Current Events

Arj

Good points and one example is my grandparents. My grandfather and grandmother moved here after the revolution Because they wanted to be with us. They always followed the rules. My grandmother did wear a scarf; not all the time but sometimes. However they always respected the law and never broke it. Both of them preferred to live in Iran. My grandmother never learned English. After my grandfather passed away she moved back to Iran where was her real home.

Another example is my friend's father. He was in a similar situation. Moved here to be with his son. Always followed the rules and the laws of America. Then after his wife died moved back to Iran.

VPK

Failing to assimilate is one thing, shrouding yourself in a tent in order to create a wall between yourself and the society around you is another. There are people (mostly older, who follow thir offsprings to the new land) who live in the West, or even ghettos, yet heeding the social norms in addition to the binding laws. Yet, in the 21st century when in addition to photo ID, people would have to go through various security checks such as x-ray screening, body scans and metal detectors on daily basis, there are those who intend to cover their faces and expect the society to adjust to their personal agenda!

This is while no country in the world has made any restrictions for those who wear hejab in public, but understandably for those who cover their faces! Indeed, whether voluntarily or not, wearing a face-covering mask in today's society is more a cry for help than practising one's religious rights!

Dont worry sister Yolanda...

"He is OK". I can assure you he has more user ID's on this site than a cat has lives! 

I dont know how this discussion led to Riots in Britain. But If I am not wrong, there seem to be a racial tone to the riots, which is not unusual for britain with high immigrant population. Our own Mr. Churchill is absolutrely right though. These riots are instigated by gangs of criminals, and executed by looters . There is absolutely no political undertone to them. In fact the last time there were widespread riots in Britain with clear political demands, it was during miners strike , early 1980's. 

As for the "brutal injustice of British democracy" (I guess as opposed to the wonderfull islamist democracy in Iran...), that some west residing islamists here are at pain to point out, why is it then that the british government has to every year-due to public pressure- tighten their immigration control laws further in order to keep out hundreds of thousands of so called "assylum seekers"? Really what kind of "unjust society" this britain is that hordes of people, mostly from these wonderfull muslim countries are trying to enter and live in?...... 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Poor and democracy

Democracy does not mean that you have no poor people. It just means that you have a system where people govern themselves. This is done either by representatives or direct vote. 

There is no guarantee that you have no poor people. If you are uneducated; or jobless you are likely to be poor. America is a democracy and you work to make money. If you don't work or work at a low paying job you won't make money. Freedom includes that of being an entrepreneur; build a business and be rich. Most democratic nations by choice have social welfare programs. There are some who are generous and some not so generous. So of course there are high class and low class neighborhoods.

I live in a middle class area of a pretty nice town in America. Because I paid for it! I worked to learn English and got an education. I work 10-12 hours a day and get paid for it. If I decided to sit on my rear end I would end up on the street. Because I am not independently rich. Why: because majority of Americans voted to not have benefits like England. In summary a democracy has no obligation to be a welfare state. 

.........

............Freethought111 got blocked! I just noticed today!

I hope he is OK!

Freethought concern

"why don't you try the experiment of living in places such as Tottenham, Islington and many other poor suburbs of London for a year and come back and report about how great British democracy is. " Freethought111

Instead of reading philosophy of people who died several hundred years ago such as mullahs Sadra, Mir damad, you spend your time learn something that is useful for you so you don't continue living in "Ghetto" area and move to the nicer neighborhood such as Kinsington high street in London. VPK can help you about that. People in those area are "color people". They are mostly on benefits. They put their head in toilets.  They don't want to take their lazy rear end to work. Waiting for government check. The writer of Harry potter used to be on benefits, now she lives in 16 million dollars house in Kinsington high street.

Good question Arj

Why does a person move to another nation and shows no interest in it. I moved to America and the first thing I did was to learn about it. History; language; popular culture; sports; music; alternative culture pretty much anything I could find. While I never stopped loving Iran I make it my job to learn about America. Made friends with Americans; went to baseball games and so on. In time I found somethings I liked and some I did not. Just like any other American.

Now we got people who move to the West. Never bother to integrate or even learn one thing about the nations they move to. What kind of life is that anyway? I could understand this if they are there as political refugees or for medical treatment. But not when they move there as immigrants. It is the duty of an immigrant to learn and integrate. If they do not want it then they should go back where they came from. Guests have a duty to their host and she did not live up to it. 

Not to mention you need to learn the rules. Not just laws but rules and norms. What is expected from them. How to show respect to others. How to properly greet a person. None of it was followed by her. She does not belong there.

Why bother?

Women like this, have evidently no ties left with the society. So why bother leaving home?! Not mention why not move to Saudi Arabia!

Ghameh

Is one of the dumbest customs in the world. Proof that there is no end to human stupidity. What kind of person in their right mind will hit themselves on the head with an axe!

Reminds me of "getting hit on the head lessons" of Monty Python. As the guy said "what a stupid concept".  At least they would hit them with a blunt object. These idiots use a sharp axe bleeding on all kinds of things. Besides being bad for them it is also bad for others. Blood is not a good thing to be getting on people.

They also don't understand Islam. From what I did learn blood outside of body is najis or impure. They are getting nejasat over themselves and anything near them. At least they should learn about Islam before making fools out of themselves.

Churchill Jan

I never said Britain is bad for its own people in fact it treats them fine. It also treats immigrants reasonably well. My problem is with the way they treated Iran. One thing about me is I do not let anger and hate get the better of me. Instead I try to be fair and honest. England is absolutely preferable to live in than any Islamic nation. Even during the Shah's times England was a better place to live in many ways. But I am Iranian; love Iran and would pick Iran given a half decent regime.

Regarding Havanas I am afraid USA won't let them in. They are very backwards when it comes to Cuba. Thanks to the Cubans in Florida who unlike most Iranians seem to have no love for the nation they left behind.

Tony Blair and Ghameh Zani of shia

"Indeed it appears Shi'ism has dumped on you and proven it is long term much stronger than any of you twits. So f*ck Tony Blair! F*ck David Cameron!" Freethought111

Yes, my friend you're right,  Ghameh Zani on the day of Ashura proven how strong, sofisticated is idea of shiiasm and people who don't believe in this kind of ceremony are twits. Don't be surprise Tony Blair attend Ghameh Zani of shiism in Iran next year because he is smart guy and sooner or later he will discover shia Islam.  On better sight,  Shia muslims could ask Jews to cut them off on the day of Ashura. They will do the job much better. I am just surprise why the rest of the world from Japan to south America never discover such a facinating religion and most of them never heard of it. it only restricted to Iran and small part of Iraq. Shiiasm must be widespred over the world.

Good we are making progress DNK :)

"No matter what I would never trade the British system for a Shia rule. Who wants to get their hand chopped off? Or to wear a tent on their head by force. "

Soon I will send you a box of Havanas (compliments of good old Winston).

I hate to

agree with Churchill :-) but England is a pretty free nation for most part. Of course as long as you are not Irish!

Regarding the riots we get them in the USA as well. If a minority does not like what the majority does you sometimes get riots. We had one when a jury acquitted the **holes who beat Rodney King. I belevie it was an unjust verdict and an indication of racism of many whiles in the LA area. But not proof that America is better off with Shiaism! Now you got a pretty big recession in Britain as the result of:

• Global recession due to bankers robbing us all.
• Their betreyal of the Shah and no more Iran to milk.
• Their loss of other colonies to milk.

So they get a right wing government which is democratically elected. It cuts back on the benefits. Then some complain. Others take advantage of it and figure: might as well rob while the stealing is good. This does not mean they don't have a democracy. It does mean they do have discontent. Not the same thing now is it?  No matter what I would never trade the British system for a Shia rule. Who wants to get their hand chopped off? Or to wear a tent on their head by force.

Still no rioter injured - can't you read?

"Across London, officers were fully stretched and members of the public were injured as bottles, petrol bombs and other missiles flew.

One man in his 60s received life-threatening head injuries, while three people were arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after a police officer was knocked down by a car in Brent, north-west London."

The injured man was a member of public hit on the head by flying bottles, Sorry FT111, British democracy has no peer when it comes to public policing.

And as for Etonian toffs, elitism is an honour to behold old chap. Jealousy won't do you good LOL.

anglophile - ZERESHK

not a single rioter has been injured

//www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/09/london-riots-police-armoured-vehicles

F*ck British democracy and the elitist Eton toffs who run it!

Here is a little education on British democracy FT111 take note

Siavash300

Go tell the people rioting all over Britian right now that British democracy is the best thing since sliced bread. I dare you!

You and people like you are complete fools living in cacoons, and the past 32 years has shown how full of it you people are that to this day you are incapable of formulating a strategy to unload on the mullahs and overthrow that regime. Instead you scratch your balls from your posh suburbs in Bel Air and Beverly Hills and think Fascism rules!

Indeed it appears Shi'ism has dumped on you and proven it is long term much stronger than any of you twits. So f*ck Tony Blair! F*ck David Cameron! F*ck Rupert Murdoch and the Murdoch empire! F*ck the whole bleedin' British establishment and the whole British ruling class!

.

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Freethought you're right again.

" Britian is not a democracy any more because an entrenched oligarchy and ruling class controls every lever of the system." "Freethought111

Yes Mr/Ms. freethought, Brits government controls every lever of the system that no one can talk or expresses his/her idea. Books are banned and jails are full of "prisoners of conscious" No political party exist in U.K only one party who dictate the law of ruling class. No one even can breath freely in U.K because of lack of democracy. Many Brits runing away from U.K take a refuge in Islamic countries. It is falsely said that people from Islamic countries come to Europe. It is the other way around. Zionist try to make Islamic countries look bad and that is their propagandas. Thousands and thousands people are waiting to get a visia for Islamic countries such as pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.. They wait in line for visa for long time and mostly they can not get a visa. Zionist tries to make it look the other around that Islamic countries run away to Europe which is not true.

On the other hand, Shia is the best form of relligion. Many people love to convert to this religion. It is true that shia relgion exist only in Iran and some part of Iraq but people around the world doesn't know what they are missing. So don't be surprise to see one day Tony Blair is cutting his head with lazer blade in memory of Imam  Hossain on the day of Ashura and he is bleeding to death.

Shia muslims are the only ones who go to heaven after they die and the rest of the world belong to hell because they don't believe in Islamic shia or they never heard of it.

When I was a little kid my father used to tell me "shah it too much for these people. He is very educated" Now, I see what he meant.

Sincerely,

Siavash

Hey "Angal-lover"

You don't need to educate me either I get plenty form others! Go back to "Angal-Estan" the land of parasites!

You don't have to educate me about anything

Since you don't know what you're talking about and are quoting pro-regime  material which is deliberately misleading by quoting passages from the authors it claims to be citing half-cocked and totally out of context. I cited you the original texts from Avarih and you come back and quote me the same link as before. Get a clue already!

When an Isalmophile met an Islamophobe

Their partnership is called "jam'e naqizain" and the consequence is, well, a laughable disaster as is seen here by FT111's flirtations with Daijan Napoleon of Khorasan.

FT111, I can't be bothered to educate you on the history of Babism/Baha'ism and their connection or otherwise with the Anglo-Russian empires. But I can refer you to this site where a number of prominent scholars have asserted such connections:

1ــ محمد جواد شیخ‌الاسلامى دکتر شیخ‌الاسلامى ــ استاد فقید دانشگاه و نویسنده و مترجم پراطلاع معاصر ــ خاطرات سیاسى سر آرتور هاردینگ (استاد اعظم فراماسونرى، و وزیرمختار بریتانیا در ایران زمان مظفرالدین‌شاه) را به فارسى ترجمه کرده و بر آن تعلیقاتی افزوده است. مستر هاردینگ در بخشى از خاطرات خود، با لحنى جانب‌دارانه، از بابیان و بهائیان یاد ‏کرده و جناب شیخ‌الاسلامى با تعریض به حمایت سفیر بریتانیا از آنان نوشته است:

"در عرض یکصد سال اخیر، بابیان و بهائیان ایران همیشه از خطّ مشى سیاسى انگلستان در شرق پیروى کرده‏اند و ستایش وزیرمختار انگلیس از آن‌ها امرى است کاملاً طبیعى. "[1]

2ــ احمد کسروى

از آن سو انگلیسیان به نام هم‌چشمى که در سیاست شرقى خود با روسیان مى‏داشتند، به میرزا یحیى صبح‏ازل که از بهاء جدا گردیده دسته دیگرى به نام ازلیان داشت، پشتیبانى مى‏نموده‏اند. به‌ویژه پس از آن که جزیره قبرس، که نشیمنگاه ازل مى‏بود، به دست ایشان افتاده که دلبستگى‏شان به او و پیروانش بیشتر گردیده.

چاپ کتاب نقطه "الکاف" که پرفسور براون به آن برخاسته و آن "مقدمه" دلسوزانه‏اى که نوشته، اگرچه عنوانش دلسوزى به تاریخ و دلبستگى به آشکار شدن آمیغ‌هاى تاریخ است، ولى انگیزه نهانى‏اش پشتیبانى از ازل و بابیان مى‏بوده.

3ــ اسماعیل رائین

رائین، کتابی خواندنی با عنوان "انشعاب در بهائیت پس از مرگ شوقی ربانی" دارد که ضمن شرح انشعاب‌ها و دودستگی‌های متعدد و مستمر در بین بابیت و بهائیت، وابستگی آنان به بیگانگان (روس‌ها، انگلیسی‌ها، امریکایی‌ها و صهیونیست‌ها) را به طور مستند بازگو کرده است. اسماعیل رائین نیز (همچون کسروى) معتقد است که در تحولات و انشعاباتى که پس از قتل على‌محمد باب در میان یاران و هواداران وى رخ داد، بهائی‌ها سهم روس تزارى شدند و ازلی‌ها، به‌ویژه پس از سلطه انگلیسى‏ها بر قبرس (و بیرون آوردن آن از چنگ عثمانى) در سهم لندن قرار گرفتند. [5] رائین این گروه‌ها را مورد توجه خاص و حمایت ویژه بیگانگان دانسته و معتقد است رهبرى بهائیت، از آغاز تا امروز، مجموعاً بین روس تزارى، انگلیس و امریکا دست به دست شده است: "از سیصد سال قبل تاکنون، خارجیان همیشه به فرقه‏هاى مذهبى در ایران و خاورمیانه توجه خاصى داشتند و حمایت از آنان را از اصول سیاست خود مى‏شمرده‏اند. "

از جمله این اقلیت‌ها تشکیل فرق مختلف "بابى"، "ازلى" و "بهایى" و همچنین فرقه اسماعیلیه را مى‏توان نام برد. چنان‌که مى‏دانیم، پس از ایجاد دودستگى میان پیروان سیدعلى‌محمد باب، صبح ازل به ریاست "ازلیان" و میرزا حسینعلى بهاءالله به ریاست فرقه "بهایى" رسیدند. به‌طوری‌که در اسناد و مدارک بایگانى عمومى انگلیس و بایگانى عمومى هند دیده مى‏شود و همچنین بسیارى از مورخان خارجى نیز نوشته‏اند، این دو فرقه در بدو تأسیس از پشتیبانى خارجیان برخوردار بوده‏اند. لرد کرزن، سیاستمدار مشهور انگلیسى، در کتاب "ایران و مسئله ایران" تصریح مى‏کند: "صبح ازل که در قبرس سکنى داشت، مقررّى خاصى از حکومت انگلستان دریافت مى‏نمود و در عین حال روس‌ها هم از وى حمایت مى‏کردند. چنان‌که تا اواخر انقراض حکومت روسیه تزارى، دربار سلطنتى روس از هیچ گونه کمک و جانب‌دارى از بهائیان مضایقه نمى‏کرد و در مقابل قبرس، عشق‌آباد کانون بهائیان شد. " ولى با سقوط حکومت تزارى و تسلط انگلیس‏ها بر سرزمین فلسطین و تنزل مقام و موقعیت و کاهش سازمان ازلیان،

3ــ فریدون آدمیت

مى‏کند که اجازه داده شود به ایران بازگردد (عین این نامه فعلاً در یکى از کتابخانه‏هاى بزرگ اروپا موجود مى‏باشد). کرزن نیز از صبح ازل یاد کرده مى‏نویسد: "فعلاً در جزیره قبرس مى‏باشد و دولت انگلیس یک مقرّرى درباره او و اتباعش برقرار نموده است. " چنان‌که ملاحظه مى‏گردد، ازلیان (بابیان) به حمایت انگلیس پشت‌گرم، و روس‌ها نیز میرزا حسینعلى و بالنتیجه بهائیان را زیر حمایت گرفته بودند و به همین جهت است که ادوارد براون به طبع "نقطه الکاف" [از کتاب‌هاى تاریخى کهن بابیه‏] که جانشینى صبح ازل را ثابت کرده و مقام میرزا حسینعلى را غصبى مى‏نماید، دست یازیده و یک مقدمه پر آب و تابى بر آن نوشته که اگر درست در آن دقت شود، از یک دست، بابى‏ها را حمایت نموده، غم آنان را مى‏خورد و از دست دیگر، بهائیان را تحقیر کرده پرده از روى مقام غصبى آنان برمى‏دارد.

انسان وقتى که کتاب "یک سال در میان ایرانیان" تألیف ادوارد براون را مطالعه مى‏کند مى‏بیند این مرد دانشمند انگلیسى چگونه با عبا و ردا و تسبیح و سجاده در ایران مسافرت کرده و در یزد و کرمان به تریاک کشیدن نیز مشغول شده و بیشتر مصاحبت خود را با مردم عوام مى‏کند و محور صحبت او در همه‌جا و همه‌وقت از بابیگرى مى‏باشد، آن وقت مى‏فهمد این افسر آزموده انگلیسى چقدر در نشر عقاید بابیگرى کوشیده و چه خدمت بزرگى به دولت خود کرده است.

و قس علیهذا

//anti-bahai.blogsky.com/1387/04/18/post-152/

VPK

I think the names Allameh Qazvini and Ali-Akbar Dehkhoda missed you in my last post. Beyond the mullahs, Kasravi has had legions of very secular Iranian critics as well. No, I do not like Kasravi's simplistic ahistorical diatribes. And, yes, I have read all of Kasravi. Again, beyond his History of the Constitution Revolution, Kasravi's scholarship is laughable because it is uncritical and his thinking is incredibly unsophisticated and crass.

Freethought111

I gather you do not like Kasravi. But as long as the name is Western like Lloyd or Henry they do no wrong. You know to me one hair of Kasravi is worth all the foreign "Iranologists" put together except for Richard Frye whom I respect. 

I have read most of Kasravi's many book and suggest you try them. But then he is not a "Farangi" so may not meet you standards. You know one of the main reasons for the revolution was revulsion with people worshiping the West. If there is one thing I share with the "revolutionaries" is being sick of idolizing foreigners. At the expense of Iranians. Unfortunately they replaced one foreign culture with another: West with Islam. We have our own and don't need either Islam or Farang.

Kasravi/etc

Is a typical example of a national chauvinist intellectual of a modernizing nation in the post-WWI period whose ideal of the nation is an ahistorical fantasy. Postmodernists and critical theorists in the Academy have had a field day with Ahmad Kasravi. Even someone as low key as Lloyd Ridgeon has easily ripped Kasravi's uncritical generalizations about Sufism to shreds. I have read everything Kasravi ever wrote. Other than his History of the Constitutional Revolution, I have never been much impressed by much of else Ahmad Kasravi said because there is barely a dialectic in anything he says. His historical analyses and generalizations are so simplistic and often paranoid it is laughable. His readings of historical events and texts are partial and uncritical, and his national chauvinism borders on the outright Fascist. The only text of his worthy of note, like I said, is his history of the Constitutional Revolution. There is more in an Allameh Qazvini or Ali-Akbar Dehkhoda than in Kasravi, both of whom contributed far more to modern Iranian intellectual discourses than Kasravi. Because Kasravi made a lot of noise in his time, and because he had a flare for offering simplistic arguments that any tom and harry could grasp, he gets accolades while the later require more brain matter to comprehend and engage with than those who follow mere slogans can stomach.

Islamophilia is not a problem or issue where I come from. Like I said, it is a problem and issue to a specific sub-culture of Westoxicated Iranians of North America and Western Europe who have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the hegemonic (crypto- and now openly Fascist) Islamophobic discourses of the dominant "white" establishmentarian culture. People like Massignon, Corbin, Lory and Jambet, on the other hand, are intellectual giants - widely acknowledged to be so - who intellectual pygmies and lightweights in any case cannot engage with on any level of depth. BTW Corbin began his career as a philosopher and as a translator of the works of Karl Barth and Martin Heidegger. And FYI one of the accusations hurled at Corbin by pro-regime Western academics such as the British born Hamid Algar of UC-Berkeley was that he was Aryanizing Islam and making Iran rather than Arabia the center of Islam and so cared more for the esoteric legacy than for the shar'ia. The British convert Algar has made the same accusation about the Iranian Seyyed Hossein Nasr as well.

I know exactly what Corbin would've thought had he witnessed the spectacle of the Devolution and Khomeini: he would've called it the final assault of the counter-powers of darkness/jahanam on the holy land of Zarathushtra before the coming of the epoch of the Imam-Saoshyant!

Freethought111

I did a bit of digging

• Henry Corbin: was a professor of Islamic studies and died in 1978. Meaning first a fascination with Islam and second did not live to see the real Islam take over Iran. What he saw was the "Shahi" version of Islam not the real thing. I wonder how he would have felt after 100 lashes of Ayatollah.
• Christian Jambet: is a professor of Islamic studies. Another Islamophile with a morbid fascination of the death cult. So what?
• Pierre Lory: director of Arab studies. Another Islamophile.

I grant you they speak Persian. That does give them at least some degree of understanding. But their fascination and love of Islam clouds their judgment. Iran is not their nation it is mine. They do not suffer the pains we do. To them it is just another case study. We have to live with it. 

There is nothing schizophrenic about my distaste for Islam particularly Shia. Why don't you read a real Iranian like Kasravi? That may tell you a bit more about real roots of Shiaism. But he is an Iranian so obviously does not hold up to "az ma behtaran". What is schizophrenic is the fascination some Iranians have with Europe. While at the same time hating it. Why do you think these guys matter because they are French? I neither love nor hate the West. To me it West is just out for itself. 

Anyway the other French obviously do not share the fascination. They are in a hurry giving the Muslim immigrants their packing papers! I hold to my belief: Islam along with Christianity and other major religions are a pile of bull. If you want to pray to the invisible guy in the sky be my guest. Maybe he is there maybe not. But if he is he does not need my prayer. And I do not need to be lectured by either French or Iranian Ayatollahs.

Bullshit

Here is the full, original text of volume 1 and volume 2 of Avarih's Kawakib al-Durriya. Find this text you quote from the link you give by your British-propped mullah masters in it, please.

But the Babis were of the same origin too!

anglophile

Yes, Bahai-bashing and laying bare the sinister motivations of this cult is my speciality, seeing how Bahaism is one of the countless bastard children of the British empire (created, propped and supported by it) just like the mullahs in power today are creations of the same meddlesome bunch of wankers in Whitehall.

As I thought, you are yet another gharbzadeh Iranian licking the boot of your "white" Anglo-master. Tell me, does the scraps your British master throws into your plate worth your shameless boot licking of him?

VPK

The names I mentioned, Henry Corbin, Christian Jambet and Pierre Lory, are all fluent Persian speakers. Corbin taught concurrently at the Sorbonne, Tehran University as well as Aryamehr University - and in Iran he usually taught in Persian. A few of Corbin's lectures while in Iran are still available and his Persian was flawless. So your assumption about "arrogance" is completely off the mark. Henry Corbin was an Iran-lover bar none as have been all of his students.

The French legacy of scholarship on Iran is not merely a biblio-fixation. Most of the top French Iranologists have spent a considerable amount of time in Iran itself. Corbin spent 30 years. Half year in Iran, half year in France.

How dare they tell you? They dare to tell you because unlike most of you North American Tehrangeles Iranians who are products of 32 years of an exile sub-culture these scholars have not rejected any aspect of the intellectual culture which most of you have, nor ignorantly misrepresented it - like most of you do.  That is how they dare. None of these people are Islamophobes nor do they hold the kind of schizophrenic cultural ambivalencies about Iran and its heritage that many of you do. Given this, they are capable of far more balanced appraisal of the facts and their significance than most of you. That is how.