PAHLAVI
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
All The Shah's Men (2)
12-Aug-2010
Part 1 -- Part 2
Before getting to the core of problems during the era after WW II until the events of Islamic Revolution in 1979, we need to have a quick look at one of the most extra ordinary and magnificent documents which has shed light on many of dark and obscure corners of the history of our nation in modern times. This document is called "Freemasonry in Iran" authored by Esmail Raeen whose life was taken because of that as he predicted when he started preparing it over 20 years earlier. Mr. Raeen has done extensive research and gathered a lot of original documents regarding the affairs that Freemasons have been involved in our country. During his research, he was threatened multiple times. He was once even imprisoned with false accusations under influence of some Freemasons who had infiltrated every organization of the nation, but later another freemason released him from prison! He says it was right after that which he could access a lot of information and documents to prove his suspicion of evil intentions and actions of Freemasons towards our nation. Mr. Raeen has met many Iranian Freemasons from whom some were openly admitting to being a Freemason and proud of it too! According to Mr. Raeen, there are some honest, dignified and patriotic people among Iranian Freemasons but there are also others who are evil and greedy and think of nothing other than gathering wealth in corrupt ways and serving the agenda of their alien masters. He believes that it is possible that many Iranians who joined freemason did so with clean and honest intentions because they were deceived by the messages of freedom, brotherhood and equality from this fraternity but later found themselves trapped in undesirable situations with traitors and foreigners. Dr. Mohammad Mosadegh might have been one example of such case that Mr. Raeen talks about. He briefly joined Adamiyat Society which apparently promoted cause of democracy before the events that ended up with Constitutional Revolution but later started working with "majma'e ensaniyat" (humanity society) which was held in Mostofi-Ashtiyani's house. A document was later released by Fereydun Adamiyat (son of Hussein-Qoli the founder of Adamiyat Society) which apparently shows the handwriting of Dr. Mossadegh taking the oath of loyalty to the cause of Adamiyat Society that according to some interpretations was the Constitutional Revolution and dignity of human being. It is unclear why Adamiyat Society should have taken such measures in getting a written oath of loyalty from its members and what has been the purpose of secrecy in their activities. Some people believe that taking the oath of loyalty was in accord with Masonic traditions which Adamiyat Society representing.
According to Mr. Raeen, Freemasonry lodges in Iran have been linked with different Masonic grand lodges of different countries that included England, France, Germany, USA, Switzerland etc... The lodges with links to England and USA were more popular and more influential than others among Iranians. Many Iranian politicians of all ranks had membership in different lodges of Freemasonry. Mr. Raeen mentions that after events of WW II and invasion of Iran, only a few of the Iran's Prime Ministers WERE NOT Freemasons which included: Ali Razmara, Asadollah Alam, Ali Amini, Abdolhossin Hajhir and Fazlollah Zahedi. He also states in his well researched book that except for Reza Khan whose control over military might have helped him to survive and implement his nationalist agenda, all other Prime Ministers who were not Freemasons during previous 150 years, were either killed or pushed out of political power by them.
Mr. Raeen has written in some details that how Freemasonry started in Iran and mentions name of Sir Gore Ouseley as the first Freemason who entered most of Iranians of the royal court of Qajari Shah and many other high ranking Iranian aristocrats in Freemasons fraternity which included the Prime Minister at that time. Ouseley who held a high status among British Freemasons, believed that Iranian society was "wild and barbaric" and suggested to British foreign minister that keeping them in that state would help British to protect their interests in India through creation of continuous chaos and weakening of Iranian central government. He helped preparation of defeat of Abbas Mirza of Qajar in his battle against Russians by passing the secrets of military plans and arrangement of his forces to Russians which was in accordance with the policies of keeping Iranian government weak and miserable. Later, after the war, he represented the Qajar King to negotiate the treaties that broke up major areas of northern Iranian territories from the mainland. He did all of this with the help of Iranian Freemasons in the royal court and around the Qajar Shah from whom Abolhassan Ilchi had bigger role.
Ouseley was later awarded with one of highest medals of honor by Russian Tsar (probably another Freemason brother). From that point Freemasonry has always played its destructive role in the affairs of our nation and Freemasons were despised by some of Iranian people who noticed their evil deeds while a good portion of Iranian elite, for different reasons, continued to work with them against the interests of the nation. The activities of Freemasons were driven into obscurity during the reign of Reza Shah but even at that time, many of most active Iranian politicians in the system and others who were involved in different affairs of the nation were secretly linked with that fraternity. Mr. Foroughi and Mr. Taghizadeh are just two of many well known names. Others include: Mr. Jafar Sharif-Emami, Mr. Mahmoud Djam, Mr. Mohammad-Taghi Eskandani, Mr. Zaryab Kho'ee (Abbas), Mr. Yarshater (Ehsan), Mr. Zarinkub (Abdulhossein), Mr. Safa (Zabihollah), Entezam (Abdullah and Asdollah) and many others who were all involved with political, economical and cultural affairs of the nation in one way or another.
Mr. Tolou-ee in his book "Pedar va Pesar" (Father and Son) has raised the possibility of Mr. Foroughi having a hand in removal of Reza Shah through British. Apparently, other than personal grievances of Mr. Foroughi against Reza Shah because of previous maltreatment, he had also complained to British Ambassador about Reza Shah's treatment of his high ranking government officials during the same time that occupying forces were present in Iran. There are some hints in the writings of Reader Bullard (British Ambassador) and Winston Churchill which show the decision to force Reza Shah to abdicate had not been taken before invasion of Iran. Reader Bullard in his memoirs about the invasion and forcing Reza Shah out of power says that, most of Iranians were in favor of removal of Shah but we had no intention of doing that as long as transportation of goods and military supplies to Russia through Iran would continue without any problem. He has not mentioned where did he obtained that information from and who those Iranians were but it would be reasonable to think that he received such feedback from those who were in close contact with him and Mr. Foroughi with much feelings of resentment (because of previous ill treatments) towards Reza Shah was one of them. He states that we (the invaders) did not want to get into internal affairs of Iranians but Iranian people were not happy about that because they believed Reza Shah was installed and supported by British and wanted to get rid of him. This matter apparently became the foundation for spreading of lies and accusations against Reza Shah through BBC Farsi program which had started to work just for such purpose during the beginning days of occupation of Iran.
BBC's reports were prepared and sent to London from British Embassy in Tehran by a staff named Ms. Lambton to reflect most current events in Iran and provoke the society against Reza Shah. Winston Churchill has written in his memoirs about why it was necessary for British to use Iran in order to help Soviet Russians while keeping the hands of Germans from Iranian oil. British had discussed this matter with the Soviets about three months before the invasion which they agreed but their condition was to do it in joint operation. There was no mention of anything regarding Reza Shah at that time and the decision in that regard was probably taken later when British and Russian troops were in Iran. All available evidences from British communication documents show that presence of a few hundreds of German citizens in Iran was just an excuse and no matter what Iranian government would do, the invasion was inevitable. Reza Shah wrote a letter about this matter to American President after the invasion and asked for his help to protect the integrity of Iranian territory. According to Assadollah Entezam in his memoirs, American ambassador agreed with Reza Shah's viewpoints regarding the invasion by British and Soviet forces in a private meeting in which, Reza Shah verbally expressed his appreciation in response to President Roosevelt's letter and his support of Iran's territorial integrity.
After this short review of some of the issues that influenced later current of events in the country, we get to the era of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in Iran. Mohammad Reza Shah started his reign on a very bumpy road from the beginning at the age of 22 after his father Reza Shah was forced to resign by British occupying forces. Most of the world was in the state of war and Iran was under occupation of old enemies with no real means to resist their demands and stop their mad behaviors towards the resources of the country and its people. Iranian government had no real power to deal with issues created by occupiers. Iranian politicians were mostly suspected of having links with British or Soviets, and Americans had also entered a new phase in relations with Iran to make things more complicated than before. While Soviets tried to influence the affairs of Iran through Tudeh party, British were doing the same through more obscure methods with the help of Anglophile politicians and clergies who had a long lasting relation with them. Americans, a nation founded by Freemasons, would definitely see better possibilities for themselves in future of Iran, as foreseen by Mr. Hoover.
One of the major issues which faced Iranian government during occupation was to reach any kind of negotiation or contract with any of the invaders to accomplish anything for betterment of the nation. This matter could easily cause a lot of problems for the Iranian government as seen in the case of northern oil discussion with Americans. Another issue was that during those times, Soviet Union had taken advantage of the opportunity to start the process of secession of northern and western portions of Iranian territories by installing and supporting a group of their own puppets as local governments. This matter was carried out with the help of Tudeh party and its military organization which was formed secretly inside Iranian army. Military organization of Tudeh party, against all norms in any army in the free world (which requires army to be free of association with any political party), was formed by the followers of Tudeh party within high ranking officers of Iranian army and became an element of real threat to stability and integrity of the nation. According to some stories, another group of officers in the army had organized themselves as nationalist military organization around the same time and had links with National Front. Lack of enough control by Iranian government over the affairs of military and misconceptions of leaders of the country about democracy had resulted in a near chaos situation in the army which was built through a painstaking process and a lot of hard work during the reign of Reza Shah.
All the works which were previously carried out during the era of Reza Shah were brought under scrutiny and in many cases criticized and condemned by old and new opposition. From building of the railways and roads to organizing the military, to expansion of education and dispatch of Iranian students to Europe and everything else was condemned by opposition who apparently believed all those work was done against the interests of Iranian people! The amount of nonsense which was put forward by the opposition that was mostly encouraged by limitless freedom (without any sense of responsibility) and motivated by presence of foreign powers that openly meddled in the affairs of the nation; was beyond sanity. The behaviors of Iranian elite in that chaotic situation justified the policies which were suggested by Gore Ouseley about 150 years earlier. Vulgarity and lompanism was the order of the day, as it is in the politics of Iran of today since 1979.
Soon after end of WW II, Iranian government faced one of the most serious challenges and threats to its integrity by occupying forces of Soviet Union which refused to leave while demanding for the oil concession in the northern region of Iran. Tudeh party was 100% behind Soviets demands in this regard and they even dispatched a group of the officers from their military organization to assist in organizing an army for so called democratic republic of Azarbaijan which was declared by Jafar Pishevary with support of Soviets. This was done in order to put Iranian government under pressure and even take away Azarbaijan from Iran if possible. Prime Minister of Iran was Qavam o-Saltaneh at that time. Qavam was known as a seasoned politician from Qajar era. He was the author of the letter which was signed by Mozzafar o-Din Shah to accept the Constitutional Revolution of Iran. That letter was presented to the Shah by his older brother Vosougholdoleh who was Prime Minister of Mozzafar o-Din Shah at the time. Vosougholdoleh is well known in the Iranian history for his disgraceful agreement of 1919 with British government after accepting bribe from them. Ahmad Qavam, unlike his brother, was considered a strong and patriotic politician with a good amount of political and negotiating skills in his bag. About 25 years earlier, he had been once arrested and imprisoned by Seyed Zia who was later removed of power and sent to exile by Reza Khan and then Qavam moved from Prison to the position of Prime Minister to replace him. With such background, Qavam ol-Saltaneh turned out to be a great choice to lead Iranian government during Azarbaijan crisis.
One of the shiniest points in the report card of Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh during those days was, passing of a bill in the Iranian parliament which was attributed to him and would prohibit the government of Iran from signing any agreement with any of invading powers while their troops were still in Iran. This became a good tool in the hands of Qavam to refuse granting an oil concession to Soviet Union in Northern provinces of Iran. He promised Soviets (after meeting Stalin) that when the Soviet's troops left Azarbaijan then the oil concession would be presented to the new parliament for their approval according to the law which did not permit Iranian government to make such concessions before foreign troops leave the country. Soviets had no choice but to either leave or face an international crisis so the left. This matter created an opportunity for Iranian army to move to Azarbaijan under command of General Ali Razmara and remove the puppet government from power. Jafar Pishevari and some of his friends and army left Azarbaijan for Russia by crossing northern borders. As part of the same operation, General Fazlollah Zahedi moved the units under his command to the west to disperse Kurdistan Democratic Sect and drive them out of Iranian borders to the west. According to some accounts, there were parallel activities from other routes in convincing Soviets to leave Iranian territories from which the meeting of Princess Ashraf Pahlavi (twin sister of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi) with Stalin and also negotiation of US representative with Russians to respect Iranian territorial integrity (as promised by US President Roosevelt to Reza Shah) need to be mentioned.
Tudeh Party which had expanded its influence and operations throughout the country by taking advantage of democratic atmosphere of the country, had found a good foothold among working class especially Iranian oil workers in southern province of Khuzestan. Oil, once again became a hot topic in the politics of Iran. Americans who had a long term plan to enter the oil business activities in Iran and had failed the first attempt due to meddling of Tudeh Party and Soviets during Prime Minister Sa'ed, did not intend to let others get away with sweet deals that they were getting from Iranians without sharing it with them. Many among Iranian elite had developed friendly sentiments towards Americans as they believed that, because of their historical conflicts with British over their independence, Americans would be supportive and reliable ally for Iranians who shared some views with them regarding meddling of British in their own affairs. In fact, Americans were considered benevolent liberators in the view of many Iranians (probably even today) who would help other nations in eliminating influence of old and evil colonial powers. Whether this view was correct or not, is debatable but the truth is that, foundation of the United States of America was put in place by some powerful Freemason figures who followed their own globalist agendas and this was the same fraternity which had influenced the politics of Iran at least since a couple of centuries ago and it might have not been very realistic to think that they would be much different than their European Mason brothers like Gore Ouseley.
The roles and influence that Tudeh party had in one of the most crucial periods of Iran's history and the links that it had with both (Russian and British) colonial powers and also to the deposed dynasty of Qajar, is so significant that requires much more attention and study to reach some real understanding and logical conclusions about this party and its effects on the current affairs in Iran. Tudeh party was successful in gaining support among some newly arrived intellectuals and working class through popular slogans. They talked about the issues which were pleasant to the ears of the portions of society that had no share in ruling power and felt to be left out. Leaders of Tudeh party were mostly coming from aristocrat families or had links with high ranking clerics with a lot of grievances and complaints towards the system which was established by Reza Shah. Nouredin Kianouri who climbed to the position of party leader in 1979, was the grandson of Sheikh Fazlollah Nouri, one of the famous Clerics of his time with proven ties to British. Sheikh Fazlollah whose opposition to Constitutional Revolution in favor of a version of religious ruling system (Velayat Faghih) became the foundation for establishment of Islamic Republic in Iran, was later tried and executed as a traitor to the nation. Nouredin married Maryam Firuz, sister of Firuz Mirza Nosrat ol-Doleh whose death during house arrest was blamed on Reza Shah by his family. According to some stories, after Reza Shah abdicated, a case against someone named Dr. Ahmadi was brought to the court of justice regarding this matter and based on complaint by Nosratol Dowleh's son, Mozzafar Firuz. The result was conviction of Dr. Ahmadi.
Maryam Firuz in her memoirs about what brought her to join Tudeh Party mentions two reasons: "the suffering of my father under Pahlavi's reign which I witnessed with my own eyes and the suppression of woman's rights" and then she adds: "I will never forget when my father desperately said if there would be anyone to revolt against the Shah and take his revenge of him?". She says that in those days everyone was on the Shah's side and the only group who fought Shah was Tudeh Party so she joined them. Maryam Firuz admits that she never studied Communism theories even though she was an important member of central committee of the party and believed that there was no need for such knowledge to join the communist party. In her view, if someone considered herself a human being, if she loved her country and her nation, she would join Tudeh Party. About her first contact with Dr. Kianoury, she says that her father and her family were familiar with Sheikh Fazlollah Nouri and his family and loved and respected Sheikh Fazlollah very much so they knew each other through family ties. Reading through these lines, one may understand that how the menace of Qajar dynasty has continued to influence the affairs of our nation since over 200 years ago even after their removal from power.
Going back to story of Tudeh party, we can not study this Iranian political group without knowing about Iraj Eskandari. Dr. Eskandari was among newly educated and trained students who came back from Europe when he was arrested along with Dr. Taghi Arani. Arani was one of the founders of communist movement in Iran along with some other people (total of 53 mentioned in previous part). According to Dr. Fereydun Keshavarz (another Tudeh Party member of the same group of 53) Eskandari was considered one of the most knowledgeable people of the group after Dr. Arani himself. After Reza Shah was removed from power, Eskandari and others were released. Shortly after that, the foundation of Tudeh Party was laid by Iraj Eskandari with the help and influence of his uncle, Soleyman Mirza Eskandari, and he became an important element within its leadership. He later climbed to the position of party leader and stayed in that position until 1979 that he was removed and replaced by Dr. Kianouri. His family was linked with Qajar royals (he was cousin of Maryam Firuz) and this matter had gained him the title of "red prince" by some communist friends. His uncle, Soleyman Mirza, was a member of Adamiyat Society (a cover name for Masonic lodge) founded by Mirza Hussein-Qoli Adamiyat. Iraj Eskandari, in his memoirs, has written in much details about everything related to Tudeh party after he left the party and took asylum in France. In order to understand Tudeh party better, Dr. Eskandari's memoirs is one of the best sources which allows us to have a look inside this party from the viewpoint of an important member and a leader who had been involved with the affairs of the party since the beginning. It is necessary to mention that Mr. Eskandari who is remembered by many of his comrades and friends as a true righteous person might have never written anything about realities of Tudeh Party for future generations (as himself put it) if the new leadership of the party would not try to smear his name through lies which they spread about him in the Islamic regime's media while in captivity.
Dr. Eskandari has written about sectarianism policies within the party which promoted certain people and even certain families which put their own interests and agendas above the policies of the party. He writes about how the problems and divisions in the leadership of Tudeh Party caused its ineffective reactions to the events in 1953 (as per Tudeh party’s historical mission) while the ordinary members followed the leadership like a bunch sheep. He says that the issue of blind following of leaders had resulted in dictatorial behavior of certain elements within the leadership which finally resulted in putting the whole party under control of KGB. He claims that as a result of false reputation of some elements, unqualified characters took over the leadership which later turned into a tool to identify and persecute of freedom lovers by Islamic Republic regime. These matters along with sheep-like attitude of followers in worshiping certain characters within leadership finally resulted in disgraceful demise and total failure of the party. Mr. Eskandari explains how Tudeh Party turned into a subdivision of so called Democratic Sect of Azarbaijan (fergheh democrat azarbaijan) after forming a union with this entity during late 1950's and early 1960's. He blames Abdolsamad Kambakhsh (of Tudeh Party leadership) who was the main ally of Kianouri, for disclosing the secret group of 53 to the government and the arrest of Dr. Taghi Arani and because of that, he had proposed (in a party convention) expelling of him and his allies from the party. The differences were temporarily settled later with the help of Maraym Firuz until Dr. Kianouri tried to climb to party leadership by making a case against Kambakhsh (resulting in his dismissal) in late 1969- early1970. Dr. Eskandari says that he did not want to allow Kianouri in such position so he became party leader himself. Eskandari says that Kianouri never believed in Communism. He (Kianouri) was very weak against any source of power and was a real coward person despite pretending to be brave. According to Eskandari, Kianouri's specialty was in lies and conspiratorial activities in which he had developed very high skills. Changing camps and joining Khomeini apparently was not out of character of Kianouri according to Eskandari. He had once praised Reza Shah in his doctorate theses as a genius and it was only after defeat of Germans in Stalingrad (St. Petersburg) that he joined communist camp.
Dr. Eskandari speaks about the passing of information about Iranian army to Soviet Union government by members of military organization through Tudeh Party which he disagreed about but could not do anything to stop it. He states that Tudeh Party in those times, was just a follower of agendas of Soviet Union and any time Soviet government was in good relations with Iranian government then Tudeh Party would stay silent. Eskandari atributes the appointment of Kianouri to party leadership and replacing him to the Soviets intelligence service, KGB which had gained full control over the party's central committee. According to him, Soviets had put the affairs of Iran and Tudeh Party in the hands of the KGB branch in Soviet Azarbaijan Republic where former members of so called "Azarbaijan Democratic Sect" stayed and worked with them. Eskandari says that Gholam-Yahya Daneshian who worked with KGB and was a close friend of Kianouri, personally made the proposal of dismissing Eskandari and appointment of Kianouri during the meeting of central committee in early months of 1979. This, Eskandari says, happened after he rejected a suggestion (in 1978) made by someone from Soviet government who was neither related to Azarbaijan nor to the ministry of foreign affairs (probably a member of central KGB), to gather Iranian military personnel who lived as refugees in all Eastern Europe in order to make them ready for initiating a civil war in Iran so that Americans had to send their forces to interfere and thus, Soviets could move their forces into Iran too; like they did in Afghanistan. Eskandari also mentions that the original suggestion to give oil concession to Soviet Union came from Kianouri and was later promoted by Ehsan Tabari who used the term "Soviet domain" for northern region of the country in this regard. He says that himself (Eskandari) once used this silly term in presence of Dr. Mosadegh who pointed at him with his pencil sharpening knife and said to him that if he (Eskandari) talked about anyone's domain in that country one more time then he (Dr. Mosadegh) would personally cut his tongue with that knife!
As we can see, decades after Qajar dynasty has been removed from ruling power in Iran, their legacy of corruption, servitude, lies and deception along with insatiable feeling of revenge from those who took away their undeserved privileges and luxuries continue to hurt our nation through the institutions and organizations that were founded mostly by the members of that family and their associates. The culture of attaching meaningless titles with ridiculous rights and privileges to the people with no real valuable qualifications, and also dependency to strangers and foreigners for petty materialistic gains and offering unconditional trust to them, had created such a poisonous environment in the politics of Iran that telling a friend from a foe was not an easy task if not impossible. Moreover, promotion of superstitious behaviors by Qajar kings and their dependent families and increasing power and role of clerics in the affairs of the nation through the royal court of Qajars had created a strong religious aristocracy within the system which spread its influence into the fabric of society that was comparable to (or even more powerful than) the influence of Zoroastrian clerics in Sassanid dynasty era. Unfortunately, this matter did not vanish after them either. The depth of corruption among elite and the extent of ignorance and illiteracy in Iranian society would not allow a speedy process to eliminate or even significantly reduce the negative effects of centuries of mismanagement by corrupt ruling powers and meddling of colonialists.
While majority in society were struggling with all kinds of miseries, the elite were busy to make plans and take revenge against one another and when everything went wrong then they tried to justify their own wrong doings by invoking complicated ideological theories or blaming others for problems. The truth is that although patriotic Iranians were not scarce in those times but infiltration by enemies and plentiful of sellouts along with egocentric behaviors of many who were involved in the politics of the nation; had created a very bad combination which called for inevitable disaster.
After WW II ended and all occupying forces left Iran, once again the issue of oil and its revenue came into focus and new negotiation started in order to advance the benefits of Iran from this natural resource by making amendments to the agreement that was made with AIOC during Reza Shah’s era. A supplemental agreement was reached between AIOC and Iranian government in 1949 that would provide Iran with 33 percent more royalties than 1933 agreement. This agreement was rejected by parliament for not addressing some major points including control over the price of oil sold inside the country and the rights for Iranian government to inspect AIOC’s financial books. Dr. Mosadegh and a group of his followers spoke up against the agreement and the discussion over this matter was dragged until the parliamentary period was over and the issue remained for next parliament to discuss after a new election. The next few years after this were the eventful years which resulted in one crisis after another and created deep divisions in our nation that were taken advantage of by enemies through manipulative propaganda and intelligence activities till this day. In the next part: the struggle over oil and promotion of falsified history about the events of 1950’s by Iran's enemies and those whose private agendas in self promotion would overshadow the Iranian national interests.
| 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 |
Beheshti & Kianouri and in 2009, Beheshti's son was in prison
by Anahid Hojjati on Mon Aug 16, 2010 08:17 AM PDTDear Anonymouse, thanks for the video clip. In this clip, Beheshti talks about holding trials for Tudeh leaders and Kianouri says what they say about them is "eftera" but Beheshti is adamant that no it is the truth. It is ironic that in year 2009, "Alireza Beheshti", senior aide to Mir Hossein Mousavi, suffering from a heart condition was in prison. I bet AN and other leaders of IRI at the time that they put Beheshti's son in prison claimed that he deserved to be in prison while "Alireza Beheshti" would say that what IRI leaders of 2009 told about him was all "eftera".
.
by Anahid Hojjati on Mon Aug 16, 2010 08:18 AM PDTdouble posting, please delete
To Sohrab; thanks for not using memoirs written after torture
by Anahid Hojjati on Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:24 AM PDTTo Sohrab: As you noted in your article, you did not use memoirs of Tabari and kianouri published during iri. As anyone with grasp of Iran's history knows, those are result of brutal torture. Thanks for not using them.
A note
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Tue Jan 11, 2011 08:37 PM PSTDear Anonymouse,
Mr. Eskandari did not discuss invasion of Afghanistan with anyone but that part has been mentioned (in 1980's) as an analogy to the event.
As for the Tudeh officers, many had been released from jail by 1977 and the rest were released in 1978. That is apart from 27 which were executed for treason. You need to take into account the number of officers who left Iran for Soviet Union after the events of 1953 which exceeded 5000 based on some stories. As I mentioned, the accurate information about number of military personnel involved in Tudeh activities were never disclosed but there were enough to ignite a civil war in the chaotic situation. The battles that were carried out against Iranian military units and royal guards in February of 1979 was initiated by a small number of armed rebels but quickly spread and many others joined in to finish the era of Monarchy in Iran and start the wonderful voyage to a golden age of prosperity under Islamic Republic system.
My dear friend, I have personally seen those debates (in your clip) live and in full. Mr. Kianouri said manythings that he retracted later but as a norm, I tend not to accept anything which is presented under Islamic Republic. As a side note, I must say that I have more respect for someone like Ayatollah Beheshti than Nouredin Kianouri. I have memoirs of Mr. Kianouri and Mr. Tabari in my access too but I would not trust to use those documents which have been prepared and published under Islamic regime in a short article. As you can see, minor things in a short article regarding major issues can create questions but as I have mentioned before, the point for writing such articles is to stimulate a curious reader to do his/her own research on the subjects that are brought up. Your questions and curiosity are true help in developing better understanding of the events which I value a lot. Hopefully sometime in future, I will write about all of these in a much more comprehensive manner in order to leave less room for misunderstanding.
Dear Anahid, Thank you for your interest and attention.
All the best
A clip of those TV debates with Kianouri
by Anonymouse on Sun Aug 15, 2010 08:33 AM PDTHere is a clip I found on youtube from those TV debates with Kianouri in it. The clip isn't good and grainy and I didn't find more just this one minute clip. Hopefully more will be available later.
Sohrab khan as for the 600 Tudeh military officers as you mentioned they were finished in 1950s. Not relevant to 1978 (a year before Soviets invaded Afghanistan in December 1979) and I'm not familiar with any "civil war" in Afghanistan which resulted in Soviet invasion.
I don't know which "Soviet invasion of Afghanistan" was the discussion that Mr. Eskandari was part of.
Everything is sacred
Dear Anonymouse, your comment shows some can be unbiased
by Anahid Hojjati on Sun Aug 15, 2010 05:48 AM PDTDear Anonymouse, thanks for your comment. In your comment you showed how much of what in this article is attributed to last Tudeh leaders are heresay. I have been reading your blogs and comments for more than a year and half. Your positions have never shown that you are a Tudeh fan but here you are showing the untruth in this article. This shows that we are making some progress, or at least some of us when we can look at situations unbiased. thanks.
Good points!
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Sun Aug 15, 2010 07:41 AM PDTDear Anonymouse,
Interesting comment, thank you! I honestly did not think that I would have to explain anything further regarding those particular statements but since they seemed not very clear then I add a few lines here. Just to clarify one thing, what you read in bold (and other statements from Mr. Eskandari) are my own English translation of the words that have come from Mr. Eskandari's memoirs which is originally in Persian. We may need to refresh our minds about the Tudeh military organization and the extent of its influence and power to understand how realistic such attempt might have been during the chaotic days of 1978 that a lot of strange things were happenning without being noticed or understood by most Iranian people. The exact number of personel in Tudeh military organization has never been disclosed but there are confirmed reports that at least 600 of high ranking officers were arrested in 1950's (30 years history of Iran by Bijan Jazani and also others) but that number in some accounts reaches to about a thousand with several thousands more who escaped after the initial arrests. These were just military officers. There were many soldiers and lower rank officers who sympathized with Tudeh party that their information was never known to the government and they later continued their normal life in the society after finishing mandatory service (for the soldiers). Whether this was a realistic plan or not, I can not tell but Mr. Eskandari himself says that he told the Soviets that such plan would not work in Iran as Iran was a different country than Afghanistan. Knowing about the history of Russian (and also Soviet Union) politics and intentions towards Iran, I tend to accept that such exchange between Mr. Eskandari and a Soviet government representative has happened. You might think differently and that of course is absolutely fine.
The part which would be like Afghanistan was; moving the Soviet troops into Iranian territory. I hope that's clear now.
As far as Mr. Eskandari blaming Kianouri for bringing up or suggesting the oil concession for Russians, I agree with you. Mr. Eskanadri might have stated that just to clear himself but in my view, no matter who said it, Tudeh Party was behind such idea and supported that through their demonstrations and in their papers so, Mr. Eskandari was as much guilty as Kianouri and others. And as far as promotion by Mr. Tabari I must remind you that he was in control of propaganda and media systems of the party and that's how he was able to propagate and promote such notorious ideas among ignorant members and sympathizers (even the public who bought their papers) who according to Mr. Eskandari followed those leaders like a herd of sheep!
There is no intention here to convey such implication as expecting Tudeh Party to stop Khomeini. The purpose of this information is to help in avoiding repeat of mistakes of the past as some of us (including myself) have noticed that, there is a lot of activities in falsifying our recent history through shiny words which; unfortunate condition of our country in recent years has made it an easy sell.
Dear benross,
Your comments and wise words are appreciated very much my friend.
All the best
Couple of points from this article
by Anonymouse on Sat Aug 14, 2010 07:28 PM PDTMuch of what is attributed to the last Tudeh leaders in this article are heresay. One example highlighted in bold in the article:
This, Eskandari says, happened after he rejected a suggestion (in 1978) made by someone from Soviet government who was neither related to Azarbaijan nor to the ministry of foreign affairs (probably a member of central KGB), to gather Iranian military personnel who lived as refugees in all Eastern Europe in order to make them ready for initiating a civil war in Iran so that Americans had to send their forces to interfere and thus, Soviets could move their forces into Iran too; like they did in Afghanistan.
Initiating "civil war"? Like they did in Afghanistan? in 1978? I am sure Masoud Rajavi and MKO had more chance than this scenario. Whose dumb idea was this? Who were the factions in this civil war? And who were going to be the soldiers and pick up arms? Tudeh sympatizers were mostly book nerds and not even sporty or athletic!
Another heresay in the article:
Eskandari also mentions that the original suggestion to give oil concession to Soviet Union came from Kianouri and was later promoted by Ehsan Tabari who used the term "Soviet domain" for northern region of the country in this regard.
"Promoted" by Tabari? How?
One item does not appear heresay was about Maryam Firouz. Well here's a little more about her in her own words and some interesting and funny comments.
There are also those several TV debates in 1980 with Kianouri, Tabari and Beheshti who was also not heresay and could've been mentioned or what Red Cross told about how they died in Prison.
While we have so many these days huffing and puffing about Islam and Muhammad and Ali killing all with their swords and so on, in those charged days of early "Islamic Revolution" the only people who talked about religion and god and so forth were them. Beheshti wanted constantly to ask them about how they don't believe in god so he could use it against them.
Those were indeed interesting TV debates and I remember them. I also liked last year's presidential TV debates. Whatever Tudeh and their sympatizers were they ended up like other political groups and went their own ways. The one exception is MKO whose sympatizers ended in Iraq and sad stories that we all know about.
It seems there is so much expected of some groups as if they had enough power to make a major difference like stop Khomeini or something. Bottom line what did we learn from all of that to teach our children who are now grown up? Stay away from politics? Don't get involved? Let others do it?
Everything is sacred
As we can see, decades after
by benross on Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:42 PM PDTAs we can see, decades after Qajar dynasty has been removed from ruling power in Iran, their legacy of corruption, servitude, lies and deception along with insatiable feeling of revenge from those who took away their undeserved privileges and luxuries continue to hurt our nation through the institutions and organizations that were founded mostly by the members of that family and their associates.
My comment dear Sohrab Ferdows, may appear as if your extremely valuable contribution to understanding of our history is dismissed. This is not my point. My point is that we have not reached a state of sane mind to understand the history. I'm looking forward to your further contribution to understanding the truth. We absolutely need it.
Dear SamSam, Ali jan, and benross,
by Anahid Hojjati on Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:11 PM PDTDear Ali and SamSam, thanks for your comments addressed to me. Unfortunately, as it is said in Farsi "dast va delam nemeeravad" to write much on IC today but felt I needed to thank you two since I like your contributions to this site.
to benross: yes, 79 was better than 80.
Dear Mr. Sohrab Ferdows
by comrade on Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:41 AM PDTI limit myself to thanking you for reading my comment. I'm sure you understand that my replying to your reply goes against the premise of my initial comment.
My best hope is that we see each other at the Tehran airport bar, celebrating the arrival of a new era.
"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Ali P jaan please define your confusion
by Anonymouse on Sat Aug 14, 2010 11:24 AM PDTKnowing what you know now if you were to go back to 1979 - 1980 would you join any "political" group?
Political groups by definition recruit believers and ask them to push their agenda. In 1980 the Islamic Republic destroyed ALL political parties.
There were parties who were against the Islamic Republic and their sympathizers distributed their newspapers and enagaged in debates like all other political parties.
Fast forward to 2009 and the Green movement headed by Mousavi. Did they not die? Did they not fight? Did everyone join them? You choose a political party and you go with the consequences and some will ruin your name and the power that be will focus on those bad apples.
In the green movement there were those who used green dog leahses and green ties and Ahmadi & Co zeroed in on those traits not the larger movement and their focus.
War changed a lot and we will never know what would have come of Iran if Saddam had not waged war. The story goes on ...
Everything is sacred
FR,My Yes was answer to whether Mujahedin contributed to problem
by Anahid Hojjati on Sat Aug 14, 2010 10:41 AM PDTFR,My yes was answer to your question if Mujahedeen by their extremism contributed to the problems. You and your other user Id flag my true comments and by the time you are done, You are champion of human rights and I am someone who condones jailing and killing of opposition. If I am not mistaken, a google search shows that your name is fake. Meanwhie, I write poetry and articles in support of human rights in Iran. Respectable IC writers such as David et, VPK, MM and many others know my human rights position meanwhile you are already known to readers as someone who shifts her position. JJ is now determined to give a voice to those who say the untruth and censor people like me. JJ probably figures that those like me stay on the site and tolerate our truthful comments be deleted. However, there is a tolerance for everything. I believe I am approaching my tolerance on this site for being censored while some commentators on this site engage in either trying to intimidate me (like keep writing that they tell readers what I did offline which the most was complaining to JJ that about someone on IC possibly being off her medications) or misrepresenting what I wrote in my comments.
Finally,
by Farah Rusta on Sat Aug 14, 2010 10:14 AM PDTMr Ferdows,
I have followed your thoroughly researched work with great interest and look forward to reading your next instalment soon. Many thanks for your hard work kind words.
Mr Ali P.
Your contributions to any thread is always decent. honest and rational. Thank you for your continued presence on this site.
Comrade,
You are my favorite communist. Uncle Joe would have been proud of you tovarishi.
Mr Benross
Always a pleasure to read your comments even though on rare occasions I may find them slightly oblique to my position.
Mr Samsam,
Thank God you are not working for the CIA - the wretched agency would have been reduced to selling soaps if they followed your investigative leads.
Ms Hojjati,
Welcome to Farah Rusta Haters Club. You will enjoy 3 months of hassle-free membership due to being a novice in conducting a civilized political dialog.
Always,
FR
Ali P.
by benross on Sat Aug 14, 2010 09:36 AM PDTThis is typical Toodé brainwash, which is consistent with any kind of brainwash we see around. You are not going anywhere by challenging it. Comerade knows something about it to advise for changing the subject.
She was in Iran until 83, I was in Iran until 86. So technically I saw a little more. And what I saw was the persecution of IRI opponents from the get go, from 1979, not even 1980. The thing is that Toodé was NOT an opponent. So it didn't see anything! It's so Brechtian all along... and as Comrade said, the history can wait. For now, we don't have the right mind to see it.
Anahid , this lady is a shady character
by SamSamIIII on Sat Aug 14, 2010 09:06 AM PDT& mind boggling contradition in terms. In the morning she is hard core supporter of monarchy , in the afternoon she calls kiaani heritage of Cyrus & khosrue's as fascism & racism..freakin hello?, one minute calls Arab invasion of Iran a good thing & next minute makes fun of some folks grammer or hairdos etc. From what I gather she is an ommatie sonnatie raised lady as she herself said from Khuzestan who happened to benefit some how during Pahlavis and due to personal benefit is biased toward some aspects of pahlavi rule that benefited her but ofcourse fully against pahlavi era patriotic agenda or Iranian identity. She is an ommatie after all & fully identifies with her ommatie brother & sister Mujaheds. Never mind her, she belongs to the walking on the fence sorta crowd as I mentioned to you before ;).
Cheers!!!
Path of Kiaan Resurrection of True Iran Hoisting Drafshe Kaviaan //iranianidentity.blogspot.com //www.youtube.com/user/samsamsia
Thank you
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Sat Aug 14, 2010 08:56 AM PDTDear Farah,
Your noble cause in support of human rights of any Iranian person with any political tendency is admirable and I am certain, it is very much appreciated by many. You express your arguments eloquently and clearly which is very important in avoiding confusion when carrying a debate. This is a great attribute that you can rely on with confidence to convey your points without being dragged into undesired and fruitless exchanges. Trust your readers intelligence and leave the final judgement to them. You are definitely a very vlauable contributor to this forum and I have no doubt that many would agree with me on this matter. Thank you for sharing your thoughts dear Farah.
Dear comrade,
History has waited too long my friend! That's why others are trying to sell us their useless garbage and made up stories in the guise of history for either filling their own pockets or serving certain agendas, or even both. Our ignorance towards our history has made us a victim for all kinds of misjudgements and covert plans of evil powers thrughout history. Everyone has written something and has said something about us except ourselves! One day Greeks wrote our history, another day Arabs, Russians, Turks, British... and now Americans and their intelligense agents do this for us. Why should we stay silent while falsehood can prevail because of our silence? Is it better to wait and regret later that why we did not speak up earlier? What do we have to lose?
Dear Anahid,
Regarding your earlier post, I don't believe that I did anything to your words. Your words are there and mine too so I leave it at that. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and wish you all the best.
I appreciate all contributions.
Jahanshah, I am disappointed at you deleting my comment
by Anahid Hojjati on Sat Aug 14, 2010 08:44 AM PDTDear Jahanshah, I write a comment, FR misquotes me and I call her on that. Just because someone flags my comment; possibly because it showed how dishonest they are, you should not delete my comment. All I did was to show based on the comments on this thread how FR had lied. If you want to delete this one too, go ahead. You did that on comment thread with Rosie too.Fine, I am sure my time will be better spent doing something else. As opposed to some on this site who have no kar and zendegi or are paid agents, what I write is based on what I have actually seen and just to let those who were not there, let them know what happened. If this is not valued, fine.
Wow! Your human rights are so selective Ms Hojjati
by Farah Rusta on Sat Aug 14, 2010 05:21 AM PDTFirst, i didn't flag your previous slurrious comment.Obviously your slurious comments were too much to be acceptable on this site.
But let me address your other astonishing accusation:
"Also I ask readers to take a look at the thread and see how Farah Rusta
supports Mujahedeen but if I am not mistaken, Farah is pro Pahlavi.
Mujahedeen were involved in armed resistance against Shah and lost many
members during shah. I don't know how Farah reconsiles her pro
Mujahedeen feelings with her pro Pahlavi ones."
I didn't realize that to protest the mass betrayal and killings of Mujahedin by the Islamic regime is interpreted as support for Mujaheddin!! Given your now-exposed lack of erudition (ala Kambakhsh) I don't blame you for not being familiar with the thinking of a much less known character (a nobody) like me. But had yo followed my comments on this site, you would have learned that unlike you I don't have a selective approach to human righjts.
In my book torture/execution of a human being, be it Mujahed, Fadaee, Tudehi, Jebehe Melli, Islamist, Reformist, Bhaii, Monarchist or any other group's member must be condemned under any regime and authority.
This is why the criminal and reprehensible activities of the Tudeh party in supporting the newly founded Islamic regime in their torture and execution of individuals and massacre of ethnic minorities such as Kurds, and Baluchis must be utterly and unconditionally condemned.
But you have already answered me in the title of your last comment to me. You say: YES it was justifiable for the Tudeh party to betray all the opposing groups and minorities to the Islamic regime!!
I rest my case.
FR
Now even more confused, by your confusion, over my confusion...
by Ali P. on Sat Aug 14, 2010 05:10 AM PDTLOL...
Dear Anahid:
I guess I understand what you are talking about, and to a certain degree, I have to agree with you.
Iran under the IRI could be devided into Khomeini years, Rafsanjani years, Khatami years, and Ahmadinejad's years.
One could distinguish one period from the other, but from one prespective, they were all, our motherland under the rule of the "Islamists", with some periods more brutal, than others.
Yours,
Ali P.
Dear Ali P, I am confused about your confusion.
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Aug 13, 2010 09:26 PM PDTDear Ali P, I am confused about your confusion. How can anyone write that IRI of 1980 was only different for tudeh? In 1980, there were tens of political parties which were active in Iran. Political parties would set up offices in universities and even high schools and anyone could freely buy the magazine of their favorite group. You may have been there but perhaps you were either very young (even younger than I was back then) or not very involved in politics. otherwise, you would not write that 1980 was just different for Tudeh.
Also I ask readers to take a look at the thread and see how Farah Rusta supports Mujahedeen but if I am not mistaken, Farah is pro Pahlavi. Mujahedeen were involved in armed resistance against Shah and lost many members during shah. I don't know how Farah reconsiles her pro Mujahedeen feelings with her pro Pahlavi ones.
Ms. Hojjati
by Ali P. on Fri Aug 13, 2010 09:04 PM PDTWith all due respect...
FR is right on the money, doosteh aziz.
"IRI of 1980 was very different than IRI of 1983"??
Very?
Democracy turned into dictatorship?
Dictatorship turned into democracy?
Did it get better in 3 years?
Did it get worse?
The executions of the political prisoners slowed down? sped up?
What do you mnean by "very different"?
(What did I miss? I was there. I didn't see anything different!)
It was only different for the Tudeh Party."There is no torture in IRI prisons", as the headline in "Mardom"(Tudeh's publication), in 1980, was replaced by "there is torture in IRI prisons",in 1983, justifying the confessions made by Tudeh leaders.
The 180 degree turn around of these so called leaders, only when their own ass was on the line, was dispicable.
The 10 minute trials of Shah's Gerenals, in 1980, were OK, but those of Mujahedeen, in 1983, were not? Vise versa?
What do you mean by different?
I am - as always- confused.
History can always wait, it has nowhere to go!
by comrade on Fri Aug 13, 2010 08:32 PM PDTI don't have to look for the motive of this blog's writer.
I'm only asking the commentators to find the convincing logic for becoming engaged in such divisive debates, at the critical time when unity should be given its due priority.
"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Farah, your answer is Yes.
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Aug 13, 2010 02:54 PM PDT.
Oh, I see. So the IRI was good until 1983!
by Farah Rusta on Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:35 PM PDTMs Hojjati
I must have hit a raw nerve that has made you come to the defence of your favorite (dare I say family?) party in such a desparate manner. In your rush to undo the criminal activities of this part,y you have incriminated the party of your choice even further - and this coming from a person who claims to be a human rights supporter (sounds very NIAC to me).
So in your book it is fine for a party with strong and openly secretive links to their masters in the former USSR to have supported the IRI in their widespread executions and confiscations of the first few and crucial years of regime's existence? It was only bad when they turned against their former collaborators?Let me fodo your homework for you and show you one of many examples of the Tudeh party's criminal collaboration with the IRI by infiltrating the ranks of Mojahedin and other non-Tudehi leftist organizations and betraying them to the Islamic butchers, It is along article but it is worth reading.
For someone like you who so passionaltely supports the Tudeh party, it is so odd not to know the top brass and founding members of her favorite party.
//www.political-articles.com/Com/Chiasma/C003...
FR
Dear Sohrab, first you changed what I wrote and then ...
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:02 PM PDTDear Sohrab, in your reply to my last comment, first you changed my arguement and then you went about proving it wrong. I never attributed fight for women' rights solely to Tudeh, I wrote that they had an important place in fight for women' s rights. It does not matter if some Iranian women did not know Maryam. As it is true for all political groups, people do not need to know the leaders' names in order to benefit from efforts of that organization. I am afraid if your reply to my comment is used as example, you read the material but stick with what you want to write so you really don't do justuce to ideas that don't agree with yours.
Women's rights
by Sohrab_Ferdows on Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:26 AM PDTDear Anahid,
I agree with you that Maryam Firuz was responsible for women's organization of Tudeh Party but, because of her special status as an important and effective member in central committee of the party, she had to be familiar with the ideology and understand that in order to be honest in leading and directing others for that cause. Woman's rights has never been monopoly of communist movement anywhere although some people in third world nations try to pretend it is. Tudeh Party had just jumpped on the bandwagon of that cause to attract women who were suppressed and ignored under corrupt Qajar rule and culture; as they did with workers of newly established industries.
One leader of Tudeh party who had more knowledge about the ideology than any others in the party; was Mr. Iraj Eskandari whose memoirs have been used in preparing this article.
Attributing everything that Iranian women have achieved regarding their rights, to Tudeh Party and Maryam Firuz (as you assert) has no realistc foundation. It is true that Tudeh women's organization was more active than others during a period in Iran's history but attaching women's right to the Tudeh party and ideology is false representation of the facts which showed themselves in communist countries of the world where the rights of whole nations were suppressed as history indicates. Iranian women have worked for their rights since a long time before even Maryam Firuz or founders of Tudeh Party were born. I personally do not believe that many Iranians even know who Maryam Firuz is let alone being inspired by her. When Reza Shah was planning to free Iranian women of the veil and its restrictions long before Tudeh party, Maryam was probably making plan to destroy him in revenge for her father! But jokes aside, thinking that Tudeh Party and Maryam Firuz are champions of the fight for women's right is not very realistic. Here is a little history prepared by one of great Iranian authors in the field of social and historical studies,Ms. Masoume Price (whose materials are referenced and used by some credible educational institutions), regarding history of Iranian women's movement:
//www.iranonline.com/history/women-history/in...
You are right that Islamic regime has executed some members of Tudeh party and imprisoned many but that does not legitimize their cause and does not mean they are right. Those who were killed probably were more honest people in their pursuit for their cause of justice and liberty than their leaders who survived. Ms. Rusta is right in her argument that Tudeh Party (and some others in leftist camp) provided support to Khomeini's revolution and regime but things in this regard are not that straight forward. We all have our share of guilt for not taking responsibiity and getting more informed.
I could not guess what would Shah or anyone else do but whatever all those figures of the past have done is there in black and white of the history for us to see and judge. We just need to read, learn and be careful not to fall in traps of bigotry and prejudice.
Regards
Dear Sohrab, Maryam Firooz was a pioneer for women's rights
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Aug 13, 2010 08:24 AM PDTDear Sohrab, Maryam Firooz was in charge of Sazeman zanan tudeh. In a country like Iran, women had many issues such as the literacy rate being lower than men, being subject to some Islamic laws even during Pahlavi regime, etc. As such, it was more important that Maryam Firooz fought for women's rights. The fact that she did not know details of communism is not that important.
Dear Sohrab, Do you really think that even Shah would have given Iranian women those rights were it not for the fact that in Iranian society, there were elements like Tudeh party who was educating women about their rights? If there were not groups like Tudeh and its sazeman zanan, then all Shah would have would be the mullahs but no thanks to efforts of groups like Tudeh, there were segments of Iranian society who knew about women 's rights and were all for it.
In leadership of Tudeh, there were individuals who know a lot about communism and wrote books about Materialism and then they were those who were in leadership for other reasons than their specific knowledge of communism. Maryam Firooz was one who was a pioneer for women rights in Iran. I respect her since she fought for women's rights, went to prison, was under torture and stayed true to her ideals.
To Farah, once again you lie
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Aug 13, 2010 08:08 AM PDTOnce again, you are misleading. So you are saying that IRI did not kill Tudeh members? this is one of the biggest lie I have read. You are the one in serious need of a Google search. The fact that political prisoners were executed and buried in Khavaran in 1367 was known after hand of a corpse was out of the grave and he was none other than "Kumars Zarfeshan" who was in charge of sazeman javanan Tudeh. Then there were other members who got executed in 1367 or some who died in priosn under torture. A physics teacher in our high school who was Tudeh member died in priosn under torture, and he was not the only one.
When Tudeh party supported the government, it was nothing like the IRI that we see now or the IRI that came to exist as early 80s became mid 80s. A early as 83 or even before that, Tudeh party was persecuted. The support that you misinform people about was always to strengthen the better members who were in IRI. How is it that last year and even now, it is accepted to support Moussavi after all the crimes happened under his watch in 1980s but people still question Tudeh's support of IRI when there were tens of political parties around in very early 80s, communists ran in elections (yes, you read it right). IRI of 1980 was very different than IRI of 1983. As we lived in Iran, every year it got worse and some of it was due to extremism of some of the communists (and Mujahedin) that you seem to prefer them to Tudeh. Tudeh and Aksariat were the responsible left while maoists just acted like anarchists.
Also, Fadayeean Aksariat had very close position to Tudeh party and they were attacked by Maoists because of this closeness in positions. You may be able to "rang" those readers who were not around but I was in Iran until summer of 1983 so I know better than you.
You mean you didn't know who Kambakhsh was?
by Farah Rusta on Fri Aug 13, 2010 07:14 AM PDTMs hojjati
Pleas next time you want to question historic facts. do yourself a favor and do your homework first. All it takes is a simple Google search. Here:
//fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8...
And since when the IRI has "killed so many" of the Tudeh members? Tudeh party was number 1 supporter of Khomeini's movement and and later their top collaborator in betraying the more genuine Marxist comrades, i.e. Fedayeean, Their veteran members are still proudly to-ing and fro-ing between their Tehran mansions and their Swiss chalets.
Lastly, the deposed Qajari seeghe-zadehs joined the Tudeh party not out of their love of their homeland as they had none or as you put it due to their "purchased education". It was out their hatred of the Pahlavis.
az boghze Moaaveih bood na az hobbe Ali!!
FR