Current Events

Thank you Darius for your

Thank you Darius for your lengthy reply. There was a lot to absorb in one go. So.I need to break down your comment into digestible sizes. I am not sure whether I entirely agree from what I have quicly readbut I appreciate your effort especially at the expense of a good night sleep. Neverthrless, even amidsts our hostilities (which I hope has ceased) I am still an avid reader of your blogs and so are RDD2 and Truth Seeker I imagine.

The topic is 1988 massacres

The topic is 1988 massacres not questioning DK (who has used his real name) about his beliefs.  In my view, political prisoners need extra protection from local and international communities. No one should be killed for having a different view.

DK, I appreciate what you said in your post.  It reflects some of my feelings especially against IC members who think it is their right to use pseudo name(s), in several cases 3-4 different names and attack members who use their real identity.  These pseudo name users think they are entitled to ask personal questions from people who have chosen to be “accountable” for their actions.

DK the amount of time you spent on your comment is not wasted.  Kako take what you have and make a blog out of it.  You have demonstrated in words WHY Iranians have a long way to go in respecting opposing views.  As I mentioned before, Iranians look with disdain at members who disagree with them.  Many Iranians who left Iran, their mentality has not changed… I will be less active because of thugs who attack others personally while hiding their won identity.  These acts are similar to those shut people up or prison them for their believes. 

Simorgh5555

OK Good.

So we'll leave it there.

Best,

DK 

PS: If I hated Republicans or Republicanism per se I wouldn't be blogging on them:

In Memoriam: Mehrdad Mashayekhi (1953-2011)

Crown Prince Reza's Tribute to Mehrdad Mashayekhi (1953-2011)

MISTER "Z": Meeting Costa Gavras For "Une Journée à Tehran" 

Republic VS Monarchy In Style ...

Particularly if I find they have something valid or profound to say or have a strong point to make: 

VOA ROUND TABLE: Azar Nafisi & Ladan Boroumand on Intellectuals under Dictatorships

But I do challenge ANONYMOUS bloggers on their views when I disagree with them be it vehemently and or Provocatively if I must. Others do so too. So Why should I apologize ? I'm not asking for their friendship or yours or anyone else's and they are not asking for mine either.

I want my Ideas to Triumph they want theirs. 

But I have never attacked bloggers or commentators who advocate any given ideology when they do it under their full identity. 

Nor have I dismissed people when they have a genuine argument which happens to convince me or that I notice that the fellow in question has valid arguments even if I disagree with them from an ideological perspective.

But if it becomes just harrassement I say Stop ...

MY ORWELLIAN NIGHTMARE: Flagging Abuse based on Political Correctness is Not Fair

You may argue that it's not a reason for me to attack them if they are anonymous ? Given that they are people behind those key boards after all ?

Maybe but then what about those with Multiple ID's ? What about those who attack people in the Public eye and trash them with cheap shots when they have a reputation to defend ?

I've been at odds with many people who have had ideological differences with me but whom I grew to respect overtime because they showed me something I could relate to. Take Mehraban ( who is anonymous too) or Anahid Hojjati ( who is not anonymous) both of whom are not monarchists yet I find I share more in common with them than I do with people who are supposed to share the same monarchists views like me.  

People on IC either become "cyber friends" or not based on the type of affinities they share. The common tastes they can develope or emotional connection they can share on a given subject which transcends their differences.

If it doesn't well like I said tough luck. Why personalize every exchange to exhaustion only because you want to get even with someone ?

I don't see the point. I have had similar exchanges with Q, and more recently with the likes of R2 D2 or Truthseeker or others and I have decided to ignore them because I don't see the point of debating with someone who is hostile not merely because of what I say but because of what I may or not represent in his eyes or merely because they are so self righteous that they think they are making a point when in fact they are just complaining. 

We are neither political leaders, or seeking office here. We are just people expressing views hoping to be heard and understood and that our ideas and thoughts can at some stage shape public opinion.

If it does Great. If it doesn't well the world will continue spinning around as if we never existed. 

But yes I do challenge Republicans as a "Political Entity" and anyone who I identify as advocating that form of government or ideology as a model for a future Iran.

As a Monarchist I have always said that my system of government was founded on Blood That was Shed and Not just under the Pahlavis but all the way back to the times of our Founding Father: Cyrus the Great. 

I have never escaped historical accountability for what I believe in where as Iranian Republicans do particularly when they keep claiming that their "Revolution" was "Highjacked" or that this Republic is neither a "Republic" nor "Islamic".

If they say this then what gives them the right to call me or other monarchists who advocate a Constitutional Monarchy for Iran : "Shahollahis" or "Dictator" supporters ?  

When did I defend torture ? When did I claim that the Monarchy should be dictatorial ?

When the likes of Aynak or Mammad attack me they hardly even bother to read the blogs post or the arguments I make. They merely attack me because they don't like Monarchists not because they have valid arguments against it. 

And there are many valid arguments against the monarchy. They just don't have any valid to make against the last Dynasty so they go and try to generalize in all directions.

That's why I call their Republican approach intellectually dishonest and dogmatic. 

I merely try to look at the world around be and try to see how things have evolved in other countries be it Europe or Asia or the Arab World and try to draw the conclusions and lessons that best fit what I advocate for tomorrows Iran.

I never claimed we have to copy and paste any model ? I said we should be inspired by the model which best fits our country.

I happen to favor the type of monarchies which exist in Europe and Spain in particular. I never claimed Iran was either Spain nor the UK nor Holland nor Sweden.

I claimed that the European Monarchies are the ones which INSPIRE ME and to which I as an Iranian can relate to.

Others including you can advocate something else ... Who is stopping you to blog on what you feel is best fit to your view of the Monarchy for Iran ?

You don't like the Pahlavis or Don't consider RP as your Legitimate Sovereign ? Fine. 

Should I stop defending him as my sovereign just to please you or your like minds ? I won't.  

Now that you know it so why insist on asking me what you already know about my profound convictions ? 

I definitively relate more to Spain or England in relation to Iran than I do to France or the US.

I don't find it at all contradictory to live in a Republic yet Vote and aspire for my home country a system which is diametrically the opposite: a Monarchy.

Yet as I said I consider both Systems as Democratic:

Republic VS Monarchy In Style ...

But as an Iranian I don't find Republicanism as GENUINE to the Iranian political and historical Landscape.

Anyone who does ( and it's their right) cannot merely do it on "moral" or "moralistic" grounds like Massoud Kazemzadeh does by boasting that Republics are better than Monarchies but overlooking the fact that their own Republic they initially supported did not deliver better but rather worse.

The Exiled Iranian Jomhurykhah's Lesson On Democracy 

As such I challenge Iranian Republicans to GENUINELY stand up for what they believe in and offer their counter arguments not merely based on ideological differences but also in the balance of historical and moral accountability.

Iranian Republicanism ( Secular or Not) advocated the end of the Monarchy in the land of Cyrus the Great, Darius and Ferdowsi.

It's their right. But then they have to live up to that argument and accept that the Islamic Republic and the crimes it commited:

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: IRI's Reign of Terror Begins (BBC Report 1979) 

are the product or unfortunate Offsprings of their School of Thought as much as the SAVAK is the product or unfortunate Offspring of my school of thought. 

The French Republic is all the more GENUINE today in that they have been accountable for their past crimes. 

VIRTUE IN TERROR: Maximilien Robespierre and the Reign of Terror (BBC)

And being accountable is not merely admitting that they took place but offering the historical arguments as to why it couldn't have been otherwise.

Do you see Iranian Republicans do that ? I don't !

They merely wishfully speak about a hypothetical Future Iranian Republic of their dreams but based on what Legitimacy ?

Based on Secularism ? We already had that under the Monarchy and anyone who claims the contrary is a liar. 

Based on Social Freedoms ? We also had that under the Monarchy. 

The French don't go around claiming their revolution was "highjacked" ...

They assume their Contradictions:

REVOLUTION DEMYSTIFIED: Truth and Lies Surrounding the French Revolution

Where as the Iranian Jomhurykhah merely keeps blaming others:

COMPLAINING JOMHURYKHAH: What Have the Pahlavis EVER Done For Us ? ;0)

So my feud is not with Republicanism per se ...

I have a feud with Iranian Republicanism, and Iranian Republicans in the light of History in general.

All the more that many of them are writing in the international medias claiming to speak in the names of Iranian Democrats worldwide without having the intellectual honesty to claim that Republicanism is not the only form of democracy in the world. 

So yes I accuse the likes of Trita Parsi, Ramin Jahanbegloo, Mansur Farhang, Shirin Ebadi or Massoud Behnood or even the so called Green Reformists turned Secular overnight for their lack of accountability which makes any serious debate let alone "Hambasteghi" as some like to advocate impossible in my book.

It wouldn't stop me to shake hands with them but I wouldn't claim we belong to the same school of thought or that we pursue the same goals. To me they represent intellectual adversaries and in the Intellectual Arena I will fight them as a Gladiator would fight in an Arena. Except I try to use words and creative tools to demolish their arguments. 

What threat am I to them ?

Given that they have all the medias online, or on TV to defend their views beamed into Iran and across the Diaspora through satellite dishes to millions of Iranians they try to sell their ideas to and brainwash them with their Republican Propaganda.

I just have my blogs ! 

I never claimed I was Right !

I claimed that is what I believe in !

All the more that I am in addition accountable for the Shortcomings and accomplishments of the Monarchy as a system of government in a bid to see it implemented in my country but in a democratic framework. 

But I have the right to be opinionated as anyone else.

After all as a Constitutionalist I have been accountable for the past shortcomings of the System of government we advocate and for the Dynasty we support:

ROYAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Crown Prince Reza Praises Mossadegh's Patriotism (ANDISHEH TV)

ROYAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Crown Prince Reza on Torture During His Father's Rule

BITTER LESSONS: Sailors Convicted of Sabotage Face Firing Squad (1953)

Cyrus Amir-Mokri on Pros and Cons of 1906 Constitution 

So I don't see why I should accept to be lectured and reduced to the pejorative term of "Shahollahi" or "Eurotrash" merely because I have an original or different view than others on a system I wish to see implemented in my country ?

Nor do I see why I should not be allowed to challenge the same people who disagree with me for their own Constituencies Shortcomings when they don't hesitate to attack me on similar grounds ?

PSS: I hope This is the last time that I will have to owe you an explanation regarding my views and convictions.  I don't shy away from debates when they matter but I don't believe I owe an explanation each time you think it wise to quote one sentence out of context as you often do to make your point. Such exchanges are very time consuming and truly if after this you still don't understand my point of view then I truly don't see why I should engage in conversations with you in the future. I have no hard feelings towards you but I truly find these exchanges very time consuming and ultimately repetitious particularly when I have answered the same question several times.

PSS: I am all the more pissed that the effort I put in answering your recurrent questions has led me to 3 AM in the morning here and as a result I lost precious time I could have used to sleep. The least is to be appreciative to the effort. 

Funny thing about 1988, thats the date when

The UK restored full diplomatic relations with IRI, knowing all this of course.

need to have good records until something can be done

in Iran, when this illigitimate regime is gone.  The Boroumand foundation is doing the right thing to document the 1988 as well as other atrocities.

Darius

Despite the previous abuse which I apologised for - I have said- I find your blogs and assessment of history fascinating which is why I often leave comments. I wasn't intending to start a war of words again nor a debate. Just my own observations. You raise very good topical issues even though we seem to be at complete loggerheads.

Simorgh5555 Do you have Skype ?

To begin with it wasn't a European War it was a World War which cost the world 70 Million Lives WORLDWIDE of which only 200 were Iranian according to reliable historical statistics ...

Human losses by country

For which the IRI is absurdly demanding for war reparations:

VOA’s OFOGH: Abbas Milani & Majid Tafreshi On Iran’s Demands For WW2 Reparations

Whilst Denying that to others :

HOLOCAUST A MYTH: Michelle Renouf on Iranian SAHAR TV

I won't get into this Back and Fro Debate with you again unless there is some kind of Skype device on Iranian.com to allow a rapid exchange of views.

People can go through the link you provided and read my arguments (which you clearly don't even bother to read nor mention in it's entirety) and draw the conclusions they want.  

Otherwise as I said debating with you is simply not my cup of tea. 

I have adressed most of these issues many times and unambiguously and believe it or not I also started writing a response here but lost the entire content before even previewing it because I pressed the wrong Button which closed my Safari Navigator. 

This is the second time this happens in an exchange with you. Last time I lost my response was to answer what you wrote on my views on Niall Ferguson. 

I told you we don't have the same outlook on nearly anything. No matter which way you wish to look at it or twist it.

I maintain EVERY Word I wrote.

If my assessments frustrate you or confuse you ... Well What can I Say ?

Tant Pis ... 

Fawlty Towers - Don't mention the war.mpg

یاد جانباختگان کشتارهای سی ساله‌ی حاکمیت‌اسلامی را در خاوران گرا

 //www.etehadesocialistha.com/HTML/Election/24_8_09/Elamieh.htm

Darius Kadivar-Not so fast

Jeesh Daram and others who use Britain as a punching bag for all of Iran's ills is obviously irrational but his view point is not without some justification. You are down on the record as saying the occupation of Iran and the overthrow of Reza Shah the Great by the Allies after the second world war was "Unfortunate, illegal yet necessary".

 //iranian.com/main/news/2011/07/05/gallup-poll-u-s-jewish-support-obama-decline

It simply beggers belief how you can justify the removal of one of our greatest monarchs and modernisers as Iran necessary because of a war in Europe, which despite immensity had nothing to do with us.Not even replacing his son Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was enough to contain the damage done to the momentum of progress which owed its credit to Reza Shah. There is a pattern which is clearly not obvious to you that whenever Iran reaches its apex of power and progress sucas in in 1944 or 1979 the British play some part which is instrumental but not necessarily decisive in quashing it and turning the country back fifty years. The Iranians are clearly the architect of their own misfortunes but the Britsh know the Iranian psyche and have manipulated it in their national interest. 

Europe's war had nothing to do with us and Reza Shah had never supported the Axis power which was a lie by the British government to supplant the sovereign King. How you, as a monarchist, can call the occupation regardless of what was happening in Europe as 'necessary' is absolutely mind boggling especially as you call yourself a monachists and have ambitions of becoming a chamberlain to the restored 'Pahlavi' dynasty. The war had nothing to do with Iran and was not'necessary' for Iran.

As many people have observed you are too Eurocentric, which given your personal background is understandable. However, don't expect people to share your revisionist history by portraying the Pahlavis as some spin-off of a European Royal family- it never was. From your videos, you seem to be only interested in ceremony and pomp and for you that is the monarchy which you aspire to. 

Also for all your hatred of republics (after all you simply categorise people as republicans or monarchists), you owe your own measured success and your personal freedom of expression by living in the USA and France both of which are 'republics'.  Obviously, Iran's first attempt at establishing a republic has been a catastrophe and many of us, including me, would like to see a constitutional monarchy restored but for every one Iranian republic that has been a disaster then there have been one hundred and fourty years of profligate and utterly incompetent dynasties such as the Qajars. 

If Reza Shah had been the first President of Iran- as he wished- you would have had nothing but praise for republics.  

No Comments by ayatoilet1 or Jeesh Daram On the "Evil" British ?

"British" Would You Please Go Home? by Jeesh Daram

Recommended Blog:

UNIVERSAL LEGACY: UK Foreign Office Spokesman's speech on Cyrus The Great's Cylinder by Darius KADIVAR 

Love it, love it, and love it

This and other massacres done since 1979 must keep alive as long as these Muslim murder rulers are in power. Even after they are gone we should have Ashora style event to remind people what Islam brought to Iran, nothing but death, darkness, sadness and misery.

well i guess Hypocracy has no END, just like the depth of HELL !

~be an act of the knowing love~

My hat's off to Boroumand Foundation

Bring back dignity and justice for those who never stood a chance against this brutal regime!

ICC

The officials of the Islamist Rapist Republic (IRR), including its "reformists" will one day face justice at ICC, that day is not that far away.