1979
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
From Shah to Ayatollah
29-Jan-2008
We are approaching anniversary of an extra ordinary event in the history of our nation, which had a profound effect over the lives of every single Iranian in one way or another even if we had no contribution to it. I remember those days that when traveling on the roads, from one place to another, we would encounter mobs of people with clubs in their hands while blocking the road asking you to say “death to shah” so they let you go! Then they put a picture of Khomeini on the windshield of your car after getting what they wanted and before you run into another group of them a bit further. It was a truly unusual scene to see and live in those days in a country, which was considered an “island of stability” in a troubled region, not much earlier!
When about a year before that, I heard about some demonstrations and clashes between students and police around Tehran University for the first time, I took the news with a grain of salt. I was very familiar with how the news, traditionally, traveled with so much of exaggeration, while living and working far away from Capital in a small industrial town. Sometime before that, I had heard about “fazaaye baaze siyaasi” or “open political atmosphere” that late Shah had mentioned a few times in his speeches and was broadcasted in news programs during the previous couple of years. But I did not know this would require violent demonstration and clash with police to show it! I thought that open atmosphere would result in activating people who were willing to have a role in political affairs of the nation and would end all those bickering about how everything was pre-planned by others and “we” could not change anything!
A few years earlier in 1975, foundation of “Rastaakhiz Party” that everyone had to become a member of, by late Shah had opened door for critics to denounce single party, single leader dictatorship. Shah himself seemed to believe that Rastaakhiz, would bring new and pure forces into play and inject new blood into veins of Iranian political body that had become too comfortable with leaving everything to be done by Shah himself. The trick did not work and all it did was a superficial change to appearance of Iranian political body with same people and same names. The hand over of position of Prime Minister to Jamshid Amouzegar after more than 13 years of late Hoveyda’s government, made no difference towards “open political atmosphere” in the eyes of those who saw the hands of Shah behind every political activitt. At the same time, a true political opposition that could provide a viable alternative to the situation was missing or failed to present itself to the society within available opportunities.
No doubt that bitterness and distrust of some political forces towards late Shah because of memories from previous couple of decades, were still at work and affecting the political atmosphere of the nation. Majority of Iranians in every sector of society seemed to be comfortably keeping their own status of being mere audiences to the events in those days. Papers were reporting the news and publishing articles, which indicated different atmosphere in the society while skeptics, held their position and considered everything as a show by government and Savak to identify and arrest opposing elements! Political environment showed some change and new people seemed to show interest and courage in getting involved and test the waters of new political order, but the change was not coming fast enough to satisfy growing demands, mainly by intellectual community, for more drastic changes. Complaints against corruption in government were publicly discussed and reported by the media but no one seemed to believe the sincerity of reports and the justice system to resolve any of the issues. Many people looked at the trials as just another show and the rumors about many thousands of political prisoners were circled around to prove the point!
Strikes that were mostly initiated under influence and inspiration of some groups who considered themselves defenders of workers rights against injustice of “capitalist world”, spread from one work place to another and, it seemed that it had turned into a fashionable thing to do. In many cases, the demands did not really reflect a true economic problem other than just taking advantage of the newly practiced liberal atmosphere of the country to bring some “change” but it was not clear to many that, what particular “change” was needed and what that “change” would result in. Later on, demand for freeing political prisoners became part of the agenda in the strikes, which by then, it had taken most of the country. In one of these days, an article was published in Iranian media blaming Khomeini for instigating and stirring the unrest in the society and trying to take advantage of newly achieved political liberties to advance his backward agenda. In this article the background of Khomeini has been brought into focus through using his original family name “Hendi” which some of his relatives have not changed to this very day.
A violent demonstration by clerics and theological students in Ghom followed the next day hence, the clash with police forces. Right after that, rumors flew far and wide through out the country about a big number of deaths and injuries in Ghom’s demonstration, which was supposedly committed by government forces when trying to disperse demonstrators. This became a staring point for “Islamic Revolution”.
From that point on, Khomeini was a dominant figure in all opposition activities and he ordered his supporters to commemorate the dead in a week and then in 40 days as per Iranians traditions to pay respect to those who had died. This kind of demonstration became a daily affair almost all over the country and every time, rumors of clashes and killings followed. Khomeini and his followers seemed to have taken the center stage and became the main force behind the events which were speeding up in an unusual manner and leaving everyone confused while pushing them aside to become mere audiences of those events and demonstrations by Islamic fanatics! Burning of theatres, vandalizing liquor shops and music stores became a trademark of Islamic fanatics that showed to be working on a predefined agenda and according to precise instructions and in a very organized fashion. Islamic Revolution had started!
Cinema Rex and Black Friday
Burning of Cinema Rex in Abadan that resulted in murder of more than 400 innocent people became another turning point event in the process of “Islamic Revolution”. Through out all these months, Iranian police and security forces were mysteriously absent and did not show any seriously active role in bringing the situation under control. Burning of Cinema Rex was quickly turned into a propaganda issue against government and Islamic revolutionaries successfully discredited the government by claiming that the action was done by SAVAK . One of my cousins who, used to work for NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company) as an ambulance driver, had friendship with cinema manager (who also worked for NIOC) and other staffs in the cinema. He usually got to see all the movies for free and, was inside the Cinema Rex that night talking to one of his friends who, was in charge of controlling tickets and checking and collecting the amount of sale at the end of night. Tickets have been sold out for the last show that day as it usually did for that movie and, except him and the operator of the projector no one was there. Their conversation dragged a few minutes beyond the starting time of the movie and his friend told him that he wanted to go inside the theatre and watch the movie and he had to lock the main door which was already closed, from inside, before going. This was nothing unusual and it was for not letting outsiders in without a ticket and when tickets were sold out and theatre was full. He invited my cousin to join him but he declined and said he had to go home.
My cousin left after his friend opened the main door, near the ticket kiosk in the hallway where they were talking, for him to leave. His father’s house, where he lived, was in one of alleys from Khaghani Avenue, which was not that far and he usually walked there. About an hour later, when he arrived, after seeing some other friends on his way to home and chatting with them a little, he noticed unusual crowd in the alley for that time of the night. Asked neighbiors what’s going on and someone told him that Cinema Rex was on fire! “I was there a moment ago, this is not true”, he replied. But, other neighbors, who had heard about that, confirmed the news. He told me that he ran back to the cinema and saw it with his own eyes. Except some smoke coming from rooftop, there was not much of evidence of fire. He saw the police and spoke with some of them who did not let anyone to get close to the scene. His friend died that night and his other friend, the cinema manager, a totally innocent man who, was not even present there that night, was executed by Islamic regime after the revolution.
Islamic revolutionaries later spread the rumor about SAVAK burning the Cinema Rex and blamed head of police, General Ramzi for failing to save people’s lives while claiming that he locked the door from outside so that the terrorists do not escape! In those days, it seemed that any negative propaganda against government was quickly absorbed and accepted by most people and government’s agencies confusion and failures had greatest contribution to make these propagandas work easier and faster.
After that incident, situation in the whole country became worse and government’s officials had hard time enforcing their own authority and taking charge of the situation in order to conduct proper investigation and find true murderers. PM Amouzegar resigned and, Jafar Sharif Emaami, a known freemason with religious family ties, formed another government. Coming of Sharif Emami in that sensitive situation was a surprise to many who were aware of his past as a person who took advantage of his own status in government to take commission of a contract for construction of Shiraz petrochemical plant.
It was not long after that when Iraqi government declared that they have someone in their custody who, had claimed that he had set fire on the Cinema. The news was quickly spread all over the country and that person was soon handed over to Iranian authorities but he was found to be a mentally disorder patient who was not capable of such actions. Case was not resolved and one more time, government was accused by Islamic demonstrators of having a hand in that horrible crime. After “revolution”, the real culprit behind Cinema Rex fire disclosed the true story about that criminal act which was planned and committed with the help of some of the important figures of Islamic Revolution in those days. After that trial, Islamic regime executed a few innocent people alongside Takbe-alizadeh, the person who set the fire and was known to Islamic revolutionaries from beginning, to close the case.
Among the activities of Sharif Emami’s short-lived government was introduction of martial law in Tehran less than a month after taking over. Dr. Manoucheh Ganji, a minister in Sharif Emami’s cabinet, in his book “Defying the Iranian Revolution”, speaks about what happened in that day. He says:
"On 7 September 1978, I had barely returned from Geneva at 9:30 P.M. from what turned to be my last U.N. Human Rights Committee meeting when my wife told me at the airport that the prime minister had convened an extraordinary session of the Council of Ministers and I should be there. I arrived forty minutes later to discover the unprecedented presence at the council of all the military commanders, the heads of police, SAVAK, and the gendarmerie. The prime minister told me that all present had decided on the immediate introduction of martial law in most cities, but the question they were discussing was when to announce it to the people: the same evening on the radio on the twelve o'clock news or early the next morning at 6:00 AM. That same evening, someone from inside the meeting leaked the information. Was there an informer around the table? There certainly was. A huge demonstration took place around Jaleh Square towards east of Tehran at around 5:30 AM to protest establishment of the martial law, the martial law that still remained undeclared! Official figures admitted to 168 casualties; the organizers claimed 2000 to 3000. September 8 was coined by revolutionaries as "Black Friday""
So-called “Black Friday” became a huge subject of propaganda against Shah and Iranian government and it was followed with a lot of myths which all turned to be false shortly after revolution. A bit further in the book, Mr. Ganji continues:
"Numerous documents have revealed in the aftermath of that day the clerics had arranged for sharpshooters with automatic machine guns to occupy strategic places around the square. They needed open confrontation and more blood to be shed. The presence at that time in Iran of several hundred Palestinian (PLO) guerrilla has been confirmed since then. Many reliable sources even refer to their mission in Iran as agitating and initiating shootings by soldiers, similar to the one that occurred that Friday...... I vividly recall General Gholam-Ali Oveisi's statement the day after Black Friday at the meeting of National Security Council. He said:
'I swear to god and my soldier's honor that their sharpshooters started the firing into the crowd and towards the soldiers. Since yesterday I have more than thirty soldier family who are in mourning in Tehran alone. They also belong to this country. You have declared martial law, forced me to bring my soldiers into the streets and then his Majesty has tied our hands from behind. We have strict order not to shoot under any circumstances, even in self-defense. They allowed only to shoot in the air. Our police is not equipped with tear gas canisters and with modern riot control equipment. The U.S. and other friendly western countries have decided not to sell them to us. You have thrown us into the ring and then tied our hands from behind. The army is being used like a scarecrow. The people are using bad language at my soldiers. They want to provoke them into scuffle and action. How long do you think this situation can last? Which one of you is willing to come and console the families of my soldiers who have lost a dear one these days? What tangible benefits their families going to receive? Why should they continue to serve in these circumstances? Aren't they human beings?'"
and again a bit further in same book Mr. Ganji quotes General Moghamd, the head of SAVAK, as saying: "We have information that the Communists and the religious groups are distributing ammunition among their supporters. Demonstrations are becoming more violent every day"
In fact, despite declaration of martial law, one could see and obtain almost any kind of hand guns or rifles in unlikely places in those days! Selling guns on the street corners side by side with revolutionary books of all kinds, with very nice and clean print and fine papers, had become a good business for some people while no one knew where exactly they were coming from. I remember once on the road from a town to another, near a village with some midway relaxation coffee shops and restaurants, I made a stop to take a look at a huge collection of guns and rifles spread on the ground by different sellers who seemed to be in competition with each other! I looked at a few hand guns and automatic rifles and when I asked the seller if they have more, while shooting smoke out of his mouth, he made a meaningful smile and said anything you want! I had never seen so many guns in one place before except in the barrack when I was doing my mandatory military service years before that!
About a month later, based on request from Iranian government, Khomeini was forced to leave Iraq for Kuwait after he refused to agree with demand by Iraqi government to stop his political activities. Kuwaiti government did not allow Khomeini to enter their country. Khomeini was also denied re-entry to Iraq and had no place to go in the middle of desert. At this time, Dr. Ebrahim Yazdi, who was informed of the situation, contacted Richard Cottam, a long time friend and an agent of CIA to get help in resolving this issue so he could take Khomeini to Paris. According to Gary Sick of US Department of State in his book “All Fall Down”, Richard Cottam contacted him and asked for a favor and he agreed to make some arrangements about this matter. Dr. Yazdi could take care of problem with the help of influential friends and led Khomeini back to Baghdad and from there, to Paris, where his friend Ghotb-Zaadeh had a place ready for them. A few days later, Islamic fanatic followers of Khomeini burned a mosque in Kerman to add another story to their list of stories, which were commonly blamed on Shah, the government and Savak.
In those months many events were happening mysteriously and among them were disappearance of some of obscure elements from within the government, were most puzzling but not widely noticed. Mr. Hushang Ansary, head of National Iranian Oil Company was among those people who left the country for United States, very quietly after a visit to Kharg island a few months earlier, in order to take care of his own “health”.
I remember this matter was brought up later on in a meeting which a group of us had with military governor of Khuzestan, late General Buqrat Jafarian, in order to reach an agreement for ending the strike in our portion of NIPC (National Iranian Petrochemical Company). The poor General had no clue that Hushang Ansari had fled the country while he was in charge of the province that had direct relation with NIOC and related companies. He was a little uncomfortable when we told him of this and made a short pause and went silent for a short moment before continuing! That meeting of course ended with no conclusive result but when after about 8-9 hours, we returned to our little town, a big crowd was waiting for us right at the entrance! They were all our colleagues who had gathered there as they had become worried about our delay. One of them told me that we wanted to tell government that we were ready to go to work if they let all of you came back without harm!
During our meeting with Governor, I realized that how we were all played with by some mysterious forces which seemed to be in control through invisible tools. I felt embarrassed in presence of such honorable person who was trying his best to run one of the most important parts of the country in such crucial times and yet he was so humble with such important duty that he was assigned to. He told us that he would relay our concerns to Shah directly because he was in direct contact with him as his personal adjutant. There was a direct phone to Shah on his table and he was pointing at it when he said that. The General begged us to tell our colleagues to go back to work and stressed that he was ready to meet us anytime we had any concerns. Our answer was that we convey the message and decision should be made collectively. In fact we were just wasting his time without having any genuine concern or reason for our strike, which seemed to have reached us like an infectious disease that we had no control over it! The strike in our complex alone was costing loss of around $5 millions worth of different industrial and agricultural products a day at that time.
Combining these two particular events of meeting with Governor and reaction of the colleagues to our delay, made me think that, things were more complicated than they appeared and someone in high places does not want this situation to end at this time yet. Otherwise, it was not very hard to enforce ending the strikes with minimal action by government law enforcing divisions. Late General Jafarian was killed in helicopter crash the day after revolution while on his way to Tehran with a few other officers and this incident was added to trail of mysterious events during Islamic revolution days! Dr. Manouchehr Ganji in his book, “Defying the Iranian Revolution”, has mentioned that General Jafarian has been part of the group which was formed later by General Badrei for a military coup to take the control of the country.
Martial law
Imposition of martial law had made no difference and Mr. Sharif Emami was forced to resign as situation worsened with more frequent demonstrations by Islamic fanatics. Appointment of a high-ranking military man, General Azhari, as prime minister made no difference in the situation either. Country was swirling down in chaos uncontrollably and vandalizing different banks and businesses of people with the justification of their link with this or that government agency was order of the day for Islamic revolutionaries and anarchists. A sense of confusion seemed to have taken the whole nation and government attempts to bring situation under control did not have any effect. Most of the nation’s work force was in strike and country was moving towards complete bankruptcy after a few months of widespread unrest that had brought all industrial productions to a halt.
Through out the last few turbulent months before the Islamic revolution of 1979, organized religious masses were regularly demonstrating against government with different excuses and religious characteristics of demonstrations were evident in all their activities. Representatives of Khomeini were freely traveling from one place to another and giving lectures in mosques and other places while echoing messages of Khomeini to people to continue their activities against government. These representatives of Khomeini openly used offensive language and all kinds of unfounded accusations against government, Shah and members of royal family as part of their speeches to display their own courage while facing no reaction by any government agencies. Secular portion of the movement had been forced out of the scene entirely and their leaders had turned into just another bunch of Khomeini’s followers while repeating his rhetoric with different words and leaving everything up to Khomeini.
Coming of new PM, Dr. Bakhtiar, a former ally of Dr. Mossadegh, created some hopes for positive change and avoiding further chaos in the country. His immediate actions in freeing political prisoners, which turned to be a few hundreds instead of tens of thousands, and closure of a portion of SAVAK that was responsible for internal security and monitoring internal opposition were seen by many as signs that things would be moving in right direction from that point on. The initial hopes turned to be false after Bakhtiar’s former allies turned their back on him and expelled him from National Front for accepting to become Prime Minister of the Shah. Bakhtiar declared that he will not leave his stronghold of Iranian constitution and expressed regret about decision made by his former allies while warning about replacement of one dictatorship with another one, which was worse than the first.
Shah left the country after months of turmoil and many Iranians celebrated his departure with joy. Daily papers published with the largest headline in the first page that I have ever seen: Shah went! A couple of weeks later, Khomeini returned to the country and was received by hundreds of thousands including secular opposition figures who were waiting for him in the airport but did not get a chance to see him at that time as Khomeini ignored all and proceeded towards Behesht Zahra grave yard to deliver his first speech. Khomeini declared that his intention was to create Islamic government but Bakhtiar told media that he will not tolerate another government for the country besides his own without knowing that his army commanders were in negotiation with opponents, through mediation of General Huyser, a high ranking American officer and second in command of NATO forces, to transfer the power.
Through out all those events, majority of Iranian population remained indifferent and chose to play the role of being merely audience to what was unfolding while a noisy minority of not more than a couple of millions in the whole country, took the streets and forced its intentions on the nation to put the country on a backward path. By the time that ordinary secular Iranians had decided to make themselves heard half way in the ruling days of Prime Minister Bakhtiar and in support of constitution, it was already too late. Head of Iranian army, General Ghara-baghi, had decided to abandon support for Bakhtiar’s government, as per advice of General Huyser, and take an impartial position in the battle between revolutionaries and the government. General Ghara-baghi advised PM Bakhtiar of this decision later in the day after the impartiality of the army had been declared through radio broadcast. Dr. Bakhtiar was completely disappointed after hearing this and asked General Gharabaghi: impartiality between whom and whom? Between “law” and “anti-law”? Between “Iranian” and “anti-Iranian”? At this point, Prime Minister Bakhtiar was left with no real power to enforce his decisions while revolutionaries were emboldened by declaration of the army’s impartiality and, certain that they would not face a serious resistance to their actions for taking over all institutions of the government.
In fact, despite statement of General Ghara-baghi that the decision about declaration of impartiality of army has been made by a council of all top ranking officers, many of those top officers were caught off-guard when Islamic revolutionaries rushed into the streets under order of Khomeini to take over the government. General Rahimi, the governor of Capital during martial law who was arrested by Islamic revolutionaries shortly afterwards, was among these officers. Later in the night, in an interview with revolutionaries that was being broadcasted on TV, General Rahimi insisted that people should respect the martial law and go back to their homes but revolutionaries told him that the government had fallen to revolutionaries and he should be obeying Khomeini now. General Mehdi Rahimi refused to obey and was executed a couple of days later on Feb the 15th/1979 after his arms were brutally cut by revolutionaries. Many other army officers were executed during following days and weeks simply because they were committed to their oath to serve their nation.
The obvious intervention of foreign elements like General Huyser and Ambassadors of United States and Britain in the affairs of the nation in final months and plenty of documents from US government which have been declassified recently, all indicate that a major role was played by those external factors in setting the direction of events of 1978-1979 in Iran. But questions remain that why the United States government would change their friendly policies towards a staunch ally, which had special importance in the region, for its strategic location in the south of Soviet Union, that was considered greatest threat to western interests? Why should the change in policy of United States have such deep effect in a magnitude to create such huge change in the political course in Iranian nation?
Who decided about the change of policy and when? How the change in policy was implemented and what elements were at work? Did Iranian government and late Shah himself know about this? Was it possible to avoid the revolution, which had such huge negative and disastrous impact, not only on Iran, but also on the region and the world? Did those who decided for such change of policy achieve their goals or not?
These are the questions that need to be addressed separately and under a different topic but by now, it has become very clear that, Islamic Revolution in Iran had a great positive impact for western world, not only economically, but also politically. And this is while the region has been suffering much more than before and from many new problems since the creation of new entity in the world of politics called “Islamic Republic” in Iran.
| Recently by Sohrab_Ferdows | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
آخوندهای فُکُلی | - | Nov 15, 2012 |
| Closing of Islamic Republic embassy in Canada | 4 | Sep 08, 2012 |
قصٌه های تکراری | 3 | Aug 26, 2012 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Copy of Documents available?
by Schahram on Wed Apr 02, 2008 01:33 PM PDT" In the same document, you see Khomeini's picture as the only possible alternative! Khomeini in fact has been under study by CIA since mid 1960's and his situation has been followed very closely by that. There is a lot more to talk about in this regard and I will try to bring them up later on in another article."
Dear Ferdows, is it possible to get copies of the declassified documents, especially that one you have described above??
Thank you very much
e-mail: schamsi@tiscali.de
Dear Wondering +
by Anonymous! (not verified) on Tue Feb 05, 2008 04:51 PM PSTI wonder when they are going to declassify the secret documents that show Khomeini as the West's puppet to keep the commnunists out!
I hope you will collect all these and print a book.
by Wondering (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:36 PM PSTThese are valuable information and research.
Dear Wondering,Thank you
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Fri Feb 01, 2008 05:47 PM PSTDear Wondering,
Thank you for your eloquntly expressed response. My version of response of course would be a bit different regarding some specific areas but you basically pointed out the major issues correctly, in my opinion.
I have to add that, also in my view, the issue of "considring" previous regime being a "puppet" regime has been in fact source of more problems for our nation and possibly one of the reasons behind Shah's tough positions against western allies on some issues in order to prove to his internal opposition that he is not what he was perceived by some Iranians. Declassified documents of different US government agencies indicate that Shah had tried to take advantage of Iran's strategic situaion for the benefit of the nation in best possible way when dealing with western allies. This matter is also seen in the issue of oil and relation with oil companies where Shah had to bargain his way for more revenue from oil through delicate negotiations with both "companies" and the governments behind those companies (mainly US). You are right that Shah should have been more careful and low key in those regards but I think he was being pressed by two major elements: 1- need to prove himself to the nation as a patriotic leader (or need for acceptance by people) and 2- need for more speedy revenue to accomplish the development plans in timely manner.
Shah's military purchases had become worrisome for United States because of their obligations towards their other allies (ie: Saudi) in the area and while they agreed with Shah in his presence but they doubted Shah's reasons for Iran's military expansions. Shah had openly told Americans a few times that he would go to others if they feel that they can not accomodate with Iran's military needs. "diversifying" military sources by Iran in late 1960's and afterwards has been discussed in American government communicaions multiple times indicating serious concerns. Another issue which had been scrutinized by western allies was expansion of economic relations between Iran and Soviet Union which was symbolized with construction of steel mill in exchange for natural gass that was being wasted up to that point. US government had warned Iran that USSR has sent 8000 of its KGB agents to Iran under cover of technicians and skilled workers! How did they figure out that exact number? unclear!
Shah had some heated exchanges with American ambassador over oil and military purchase issue in a few occasions. All of these have been reported in government communications. You mentioned American's worries about Iran after Shah which is very true and this matter has been discussed in government docuements more than once and in details! In an intelligence report by American embassy in 1972, the issue of Iran after Shah if he is "out" by "sickness" or "assassination" is discussed in a very detailed manner. In the same document, you see Khomeini's picture as the only possible alternative! Khomeini in fact has been under study by CIA since mid 1960's and his situation has been followed very closely by that. There is a lot more to talk about in this regard and I will try to bring them up later on in another article.
As far as the greed and behaviors of "imperialists" (international corporations and elite), you are right. they have no ethics! But in order to understand them we need to look at a few different issues from which the presence of "sell out" elements among different nations is an important one. This is something which has to be discussed in very detaild manner to have a better understanding of their justification on how the world should be managed in their view, which they are working very thoroughly toward that.
You pointed to Bushehr petrochemical plant which I think you probably mean "Shapur Chemical and Petrochemical complex" as I was not aware of such project in Bushehr? I know that there was a huge expansion project for Shahpur port petrochemical industrial complex which would change the population of that town from 30000 to 1975, to 1 million by year 2000. All of that has been dropped and except for the huge Iran-Japan project which was more than 90% complete in 1979 and was destroyed during war and then rebuilt, nothing has been added there! Thanks agin.
Regards
Dear Kaveh, The news
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Fri Feb 01, 2008 05:39 PM PSTDear Kaveh,
The news about Imperial Ariforce Technicians meeting with Khomeini was definitely an important news at that time, wheter fake or real. I am sure there are many other events which we might have not even heard of them yet which had some degree of importance as far as their effect in process of Islamic Revolution. I tried to squeez the materials in this article as much as possible to get an acceptable abstract for this phenomenon without compromising the major elements while avoiding to bore the readers. I remember the battle between Royal Guards and "Homafars". It was really another sad day in history of our nation which was just starting to taste and enjoy their civil liberties and feel as part of civilized nations. In the years and months before that, we used to hear such news happening elsewhere in the world and could not believe that it might happen to us too. Thank you very much for sharing your information and thoughts.
Regards
Some more info
by Wondering (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:35 PM PSTThis is a neat link. It may explain some of the questions:
//www.warcryer.com/guadalupe.html
To: KavehV
by Wondering (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:28 PM PSTWell, I think things are relative. Nobody is 100% a dictator or 100% democratic. Many Iranians long for the days of Shah only because of what happened afterwards. So now, to them it seems that Shah's time was great. They don't remember anything bad about it anymore. And Shah's times were great, if we are comparing.
Shah was in fact put in place by the US and maybe the British. But he wasn't really a dictator as such. Most of the rumors about his "dictatorship" is extreme exaggeration. Most of these rumors actually started by the US and the British, once they decided they didn't want him there anymore.
I think the main reason he was in place was because Mosadegh was a bit too extreme for British taste. Shah was a bit spineless and did not particularly take sides one way or another. But near the end he had started to take sides and that was what ended him. He had practically taken over OPEC and was causing the price of oil to skyrocket. A fake revolution was staged and a an extremely incompetent regime was put in place instead in order to continue the guaranteed free flow of cheap oil.
Greate Writeup
by Wondering (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:01 PM PSTI congratulate you on your honesty and sincerity. If more of us could be more honest with ourselves, I think we would, step by step, realize the truth about what happened. And the truth sets us free. I am a believer that the "imperialists" created this "revolution." Sure, people participated in it but they were not the actual drive behind it. And if we understand that, we realize why right after that the people somehow magically did not have the same power to change the system anymore! This was despite the fact the the new regime while maybe more ruthless, did not nearly have the experience, and cohesion of forces that was available to Shah. When did these "Islamists" learn how to repress people better than the extremely feared SAVAK? I don't buy it for a second.
These are my answers to your very good questions:
Who decided about the change of policy and when?
I think Shah had started to lose its value as a puppet regime. He was supposed to maintain enough control over the area only to allow the free flow of cheap oil and resources and also to fight the communism (which in my view was not that important to them). But Shah's system along with the rest of country had reached a point of critical maturity, or was close to it, to a point where Iran would soon stop selling cheap oil. Shah had already publicly announced this (one of his mistakes). Also it is possible that when Shah, again publicly, attacked "the Jews" for meddling with the world affairs to much brought his own demise because as you probably know Israel is extremely sensitive to such attacks and does not tolerate it at all - but again, I think this factor is probably not that important as I feel that in the final analysis even Israel is being used and that Israel is not at the very top of the food chain. By taking out a strong regime, and putting in its place a very weak regime (consisting of the most uneducated and superstition-filled backward group of Iranians) the imperialists guaranteed for themselves another few decades of cheap oil, etc. Just for good measures, they instigated Iran-Iraq war to further weaken Iran as well as change the Iraqi regime more towards West (Iraq lost all her old Russian fighter jets and weapons and purchased such weapons from France and other western countries). So when you look at it it was ll good for the business. Add to that the fact that having a scarecrow would be very useful for the US government to suppress its own people, pass repressive laws such as the Patriot Act, etc and cause its people to allow US government to purchase more military equipment (more contracts for the imperialist). The US population currently lives in fear and is easily paying the cost of wars due to the fear that the war "could come to their home" if they don't pay. If you think about it there are many other side benefits.
You must keep in mind that the "imperialist" does not care about American people either. They had an officially reported 70,000 of the Americans killed in Vietnam only as a political tactic to gain power, to get military contracts, etc. So don't confuse "America" with the "imperialist." In other words, a policy change is not necessarily for the good of America. These people have no country.
How the change in policy was implemented and what elements were at work?
I believe that essentially they did an analysis of the area and figured out that if Shah was gone and a few intellectuals in Iran were restricted somehow (killed, imprisoned, exiled, etc), all they had to do was to have a referendum! They already knew which sector of the society would win such "democratic" election. A revolution may have been chosen because that would seem most realistic and least suspicious as opposed to any other way. Because they knew that such a regime could not realistically stand on its own feet and also because such a regime would not and could not be openly connected with the West, a revolution probably was the best method. It made the mullahs feel like they had themselves taken over and that "God helped them" win such a powerful regime, all that nonsense. I think a "revolution" just fit the bill, considering all factors involved.
Did Iranian government and late Shah himself know about this?
I don't think Shah ever realized what was going on fully. He did mention at some point that "East and West are having a fight and my dynasty is suffering because of it." or something to that effect. This would be close to the truth but not very accurate. It was mainly the West that was taking the dynasty out. Unfortunately one of the biggest mistake he made was that he started attacking the West (at least verbally) while heavily dependent on the West. I am not sure why he made such a huge mistake but he did. He simply did not have that much independent power (educated people, industrial infrastructure, etc) to confront the West. He should have waited - he should have let the West steal the oil for a bit more. It would have been less costly.
Was it possible to avoid the revolution, which had such huge negative and disastrous impact, not only on Iran, but also on the region and the world?
I think the main reason the revolution was staged was because Shah had started to become "unruly." He had started to not follow every command he was given by the West. We see for example Saudi kings enjoying their pathetic rule simply because no matter what, they never raise their voice against the West. Shah did. He started controlling the OPEC and probably other things. That was a big no-no. He simply badly underestimated his opponents. I am not very familiar with the history but I think that is what basically ended him. I think that is the only way a revolution could have been prevented.
Did those who decided for such change of policy achieve their goals or not?
I think we have to realize that imperialists, for a lack of a better world, those whose main motivation is greed and those who want superiority, are not rational people. So in the long run, they end up destroying themselves. Nobody truly wins. But in the short term view, I think they achieved cheap oil for the past 28 years. Imagine what the price of oil would be by now if Shah had finished his plans. If Shah had finished Bushehr petrochemical plant ALONE, the price of oil would probably be somewhere in the vicinity of $1000 per barrel. I am quite sure of that because I was trained as a chemical engineer in Iran and we were given some very amazing statistics as to what that plant would mean to Iran, and even the whole Middle East. That plant alone would take bread out of many imperialist tables! And Shah had other plans! He said in one of his public interviews that he would not sell crude oil to the "blue-eyed people" anymore! That is a dangerous thing to say! Most people in the world, including Iranians and americans, do not know that having crude oil is nothing is you can't have refineries and petrochemical plants. With those you make a killing! So again, in short term, hey did reach their goals but in the long term such plans have no value and nobody wins. A more destabilized Middle East with its problems overflowing all the way into the American land is partially the result of such policies.
Mr. Ferdows, Thank you for
by KavehV (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:34 PM PSTMr. Ferdows,
Thank you for providing us with the memories of those years through your own experiences. This is quite encouraging to see a convergence of our personal experiences and observations regarding the '79 events. This is a hopeful and encouraging trend for a better future.
There is another little detail, I thought may be helpful to the readers, as it relates to the armed forces declaration of neutrality. In the final months, or weeks, of these disturbances, there was a great deal of concern about the cohesion and integrity of the armed forces. These concerns were initially coming from Washington, but I would think that, many within the armed forces and the government had similar concerns, and fear of a civil war ensuing a fractured military. The turning point was, as you may recall, the supposed meeting of the uniformed airforce technicians (Homafars) in front Khomaini, on school grounds (I believe where he resided at the time in Tehran). There was a single photo of the event that was published in Etela'at (or Keyhan) paper. The photo was called a "montage" (fake) by the military governor, but it was taken as the anticipated breach in the cohesion of the armed forces. As the result, the Royal guard division, whether within their legal obligation or not, sieged the airforce compound and demanded explanation from compound commander. What ensued is still a mystery to many, some airforce personnel were shot by Royal guard officers over an argument (presumably over the picture taken with Khomaini). The result of which was the opening of the airforce armory and a gunfight with Royal guard corp. The crowds quickly became involved at day break and somehow broke the Royal guard siege and gained access to armory, with the help of airforce personnel. General Badreii, on Mr. Bkhtiar's request, called off the siege and ordered his troops back to their base.
This was another half measure adopted by the authorities, at the time, which backfired severely. There are still many questions about how and why of some details. The half measure of confronting the airforce technicians accused of treason, in an emotionally charged confrontation is one thing. Then allowing public access to armory and withdrawing right at the start of the fire fight ? How much would it take for the guards to suppress a few dozen airforce "technicians" ? In retrospect, one can argue the cohesion of the Royal guard may have been in question already, as there were rumors of a shootout in Lavizan base a few weeks prior to this event. It maybe that the bug of revolution was slowly affecting the military and, for that time, declaration of neutrality was the honorable way out of a bloodier civil war. But later, the officer class of the Imperial Armed Forces paid by their blood, nevertheless!
Interesting.....
by KavehV (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 09:53 PM PSTI am not trying to pick on anyone's conspiratorial sensitivities, but I just came across this video that astonished me;
//www.youtube.com/v/h9fJYck6PTM&rel=1
From my 30 years of experiences with Europeans and Americans, I have never met anyone, European or American, with such strong opinions about Iran's last monarch as the British! In every case, I found that their prejudice is not based on facts (since they knew little beyond 30 year old propaganda), but some inner belief with unjustifiable sympathies with Islamists of IRI. As an outsider and with somewhat limited observations, I am not surprised to see UK the hotbed of Islamist extremism today.
Why?
by Joubin Houshyar (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 08:00 PM PSTSalaam,
.
The late Shah was a nationalist. The New World Order is conceived as institutionally trans-national.
.
Thus: "Shah must go" was likely first uttered in either French or English ...
.
/& Salaam
Ananymous4now, I could
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Thu Jan 31, 2008 03:56 PM PSTAnanymous4now,
I could get the pdf from earlier link but it was only 2.2 MB. I sent you an e-mail. please let me know if there is something else. Many thanks.
"az maast keh bar maast" is right. There is no doubt that, in any social phenomenon, the most important factor has been and continues to be the role of people themselves. Having said that, neglecting the influence of foreign elements which always work through their internal agents (as in this case) can have disastrous results and should not be overlooked. That's why all nations have their own security apparatus to watch over things like that.
Dear Afsaneh
by Anonymous4now on Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:28 AM PSTYou seem very irritated and upset in your posts but you don’t present a valid argument and resort to rhetoric and harsh words. I gather that you believe that the Russians controlled the masses in Iran to commit themselves to this “revolution”. I am very interested to hear more about this technology, because it certainly is news to me. Not only is the Physics of it unknown to me but the engineering that would go into such a system that could selectively, and over vast distances, passivate one sector of the society (the by standers of whom we know there were plenty), have a moderating effect on the protestors (peaceful demonstrations), aggravate the aggressors (Bank and government building looters and burners), and leave the Mullahs alone to coordinate their revolution. I would like to learn more, and if you can argue the case in a convincing manner, then I will definitely put the time in, and take your recommendation, to read the book by this Lieutenant Colonel of the U.S army. Don’t be so impatient. It is the first time, I , and I believe a lot of others, have heard this and if you want to be helpful and open our eyes, then help and convince us. Thank you.
"Sohrab"
by Afsaneh (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:04 AM PSTLOL...talk about Ignorance!!!! How about I leave the reading of books and useless speeches to you. There will come a day when I would say "I told you so", until that day... agha jaan take care and don't work too hard to free Iran by sitting at your computer and writing too many rubbish that has been fed to you by none other than those who have got you where they exactly want you.
And I must add in regards to the problem with Iranian sort of called "intellects" is that there are no shades of gray. Any knowledge contrary to that which you hold so dear is refuted as ridiculous...so evident by your response.
Sohrab and Salar: I
by Anonymous4now on Thu Jan 31, 2008 09:49 AM PSTSohrab and Salar:
I think we are all in agreement that the revolution came as a result of an orchestrated effort and a conspiracy but disagree on who committed this orchestration. I believe it was the Islamists who conspired to bring about the revolution, and the Iranian people were the unknowing culprits in the execution. The Americans tried to make the best out of it towards the end, but Europe and in particular Russia have benefited from the mistakes of the Americans. The Islamists have been busy in Iran since 1947. They assassinated Ramzara (1951) and Mansur (1965). They attempted to assassinate the Shah in 1966. //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fadayan-e_Islam Mansur is reported to have been put on trial, in absentia, by an Islamic court, much like the one’s Broojerdi talks about in his book, held in the seventies, that convicted and executed various people. As I mentioned the Islamists started to become more and more sophisticated and organized from the early 70s and their religious leaders were relentless in the proliferation of propaganda against the Shah’s regime. I was attending school in England when I visited Iran for the summer of 1976. The contrast to me was shocking, but still I was not informed enough or sophisticated enough to make anything out of it. Most of the school friends and neighborhood friends I had left behind had become devout Moslems and would have nothing to do with me. In 1977, while attending university in the states, Iranians wanted to organize an Iranian booth for the cultural night the university was going to hold. The confederasiony boys would not relent and wanted us to make the event political. In one of the meetings a filthy and unshaven character showed up and when I asked the conferasionies who they thought was going to replace the Shah, the filth bag said “Ayatollah Khomeini”. I exclaimed, a Mullah! At which time everyone burst out laughing. He was visibly agitated and before he left he said, “yes, an Islamic Republic”. I had no idea who Khomeini was and could not give any credence to his statements, but when the next year I witnessed Iranian female students marching on the streets with chadors, and seeing all sorts of people from all walks of life carrying Khomeini’s picture, then I put two and two together. We are too willing to pass the buck and blame external forces for the contagious lack of judgement we exercised. The Shah’s strict censorship and banning of banning books such as the leftist clap trap and khomeini’s devine revelations played in the hands of the Mullahs whose relentless propaganda spread the vail of ignorance over the Iranian population. Az mast keh bar Maast. No one persuaded the Iranians to abandon their positions wholesale and protest in the streets, or line the streets from the airport to Behesht Zahra to greet a mullah that Obeid Zakani had tried, in vein, to make known to us, 7 centuries earlier. Sohrab, your own article attests to the unreasonableness of the people who were protesting, but did not know why or when to compromise. Any way, I hope you were able to download Broojerdi’s book, because I tried to email the book but it bounced back several times due to size limitations (the pdf is 17 MB).
Dear Salar, As far as factor
by Sohrab Ferdows (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 04:36 AM PSTDear Salar,
As far as factor of "ignorance" in the Islamic revolution, I am reffering to the main event and process, up to the point when Islamic revolutions actually occured. whatever happened after that (including assassinations) are all by-product of the main event. the rest I agree.
Dear Afsaneh, Thank you for
by Sohrab Ferdows (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 04:21 AM PSTDear Afsaneh,
Thank you for your life saving remarks! It is relieving to know that Russians instigated fake Islamic revolution to break the Soviet Union apart and let NATO sit in their former Soviet States and then get 20% of Caspean sea instead of 50% that they had! That is a real wonder of how some people can figure out everything so easily while "boys" are sifting the sands in playground! I just have a little suggestion if you don't mind; Next time you decide to make a derogatory comment about anything, at least read a couple of more books on the subject and do a little research, and also do not settle for one piece of paper somewhere in the congress of United States! That's not healthy!
Regards
3 Factors of our demise
by Salar (not verified) on Thu Jan 31, 2008 01:52 AM PSTOn why US shifted its policy and such, well the short answer is they felt they have to protect their interests and also their trading partners‘, what were their national interests back then and now?, that I think you can dig up by your own. Also to understand their behavior back then, we must also look at the state of the affairs outside Iran (socialism and communism being the largest threat back then) as well as the political landscape inside iran. I explained some of them before and to ignore a huge chunk of our recent political history, movements, and influential figures like mousadegh and his movement and its long lasting effects in Iranian society and politics is an imprudent suggestion and plainly an offensive manipulation of the truth that will only take us to never land. The only person who spoke of the truth and had accurate political analysis of events and facts was Dr Bakhtiyar who with 450 of other political leaders and figures of our nation were systematically assassinated by IRI thugs abroad with full assistance and protection of western intelligence and security forces. Was our ignorance at fault here too? Did ignorant Iranians poured into streets of paris and demanded this too? All those three factors I mentioned before are at play.
1. Foreign powers, in particular US, Britain.
2 fifth column elements (akhood class and religious class surrounding them)
3. Our ignorance
We need to recognize and analyze each one equally and fully, without that we stand no chance. Number one knows us and our weaknesses well but we know nothing about them (politically). Number 2, has been operating freely under the radar of our consciousness without detection and because of our ignorance. Number 3, well, we are OUM, operating under the influence of Islam, aren’t we?
I think
by Afsaneh Parsian (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 08:55 PM PSTThose of you who are interested to know why and how the "phony" revolution took place in our beloved country should read "the Anatomy of a Revolution" by Archibald Edward Roberts, Lieutenant Colonel, Army of United States.
And if you have an access to the Library of Congress search for a letter from "Committee To Restore The Constitution, Inc." to Dr. Revillo P. Oliver dated 2 May, 1977.
You will be shocked to find that what you are saying above is all commentary. Speculations and guess works. However honorable your intentions are, they are not the truth of what happened.
I will give a hint, an expert from this letter " Perhaps the most ominous revelation of the Canada studies is that the USSR is experimenting with Low-Frequency modulations as a device to influence brain-wave at great distances and thus generate, on command, violence or passivity in selected populations. Dr. Puharich related his own and other attempts to alert military and government heads to the significance of the Russians...."
While you boys are dreaming in your slumber of an answer to justify the ambush of Islamic atrocity and departure of late Shah the Cat is being devoured by the Wolf. And almost everyone who has 2 cents for brain is looking at USA.... try looking up the other way.
Look how much Russia is benefiting from this fake revolution, how much they have taken over our country. We literally gave them Khazar in a silver platter.
So next time you boys want to reminisce about the by gone times and start burning some brain calories over what happened try to open your eyes and see what "is" happening.
Dear Salar,Disastrous
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Wed Jan 30, 2008 06:48 PM PSTDear Salar,
Disastrous impact of Islamic revolution in the format of inspiring Islamic extremism and stirring antagonistic sentiments against other religions and non-muslim societies has been felt universally in every society. The obvious evidences are present in abundant everywhere including Europe and US. The positive impact for western world or better say "developed nations", has been in the area of economy and geopolitics as I mentioned in the article. This does not mean that western societies have not suffered from this event while their elite have had biggest interest in that and still do. Just remember that Ben Ladin, a creation of CIA and NSC of US, has been one of the most discused charaters in this regard and still is at work while no one knows why he can not be captured or killed even though he has been implicated in 9/11 event!
Your response does not provide any information about behavior of US government and foreing elements which all the questions are related to. You have repeated some old arguments about Shah and Mosadegh which I have no interest in because this issue is not relatd to relation between those figures in any way. Diverting debate towards those argument will not serve any purpose other than misleading us into unneccessary endless argument in the same old style of bickerings that have brought us to this point.
You can call this event anything you like but remember that you brought up your objection for naming of the event not me! My interest is in finding the truth, whatever the name is! I agree with you on effects of foreign elements were at work but you can not ignore the role of those people who poured in the streets and became the material of this whole story. But the whole point is that why we, as a people, fell for their trick and why a big majority stayed silent in the whole episode at such important times in the history of our nation?
As I mentioned, my purpose is to find the truth without ancient and habitual biases which is very common in our society and among our people, as much as possible. If you have sensed any sign of self righteousness of my response, I have to say, that has never been my intention and I sincerely offer my apology.
I agree with you on almost everything you said in your most recent post at Wed Jan 30, 2008 05:27 PM PST and appreciate your attention and interest but as I mentioned, the questions at the end of article were about external element which affected that event. Maybe I have not explained myself clear enough earlier and hope everything is clear now.
Regards
Sohrab: Your Contradictory Logic
by Salar (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 05:27 PM PSTQuestions from your article, at the end you ask: “Who decided about the change of policy and when? How the change in policy was implemented and what elements were at work? Did Iranian government and late Shah himself know about this? Was it possible to avoid the revolution, which had such huge negative and disastrous impact, not only on Iran, but also on the region and the world? Did those who decided for such change of policy achieve their goals or not? “
If you read my first response carefully I answered all of them as simple and concise as I could. Sure, one could argue for pages and write books about each one but not in the comments section here. Moreover, above you calim the revolution had disastrous impact ... for the world. later you say it was beneficial for the west. so which one is it? how could it be disastrous for an entire entity but beneficial for a part of it?
Again you say: “ These are the questions that need to be addressed separately and under a different topic but by now, it has become very clear that, Islamic Revolution in Iran had a great positive impact for western world …”
“Islamic Revolution” and its meaning needs to go under further scrutiny. First of all it wasn’t a revolution if it was designed and systematically executed by foreign powers and their fifth columns in Iran. Sure Iranians were fooled to participate and carry out the scenarios prepared for them but they didn’t design it and had no leadership or control of it. Would something like this still be called a revolution by any logic? I seriously doubt that. Furthermore, the dominant theme until very last stages was being anti-shah and anti imperialism, not Islamic. So, at best you could call it a staged revolution, preemptive revolution, controlled revolution but certainly not a Islamic revolution, better word for it would be a coup that was designed and staged to look like a revolution and events and elements involved certainly made it possible to look like that. So, If you used “Islamic regime” in your sample writing above, it would make more sense and be more precise.
Again in your response you insisted “Islamic revolution was a revolution whether you and I like it or not! It des not matter how it was instigated but it was a revolution nevertheless.”, excuse me!!!, “doesn’t matter how it was instigated”, huh??? explain that logic to me!! We all know how it happened, the trillion dollar question is why it happened. Now you are being contradictory to your own argument and questions in your article and later comments. You are just arguing for all sides.
Look my friend, it doesn’t matter whether I answered your questions or your points are better than mine, etc. etc. ego has no place when you are trying to work for something that is beyond your self-righteousness and complacency. The ultimate questions are why we failed then and why we are failing now. The theme you are pushing for is our own ignorance and naïveté. Sure I agree with that, but there are two other factors in the equation that played equal if not more important roles then and now. 1. Foreign powers in particular westerners with the leadership of US and Britain. 2. Fifth column elements in Iran, which have been mainly Akhoond class and the religious class feeding them (call them akhoond kot shalvar poosh, efrati mazhabioon, bazari, whatever) who always work against iran‘s interest. We need to identify and understand our enemies, iran’s enemies, in order to be able to analyze them correctly and know how they operate, to predict their next plan and moves to prepare our own counteracts and stop being a passive viewer of events or at best reacting late to them. So, just recognizing and fixing one of these factors alone as you and many others suggest will not get us far in this battle.
Dear Anonymous4now, The
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Wed Jan 30, 2008 03:11 PM PSTDear Anonymous4now,
The single element which has been behind all Islamic movements since about a century ago and has been behind all mysterious Islamic uprisings all over the world, is nothing but "Islamic brotherhood", founded by Hassan Albanna after seyed Jamal Asadabadi failed and was kicked out of Egypt. This is as real as it can be. Even killing of Mr. Tabatabi in United States was their work through an American muslim who has said it very clearly that his mentor was Mr. Ramadan.
I don't want to go to details for you regarding this but, while I hate conspiracy theories probably even more than you do, discounting the element of conspiracy in such huge event in the absence of real solid and logical factors to be connected together, would be a big mistake! Conspiracy is always there and will always be there but it is up to us, the people, to make it failure.
The blame remains on us because we failed this time and they won. I agree with you that Americans have tried to milk other events without really having a serious impact in them but this case is different. A huge amount of evidences and declassified documents exist that indicate a well planned program has been in work since early 1970's.
Thanks for the link
All together...
by Anonymous until iran is free (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 01:58 PM PSTLet's all together say:
Javid Shah...
Only to pest off the islamists who lost and ruined iran.
Sohrab Jaan
by Anonymous4now (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:32 PM PSTI did hit the link I provided earlier and it took me to the 2shared website with the information about the pdf file showing. At the bottom right of the screen there is a “Save file to your pc: Click here” link which allows you to download the pdf.
Anyway if you believe his account, which is way too detailed to be made up, the “revolution” was brewing and being organized by the likes of him from early 70s. He started his involvement in 1975-76. Islamists like Chamran had started their activities much earlier. This book and another by Ja’far Shafi’zadeh have an ominous feel of reality for me, because they both present a list of those to be assassinated by them at the end of their books. Broojerdi’s includes several names of my father’s friends and Shafi’zadeh’s includes my dad’s name. I think they are a must reading for all Iranians.
I get the feeling that we are, once again, ready to shift the blame on some conspiratorial external force for the revolution. While I think the West tried to milk the revolution, to its own advantage, as much as it could, it was our ignorance and our willingness to be fooled that took us down the path that led Carter to extend a hand to Khomeini. So if there have been benefits for the West it is because they have adjusted themselves to take full advantage of the incompetence and the self serving attitude of the Islamists in Iran, at the cost of having to provide security in a much more dangerous world, than we used to lived in. You have to take into account the cost of fighting IRI mischief around the world and also the cost of fighting global Islamic terrorism for which the Iranian revolution was inspirational.
Everyone, from those who participated and those whose inaction helped the Islamists gain control, believed that their destiny was in removal of the Shah, at any cost. My own father who had raised me wise to the ways of the Mullah and who was a Mossadeghi and had spent 3 months in jail in 1953 for distributing National Front literature, let himself be fooled by a mullah and stayed up the night before Khomeini returned, celebrating, despite knowing who Bakhtiar was and what he stood for.
Anyway, in closing, if you have not enjoyed the poetry of Masoud Sadr, here is a link to his collection. It is an amazing recitation of the history of the revolution in ghasideh format, factual and impressive.
//www.masoudsadr.com/main.html
Alborzi,Comaprison of
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:43 AM PSTAlborzi,
Comaprison of Cambodia and Iran is comparing apples and oranges. Cambodia was taken over through guerilla war by khemer rouge who had also infiltrated the government. Cambodian people never handed their country to khemer rouge willingly as Iranian did to Islamists themselves through remaining impartial audience.
Whether Shah was pokh or not is beyond this article but as a reminder, all those who thought of themselves as being more pokh than Shah, failed miserably when they had the chance to make things right as they always claimed.
Cambodian people will argue for the title
by Alborzi (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:10 AM PSTWhat a lot of people make mistake is that they consider
the revolution as a Islamic movement, Khomeini got to power by default and Mojahedeens, however they did not have a chance if Shah was half sane. I really get annoyed by people who think he was a pokh.
markux, your comments
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Wed Jan 30, 2008 09:03 AM PSTmarkux,
your comments have no meaning and do not bear any real and logical argument. please help yourself and bring up a real argument so everyone can see what you have to say. you can not do anything with meaninglss slogans.
Dear Alborz,
Shah has not been the only leader in the history or in the world that you can brand with that label but where in the world have people brought such misery on themselves as they did in Iran?
It was the Shah's incompetence
by Alborzi (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 07:44 AM PSTThere is no doubt that a form of Islam is in most Iranian culture. But this form has always been tolerant and progressive.
Shah had massive amount of oil money and a relatively progressive country. Backward countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and Jordan do a better job of dealing with fundamentalist than Shah ever did. He was just an idiot, coward. The revolution was not planned/won by any one it was Iranians who got tired of the idiot and it fell in the lap of Khomeini.
Dear Bahram, Yes you are
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Wed Jan 30, 2008 07:34 AM PSTDear Bahram,
Yes you are right, some people went on the roof tops at night and yeled "alah akbar" but there was a lot of contributions from laud speekers too! just remember that other people were there too when these things happened. General Azhari was definitely a weak charater for the position that he held but the issue was not failure of Azhari alone, it was the system which failed and the silent majority who were just watching all of this as if they were sitting ina theatre!
Dear Shadi,
Thank for your contribution.
Dear Avareh,
President Ahmadinejad IS symbol of destruction of Iranian culture! the culture that he talks about is his own and not Iranian culture!
Dear Afsus,
Ignorance and lack of awareness has been the biggest issue facing our nation and if I want to ad one thing to that is, lack of will to take responsibility and act on our own behalf!
Dear Salar,
I don't see any response to the questions in your post. you are repeating the same historically biased materials which brought this misery to our nation as they are facts! Dear friend, you are far from being right on almost everything that you brought up in your response. Islamic revolution was a revolution whether you and I like it or not! It des not matter how it was instigated but it was a revolution nevertheless.
Iran was never bound to have a revolution as historic conditions to brew a reolution never existed at that time, that's why you had a "Islamic" revolution!
Not we, you are
by markux (not verified) on Wed Jan 30, 2008 07:07 AM PSTyour were and still are.