some who just want to jump on the banwagon, I will not say how, but will be glad to do so, if you clearly ask me.

(b) I repeat again: Suppose that you are actually right in (a). What does that have anything to do with politics that we discuss, other than you using it as another weapon in your arsenal to attack me? Why do you always have to refer to me by anything and any name or label other than a simple Mammad?

You say you respect my privacy. Then, just use my name, and criticize me as much as you want, but politely and with subtance. I cannot remember that you ever said anything about me that had any subtance. Your tactic has always been the same "hit and run": "The Islamists/anti-semites and their lefty....." followed by some hollow phrases. I am not the only person who has told you this. Many other have said the same.

(2) Even when you supposedly want to respond to me in a polite way (in your last post), you cannot help yourself attributing my real and non-existent shortcomings and failures to "old Islamist tactic;" that is, generalizing it. That is telling. I speak for myself and ONLY myself. Leave my religion and the co-believers in my religion out of this. Respond to me.

(3) Just to give a more precise way of referring you to one of your insults: One time, in response to what I had written, you posted a comment called "bad chemistry," and started out by saying, "Patriot, smart, traitor, charlatan," and continued with your standard "Islamist/anti-semite and their lefty allies." I leave it to the readers to interpret what this meant.

If I get time, I'll find every reference and link to what you have written about me in the past. I do not lie, especially in the fasting month of Ramazan, while I am fasting. I am not going to ruin what I do as a Muslim to score a "victory" over you. 

(4) Regarding you and Islam: I told you clearly in my last post how I arrived at the conclusion. I also asked you certain questions.

(5) No, I do not want you to stop commenting on this site. Keep doing it, but do it in a meaningful, constructive way, and not viewing it as a way of settling old scores, and attacking people like me in the process. 

Mammad

Re: Mehran

Compare Iran with Iraq. Compare the daily life of an Iranian vs the Iraqis. Which one would you rather see your family living?

IRI as bad as it is, does not compare to a foreign attack and occupation. Lets not wish that kind of destruction. IRI's corrupt and criminal but the majority of Iranians are safely going to school and work, they shop and eat out, they travel and live their daily lives without having to dodge bullets, get blown away by bombs or have their cars run over by humvees.

Why would anyone wish the same fate as Iraqis for their own relatives and hamvatans?  

IRANdokht

"World renowned" & other stuff

Unfortunately I do not have the inclination to go through all your points, but will highlight number of them and wait for your response in the form of proof.

 1-You, Mammad state: “For a long time you called me an anti-semite, simply because I criticize Israel. To you, anybody who criticizes Israel, even in the most minor way, is anti-semite. Once I asked you why, your response was my liberal use of Zionist.” Since all the exchanges are available on the site, cite the time and article in which I have said what you quote me as saying“

 2-You, Mammad state: “Then, you claimed that I had referred to myself as "world renown scientist," which I have never done, but what if I had? What does that have to do anything with what we discuss here?” You have chosen to be “Mammad” on this site and I respect your choice. But should you publically give me the authority; I will post the video in which you, Mammad, under your full name do specifically state that you, again Mammad, are a “world renowned scientist”.  There is nothing wrong with it but when you deny it and then attribute it to the announcer of the program, it becomes a credibility issue.

3-I had for the second time challenged you to cite where and when I, Fred, have ever insulted, impugned or in any way degraded the Islamic religion or for that matter any other religion. Don’t go on a tangent, cite the time and article and my exact word.

I will postpone the response to the rest of your longwinded post till you provide answers to number 1 & 3, and should you wish the green light on number 2. Should you fail to cite specific time, date and my exact wordings which are the basis of your accusations then I will take that as your inability to do so for the simple fact that it is and was to begin with an old Islamist tactic. And should you cite them then I will stop forthwith any further postings on this site.

Mehran- 001 What do you

Mehran- 001

What do you mean by “medical culture?”

Human rights issues are aside, incidentally if there is one thing that Mullahs are good at is building. Have you visited Iran lately? If you have, you should have noticed considerable improvement in infrastructures of the country. Cities are also inundated with government buildings.

Varjavand

Hamvatan101

1. Do not call me Dear and then call me oghdei. They do not go together. You see the irony?

2. I absolutely positively reject the notion that I am a victim. I AM NOT, and NOT PLAYING ONE. I choose to be here. Anyone with a iota of sensibility knows that attacks of the Fred type - and your type for that matter - come with the territory. But, I will not leave the kitchen because it has become too hot. I am here to stay.

3. Fred claimed that I made my statements about him, Muslims, and Islam without any basis. I only pointed out a small fraction of what he had done.

4. Jewish organizations everywhere have said many times that, anyone who says that he/she respects Judaism but is anti-Zionism is, in fact, an anti-semite. But, if you call Fred a Zionist, his bogus scream of indignation will be deafening. In other words, we must accept Zionism, but not call its adherents Zionists!!!!

5. Your defence of him in calling me Haji rings utterly hollow, because the man has never ever referred to me as "Mammad." It is either "Haji," "Mashdi," "World Renown Scientist" in quotation marks, "Islamist," Islamist/Anti-Semite," "Charlatan," "Traitor," "clueless," etc. But call him for what he is - Fred the Zionist - and his screams will be defeaning, even though Zionism is a political ideology and the basis for the State of Israel which the man defends. 

6. Your statement, "Judaism and politics do not mix," is too absurd and unreal to even pay attention to, let alone respond to, given that Judaism and Zionism are the basis for Israel.

The Christian fundamentalist Sarah Palin, who as a mayor of a small town and as a governor has tried to impose her fundamentalist views on the citizens also confirms what I have saying such such people for quite sometime.

7. See me or label me anyway you want. In a short comment you already called me a few things, so what is a few more? I am a practicing Muslim; I am a leftist in terms of my political beliefs, and I am absolutely and positively proud of both. Most importantly, I am here to stay. I will not quit commenting. So, anyone who fantasizes about me quitting by unfairly and baselessly attacking me, is just fooling himself.

Mammad

Destruction of Iran?

you talk about destruction of Iran but you don't realize that the country is already destroyed by the medical culture of Mullah's. It is necessary and urgent that something must be done.

Ms. Sepajpour,

Ms. Sepahpour

While I cannot participate in the debate about the underlying issue of your article because I don’t have a great deal of information about it, I would like to commend you for your edifying articles and your unwavering stance on what you believe, as I do, is right. I hope those pinheads who wish the destruction of our country, simply because they don’t like its government, learn that they cannot sway any opinion by mudslinging and scaremongering.

Please keep on writing

Varjavand

Dear Mammad, Stop Playing the Victim

Give us a break. You always claim that you are being attacked because you are a Muslim. Now you have found a perfect character to dump your oghdeh on in order to play the victim. You found Fred, an Iranian Jew, who probably has seen nothing but bigotry coming out of the Islamic rulers of the IRI. So now you claim that he calls you Haji because of the soldiers in Iraq? This is the most bogus claim I have ever seen on this site. Yeh, he called you Haji but I have seen Iranians call other Iranians Haji all the time. You always say that your are a proud Leftist and Muslim. Yes I agree that it may have not been a sign of respect to you but he did not call you a Haji because you are a Muslim and because the GI's in Iraq do it, he called you a Haji because he suspects (as many do on this site) that you are an Islamists due to your admitted love of many Iranian Islamist thinkers and philosophers.

The way you talk about Bazargan, Shariati and the rest of the Iranian Islamists, the way you have described Khomeini (a bigot) only leads a rational person to see you as an Islamists. You have stated many times that you believe in a secular Iran. I, and many others, simply don't believe you because of your relations with the IRI, because of your politics and because of your love of Islamic political thinkers. Islam and politics don't mix, like Christianity and Politics don't mix & like judaism and politics don't mix. Islam and politics, however, has proven to be the most darconian forms of politics out there today (IRI, TALIBAN, HEZBOLLAH, SAUDIS......). We simply do not trust you. Every time the issue comes up, you play the "I am a Muslim" victim card.

You are a very sophisticated Leftist Islamist sir. Stop playing the victim

botshekan

Although I do not appreciate your condescending tone, I am going to clarify some matters for you:

1- I explained that the common goal of the people I had named and the ones who think like these gentlemen do was the same: a free and sovereign Iran. Now compared to that goal, the arguments here were simply minor disagreements.

You want to interpret my words in a way that allows you to ridicule me, that's your prerogative. I was not making a "grand statement", I was comparing two groups of people who love Iran but have different ideas about how to better save her. If you do not belong to either group then the statement did not apply to you. Pure and simple.

2- Although Palin's interview is not directly linked on the main page anymore, I checked it and noticed that you must have been the "free thinker". The "grand statement" I made there which resulted on more ridicule from you was about being a free thinker despite others, referring to your announcement that since Q, Khar and I didn't think Palin was qualified you will support her.

Well, I stand by that comment, and I do not see how it's related to Dr Bakhtiar and you accusing me of supporting Dr Bakhtiar despite Khomeini and gang. How do you know or assume that was the reason for my support? How would you even relate these issues?

You do assume a lot don't you?  

I suggest you stop trying to belittle people and do something constructive with your time.

Thank you

IRANdokht

many good points were made

many good points were made here. Though, I liked the one from Anonymous from iran most. It is about taking responsibility, not our strong trait! Cheers F.

Dear Mammad, Stop Playing the Victim

Give us a break. You always claim that you are being attacked because you are a Muslim. Now you have found a perfect character to dump your oghdeh on in order to play the victim. You found Fred, an Iranian Jew, who probably has seen nothing but bigotry coming out of the Islamic rulers of the IRI. So now you claim that he calls you Haji because of the soldiers in Iraq? This is the most bogus claim I have ever seen on this site. Yeh, he called you Haji but I have seen Iranians call other Iranians Haji all the time. You always say that your are a proud Leftist and Muslim. Yes I agree that it may have not been a sign of respect to you but he did not call you a Haji because you are a Muslim and because the GI's in Iraq do it, he called you a Haji because he suspects (as many do on this site) that you are an Islamists due to your admitted love of many Iranian Islamist thinkers and philosophers.

The way you talk about Bazargan, Shariati and the rest of the Iranian Islamists, the way you have described Khomeini (a bigot) only leads a rational person to see you as an Islamists. You have stated many times that you believe in a secular Iran. I, and many others, simply don't believe you because of your relations with the IRI, because of your politics and because of your love of Islamic political thinkers. Islam and politics don't mix, like Christianity and Politics don't mix & like judaism and politics don't mix. Islam and politics, however, has proven to be the most darconian forms of politics out there today (IRI, TALIBAN, HEZBOLLAH, SAUDIS......). We simply do not trust you. Every time the issue comes up, you play the "I am a Muslim" victim card.

You are a very sophisticated Leftist Islamist sir. Stop playing the victim

Botshekan

You could have fooled me with your equal-opportunity botshekani, because you had repeated, WORD BY WORD, the standard attacks of the monarchists on Dr. Mosaddegh. But, if you really are who you say you are, then, I stand corrected, and I apologize for that.

Where is the evidence that Dr. Bakhtiar "knew" that the army was going to surrender to the revolutionaries? I have read General Heuyser's book. In every page of it, he states that his mission was to convince the army high command to support Dr. Bakhtiar. This is yet another claim by the monarchists that you are repeating. Give me a reference or link that indicates what you say.

Check my story about Dr. Bakhtiar independently, before calling me a fabricator. Do not take it from me.

As to whether I am a good scientist or a good Muslim:

If you believe that religion is a private matter, then whether I am a good or a bad one or none at all is strictly between me and God. So, you are in no position to judge. 

Whether I am a good scientist or none at all is also decided by my peers in my research fields, not by you, unless you are in the same research fields. It is as simple as that. 

Mammad

dokhte iran...

The problem is that ALL pretend to care for iran. Remember khomeini, rafsanjani, yazdi, bazargan, rajavi, ...? But under that thin layer of patriotism, often lies personal agendas; that is not new to iranians if you look at ANY revolutionary from 1979 on. They thought they had all the answers and they achieved exactly what they planned. After all khomeini spoke on behalf of iranians. Islamists really want an islamic republic, maybe not this one, but another one shaped in their views. So do leftists, not to mention the weird combination of left and islam. But even under that thin layer of patriotism and thick layer of ideology lies still more dangerous agenda: desire for control of wealth and power.

Iran has changed. Talk to cab drivers in any large city and they will lay it out for you much better than these 70s intellectuals residing in the west. People lost faith: in islam which is the source of all these problems as long as it is anything more than a private matter. Mullas claim that they have established the real islam and according to the rules of shia islam, we have to accept that.

There are several classes in iran today: (1) the ruling class is corrupt to the bone in all respects (power, wealth, sex, looting of the country, oppression of people, and on and on) like never before, except that they put a religious hat on it and force it upon people. They do not care for likes of mosaddeq and in fact are happy to see likes of him dead. (2) the stragglers who do anything to make a buck, they have fallen into the culture of "aftabeh dozdi". They do anything on a daily basis to make a little bit more money by constantly cheating others. This is the culture that IRI has created. (3) decent people who cannot accept either. these people are either very depressed and angry or try to get out of iran any way they can. When in the shah's time people struggled to get into countries like Malaysia and joyed when they could?

Mullas have access to riches in the name of god and islam. It has become fashionable now that in their position of power they look for desperate young girls who cannot make ends meet and perform the holly "sigheh" on a monthly basis. It is not unusual for a person of power and wealth have several monthly sigheh in different corners of the city. I know one such person indirectly who is being paid a nothing 45,000 tomans on a monthly basis to be continuous shigheh of a religious person. This is the reality of daily life in iran, not what mosaddeq was or was not. What his kind and kind of dr. shariati did to iran: they wanted to rule and decide for others, one failed, the other died before showing that he was yet another islamic thug. But you hardly hear people speak foul of the shah, and when they do, it is for cursing him to have left iran and handed the country over to a bunch of country-less. Like that baluchi can driver who was saying that there is only one major beautiful institution in baluchestan and that is the university that shah built decades ago. And a teacher who referred to streets by their old names saying that he did everything he could for his country by teaching, but his country failed him in the past 30 years.

Don't trust islam, don't trust islamists, don't trust leftists, don't trust anyone who puts any ideology before the country and rule of the people and rule of law. They are all lying, sometimes knowingly and sometimes unknowingly, and have been for the past 30 years. They all want to replace iranian identity by ideology and use that only to rule. That is exactly what islamists have been planning all along, except that they want another one in which they are of the ruling class not this one. Islam has become the number one enemy of iranian. That is a fact proven by a simple observation of iran of today after 30 years (or 1400 years?) of islamic rule. Islam failed in iran, badly. So did leftists and intellectual of the 70s and whatever remains of them.

Anonymous Observer

Countless number of times I have stated my support for everyone to practice his/her religion as a private matter, from Bahais to Jews, and Christians.

Countless number of times I have said that I support a secular republic in which religion does not play any role in governing our nation.

Countless number of times I have criticized what I find to be wrong, illegal, criminal, etc., in what the IRI has done (even in response to your own questions).

Yes, I do not support military attacks. I do not support sanctions, and YES, I PROUDLY have defended Iran's rights to FULL nuclear technology. I absolutely have no problem with how this position of mine is interpreted by anybody. One either does not believe in something, or one is ready to publicly declare it, advocate it, and defend it, if it actually needs defending. But, some people interpret this as part of my Muslim beliefs and, therefore, link it to my non-existent support for the IRI.

So, I do not know what the heck you are talking about. How much clearer can I get about religion and governing, or my deep respect for adherents of ALL religions?  Show me one instance in my posts that I have said anything that can even be interpreted the way you claim.

Yet, some people like come back constantly and bring up my religion. Why?

BECAUSE, as I have stated, the problem that some people have with me in this page is that, I violate their stereotype of a Muslim.

Some people have become so hardened about what they perceive a Muslim is, that when they see a man who openly declares his religion (that he practices) and political beliefs, and writes clearly, with as much information as he can, they just cannot take it.

No, if I have no problem with Anonym7 and people like him, it is because of a mutual respect, not because he agrees with me, or me with him.

I am not in this page because I want to gather some support for myself and my positions. I am here to express my opinion about different subject, and inject, to the extent that I can, some sane analysis of what is happening. I respect anybody's disagreement with me. It is anybody's right to agree or disagree with me. Either way is fine with me.

Mammad

Fred and his Bogus Claims

Spare me your bogus indignation. 

I am really sick and tired you acting as if I do not understand what you are doing. You think that you can hide behind the seemingly "sophisticated" way of writing. Let's see, and this is just a small fraction of all the things that you have thrown at me and Muslims like me. 

1. To me personally:

For a long time you called me an anti-semite, simply because I criticize Israel. To you, anybody who criticizes Israel, even in the most minor way, is anti-semite. Once I asked you why, your response was my liberal use of Zionist. I thought that Zionism is the basis for the State of Israel, and you of course love Israel. So, why is calling something for it really is being anti-semite? 

Then, you started adding to your accusation the word "Haji" in a derogatory manner. I knew that you were using it just to mock me, and I knew that you had learned it from US soldiers in Iraq. First, you denied it. Out of your utter dishonesty, you attributed it to your suddenly-found respect for the Islamic tradition of Haj. Then, after I gave everyone in this page the link to the subject of Haji and US soldiers, you stopped it.

Then, you started bragging about knowing who I am and everything about me (in your attempt to "scare" me, or stop me from commenting here), and questioning everything about me, from my education, to my research, to my position at my university, to even things that have nothing to do with me. This is while you absolutely positively do not know the first word about my scientific research, what I have done, or am doing. 

What is the point of your bragging? When I constantly publish articles with my full name, what the heck is the purpose of your bragging? That is another manifestation of your smart a..ness. 

Then, you claimed that I had referred to myself as "world renown scientist," which I have never done, but what if I had? What does that have to do anything with what we discuss here?

Then, you started calling me "Mashdi," which is another way of mocking me. But, for a mysterious reason (but not to me, trust me on this!) you stopped that.

Your self-righteousness towards me has been peerless. One example: A couple of times, I mentioned in this page that I knew and was a friend of the late Majid Sharif, who lived in Los Angeles before the revolution, and was murdered as one of the victims of the infamous Chain Murders. In your typical self-righteous way, you implied that if Majid were alive today, he would think of me the way you do. You even said, "I have been trying to tell you this, but you just don't get it." How do you know? How did you conclude this?

Countless number of times you have called me "clueless," "Bazargan wannabe," "Shariati wannabe," "supporter of the IRI,"..... without presenting a iota of evidence.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

2. To Muslims:

Have you ever stated what you consider as peaceful, moderate Muslims, who are, in fact, 99.99% of all Muslims? You claim that you attack IslamiSts, not IslamIc things. You have never done that. To you, a good Muslim is a dead Muslim.

Have you ever even stated that such differentiation between peaceful Muslims and radicals exists? Nope! If you believe it, would you define it here? If you do not, I rest my case.

Suppose that I am a radical Muslim. In attacking me, have you ever stated something like, "of course, I know that you do not represent all Muslims"? Absolutely not. I have always been part of your standard phrase, "Islamist/anti-semite plus their lefty allies."

In your desire to see the IRI go away, you have time and again stated that everything - Islamic parties and group, reformers, religious-nationalists, etc., etc., - must go. Why? Are they all the same to you? Then, what happens to you claim? Some of these groups have been working under the most difficult conditions.

Have you ever tried to the attention of people in this column ONE, just ONE, positive thing about many Muslim thinkers, activists, and so on. Absolutely not. The reason is clear: Despite your claim, you see all Muslims the same way.

Have some shame in what you do, and courage and honesty in admitting to at least a small fraction of the above, which itself is a small fraction of everything you do here, instead of the abundance of smart a..ness that you exhibit in writing absolutely meaningless and hollow comment. 

To me, you are a read and re-read book. I have known too many of your type not to know.

Mammad

Muslim academic and the flying nun

IranDokht:

You grand intervention reminded my of a popular tv series that was shown in Iran of the sixties called "The Flying Nun". Not that you are a religious person or a flyer but your peacemaking intervention is a typical flying nun act (www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kyYwj7KQKQ).

But that was a fictional tv show. Here we are talking about real stuff. Which brings me to the point I want to make.

I do not qualify for the full memberhip of ether of the two groups you described in thses terms:

"We have two groups of proud Iran lovers who are articulate, educated and well informed about the history and the politics in Iran"

In coming up with such grand statements (you seems to have a natural habit of making grand statement as the one you made on the Palin Interview thread, to which I have alreay provided a reply - see the thread) you are painting a very black and white picture of the issues (the very type of picture you accuse others of making) or put it differently you simplify the matters to such degree that they are no more meaningful. For example:

"Why can't we respect one another and not fly off the handle when we have minor disagreements? "

"Minor differences" did you say? I am not sure how minor you like to be minor but perhaps you could tell us what you mean by minor differences. Are you suggesting that a difference of opinion on whether the Islamic revolution was an authentic revolution (as some of the people you have mentioned believe in) or a carefuly orchestrated riot on a grand scale (as some other belive in) is a minor differece of opinion? Or do you regard the opinions that Mossadegh was remove by a Coup or by a popular uprising are very minutely different?

Mammad:

You claim to be a Muslim and an academic. Words are cheap Mammad but I am afraid from the Islamic angle there is a price to be paid for making false accusations and from an academic view there is a loss of credibility when you fabricate stories and present them as facts:

" In addition to many inaccurate statements that you made, it is clear to me that while you are trying to break one "bot," namely, Dr. Mosaddegh, you are very much in worship of another "bot," namely, the Shah. "

As a Muslim you must make sure not to accuse people with false allegations and as an academic you are supposed to do your homework before present what you call "facts". You have done NEITHER. If you had done a little search on this site you would have seen that I break the "bots" in equal measures regardless of who they are and what they do. I am an iconoclast with no favorite icon. I amy not brak them totally but I damage them beyond repair. I have little time for those who glamorize others (Mr Kadviar and I have a long history of conflict of opinion - see this: //iranian.com/main/albums/meeting-farah?p... -Still deluded after all thses yers). To me all "bots" must be broken, be it the Shah, Reza Shah, Khomeini or Khatami. This is the weakest point of Iranians and the Shiite sect of Islam, to which I suppoe you belong, is so replete with bots. From Ali to Khomeini.

You also have fabricated a story about Bakhtiar in order to put him down which is not only without a credible source of reference but is against all the prevailing historic facts.

You say that Bakhtiar backed off from a meeting with Khomeini not because he (Bakhtiar) refused to resign as a prime minister but as you falsely claim:

"BECAUSE, AS HE HAD TOLD MOHANDES BAZARGAN, THE ARMY HAD MADE IT CLEAR TO HIM THAT THEY WOULD KILL HIM, IF HE WENT ALONG WITH THE AGREEMENT. He was afraid for his life. I do not blame him, but this also indicates that Dr. Bakhtiar was not the hero that some people try to make him. "

Bakhtiar could not have feared the army to kill him because he knew that the army was already on its way to surrender itself to Khomeini. The army, thanks to General Heuyser's advice was already keen to accept Khomeini as the country's leader.

Bakhtiar is on record to have said that he was not prepared to meet Khomeini as a resigned prime miniater because only as an activeprime minister the meeting had a meaning otherwise he was not interested to meet Khomeini as a curious individual!!.

Do you see that even with your fabricated story you can't dent Bakhtiar resolute stance on this isuse. I have already given Bakhtiaris a taste of my own medicine but I have to give him credit for not resigning in order to meet Khomeini. Bakhtiar aa a private individual was of no use to Khomeini and of no use to the country.

So Mr Mammad, you are neither an investigative academic and not an honest Muslim.

Anonym7 - One More Point

If you read my comment again, I said that Mammad uses the accusation against people who disagree with him. You, on the other hand, say that:

"... my respect for Mammad is not because I know him personally, but because I believe his ideas present the most sane alternative."

Therefore, you agree with him on issues. That's why he hasn't made the accusation against you. My comment addressed the ones with whom Mammad diagrees.