Iranian of the Day

Dorood

Haha

You really believe this picture. I dont think you're so naive, you're just pulling my leg. its a tweaked picture of these two dictator in two different time and location. thanks to photoshop. I didnt tell you, I'm a photographer and I'm pretty good with photoshop too, if you want I can fake an elaborate photo of these two eating ash reshte together for you, so you can use it next time.

Dear Divaneh you're 100% right. Thanks for your reminding note, but I dont know why these laawyers even engage in this kinda debate. Pahlavi family stole a couple of million dollars from Iran when they fleed but during these years they didn't even send a blanket or even a free meal for Iranian refugees who were starving in camps in turkey. many of those refugees were their ex-supporters.

Cheers 

In conclusion

We need to have a clear view of the past not to repeat the same mistakes, but we should not let it to ruin our today's unity. 

Dear Farah,

Thank you too for the civilized debate. It definitely cleared one or two things.

Dear Mory,

You are falling short of your own advice. Farah knows it but she is like a lawyer who has to defend a case. Winning the case comes first.

Here is the evidence!!!

Mory joon you mean you really doubt my words when I say the revolution was a big conspiracy between the Shah and Khomeini ? Well, I have the irrefutable evidence for your inquisitive mind. It is a picture chosen by our authoritative resident historian Arash Monzavi-kia in one his superbly well researched historical writings. Look at the picture carefully, the Shah and Imam at the moment of striking their conspiratorial deal!

//iranian.com/main/2009/feb/shah-vs-khome...

Do you believe me now? What more do you guys want to see - a video of the the two men having  aashe-reshteh together? Come on be fair  Mory joon.

FR

هر کسی از ظن خود شد یار من

First off I don't know how to apologize and express my regret of being new and newly registered. I did not know its an unforgivable sin. In your idea It probabley shows whatever I say is worthless. Its a common feature of dictators and their supporters. They love to put other people down or look down to people.

there are some words which are heavily insulting for dictators and their follower like "people". They can't even include people in their analysis, like this one:

"the Islamic revolution was a conspicracy between the Shah and Khomeini"

this was the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life. they can't believe that revolution was done by people because in their opinion they are superior and people are incapable of toppling them.

for us, new Iranian generation (and newly registered) Mosaddegh remains our national hero. he was the one who gave us the vanity after 100 years being belittled by foreigners (Dont forget Torkamanchai, Golestan, Saadabad and....).

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYutojeC5Kk&feature...

We have to follow his path to find our democracy and freedom. but before that we must know our history at least during the past 100 years, then we can truly address our problem and tackle them. 

For those who have time reading the "All the shah's man" is highly recommended. go to the link below and download it for free.

//www.118ba118.com/Ebook/309311/%D9%87%D9%85%...

P.S. I cant wait to see any evidence regarding to the conspiracy between shah and Khomeini.

مدتی‌ این مثنوی تأخیر شد

First if I may begin with our newly arrived (and newly registered) commentator, Mory and offer my advice on keeping it cool and calm otherwise his/her health may suffer because of Mossadegh and Kashani and zaboonam laal, the Pahlavis!! Well let me make it simple for you Mory joon, the Islamic revolution was a conspicracy between the Shah and Khomeini and the latter suggested to the former: "as you have been such a faithful soldier of Islam all your life, I am giving you this chance to leave the country with all your wealth and family and leave the rest to me and my clan  Allah will forgive those who served His will." 

Does this make you happy? If it does then please save a prayer for me too.

And now to our dear Divaneh:

Divaneh jaan, it seems that we are reaching the end of the road and none us has managed to convince the other. You see, funny enough I have had the same experience with all the Mossadegh faithfuls, including Kazemzadeh and Amini and now you have joined the same club. No matter how much one reasons the members of this club remain resolutely unchanged.

But there are other independently-minded voices here who are not pro-Pahlavi nor pro-IRI and yet find my rationale convincing enough to cast a serious doubt on the suggestion of a successful coup (if not rejecting it out right) and are equally convinced that Mossadegh was a decietful and disloyal character who held the nation hostage to his power grabbing ambitions and now his followers are taking history hostage to his memory.

Your reference to the blog written by Kazemzadeh in defence of my charges against Mossadegh is indeed a good example of how Mossadeghists resort to conpiratorial theories and refrain from answering a straight question. On the same blog I have indisputably quoted dates and evenbts in which Mossadegh and Jebhe Melli were colluding with the Islamists and paying ransom to them in return for support, None of the usual pro Mossadegh people here could come up with a counter evidence of argument. If is nonclusive to you well, then offer a conclusive argument.

As for Fatemi's article and his anti-Pahlavi speech after the Shah left the country I cannot refer you to the original sources and they are not on the Internet but perhaps this one can help:

//www.aftab.ir/articles/politics/plitical_history/c1c1226486499_housin_fatami_p1.php

And if you are happy with an informal acknowledgement of interference in Iran's affair back in 1953 (something which is open secret), given by a Democrat secretary of State in an informal gathering of Iranians in LA for the events tha happend 50 years earleir under a Republican administration and accept it as an apology, then please by all means keep believing that way. But remember that in the western diplomatic circles such acknowledgements are not regarded as apologies but simply stating what is already public knowledge. If America wanted to truly apologize to nations for her interference in their internal affairs and political lives, there are far more essential cases like Chile, Guatemala and recently Venezuela not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan,

Well  must thank for your civilized debate. I shall continue commenting on this topic in other blogs.

FR

Dear Divaneh and Farah

Sorry to meddle into your discussion I read a sentence and it enraged me so I have to mention something

Dr Mosaddegh forged an allience with Ayatollahs???????

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was the first king of iran after "Ghadesiyeh" who went to Makka and become a haji. If you just google your favourit dictator in the internet you can see photos of him stoning Sheytan in Makka. he was a disgrace in Persian Monarchy. A persian king went to flatter Arabs, biggest invaders in our history. A persian king went to visit graves of "Omar" and other barbarians who killed our fathers and raped and enslaved our mothers. Such a SHAME. Please go to the link below and see him praying with those who raped his foremothers

//www.hadeseh.com/b/photos/shah-haj-mecca-tri...

Now (پیدا کنید پرتقال فروش را) who fostered Islamic government theory?

many people go to the Makka every year because of their false believes but not in any circumstances a persian King can do so. I think after him the only Iranian Authority who went to Makka while he was holding power, was Ahmadi Nejad. go to this link and compare these two disgrace in Persian history. (I think I can see a swagger in Ahmadinejad face but please tell me if you can find anything but misery in Shah face)

//bedunid.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/287.jpg

and this is his confession. No one is more qualified to vouch for all opression in his era more than himself, listen to him  word by word

I know for you who had a fancy and luxury life because of dictatorship its really hard to admit, but if you like dictatorship why you fleed like a pig and all of you came to Democratic countries like USA, if any of you still wake up alive everyday its just because of democracy, why none of you migrated to Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Qatar, Oman or any other effing kingdom but you came directly and seek asylum in democratic countries?

Dear Divaneh you are just alright I can understand you love your country and you're trying to be nice but you're trying in vain because as I said before everybody in this world knows Mosaddegh was overthrown by a coup, even USA admit it formaly but these people dont want to concede, Its not because they dont know it, its just because they dont want to admit, they are stubborn as a mule.

Dear Farah

There are many people who want to revise the history including those who maintain that Cyrus the great was controlled by the Jews and question to whole Iranian history. These are normally self defeating specially when events are closer to our time and are recorded not only by historians but also in the internal documents of CIA and MI6.

With respect to the Razm Ara, you had already explored thie matter inconclusively here

//iranian.com/main/blog/masoud-kazemzadeh/mossadegh-and-amnesty-razmara-s-assassin

and I remind you that all those who conspired in the terror of Razm Ara seem to be in Shah's camp including Alam. From other sources cited in the above blog it seems that Mosadegh did not granted amnesty to Fadaian Islam and that cost him Akhonds support.

Yes Albright apologised for setback to Iran democracy. You can revise it as much as you wish but it does not change.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: The coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development, and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs.

more here

//transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0004/19/i_ins.00.html

There have also been plenty of documentaries on this subject. Do a little goole search for yourself. The internal documents of the CIA were declassified and released a long time ago.

With respect to the great crowd who supported Mosadegh initially, you must remember that many were religious people following likes of Kashani and Boroujerdi that at the end had sided with the Shah. The same crowds who formed a big proportion of the 79 revolution.

With respect to the Fatemi, please provide a reference to the article or statement where he asked for Shah's head.

As I already said we must agree to disagree and wish the best for the future.

Dear Divaneh

One of the weapons in the hands of the anti Pahlavi camp has always been to reject the established versions of history and to embrace a revised version as approved by them and sold as the true version. But when their version is questioned by their critics, they are labelled as revisionist. What I have written here is not entirely or exclusively of my own making but it includes the critical views of a small but investigative body of writers and historians who are not accepting the flat denial or the blanket approval of one side or the other.

As for Razm Ara, regardless of whether he was a rival to the Shah or an enemy of Mossadegh, or whether he was killed by an Islamic terrorist or by an ultra patriotic monarchist, consider this undisputed fact: the suspect was freed by a hastily passed act of the parliament when the Jebhe Melli had won the majority of seats and elected Ayatollah Kashani as the speaker of their parliament,s and without a single sign of disapproval by the incumbant prime minister: Mossadegh? If you accept this as a sample of Mosadegh's respect for the constitution, then I can understand why you have no problem with his bogus referendum and the subsequent dissolution of the Majlis.

You also used the case of Albright who in a small Iranian gathering and at the invitation of the IRI's best friend in America, Houshang Amir-Ahmadi, acknowledged (but did not apologize) for the American involvement in Iranian affairs in summer of 1953. Does this mean that they actually succeeded in the coup, or is it your own philosophical interpretation of those events and Albright's words that make you believe in a successful coup? Are you suggesting that a small group of thugs and prostitues managed to defeat combined force of the supporters of Tudeh and Jebhe Melli? What happened to that great crowds of Mossadegh supporters who only a year earlier clashed with the guns and tanks of Ghavam forces and many of them lost their lives in 30 Tir?

And as for Fatemi, did I ever condone or justify his execution? I am simply giving you the consditions surrounding his death by reminding you that when a high ranking official like Fatermi, publicly  demands the Shah's head and urges the people to violently overthrow the constitutional monarchy to which he was sworn to uphold, the law of the land calls this high treason and it is an offence punishable by death.  All these happened under the silent watch of his boss Mossadegh - the so-called law abiding grand citizen of Iran!!!

I am pleased to note that you don't see all things in black and white but do not forget that the ultimate burden of responsiblity is on our shoulders for making the Shah, Mossadegh and Khomeini who they were.

FR

Coup? What coup?

What do you expect me to say to someone who makes the above comment, dear Farah? This is now becoming a discussion of fantasy. Your comments are full of inaccuracies, false reasoning (Maghlateh) and wrong conclusions. For example how did you come to the conclusion that I supported Shaban Bimokh action when he was beating the communist? What made you think that I used Shahneh as an opposite to Sheikh? Why do you ignore the facts that I raised about rivalry between Shah and Razm Ara and smear Mosadegh who unlike Pahlavis never resorted to terror as a tool? 

You also change my words and when I write "It seems that Mosadegh had to dissolve the parliament and call a referendum" you reflect it in your comments as "Of course that Mosadegh had to dissolve ..."

You mention the failure of the Anglo_american coup but forget to state what happened after the failed coup and the mobs that were orchestrated by CIA and MI6 who now had the support of your friend Kashani.

Most strangely you almost condone Fatemi's execution on the ground that his newspaper was anti monarchy or, as you say, he had a foul language. That makes me very uncomfortable and I start to smell a different flavour of IRI.

For me facts are more valuable than tit-tat exchanges of twisted words and feel that we are not getting anywhere and have to agree to disagree.

And one last word Farah. I do not see things as black and white. Shah did many good things but his dossier also includes dark points and we cannot trun a blind eye on those in the very same way that we should not forget his services. Same is true about Mosadegh and all others who are after all humans and prone to errors. Their good and bad deeds, the outcomes and our history should be guiding light for the future.

A SIMPLE QUESTION

Democratic Front (jebhe Meli) that Mr. mossadeq was belong to

Isn't the same front that Dr. Yazdi (cia's agent) belongs too ?

The Oil Nazionalization effort was ONLY to switch the British hands to the Americans ....$$$$$$$

without BLOOD SHED.          Maziar

و اما شما دیوانه جان

Is it not so surprising for someone. meaning you, who until a few days ago had not heard or read about Mossadegh's referendum to dissolve the Majlis (the most treacherous - to borrow your own words -  anti constitutional of his deeds), to become so "knowledgeable" on Mossadegh's relations with the mullah? And I have noticed that you are a little "diplomat" too!! Even after having read or been "informed" about Mossadegh's referendum, you write:

" Now I have done my fact finding and it seems that Mossadegh dissolved
the parliament and called a national referendum when he became aware of
plots against him and conspirators in his government."

Did you say: "it seems"!!!

You mean you don't even completely believe the "facts" you have found?!! Isn't this an example of what you accuse others of:

"More dangerous that those who know a little or a lot, are those who
know what they like to know and believe what they like to believe"

You know Divaneh, and this is not a criticism of your personality (as virtual as it comes across) but a comment on your style of debate, your use of such words as traitor, treason, treacherous, etc. display a deeply biased and rigid opinion that is not open to reason with. Don't you know that calling someone a traitor is not politically correct these days. Traitor to what and by whose judgement? Nevertheless and with full awareness that I will not get an objective response I address some of the issues you have raised.

It is not my fault that your reading list has excluded some of the most leading and thought provoking writers and historians of our contemporary history. like Ajoudani, Milani, Matini and Mirfetros. You sound as if you are the reference and if you chose to ignore some then they are not worth being read or discussed!! I simply refer you to read their findings (and not self-made opinions) on, Reza Shah, Shah and Mossadegh and then talk about ghiaase ma'alfaaregh!

I also find it amusing the way you twist and spin the facts to suit your argument. You are effectively saying: well, of course Mossadegh had no choice but to dissolve the Majlis because it was full of traitors! Really? So by whose authority did he do it? The constitution had not empowered him. And if he unilaterally decided to do so against the highest legally binding text, meaning the constitution, well, was it not the same thing he was alleging the Shah of doing?

You also say: It was OK for Jafari to beat the communists when Kashani and Mossadegh were allies but not so when they fell out with each other. I am not sure what you call such statements but they are commonly known as double standards.

And I can see that you like to stick to unproven conspiracy theories about who shot Razm Ara (the arch eneme of Mossadegh) but do not care that the suspect assassin was released by Mossadegh's government bot because it was legally proven that he was innocent but because Mossadegh's government considered Razm Ara as a traitor (your favorite term) the Razm Ara was mahdooro ddam (and who said Mossadegh was a secular minded person? lol )

And now to your so-called questions:

Americans (persuaded by the British) had all the intentions of removing Mossadegh for their own reasons: saving Iran from falling into the hands of the Soviet-backed Tudeh party. But with all their intentions and conspiracies, was it the Anglo-American partnership that eventually removed Mossadegh?  I leave you to find the answer yourself - LOL

It was unfortunate that Fatemi had to be executed for the misadventures of his boss but, to use your own word, Fatemi had allegedly committed an open act of treason against the constitution but using the foulest of languages in his newspaper and to call for the violent removal of the monarchy. Fatemi was regarded by the top brass of Jebhe Melli as the black sheep of the group: a journalist  who had no political skills and only using an offensive language was the shahneh of his boss Mossadegh! He was a sheep to the slaughter and was sacrificed for the power mania of his boss.

Also see my questions and answers to another Mossadegh worshipper.

//iranian.com/main/2010/jun/winners-and-l...

FR

Now you make more sense Benross

" But I reached this personal view, thanks to nobody."

And this is what I call an organic thinker :)

Thanks for elaboration

FR

I meant their hairdo!

Coup de cheveux

When my school history books don't tell me exactly what happened few years before I was born. When nobody dares to tell me exactly what happened. It is a coup, no matter how you 'cut' it.

I'm sorry but this is as far as I can go. Those who expect me to apologize for ignoring my history, can not be the same who kept me in ignorance. That Mossadegh guy was the worst kind of crap. This is my personal view. But I reached this personal view, thanks to nobody.

Coup? What Coup?

بقول معروف

اول برادریت را ثابت کن بعدادعای ارث ومیراث بکن.

FR

The coup was not about two

The coup was not about two incompetent power hungry leaders who didn't know how to work together. U.S couldn't care less about either of them. And they were no different than any other incompetent power hungry typical Iranian. It was the height of the cold war and the concern was the red wave, which unlike them, knew exactly where they were heading.

We should know by now, that worshiping 'independence' carries an abject reactionary mentality and behaviour causing permanent 'dependency'. We should not talk about that. At least, not when we reside in the West. It's minimum decency.

Unlike Farah, and many others, I have no intention to prove one side was right and the other side was wrong. There is no right side in a history that leads to Islamic revolution. The only right side is to undo that revolution. 

Dear Farah

"More dangerous that those who know a little or a lot, are those who know what they like to know and believe what they like to believe"

Contrary to your claim on knowing everything (which is the sign of ?) I am very comfortable with stating my unawareness when I don't know something. Still, without being big headed, I possibly can teach you a little about these events. Now instead of resorting to insult or empty words about my personality and me being a philosopher, hypocrite, novice of scanty knowledge, or whatever else comes to your mind, try to answer my questions in the very same way that I answer your questions. Keep your judgements about my personality for yourself.

The comments that you attributed to Milani or Ajoudani and I chose to ignore is a good example of invalid comparison "Ostad Moshiri calls it Ghiase Ma Alfaregh". For example what is to compare between Mohammed Reza Shah and Mehrdad I the Ahskani king? or Xerexes? or Amir Nasr Samani? Each of these kings lived in a very different time and in a very different environment and ruled a society with different religions and beliefs.

You are trying to suppress the truth as evident from the points that you have made about Mosadegh. Here are some of your misleading comments that you have raised to smear the nationalist leader.

You said: Mossadegh had forged a strong alliance with some of the most backward religious leaders of his time meaning Aytollah Kashani.

Mosadegh was initially supported by most Ayattollahs for his stance on independence and freedom of Iran. Whilst some such as Taliqani and Zanjani supported him to the end, he lost the support of most others amongst them Kashani whose request for influence in the government's policies and other personal matters were rejected by Mosadegh. He was also opposed by Boroujerdi (Marja Taghlid) for having given voting rights to women. We can therefore conclude that your claim that he was appeasing Akhonds is false.

You said: he was supported by the same Shaban Bimokh in the first year of his premiership until he fell out with Kashani.

Of course. Shaban Bimokh was a Kashani Mob and was controlled by Kashani.

Indeed we know that the very same backward Kashani joined forces with Shah and foreign powers in the conspiracy against the nationalist government. Shah later executed the outstanding Dr Fatemi, who was an advocate of oil nationlisation and in doing so had angered British.

You said: Did you know that he allowed the murderers of Razm Ara and Hajir, his own predecessors to be freed and returned to their Fadaeeyan Islam comrades as a gift to Kahsani

It is well known and documented that there was a rivalry between the Razm Ara and the late Shah. He was escorted to the mosque by no other than Alam. There are also some suggestions that he was in fact was not killed by Tahmasebi's shots and the bullets were fired by a Colt only available to soldiers and by a security official in plain cloth. Those who benefitted from this murder and had arranged it were certainly those who arranged for Tahmasebi release.

You see Farah, you may be able to deceive yourself but you cannot deceive others. Everything is in open and there have been many books, articles and documentaries about this issue.

Now perhaps you can answer my questions and hope that you can answer them with some level of fairness.

If Mosadegh was not effective in securing Iran's rights, then why did the British who had for many years sucked our resources, arranged a coup together with American and replaced him with a weak Shah?

Was it not an act of treason by Shah to kill Dr Fatemi (Mosadegh's cabinet foreign minister) who was also an advocate of Iran's independence?

There are many other questions but these two suffice to judge your impartiality.

My Mad Philosopher Friend

Not so long ago a wise man said:  

 "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. So is a lot"

His name was Albert Einstein or so is attributed to him.

It is clear that while you are honest about your lack of knowledge about some very important developments in the recent history of our country, you are bold enough to form firm opinions based on your scanty knowledge. This is why that wise man said that little knowledge is dangerous. It is not dangerous to the people who are in the know but it is dangerous to the very person who possesses that incomplete knowledge.  You also appear to dismiss the result of long years of hard work and research done by the leading scholars in history and remain committed to your little knowledge. This is where the danger is.

You see Divaneh I am trying hard to avoid being condescending but I must tell you that your stance on the questions such as religion, nationalism, democracy and more is that of a biased person who is resorting to a number of cliche slogans and mottos without exploring the meanings of what he is shouting. This stance can easily lead to hypocrisy. Did you know that your hero Mossadegh had forged a strong alliance with some of the most backward religious leaders of his time meaning Aytollah Kashani? Did you know that he was supported by the same Shaban Bimokh in the first year of his premiership until he fell out with Kashani? Did you know that he appeased the mullahs by not allowing the the mixed sex schools to be opened. Did you know that he allowed the murderers of Razm Ara and Hajir, his own predecessors to be freed and returned to their Fadaeeyan Islam comrades as a gift to Kahsani for his suport for Mossadegh's installation as a prime minister. There are many more occasions that I can site but I can't see much point because my point is made.

These are not philosophical takes on certain development but the historic facts that remain indisputable to this date. You can do the research yourself.

But please remember that if you see nothing wrong with Mossadegh's dissolving  the parliament (against the word of the constitution and without being powered to do so) then you shouldn't see anything wrong with the Shah's intrpreting the law in his own terms.

I think before we can continue any further you have to read a significant amount of litrarure on the recent history of your country (both pro and against) and debate thing from an informed stand and not not from a novice one.

Once again I am sorry to have come across as patronizing but I am sure you can equalize by firing back at me at a latrer time.

FR

Getting its history wrong is part of being a nation

Homa Katouzian starts his book with this brilliant quote from Ernest Renan. I was actually intrigued to continue the read just by this fabulous start!

The bottom line is that we have to stick with our nationhood. We will always get our history wrong. Or more to the point, differently. Does it matter to the task at hand. Did it ever matter?

Dorood

Hey guys last week I uploaded these videos on youtube and posted them on facebook begging people to share. Now I'm so happy I found them here. this is conquering one of the barriers. this is dialog. Apart from those supporters of dictators who made some personal attack to Mr Moshiri I can’t stop praising my fellow who first shared them here and others who posted these mind boggling comments.

At the bottom line I believe democracy starts from our small communities, our homes, our parties and gathering and especially places like here. Thanks to technology we can discuss our problem no matter where we are and who we are

Although we (Persians) can never come to a conclusion and our purpose of participating in a debate is to dominate our idea and conceding that is out of question. but afterward when we go back to our solidity it makes us think and it works, it really does. (I'm being a bit sarcastic but it's unfortunately somehow true. After half of a century all the world say Dr Mosaddegh was overthrown by a coup conducted by foreigners, all the evidences say so, US government admit it and formally apologized our nation but dictator followers do not admit. They are pathetic)

anyway personally I'm not agree with Mr Moshiri when he says conditional Monarchy was a good system for Iran. Don’t get me wrong, I'm not saying constitutional Monarchy or Mashrooteh was bad, that was a graceful achievement by our national heroes in our history but I can't even think bowing and kissing a person's hand because he or she is coming from a sacred sperm without doing anything or having any qualification. Thanks to previous dictator and his predecessors who simply disgraced monarchy.
If these videos appeal to you, please go to  “//www.youtube.com/user/SarzaminJavid” I’ve  uploaded some other videos from Mr Moshiri and I do so when I find something interesting.   
Cheers 

Dear Farah

Well I think we are all philosophers as each of us has his/her own philosophy about life. However if you are trying to wrap the word fiction in a cover of philosophy and imply that I have replaced the fact with fiction then you are wrong.

I have already explained my reason for calling the education in the Pahlavi era a poor education and you have not addressed those point. Shah was afraid of Akhonds and allowed them to influence the Iranian state education of which the most notable was the religious studies (talimaat Dini) that was nothing but lies about Islam.  The spread of the same Islamic lies on the national television was another aspect of that poor education. Financial aids to mosques and hosseiniyehs in contrast to measures straining other ideologies created nothing but an unaware nation following religious zealots. Was it not Shah who was devotee of the Imam Reza? who went on pilgrimage and made the most publicity with that towel in the Arabian deserts? Is that what you call “pulling Iran out of the clutches of the religious backwardness and dogma”

We must appreciate that education is not only what you are thought in the school (which was full of lies) but also what a government teaches a nation using all available media. You can visit my previous comment to see what was missing from that education and why censorship is part of a poor education policy. With respect to Milani and Ajoudani they are entitled to their opinions. I am not aware of the context in which they made their comments, nor think this is a valid comparison to compare Shah with those who ruled Iran in the last few thousand years in many different circumstances. Shah was ruling a country that had already made its claim on social justice and enlightenment. If anything, Pahlavi decelerated that movement through its dictatorship.

It was nor a fiction when I suggested that I was not aware of Mosadegh dissolving the parliament. It did not mean that he didn’t, it meant that I was not aware of such action and that I had not time to go fact finding. Now I have done my fact finding and it seems that Mosadegh dissolved the parliament and called a national referendum when he became aware of plots against him and conspirators in his government. What else do you expect from the true leader of a nation? We are fortunate that now everything about Mosadegh and Operation Ajax is in open. We now that Shah cooperated with British and Americans (despite his own will) to overthrow a nationalist government. We know the roles of CIA, MI6, Ashraf, Zahedi, Rashidian Brothers, Shaban Bimokh and all those who sold Iran to the British oil interests. The stink of that treacherous act is still in the air of our country. What are you trying to do? To rewrite the history? To portray treason as service? Was it not that the first act of Zahedi was to sign the oil consortium agreement that gave control of Iran’ oil wealth to British and Americans?  Even Albright apologised in 2000 for the US ill advised policy that was a setback for Iranian democracy. These are very bitter facts and it is best that are left to be history if this nation has any hope of reconciliation.

Dear Kaveh

I agree with you that bygones are bygones. What is important is that we share the same vision for the future of Iran as a progressive, democratic country that safeguards the civil liberties and human rights of all its people.

دیوانه جان سلام

Thank you for your civil response to my otherwise sardonic comments.  You are obviously a gentleman. And I can see you are a bit of a philosopher too. No, I really mean it. There is absolutely nothing wrong in being a philosopher or having a philosophical outlook on life but while replacing facts by philosophy may win you political followers it does not help you in reaching the truth.  The reason I say this is because some of your points are so radically at odds with the established facts that make one wonder if you are talking philosophy. Let us consider one of your acusations:

"... assisting and aiding religious backwardness financially and through poor education, ..."

There are historians like Abbas Milani and Mashallah Ajoudani who were both members of the leftist activists and intellectuals fighting against the Shah. They may have had similar views like yours back in the 1970's but now and after a long an objective analysis of the historic facts and developments of that era they are firmly convinced that no other kings before the Pahlavis had done as much as they did in pulling Iran out of the clutches of the religious backwardness and dogma. Their achievments are no better demonctrated than in the fields of education and judiciary as well as in opening the path of gender equality in education, law, workplace and politics. Without such efforts as participation of women in the elections (as symbolic as it may have been), teaching and even judiciary (Shirin Ebadi being one such product) we woud have been no better than our neigboring countries of Iraq or Afghanistan. Are you seriously disputing these staggering achievements? If your answer if yes then I must conclude that you are founding a new philosophy: the philosophy of denial.

I have no quarrel with those who suggest that the Pahlavis had to enforce their modernization drive but modernizing they were, nonetheless.

As for your hero Mosaddeq, I have written at length on this site and I don't wish to restart it again. But of all the points you have made, one is most interesting:

"I have not heard or read about him (Mosaddeq) dissolving the parliament. "

Again, are you serious or is this another philosophical view?

Perhaps you can tell me why Mosaddeq held a referendum!

Thank you

FR

ps - If a shallow-minded person like Bahram Moshiri considers that Shahneh is the opposite of Sheikh, then do we have to repeat his falsehood just to keep in line with him?

Dear Divaneh

my 99% figure is based on an extrapolation from the current stats.

today 26 million people are enrolled in schools in Iran. UNESCO says that this is 95%. in 1978 11 million were enrolled. basic maths based on the population growth tells me that in 1978 a bigger percentage attended school.

We might not see eye to eye on history, but being familiar with your contributions on IC, I rather concentrate on the future over which we are mainly in agreement

cheers

Kaveh

Restoration MEANS Reconciliation

Definition of a Constitutional Monarchy = It's The Republic of Imagination Within the Empire of Dreams ... 

might for right, right for right, justice for all  in the end, it's not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game.

How the idea of the Round Table Got into Arthur's Mind:

You people are missing the

You people are missing the point. We still have a king. Unless you support IRI.

Now keeping the monarchy is something that will be decided in free Iran.

Dear Kaveh

None of those dictator ridden ME countries had the same opportunity as Iranians did in 1979. Give any of them half a chance and they will dive into some sort of Islamic thuggery head first.

I have heard this comment that we were not ready for democracy too many times and think contrary to that comment, the early parliaments and plethora of newspapers in those times proved that Iran was ready to embrace democracy. This was the country that hanged the treacherous Fazlollah Nouri and had a good balance of liberal and national forces in its power structure. That newly born democracy only needed some protection, but I am not going to cry over the spilled milk.

I have explained my reason for claiming that the education in the Pahlavi era had poor quality and your statistics is not a response to what I listed. I however would appreciate if you could provide the source of your statistics such as school attendance by 99% under the age of 16.

As far as I know Mosadegh was given special power by the parliament and that power was later extended by the Majlis. I have not heard or read about him dissolving the parliament.

I agree with you that our best chance was for the Shah and Mosadegh to work together and it's unfortunate that it did not happen.

I did not call anyone Shahneh, I called them "Supporters of Shahneh" and have already explained that it was used in this blog to voice Moshiri's phrase. I also think that the use of the word Shahneh is not completely inappropriate but if it offends you or others, then I stop using it.

I am already reconciled to those Iranians who want to see a symbolic king and if such a notion is voted by majority of Iranians then I respect the people choice. I did not attribute POV to others, I only tried to let DK know what comes to the mind of many Iranians such as me who do not favour monarchy.

Darius Jaan

Sorry that I didn't return to this blog until now otherwise I would have answered your question.

The answer to your question, in my opinion, is: Yes! A quasi-democratic system can be put in place but it will be a tenuous one and can easily come under the threat from one or the other side. Examples of this kind are seen in our neighboring country of Turkey or further afield in Spain and some of the newly democratized South American countries such as Argentina and Chile. We don't need to love each other to live with each other.

FR

Dear Divaneh

You agree that the logic is superficial but then go on to restate the same logic.

If not most countries in the world with the exception of western democracies, then certainly all the countries in our region & all Iran's neighbouring countries did not have a better record on "the denial of political freedom and democracy, heavy hand on the true nationalists and out-of-line intellectuals, ban and censorship of the press" than the pre 79 Iran. did they all end up with the thugocracy that is IR?

Did the "reliance on religious figures for legitimacy" come to Iran with the arrival of the Pahlavi's? Didn't khomeini's initial opposition in 1963 stem from his opposition to the land reforms & women's rights that meant the end of "assisting and aiding religious backwardness financially".  Can you please enlighten me as to what was wrong with the "poor education" system that brought a country from under 1% literacy rate to nearly 50% within just 57 years. was it the "poor education" system that enabled 99% of all people under the age of 16 to attend school in 1979. That very same "poor education" planning is still responsible for today's educated.

Can you also let me know where within the constitution, did the "elected prime minister", have the power to dissolve parliment & rule by decree?

While the shah's order to dismiss Mossadegh was not unconstitutional, I agree with you that the fact that it was a feature of a foreign scheme divested it of any legal legitimacy, but without removing the shah's popular legitimacy up until a couple of years prior to 79.

Iran was not ready for full democracy in 1953, nor in 1979. our best chance to achieve democracy gradually was for Mossadegh & the shah to work together. the fact that they did not was down more to Iran's political elites, the cold war & Iran's Oil, than Mossadegh's and shah's patriotism or lack of.

Your labelling others as "Shahenh" with the definition that you provided, might measure up to Moshiri's standards, but certainly does not bode well for a "complex national reconciliation".

Finally, please feel free to speak for your own POV, with out attributing POV's for the supporters of constitutional Monarchy. I for one do not believe  "in an unelected leader" which will "rule out the hopes of all other factions to lead the country". I hope that will make it less complex for you to reconcile with some of us.

Dear Benross

How can I answer the question that no one else has answered for 30 years? We just continue in opposition until there is an opportunity to replace the IRI with a democratic regime.

Dear Divaneh

That was not my question. And I don't think RP asked you what to do either.

I asked now what. That is a 30 years old question. You should have come up with something by now.