VIEW

4new...

I just said that IRI is blindly brutal. They simply do not value any iranian lives. As Khomeini said: "even if one person remains alive that is enough for islam." In layman's term, they are willing to massacre all 60 million iranians on behalf of their murderous god and inhumane religion, whatever they may be.

Having said that, now we know that all the lies and deceits aside, shah's regime was quite benign compared to IRI but people rejected him, for many reasons, but among them because they associated him with being installed and supported by the west. In other words, anything installed through foreign intervention is doomed from day one, besides the devastation that outside intervention can bring to the country and the people.

Yes, the situation is very difficult, but I still believe that if we get to have a trusted leader who can motivate at least a couple of millions of people, some elements of the regime, like police and army, may capitulate and refuse to participate in mullas' crimes against their own people. Remember that we also thought that shah's regime was very strong and stable, but when people protested on the streets en mass, the system crumbled from within quite easily.

Maleknasri M.D.: I am so blessed by my god (which is totally different from yours) to not be in your shoes. If I were you, I would be so ashamed of myself for providing any support for a regime that has murdered tens of thousands of human beings and oppressed and robbed a whole nation for 29 years for no reason. Obvious you fall into one of the following categories:

(a) you are so desperate financially and so cheap that they could buy you with money.
I am so blessed that I am neither so cheap nor so desperate to sell my soul for money.

(b) You are blinded by islamic fanaticism that you justify any cruelty just like your role model khomeini did.
I am so lucky to be given an intelligent mind that can think independently of any false religion and fanaticism. I am so lucky to associate myself with a kind and gentle creator who does not commit any crime and who does not need to delegate his crimes to a bunch of stupid mullas.

(c) You are simply so inhumane that do not value the lives of those murdered by IRI leaders, legitimized by their religion.
I am so fortunate to have a human heart that cannot accept any harm brought to any being no matter what the rational.

(d) You are not an iranian by deed. You cannot be an iranian, since the most precious part of iran are iranians and no true iranian is willing to harm another iranian for any reason, let alone for the sake of a foreign religion and a bunch of criminal IRI leaders.
I am so fortunate to have empathy towards all innocent iranians. Nothing is above and beyond the lives of innocent iranians, neither any religion, nor any bogus cruel god.

I indeed feel so fortunate to not share anything with the beast inside you doctor, the devil that has possessed you indeed lacks any humanity whatsoever.

Farhang and Teach

We all agree that the end should be the same but we disagree on the means to achieve that end. Do you believe that this regime will role over by peaceful means? Please convince me because I would love to be proven wrong. They have killed and tortured anyone who could remotely be associated with an uprising or dissent. The Kurdish people were massacred in the 80's, the uprisings of the early 90's were crushed, as were the student uprisings of 1999. Journalists and intellectuals were systematically purged in the Khatami era in the serial killings. The women movements and the union movements that do not even challenge the legitimacy of the IRI have been crushed; because of the fear of the precedence they may set for anyone who wants to challenge the authority of the IRI.

They have no mercy on their own either. Ayatollah Hossein Broojerdi is being tortured to death, as we speak, because he stood for separation of religion and government.

If you believe there is any peaceful means within Iran that can challenge and remove this regime from power, without large scale massacre of the population, please let me know. I would join it immediately. The sad reality is, I believe, that without help the Iranian population will pay a heavy price, as it has in the past, when ,and if, they dare to challenge the authority of this barbaric regime.

Democracy must come from within!

Abarmard,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! We need more moderate and reasonable arguments such as yours if we really want a better future for Iran. Definitely, the situation won't get any better by nonsense verbal attacks (such as that by the "frustrated" maniac in that video clip), bitching about everything without offering a solution, resorting to violence and hoping for an outside intervention to change things for us. We definitely, do NOT want another bloody revolution, coup d'état, or foreign invasion to push us further in the hole. Iranian history is full of these adventures, and we have seen enough.

What we Iranians need to experience (perhaps for the first time in our long history) is the true democracy. And that will never happen unless we all are prepared for it. As you have suggested, we need to educate ourselves and our children the basics of democracy. It starts at home and in the family. We need to teach our children the values of decency (as opposed to greed), respect and tolerance for other opinions, sacrifice for the sake of collective benefits, and above all participation. Freedom and democracy cannot be injected from outside, and will not be established by a government on its own. It requires faithful participation of people in political and social affairs, unity, sacrifice, and, perseverance. Once the majority is equipped with this powerful tool, it can confront any evil force either internal or foreign. This is how the "developed" countries managed to come out of their holes and become developed.

Until then, good luck and payandeh baad Iran!

Betaraf: I am Abdullah who

Betaraf: I am Abdullah who lives in east coast and I have shed a few skins so far. One of the outstanding human characters is his/her capacity to advance and to change to a better person. your failiar to do so saddens me. I still encourage you to come out of your cult's chains and learn and enjoy civilized world. I know you are thinking and trying hard, just give yourself a pleasure of only one day outside your cult and see what I mean. Betaraf may be fitting logo by the way for your cult.(you know what I mean). Good luck.

Some observations ...

The everyday situation for iranians is truly extremely sad and difficult, specially for lower-class poor iranians. It is truly heart-breaking to see the fundamental cultural changes that IRI has brought to iran as supported by statistics from today's iran:

//faheshe.blogfa.com/

IRI is corrupt and incompetent at its deep roots, at the level of its constitution and all of its organs; it is a deadly tumorous and well-spread cancer, and whatever its motivations, religious or not, MUST be uprooted completely before there is any hope for the future of iran. The cost is dissatisfaction of a minority who have ruled and milked iran by brute force for 29 years; so be it. They in fact have no interest and no belief in, and no understanding of, prosperity of iran. But they are not like shah, who left so easily; they are willing to commit mass-murder to maintain power, as they have done in the past 29 years.

In the hind-sight, it was quite obvious that we were dealing with brutal mullas from day one. Just looking at the brutal lynchings of the first few days after the revolution, we could see the nature of the devil that was welcomed in iran. We should not repeat that as "kheshte avval chon nehad memar kaj, taa sorayya mirevad divar kaj." Justice and due process should not be compromised from day one.

The only viable approach is a peaceful Gandhi-like approach, otherwise lots of people will be harmed due to inhumane brutality of IRI; that is simply unfair to those who lose their bread-winer or beloved.

I believe people of iran are quite ready for a fundamental change. Unfortunately, there is no Gandhi-like individual that people know and trust. And people are cynical and cautious after the experience of treacherous khomeini, and rightfully so.

I am certain that there are many honest and nationalist individuals among the 60 million iranians. But (s)he needs to be equally resilient and decisive, a modern and democratic version of reza shah, or mosaddegh.

We need to strive in finding such one or group of persons. And once a critical mass of support for such person(s) is reached, it may not be reversible by any mulla or mulla-supporter. They will have to pack up and go with far more humiliation than what was delivered to shah in his last days, a humiliation proportional to the fundamental, and somewhat irreversible, damages that they have caused iran and iranians in their 29 years of ruling iran.

Hopefully we'll be pleasantly surprised one of these days by resiliency of some iranian(s) as night is darkest before dawn.

Dar naaomidi basi omid ast,
Paayaane shabe siah sepid ast.

To Anonymous4now

You’re construct “a philosophy of non Iranian origin” is artificial and is yours alone.
Iran has not been in vacuum for the past 1400 years.
Iran is at war and whores like you are the reason.
You are definitely not Iranian.

If you were you would put your trust in Iran
and not US or Israel.

Go sell your self, there is a market for your kind with recent OIL surge $100/b.

Dear Anonym7: We obviously

Dear Anonym7:

We obviously have a difference in opinion. You either think that this regime is good enough as is or that you agree with Abarmard that the passage of time will teach us things we will need to learn to correct the situation. I happen to think that Iran is under a political, cultural and social invasion by the adherents of a philosophy of non Iranian origin that is in conflict with Iranian values which had influenced Islam as Abarmard alluded to. This is the reason for the conflict we see today in Iran, for which Iranians are paying a heavy price. I wish the problem Iran is facing was so easily resolvable by a mental check up for me. I would do it in a heart beat.

Re: Well Rosie, I know it is

This case (Anonymous4now) says: "The only way this regime can be de-clawed and disarmed is by aerial bombardment of its command structure" ...
"Unfortunately, dire times require dire solutions."

yes, it is a dire time for you to search for some mental checkup.

Well Rosie, I know it is

Well Rosie, I know it is politically incorrect to say this but I don't think there is any solution for the quagmire Iran is in other than help from without, which is looking to be less and less likely. The security apparatus of this regime is too brutal for any uprising from within, as Dr. Ramin Kamran advocates. They will have no qualms about mowing people down, as they have done before. Besides, all organized opposition to the regime has become obliterated. Sanctions will only hurt the Iranians population and cannot be implemented fully, any way. A land invasion is impossible and is not even contemplated. The only way this regime can be de-clawed and disarmed is by aerial bombardment of its command structure so as to embolden the population to take matters into their own hands. You may argue that there will be people killed in the process. Yes, but haven’t enough people been killed by this regime? Won't they be killed if they were to rise up without any help? The consequences of a Western response to a Nuclear mullahtacracy will be far worse than de-fanging the regime now. I would love to be proven wrong and shown a more peaceful way to salvage what's left of Iran. Unfortunately, dire times require dire solutions. Sometimes it takes an amputation to save the rest of the body.

Dear Anonymous4Now,

What would you suggest then as a pragmatic solution?

Dear Abarmard

Thank you for the thought provoking piece, but your solution is not very pragmatic.
People are being executed, tortured and imprisoned on a daily basis, Iranian children are getting brain washed and indoctrinated in the IRI ways so as to help sustain the regime, people live under daily scrutiny and have to endure humiliation, and everyday people are running away from their motherland in every way possible, and your solution is to take our time to educate ourselves about the "historical social component" of Iranian society? That is a noble goal for any country to have but not when the country is suffering so immensely and is being plundered of material wealth and drained of intellectual capacity. The patient is bleeding and it needs immediate attention. Once outside of the ICU then you are right, we must, absolutely, learn to know who we are, where we have come from and where we intend to go, together.

Baa sepas.

Crazy Persian lady?

She was just too frustrated to speak properly; you can not judge her by this short clip. Please people, stop being so judgmental.

Correction bellow

the following (bellow) is statements are by Native and not by Reza Zarabi

-------------------------------------------------
I was planning to write an in-depth article on this issue. However, I have been too lazy to do so … I will sum up my main points for now.

Points of discussion:

-US Democracy is a Trojan horse
-----------------------------------------------

Patterns of Democratic Evolution

Is There a History of Democracy?

Are there Patterns of Democratic Evolution ...

Abstract patterns --- mental diagrams --- which, for the most part, we have not constructed ourselves

- Democratic Agents and the Actors are the people of Iran residing in Iran, the Iranian diasporas, and finally US and the Jackals…

USA and the Jackals are manufacturing artificial context for change…a kind evolutionary forced mutation. This “forced mutation” was introduced with 1953 coup that brought the Shah and has taken a life of its own.
Iran reacted by seeking refuge into comfort of its historical strength … the Shia Islamic traditions. Obviously, this was an unnatural growth, a forced and reactionary step. IRI is a kind evolutionary forced mutation.

Put an obstacle around a new planted tree. It will grow and take shape despite the obstacle.

Iran is that tree and IRI is its shape despite 1953 and the sanctions …

In its natural setting any given entity goes through growth and life cycle and evolve in parallel not dissimilar than other entities within same specious.

Time Makes More Converts than Reason

source:
//www.nipissingu.ca/department/history/muhlbe...

-----------------------------------

The following is a "Coy and Paste"
The Author is Reza Zarabi. The artcale was first posted onJPost.com. but it has been removed so I
copied it here

-------- by Author is Reza Zarabi --------

I was planning to write an in-depth article on this issue. However, I have been too lazy to do so … I will sum up my main points for now.

Points of discussion:

-US Democracy is a Trojan horse

------------------------------------------------------

Ｉf we are to believe the notion that the future progression of nations, especially in the developing world, rests on their adoption of some version of representative government and if there is any veracity in Fukuyama’s anecdote to civilization as being a politically-empowered citizenry, it is all but time to analyze the utter ambiguity of what so many refer to as democracy. At a time when the world’s only superpower is attempting to instill this indistinct concept into two nations that have never experienced anything close to representative government, it has become necessary to examine if American endeavors in sowing democratic principles in Iraq and Afghanistan can ever be realized and in doing so, understanding if these “democracies” are to be achieved, what would the nature and role of these new-found institutions, both to their peoples and the world at large be?
Generics and its fallacies
At its most rudimentary form, we envision democracy as a political system that allocates to its participants, some say, a future and ensures the welfare of the country they inhabit and by extension, at least some finite control over the panorama of their lives. Yet, like all theories, when met with reality, they drastically morph into disparate shapes, taking on different characteristics wherever their principles are applied. An apposite measurement of modern democracies manifests the clear and transparent distinctions amongst them. For example, India, Israel, Germany, Turkey, and the United States seem to be functioning democracies that provide a voice and a vote to their citizenry and a vision for their respective nations. Yet besides meeting the basic requirement of creating a politically self-determined population, no system is even slightly similar to the other.
In the case of India, its democratic development did not spawn from an enlightened foreign power but came about by its independence from Britain’s hegemonic past, to it being partitioned into three separate entities as a result of ethnic and religious conflict, to it finally reconciling itself with the eclectic nature of its citizenry. In Israel’s case, her road to democracy came about by the decimation of millions of her people on another continent, to the culmination of a political religious movement that sought to coalesce a fragmented people, and finally from the successive wars it faced to protect its survival.
Turkish democracy was born out of the ashes of a once glorious empire, to the formation of several independent nations that included the Turkish Republic, to the transformation of her peoples from a medieval mindset to modernity by an enlightened leader, to several military coups, and into finally becoming the sole democratic nation in the Islamic World. Germany’s democracy has its roots in a colossal loss in the first World War, to witnessing a resurgent economy only to be shattered by massive economic recession, which gave rise to a fascist tyrant who waged unspeakable horror on her people and invaded several neighboring countries, then to have her cities leveled by invading armies, to be split in two and be occupied by an expansionist Goliath for the better part of a half-century, and finally to be reunited as one entity. America’s road to democracy witnessed her incipient weak confederation’s rebellion against a delusional tyrant who sought to shape this new burgeoning society into a satellite of its mother nation, to being ripped apart by a brutal civil war that defined a great portion of its inner struggles as a people, to being led into two World Wars only to come out triumphant, and to being the sole survivor as empires crumbled around her feet.
It is in these different contexts that each separate functioning democracy was formed and ultimately matured.
Each political system is drastically different from the other, by reason of the distinct nuances that make up the people of each society and the historical milieu that shaped their cultures. It is this reason that Indian democracy can never take root in Israel and that Israeli democracy can never function in a country like Turkey. By extension, German democracy could never meet the needs of American citizenry.
The syntax of ambiguity
If we are to accept that each aforementioned nation is capable of providing its electorate with some semblance of self-rule while also being diverse from each other, we must also understand when following the theories of Cheney, Bush, or Blair to their logical conclusion, there is nothing to be harvested save for failed policies, billions of wasted tax-payer dollars, and a global animus that will last for generations. In a recent Jerusalem Post interview, the former UK prime minister stated that concepts such as “freedom and democracy” are applicable to all nations. Yet dealing in esotericisms allows the likes of Blair to avoid responsibility for the results of policies that have so far failed. Although Blair pontificates in with grand mannerism about such vague concepts, it would have been interesting to examine what his responses would have been were he asked about why his nation had taken part in snuffing out the Muslim World’s first organic democracy in 1953 in Iran.
This democracy was not led by any fanatically-religious movement or any idealized fascist sense of nationalism like so many previous revolutions. The 1951 Mossadegh revolution in Teheran was motivated by a nation seeking to modernize and become part of the progressive global movement. Yet, in doing so, this new politically-able population decided that it was in their best interest to nationalize a commodity that was so far being squandered away to the benefit of global powers like Britain and the United States. In this we see Blair’s hypothesis of democratic empowerment of all people become directly pernicious to the selfish objectives of superpowers.
When Britain realized that the newfound self-determination of the Iranian population meant that British oil companies could no longer make enormous profits by the theft of natural resources that rightly belonged to others they, along with the CIA, implemented Operation Ajax, successfully instituting a naval blockade on Iran which led to massive civil unrest and ultimately the overthrow of her nascent democracy. The re-installation of a puppet dictator that acquiesced to any and all Western objectives while he was inflicting hell on his own subjects came home to roost decades later by the rise of Khomenei-ism, the only other alternative left to combat Western manipulation of Iran's internal affairs.
For as much as the Islamic Republic is now seen as a failure, had the West initially realized that this incipient system was actually attempting to instill some form of representative government to its people, Iran’s theocracy would not even slightly mirror its current form. The sanctions that were placed on Iran, the invasion of the country by American proxy Saddam Hussein, and the deaths of a million of her people in a brutal war in which the US did everything in its power to prolong for eight years in order to boost its military industry’s sales, had all but stunted Iranian democracy, perpetuating a 30-year imposition of Islamic martial law where the most fanatical ideologues have full and unchallenged control of the government. Had Iran’s jejune theocracy not experienced a Western onslaught that saw its cities bombarded nightly, its financial assets frozen, and its economy grinded to a halt, the paranoia that gave birth to such entities as Hizbullah and the Qods Force, would not exist.
Iran’s government would then have to be accountable to its own people, reconciling itself with the desire for modernity, independence, and economic progression. As I have said before, the delusional optimism that waits for a 1979 redux in Teheran has no basis in reality. Iran will not experience another “revolution” like the one that ousted the Shah, yet Iran will change, it will evolve.
It is evolving now. Whether this is realized by a national referendum propagated by pragmatists like Khatami or Rafsanjani, a military coup by the now affluent Revolutionary Guards, or the eventual abolition of the role of the Supreme Leaders and Guardian council whose shadow government suffocates any autonomy amongst the branches of government, true Iranian democracy is all but imminent. However, constant sanctions and threats of war will perpetuate the influence of the most right-wing fundamentalists like the current president, setting back the hopes for Iranian self-determination another generation.
Different shades of democracy
The question should not be if “democracy” is applicable to all people, but what type of democracy could take root in a specific country. Theologian, Reza Aslan, describes the concept of Islamic democracy as being a substitute for the West’s imaginative remedy for the Middle East. Given the milieu of the nations of the Islamic World, especially in the Arab World, Aslan’s suggestion is definitely a step in the right direction, for it is countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan that will most likely experience this form of representative government. If one is looking for a 1979 redux in the Middle East, they most surely will find not it in Teheran, but first in Cairo, then in Riyadh, and possibly Amman. Every trait that was present in Teheran in 1979, which eventually led to the ousting of the Shah of Iran, is ubiquitous within Egyptian, Saudi, and Jordanian society (in that order). And just like in all dictatorships in the Muslim world, the deficiency of any civil society apart from the totalitarianism of the potentate, the lack of any non-governmental organizations, and the absence of any viable political alternative, leaves an enormous void only to be filled by the mosque.
Within Egypt, a dictator masquerading as President has had an iron grip over the country for the better part of 30 years while his government receives a yearly sum of 2.5 billion from the United States. This inordinate amount of aid is not used to fund charities, or buy college textbooks, or help any domestic industry. It funds Hosni Mubbarak’s security apparatus that enables his autocracy to subsist. Within Saudi Arabia, the ruling family, after virtually eradicating the minute eclectic qualities that their country once possessed, expects its society to function in a similar manner to the Rashidun Caliphate, where women are treated as objects, denied suffrage and where religious freedom is only a figment of one’s imagination. Yet the House of Saud is somehow granted Favored Nation Trading status and has access to any Western military technology of their choosing. These totalitarian systems, which nations like the United States and Britain turn a blind eye to, along with the schism that persists between the ruling elite and the common citizen, has created a reality in which their own indigenous populations utterly believe that their leaders do not represent their interests nor their identity.
It is this reason why every poll taken in the Arab World consistently shows Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ali Khamenei, and their sycophants in Southern Lebanon as the most popular global figures…And why? What does Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Ali Khamenei, Persian Shias, possess that makes the hearts of Arab Sunnis swoon? Well, it’s not what these leaders of Iran have but, more importantly, it’s what the Arab masses lack, and that is someone who they feel represents their welfare and their self-perception. At some point, societies reconcile with who they are as a people and who sits at the helm of their nation's government. On the streets of Cairo and Riyadh, the signs of a cataclysmic change in leadership are becoming pervasive and just like in Iran in 1979, the mosque will eventually fill the void.
As for Islamic democracy, time will only tell if this brand of representative government could actually meet the needs of a countries like Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Yet, context is what is so often left out in this debate. Too often, deference is given to vague panaceas without any consideration of the ethnic morals and traditions they are being applied to and just like Indian democracy could never function in Israel, Islamic democracy can never take root in nations like North Korea or Myanmar.
It is time to reshape the concept of what we feel democracy to be. Pluralistic, societal self-determination that is attuned to the pulse of the culture in question is what we must ultimately define as being democracy.
For Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as Western policy makers naively believe that somehow Baghdad would someday resemble Dallas, Texas, Basra would morph into Miami, Florida, and Kabul would resemble Portland, Oregon, no amount of money or military presence can bring true political empowerment to these populations. Instead of trying to institute some foreign element that mirrors Western regimes, Washington should accept that the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan would be shaped by the aspirations of their respective people and not by impractical politicians in different lands. For it is this homegrown experiment, this endemic democracy that will ultimately move nations towards successful progression in hopes of reaching their God-given potentials.

Abdullah you act really civil here!

If you are the one who lives in the East coast,you have shed a few skins to look and sound so civilized.If you are not the one please disregard this comment.

Hey you want quick fix?

If it changes and we take over here is the fix:

You cross the road, 100 lashes
You pretend to be religious, 200 lashes
You talk about good old days, 50 lashes
You play any LA style Persian music, 10 lashes
You dance and you are a man 100 lashes, women fine
You sing and you are a man 200 lashes, women fine
You drive recklessly, 300 lashes
You smoke opium, 10 lashes
You talk about religion (any religion), 300 lashes
You talk about Pahlavis or Ghajar,100 lashes
You accept or give bribes, 500 lashes (almost death)
You insult Arbas, 50 lashes
You praise the British, 300 lashes
You act like a thug, 400 lashes
You spit on the street 200 lashes

No execution
No public hanging
No dress code
No loud music
No motorcycle in the city, moped OK

I am running for the office of President in Iran, vote for me.

Good Work

Thank you for the wonderful article.
We need more educated Iranians among us
to help us for better understanding of what is
good for us and our Iran. good job keep it up.

There is no quick fix : WELL Said

hey Mammad, very well said. Usually I don't like comments that are longer than the article, but your comment was very well worth reading. I am also as secular as it gets and I can't agree with you more. I see more and more Iranians thinking that way, i.e., realizing:
"..there can only be a slow, or relatively slow process of democratization from within (for Iran)"
(form some Mammad guy)

Reality

Excellent article! Some only want a violent move. They probably have their eyes set on the hanging of certain people in power in Iran. They claim they are fighting for the people, or for democracy, or for modernization; they claim they want to rid a country from an infection; they are absolutely unwilling to review the facts. They consider anything but a violent destructive move that hopefully kills quite a few would be a "defeat." Their only solution is to get rid of anything Islamic. They never explain how exactly this would happen. Where is the force that will shut all their supporters up? Where is that army coming from, who will fight all Basijis, Pasdars or whatever, and all those millions of uneducated people who will line up to support them if they believe that their precious religion is in danger? I suppose they consider some superpower would do it for them. Currently no opposition group has any such power, and it is unlikely that any of them will have in the next 200 years.

Personally, I think such people are beyond logic now. The fight is "personal" to them. They are not really fighting for "people" or "freedom" or any such valuable cause. They are fighting out of hatred and for self. They want to get even with whom they consider have hurt them. Maybe their loved one was executed; maybe their family was destroyed by them. And now, anybody resembling that "enemy" must be destroyed. I wish I could ask these people to take a better look and realize that maybe they "also" were responsible for what happened; maybe they were also not that righteous. If we look for revenge, I think, we should all kill each other because at one point in time we have all done things that we are not proud of. But if we see things the way they really are, and not the way we want to believe they are, we will then be able to understand, feel peaceful and move on to a better world. Cheers!

There is no quick fix

All the commentators who want a quick solution to the present situation in Iran do not, and cannot, offer any practical solution themselves. Most of them were hoping that Bush will attack Iran, but their hopes were dashed after the NIE report. Most of them claim that they are opposed to attacking Iran, but then attack anybody viciously who states explicitly that he/she is opposed to military attacks on Iran. Most of them give us slogans, not practical solutions. "this cancer must be removed." "Islam is the source of all evil." "Middle East is suffering because of Islam." "all Iranians hate Islam." "the Shah was great." etc.

Africa is suffering the most, but in regions where Islam plays no role. Many parts of South America (Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Brazil, etc.) and Central America (most of it, from Mexico to Panama) are suffering from extreme poverty and lack of education, health care, etc., and Islam does not play any role.

So, it is naive and utter simplification to blame Islam for all the evils of the Middle East, or even Iran. What is the role of Israel's expansionst policy in the misery of the Middle East? What is the role of the secular regimes of Egypt and Jordan in the misery of their people? Saddam Hossein was a secular, and a bloodthirsty dictator.

There are only two ways to change the present situation in Iran:

(1) Through foreign intervention. The last two times that this happened, namely in 1921 and 1953, the results were disaster. Reza Shah did some good things for Iran, but his dark and bloody dictatorship was a disaster. As for his son, it was even worse. Besides, Iranians are highly nationalist. Any overt attempt will utterly fail, and the time of foreign- sponsored coups has been long gone.

(2) Through the efforts of Iranians who live in Iran, with support from Iranians in diaspora. This would then be a process, rather than a project which has specific starting and finishing dates.

A process can be slow, or fast. The fast one, the Revolution of 1979, was tried and was a failure. Thus, there can only be a slow, or relatively slow process of democratization from within. Those who advocate this, including me, are not IRI supporters. My family has lost sons, daughters, mothers, and fathers to the IRI. But, there are personal feelings, and then there are nationalist feelings, thinking only of Iran and its national interests. We all leave the scene some day, but what should survive and thrive is Iran.

Those who want to pull a fast one are out of touch. Travel to Iran and contact as many people as you can. You will find that people want change, but do not want it to happen the way it happened in 1979. They are tired of bloodshed. Thousands were executed in the 1980s, and hundreds of thousands were killed during the Iran/Iraq war. People are also nationalist and against foreign intervention, particularly after the disaster in Iraq. Advocating anything other than a process from within, the speed of which can only be detemined by Iranians living in Iran, only implies that the advocates live in an ivory tower or in a vaccum.

No one is going to develop democracy for Iran, but Iranians themselves. If any nation or government claims that they want democracy in Iran, do not believe it. Any government, in the best-case scenario, only defends the national interests of its own nation, and anything that helps that is considered good. If the IRI respects the US interests in the Persian Gulf, you can bet your house that they become, overnight, democrats in the eyes of the propaganda machines in the West.

the US, over anger of its Sunni allies, helped the Shiite groups in Iraq, long allies of Iran, to come to power, and these guys, if they could, might create IR of Iraq. The first IS was not IRI, but that in Pakistan, established in 1977 through the US-supported coup by General Zia -al Hagh, who exceuted Bhutto. Just take a look at Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Ghazaghestan, etc., all US allies and all the worst kinds of dictatorship. Why does the US not help the people of these nations to develop democracy? Wahhbism of Saudi Arabia is the inspiration for all the Islamic radicals and terrorists, and Saudi Arabia is a "stunch" ally of the US.
Come on people. Open your eyes.

We can look at the Islamic Revolution of 1979 from a positive perspective. How? In at least two ways:

1. It took Europe centuries to recognize that religion and politics do not mix; it took Iran only two decades, a direct result of the Revolution.

2. We Iranians always blamed others for our problems. But, the Revolution was of our own making. Now, we cannot blame anybody but ourselves, another positive and awakening result of the Revolution.

Finally, it is nonsense that Iranians, at least the ordinary ones living in Iran and making up the vast majority, hate Islam. Spend one Ramazan in Iran to see how many people fast. Spend the 1st 10 days of Moharram in Iran to see how widely and broadly people mourn Hossein. This was true during the Shah, and it is true today.

What people hate is the reactionary mullahs using their religion to enrich themselves, to kill their children, or jail them, and to intervene in their private lives. But, insulting people's religious beliefs will not get anybody or any group anywhere.

Re: "REPLY:NO QUICK SOLUTION" Dr. Maleknasri...

It's always so refreshing to read from someone who claims to be an M.D. but doesn't know basic English and misspells common words like "IANIAN" "NAIGHBORES" "MY SELF", and misuses the word "advise". In the future you might want to use spell-check before hitting the "send" button.

"Contributive" religion???? Islam???

What does Islam contribute exactly? The word "Islam" derives from the word "peace" yet Mohammad advocates spreading Islam through violence and by the means of the sword.

Re: Crazy Persian Lady

I don't think she's crazy as much as she is frustrated. Having spent a few months in Iran, after living in the States for the past 29 years, I can empathize with her frustration and anger. Those may not be my first choice of words to express my anger but then again to each his/her own.

Nice article

Nice article, thank you.

It is sad with those out there who condemn one of the most contributive, historic and culturally significant religions of our times merely based on the actions of some unelected government.

Why are you so easily fooled by the propaganda out there?

1- Iranians need to get

1- Iranians need to get civilized, everytime some body says anything right away personal attacks start. Even if the author of this article belongs to any group or entity, what should really be important is what he is saying not who he is. 2- This article makes a good point of suggesting that lets do our home work and understand Iranian society before we propose solutions. It only sounds logical. people's anger and frustrations with IRI should not and can not translate to hate Shiit Islam or particular group of people. Those who just show emotions are doomed to fail in front of those who are using their wisdom. 3- Lastly, history should be our teacher. Over the last 30 years the only reason that IRI has gotten away with what ever they like to do is because the opposition is weak. Looking at all the opposing groups (organizations, religions, group of people) none of them have substantial understanding of what is really Iran and Iranians all about and where they are heading. All of them have a solution in mind and right or wrong they want to argue their answer is the best answer. We need to be more interested in understanding our current society as it is with its dynamics that are effecting the majority then we can may be ponder on the first steps of any solutions. If we don't take this task seriously then we will have another 30 years of going in circle and at best some external power or ideology will make decisions for us.

The Cure for an Abscess is draining it

Iran ,like a patient infected with a deadly bacteria called "religious fanatism" ,needed a major operation to drain this old old pus or abscess(Cherk). IRI showed us the cherk,the disease the savagery of this rule and when we see the problem we could fix it. That's why after almost 30 years of Islamic rule ,the revolution generation is totally on the opposite side of where their parents were in regards to Islam. If their parents considered Khomeini an honest mullah ,they know that he was a lier.

Malek M.D. is pimping for IRI again...

Nobody is willing to protect ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, except for those who are an integral part of IRI gagesters, thieves, murderers, and fanatic arab-parasts.
People are willing to protect IRAN, but NOT the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC. ISLAMIC REPUBLIC is an anti-iranian foreign rule of arab laws imposed by thieves, murderers, and arab-parasts on wide spectrum of iranians.
Yes, today lots of iranians view islam as the enemy. This has not developed overnight, but as a result of observing 29 years of oppression by those who claim to know best what islam is and rule based on islamic laws.
If you want to know what islam is, it is just a word, but its nature is best described by actions of those who claim to be protectors of islam through committing murder, thievery, deceit, oppression, and mismanagement of every aspect of the country, by likes of khomeini, khamenei, rafsanjani, and the rest of those IRI leaders.
The only way to save iran, and surprisingly islam, is to make religion a personal matter instead of a political object to be used as tool of oppression and domination. People should be the only ones who determine their destiny under total equality AND on a continuous basis. If freely-elected representatives of the people pass laws that are in accordance to sharia'h, so be it; if they pass laws that are contrary to sharia's, so be it. Either way, people should decide, not once, but on a continuous basis to be able to correct any mis-steps.
The cancer in the heart of iran is political islam and IRI leaders and protectors. The cancer must be removed decisively and quickly, before it kills the patient, and all IRI leaders and protectors, should be punished for their crimes against iran and iranians for the past 29 years.
In 2006, officially, there were 177 executions in iran.
In 2007, officially, there were 221 executions in iran, with several of them under-age at the time of alleged crime.
Iran stood second to china in both years in number of executions in the world.
That is an insult to integrity of iran, that is the reality of islam, that has to be defeated before we can gain any level of decency and prosperity.

Iranians will blame everybody

except themselves.

Islam,Arabs,Amrika,English,China,India,Korea,UN,Arab,
Arab,Islam,Islam,Islam,Arab,Palestine,Bahrain.

there you have it- the mentality of some Iranians.

Collective case of amnesia

Islamist hope and think Iranians suffer from a collective case of amnesia by making this sort of statements: “The more recent history of Iran and Iranians from the past one hundred years indicates the devotion of Iranians towards the Shia Islamic traditions”. If that were the case why the constitutionalists didn’t go for the Islamist rule? Sheikh Fazl-olah Nouri the highest Mullah at the time wanted it as did the King, remember Mashrou’e (religious rule) in place of Mashrouteh(constitutional). If Iranians are so steeped in Shitism as the Islamist like to pretend it to be then after three decades why are they so worried and don’t let go of the police state rule? The goal of this sort of write up is to say one should put up with this Islamist Republic and just zip it. Well, nothing doing, for all its crime against humanity and plundering of wealth, youth and future of Iran and the region it has to go, and according to history, sooner rather than later it will at the capable hands of Iranians.

Iran is occupied!

Iranians can not be Iranian in their own country.

Stop Genocide of Iranians and Iranian culture by Islamists.