The American Republic's Hypocrisy for Iranians and for Muslims.


The American Republic's Hypocrisy for Iranians and for Muslims.
by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy


It's always important you consider the motives of those you listen to.

Do you Remember the widespread accusations that SAVAK was routinely Torturing People.  Those allegations certainly had a motive and Iranians are paying for believing them today. While some cases had occured, they were done without the knowledge of superiors and unlawfully, people involved were charged and lost their positions.  Hypocritically, the systematic and widespread torture of hundreds of humans has come to light from the very group of "better thans" that accused SAVAK of acting unlawfully.

The "Better thans", namely "America" used to have a magical meaning for Iranians and people all over the world, but things have changed.


It's so Ironic that the country which backed Khomeini and worked hard at removing the Shah, managed to convince Iranians that it was human rights they were so concerned about.


Americans were not unaware of propaganda and quite happily deployed such techniques in realizing their agenda to deceive and manipulate Iranians. All in the name of "Democracy" and "Human Rights", didn't anyone ever stop to ask if they even had these working for themselves?

Their Legacy has been already eched in the stone that their history is being written.

GITMO Isn't closed and may never be, because human rights are a relative thing for Americans in practice.

When Carter implemented America's new policy of "get your filthy persian hands off my oil" it was with the full knowledge that human rights only mattered for some and especially not Iranians, which by his actions he considered to be like animals. 

So what is the American Story of Today regarding Torture in Guantanamo prison?

On Jan 7, 2011, President Obama signed the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill
which contains provisions preventing the transfer of Guantánamo
prisoners to the mainland or to other foreign countries, and thus
effectively stops the closure of the detention facility.  Didn't he pretend to want to shut it down?  


Supporters of controversial techniques have declared that certain protections of the Third Geneva Convention do not apply to al-Qaeda or Taliban fighters, claiming that Article III of the Geneva convention[34] only applies to uniformed soldiers and guerrillas who wear distinctive insignia, bear arms openly, and abide by the rules of war. Jim Phillips of The Heritage Foundation has said that "some of these terrorists who are not recognized as soldiers don't deserve to be treated as soldiers."[35]
Critics of U.S. policy say the government has violated the Conventions
in attempting to create a distinction between "prisoners of war" and
"illegal combatants."[36][37] Amnesty International has called the situation "a human rights scandal" in a series of reports.[38]

One of the allegations of abuse at the camp is the abuse of the religion of the detainees.[39][40][41][42][43][44]
The U.S. government has claimed that they respect all religious and
cultural sensitivities. However, prisoners released from the camp have
alleged that abuse of religion including flushing the Qur'an down the toilet,
defacing the Qur'an, writing comments and remarks on the Qur'an,
tearing pages out of the Qur'an and denying detainees a copy of the
Qur'an[citation needed]. These allegations were highlighted by Pakistani politician Imran Khan.
Some of these abuses have been seen as emblematic of the whole military
leadership's approach toward treatment of the prisoners while others
argue that many abuses are performed and directed on an individual level
with severe disciplinary repercussions if discovered. One of the
justifications offered for the continued detention of Mesut Sen, during his Administrative Review Board hearing, was:[45]

"Emerging as a leader, the detainee has been leading the detainees
around him in prayer. The detainees listen to him speak and follow his
actions during prayer."

Red Cross inspectors and released detainees have alleged acts of torture,[46][47] including sleep deprivation, beatings and locking in confined and cold cells. Human rights groups argue that indefinite detention constitutes torture.[who?]

The use of Guantánamo Bay as a military prison has drawn criticism from human rights organizations and others, who cite reports that detainees have been tortured[48]
or otherwise poorly treated. Supporters of the detention argue that
trial review of detentions has never been afforded to prisoners of war,
and that it is reasonable for enemy combatants to be detained until the
cessation of hostilities.

The dental care of Guantanamo Bay detainees is good, according to the United States Department of Defense.[citation needed]

[edit] Prisoner complaints

Three British Muslim prisoners, now known in the media as the "Tipton Three", were released in 2004 without charge. The three have alleged ongoing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution being committed by U.S. forces at Guantánamo Bay.[49] Former Guantanamo detainee Mehdi Ghezali
was freed without charge on July 9, 2004, after two and a half years
internment. Ghezali has claimed that he was the victim of repeated
torture. Omar Deghayes alleges he was blinded by pepper spray during his detention.[50] Juma Al Dossary claims he was interrogated hundreds of times, beaten, tortured with broken glass, barbed wire, burning cigarettes, and sexual assaults.[51] David Hicks also made allegations of torture and mistreatment in Guantánamo Bay, but as part of his plea bargain Hicks withdrew the allegations.

An Associated Press report claims that some detainees were turned over to the U.S. by Afghan tribesmen in return for cash bounties[52] The first Denbeaux study
reproduces copies of several of leaflets, flyers and posters the U.S.
Government distributed to advertise the bounty program; some of which
offered bounties of "millions of dollars."[53]

Forced feeding accusations by hunger-striking detainees began in the
fall of 2005: "Detainees said large feeding tubes were forcibly shoved
up their noses and down into their stomachs, with guards using the same
tubes from one patient to another. The detainees say no sedatives were
provided during these procedures, which they allege took place in front
of U.S. physicians, including the head of the prison hospital."[54][55]
"A hunger striking detainee at Guantánamo Bay wants a judge to order
the removal of his feeding tube so he can be allowed to die, one of his
lawyers has said."[56]
Within a few weeks, the Department of Defense "extended an invitation
to United Nations Special Rapporteurs to visit detention facilities at
Guantanamo Bay Naval Station."[57][58]
This was rejected by the U.N. considering the restrictions "that [the]
three human rights officials invited to Guantánamo Bay wouldn't be
allowed to conduct private interviews" with prisoners.[59] Simultaneously, media reports ensued surrounding the question of prisoner treatment.[60][61][62] "District Court Judge Gladys Kessler also ordered the U.S. government to give medical records going back a week before such feedings take place."[63]
In early November 2005, the U.S. suddenly accelerated, for unknown
reasons, the rate of prisoner release, but this was unsustained.[64][65][66][67]

In 2005, it was reported that sexual methods were allegedly used by female interrogators to break Muslim prisoners.[68]

In a leaked 2007 cable, a State Department official requested an
interview of a released Libyan national complaining of an arm disability
and tooth loss that happened during his detainment and interrogations.[69]

From Wikileaks, By March 2003, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had been waterboarded at least 183 times by the CIA.[18]

It's truly depressing to reflect that Iranians were mostly deceived and manipulated into betraying their king and destroying their own country, by people who act this way and have frieds that they support like the Governmet of Israel "the middle easts only democracy" which engages in similar activities. 

So what do you say to Iranians who are still hoping that the USA will be the friend of Iranians and help achieve their freedom and even ask for their military support?

Does this sound like a Free Country to YOU?  Just because we can openly discuss these crimes, exactly the way we used to in Iran when we used to allege the Shah was committing torture on us. 

Are these acts what the people want?

Please Reflect a little on Freedom, the Next time you drive around in America.  Also stop to think how good Iranians used to have it before the Shah was forced to leave Iran.




Recently by amirparvizforsecularmonarchyCommentsDate
The Wests Mission Accomplished in Iran, Iraq and Libya. Now Syria. Part 2. (4 parts)
Nov 29, 2012
Nov 22, 2012
Let Us Unite, With Humanity.
Nov 10, 2012
more from amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

RB I would not say the US was solely responsible,

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

I also include the british, the french and the germans.  :)

When it comes to hypocritics it's dishonest to leave anyone out.

: )

Of course I don't point fault at the Shah or Iranians who were deceived.

If a person goes into a store and steals items, do you immediately think of blaming the store owner for his faults in not protecting the store, thats blaming the victim of the crime, just ridiculous upon reflection.

When it comes to slavery, do you really blame the slaves?  

How intellecually honest is that RB?

Blaming the victims of the policy, the slaves, is just unfair in my opinion .

Or do you rightly point fault at the vastly more powerful side that made
slavery the law of the land, used its military to impose its policy and
enslaved people that were black/negro.

You sound very desperate by using the personal responsibility card in the case of the shah and iranians in the 1970's when one reflects on the immense coercion and deceit used by vastly superior forces.  In
Irans case you are blaming the victim of disasterous and cruel policies
intended to roll back the democratic process, but reading your comments
elsewhere looks like no one has clued you in.

The only way to cure ignorance is either knowledge or discusson with people actually implementing policy, my starting point for you on your journey would be here. //

One day you may even thank me, that is if the truth ever becomes an important component for you in developing your conscience.



SK jaan

by Reality-Bites on

I totally understand your points and agree with many of them. Like you, I always try to stand for human rights regardless of who the victims are.

I was and remain totally opposed the philosophy and disastrous policies of the US Neo-cons, with the Iraq invasion and its aftermath being the prime example (though seeing Saddam fall was great). The US should indeed be condemned for hypocrisy in many areas. I'll also add its support for the brutal military juntas of South and Central America in the 1970s and 80s to the list.

However, what I try to do is judge US's actions on a case by case basis and each case on its own merits. There are also some decent things that the US has done. And the reason why I posted my view on this blog is that I think the author, due to his belief that the US was solely responsible for the fall of the Shah and that Shah himself was blameless (at least based on what I've read of his views), is extrapolating US misdeeds in Guantanamo to also make a sweeping case that US is anti-Muslim full stop. It seems that he blames the US for almost everything. 

As much a critic of the US as I'm in many areas, I don't believe that is either accurate, or that simple.


SAVAK was routinely torturing

by Mammad on

the political prisoners. In your attempt to rewrite the history, you now deny some facts that even some of the most ardent Pahlavi chi have accepted in the past?


Soosan Khanoom

Dear Bavafa, You and RB

by Soosan Khanoom on

are actually among a few who get it on this site ..... 

I was just explaining it further and especially for those who commented here... 

: )  


SK: no apology needed

by Bavafa on

You are not going to get any disagreement from me regarding your general sentiments about US foreign policy specially towards 3rd world counties. I believe my views have been expressed previously and rather clear on that subject.

But I also don't find a great contradiction in what RB said to point out that all things considered, (paraphrasing here) Muslim don't have it as bad here as many if not all other places. Specially that he opened his argument in agreement and with abhorrent feeling regarding the treatment of prisoners in GITMO.

so maybe I get it afterall :)

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 


Soosan Khanoom

I am sorry Bavafa

by Soosan Khanoom on

I just asked you a question and I did not mean to be rude to you.  

Things that are happening in the Guantánamo Bay are against human rights.  It does not matter who are those prisoners.  This is regardless of their religion and their ideologies.   Those prisoners are accused  ( with no rights to a real lawyer to even defend that accusation) of being the " Enemy of the state " ....... Something that we do not see happening on the U.S soil and to the American citizens. 

Now, Why should  talking about that place make anyone to say : 

" OK ....  but muslims are happy inside the U.S " 

What this has to do with a U.S citizen who is living inside the U.S enjoying the domestic policy under the flame of statue of liberty ?  

These Neo-cons will bug anyone who is against their foreign policy, GITMO, etc and to do so one does not need to be a muslim. They just use the word muslim as a label cause they have run out of sticky labels. They are using it to the point that they even call the liberal's atheists a muslim. Not just any muslim but radical muslims only because they are questioning their policies. 

I have had enough of these shits we call politics and I am not going to talk politics anymore, at least for now .....

need a break !! 



SK: Not always but I have a feeling...

by Bavafa on

you are going to make me khar fahm 

Aren't you?

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 



Sad Update from bbc today, on CIA Rendition Details.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Aviation logs and other records were exposed by lawsuits and European parliamentary inquiries, and investigative accounts have traced patterns of some planes used in the flights.

In 2007 alone, the Council of Europe estimated that more than 1,000 CIA-operated flights passed over the continent.

Several European nations have been accused of co-operating by
hosting secret CIA prisons or allowing CIA flights carrying the
prisoners to use airports on their way to other countries.

In 2008, the UK admitted that CIA rendition flights had
refuelled on the British overseas territory of Diego Garcia in the
Indian Ocean.

Two years later, Prime Minister David Cameron set up a
"judge-led" inquiry to look at claims that UK security services were
complicit in the torture of terror suspects.


The magnitude of these programs is mind boggling and truly depressing.

Even with Obama the injustice continues, stopping it was never an available choice for people, based on results it was just a way to manipulate people to participate politically on one side versus another. 

We are told if you don't like one leader, say obama, just choose another, but we are not taught or explained by anyone that the Republican model actually doesn't provide you with the choices you think it does.

Many intellectuals are ignorant about their ability to chose in a Republic. 

Something more to reflect on, The hypocrisy is that a Republican system provides us with a choice based on manipulation, deceit and coercion so that when we get the candidate that says he will stop these injustices, we are infact cheated as it just continues and his actions do not match his words. 

Yes we can remove him, but ultimately the key is we are powerless to change crimes.  Now compare to Irans monarchy, where systematic, widespread crimes were NOT going on, and nothing close to the scale we see here.

For the complete article //



Atheist Muslims....LOL

by Cost-of-Progress on

That's funny - an oxymoron, of course. Kind of like Islamic Democracy.....The right wing nutcase of the US will be its own demise. Just listen to the new cowboy redneck on the presidential candidate block: Rick Perry. He resonates with a lot of folks on the far right.

I bet he'll be nominated to run against the black guy.




Soosan Khanoom

Bavafa you do not get it ? Do you?

by Soosan Khanoom on

Bavafa you do not get it ? Do you?



Dear R-B: Well said...

by Bavafa on

You did not leave any thing out to be added in a fair and unprejudiced comment

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 


Soosan Khanoom


by Soosan Khanoom on

There is a huge difference between U.S foreign policy and its domestic policy. You do not have to be a muslim to see the difference. There were some other times, not too long ago, that the so called enemies were among other group of people.

I certainly hope that U.S domestic policy stretches out a bit to cover its foreign policy and, for sure, I do not want to see the opposite happens.  But those who are influencing U.S foreign policy are working non stop to make sure the opposite happens. 

I do not even understand your argument here. You think people say these things because they are muslims. No wonder why Newt Gingrich thinks the liberal leftists and atheists of the U.S are radical muslims or eventually will be.  It is so funny to see our own intellectuals are falling for this crap. 

Either you guys should stand for justice everywhere or basically no where ....  

Newt Gingrich's Grandchildren Will Be Ruled By Atheist Muslims 





A bit of balance wouldn't go amiss!

by Reality-Bites on

No doubt the US government deserves condemnation for many things that have taken place at Guantanamo. This has definitely hurt US's image and its stance on supposedly being on the side of Human Rights.


Despite Guantanamo and the general rhetoric about "Islamophobia" in America, what is the reality of life for Muslim diaspora in the States?

Overall, how are Muslims treated in the US? What percentage of Muslims who live there, believe they are persecuted purely for being Muslims? Is alleged discrimination against Muslims and "Islamophobia" written into American Law?

And if things are so bad, why are there so many millions of Muslims that have chosen to live in the US and many millions more (including those that forever slam the US for being anti-Muslim) who would join those already in America, given half a chance?

What about the hypocrisy of those Muslims that live in the US and continually criticize it for being anti-Muslim?

My point? Yes, by all means condemn the US for its hypocrisy in many areas (including its support for dictatorial regime like Saudi, Arabia while preaching democracy elsewhere), but to base the entire US approach to Muslims on Guantanamo, is simplistic generalisation. 


 FG: I doubt ver much that

by vildemose on

 FG: I doubt ver much that this author is either secular or a monarchit (read, Islamist khomeinist)

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt


Disinformation from Al Queda or from right-wing monarchist?

by FG on

The "secular" monarchy proposes is "secular" only in the sense that Hitler's regime was secular.   That is, what he seems to offer is a monarch who is not a cleric but who is as dictatorial as Khamenei.   The tipoff to his attitude and intentions can be seen in his blaming all problems on foreigners--a trait shared with Khamenei's regime and every other fallen dictator or those in the process.   Foreigners are blamed for all domestic problems and are behind all popular discontent.

The truth is that the Shah, like the Mullah, created his own problems.   A lying Khamenei, knowing what appeals to western liberals, spread details (accurate) of Savak's crimes but pretended to stand for something different.

I also find it strange that an advocate of dictatorial "secular" monarchy would pass along Al Queda's lies about throwing Koran in the toilet at Guantanamo.  Isn't it strange that an advocate of secular rule should give no much attention to Al Queda's alleged grievances?  

As Khamenei lied to get power, so does Al Queda.  Using such lies to achieve "worthwhile" goals is standard among power-seeking clerics everywhere.

Whatever the case, it's obvious this guy doesn't want one thing for Iranians--personal and political freedom, human rights and democracy.  What he offers is more of the same--the replacement of one rotten system with another.  Iranians have already been there, done that.



Soosan Khanoom

It is a Jungle out there

by Soosan Khanoom on

Only those who are in power are the ruler of this Jungle. Those who have guns and money and no shame at all.....can kill , can imprison, can torture and get away with it and oh they have a terrorist list too ...

When you sell your soul to the devil, you don't have to worry about anything.  Zombie or not. 

Dick Cheney: One Year As a Walking Zombie



We are purposely comparing The US Republic & Irans Monarchy

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Under the Shah here bushtheliberator.

Why don't you ask Mehdi Karoubi, who was at war with the Shah's Administration and held in Jail for supporting people that were killing Iranians how he was treated to get an idea of the differences between these two governments.  Watch him discuss his own experiences in jail with others.

Maybe you'd like to ask Abbas Milani who was also at war with the Shah's Adminstration and member of a marxist group that had killed Iranian Police using terror tactics how he was treated in the Jails of the Shah before the revolution.He has explained what he went through in man places, then compare it with the Republic of the USA.  It's laughable what Iranians used to say about the Shah upon a little reflection.

Both these people discuss their predicament, not as Absolutes but with an eye towards setting the record straight.  Neither were tortured or held indefinetly by the government.  Even the Head of the MeK who had personally ordered killings was released by the Shah. Focus on the advantage of doing a comparison for yourself.

Think USA today, then Think Iran 1970's and tell me with a straight face that the USA is "better than" Iran was in the past with the Shah. 

What I am encouraging people to do is to read this and try a simple exercise and slowly test their ability to reflect and do comparisons.  It's easy, try it, then feel free to express the great loss our nation, Iran, has endured since 1979 in your own wise words.



Absolutes are as comfy as an easy chair on the sideline,

by bushtheliberator on

But the USA is at war,and nothing exposes the relative nature of human rights more clearly than blood, and trumpets.

VicePrez Dick Cheney is on his " I dunked them once, and I'd dunk them again " book tour,,,;Obama's  "close Gitmo" was just another sop to the Lefties. But I find both men quite charming relative to the folks we're at war with.



Soosan Khanoom


by Soosan Khanoom on

U.S does not practice what it preaches ... 

Thanks for the info on the Guantánamo Bay ! 


I enjoyed reading it

by iamfine on

Well written and yes " human rights are a relative thing for Americans in practice" 


Did you read this blog?

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on


Any comments how to fix it?



by Tabarzin on

As always, well put!