Amir Parviz for secular monarchy

South Africa is not Iran.

It does't have 40 Trilion Dollars of Natural Gas Reserves, strategically it doae not block both China and Russia from the ebtire middle east and the worlds oceans.

World interest is for Iran different than south africa.

Mammad, Most of the income from oil royalty if you had any idea about the complexity of the business is from processing the crude, In the 90's the figure for the profit from 1 barrel of oil was around $1100, plastics etc, not the $20 clinton was paying for it. This is why it is a curse that we can not just negotiate away.

You are debating a point on a subject you know little about.  That's the most likely reason most of your family was against shah.  I would add ignorance to namak nashnass.  Because Ignorance is what gives rise to evil.  The Regime is Raping Iranians economically and in doing so securing its own future with the EU/Russia/China.  The west can't find a better regime to serve their neo-colonial interests.  For now America wants to use Nato to divide Iran up, but Nato won't give up the IRI as easily as the USA, Israel does not have the same influence on it's policies.

VPK

I posted the link a few months ago here on IC. I must find it among my old e-mails. As soon as I find it, I'll post it again. Zahedi said $40 billion, not $40 million.

Even if what you say about the apartheid regime is correct, that is not what that regime is known for. And the Shah did not act like De Klerk who saw the writings on the wall and opened up the system. The Shah dissolved all pretences to a multiparty system, founded the quasi-fascist Rastakhiz Party and, thus, was overthrown exactly 4 years later.

I repeat: The relevant question is: Why did the 1979 Revolution make a wrong turn?

Mammad

South Africa

Does indeed owe much of its advancement to the White colonists. It also owes it to Nelson Mandela. As well as the wise policies of De Klerk who allowed for a normal transition. 

If Mandela or De Klerk had been nuts South Africa would have been a disaster. In Iran Shah acted like De Klerk but Khomeini did not act like Mandela. Instead he acted like the vampire he was. Instead of peace brought war; misery and backwardness.

That is the difference of the two. A similar thing happened on Rhodesia. Where Mugabe brought misery; famine and disaster. A nation requires good leadership. South Africa had it for a long time except it only catered to whites. Now it caters to all its people.

Mamad 40 billion?

What I have heard is 40 million. Would you please document the 40 billion figure. 

Yeah, right!

100 years ago people were eating other people in South Africa. And, out of 100 years, 80 years were controlled by the apartheid regime. Today, South Africa is the most powerful nation in Africa and a worldwide influence. So, yes, South Africans owe that to a racist, anti-human regime!!!

Have you ever heard of anything called "jebr-e zaman?" Even in some of the poorest nations of Africa, ravaged by colonialism, there has been progress.

Namak nashnaas? You better come back with better arguments!! This is a serious debate, not your efaazaat after having a large dinner and a couple of drinks!

Mammad

Regarding Foriegn Media

I saw an interview of the Shah by Mike Wallace on youtube. Wallace was so rude and arrogant that frankly deserved a punch in the face. It was obvious he is out to trash the Shah. Now I have criticized the Shah also. 

But the way the smug; **hole Wallace treated the Shah had to be a wake up. Of course Shah disregarded it and see where he ended up. I would have walked out of the interview if someone treated me like that. And I am just a guy not a king!

There is no question in my mind that Western media was out to get him. They fresh from eating Nixon were out for more blood. BBC of course is the official organ of UK propaganda so no surprise there. Well so much for impartial Western media.

Mistake? What mistake?

Iranians NEVER make mistakes. It is always the other people's fault, like, errrr, yes like the British. Look at Mohammad Agha Sahimi's comment. Out of desparation he is taking refuge to the most discredited fiction writer of all times: Mohammad Gholi (zaminaye- baabaamo-reza-shah-gereft) Majd. I guess the former Mohammad Agha's professorship must be in the same league as the latter Mohammad Agha's doctorate.

Bahmani, take note.

I would say to all

of you, please wake up and view the reality of today, most of you even don't know what was the life in shah time.

you and I, all we have a  one problem and that is IRI and we all should concentrate on that.

please for those who still hate shah and still feeding old propeganda to public, stop the bullshit because facts are very clear. 40 billion dollar, some people don't know math and don't know how much was the oil then.

those who

claim they were 'well off and against the shah' must have been off their rocker!!!

without the pahlavis iran would be worse off than afghanistan!!! or somalia!

any semblance of modernism or progress was all due to the efforts of reza shah-

the namak-nashnaas iranians who enjoyed any little bit of freedom before the fiasco of 1979 owe it all to reza shah!  imagine if the akhoonds had taken over after the gajars! or if the bludering qajars had stayed in power!! where would iran be now!

and one last thing, I love the argument about the shah and the money he spent on advanced weapons!!!

what do you thing saved iran's ass when the arabs attacked us??? without those weapons, saddam would have captured shiraz!

give credit where it's due!! 

COP

Khomeini was a con job and the majority fell for it, from intellectuals all the way down to the common man. We needed a nationalistic figure to out-smart him and keep him in Paris for another year or so until things can be stabilized. But we didn’t have anybody like that. And meanwhile, Marxists and Tudeh were doing their thing.

Mammad is very correct in his first comment:

"So, the right question, in my opinion, is: Why did the Revolution made a wrong turn? "

This is a very relevant and timely question, worth it's own blog.

The rest of your comments amirparviz, come across as pure propaganda for monarchy, albeit, quite often, your arguments tend to turn strange turns, resembling propaganda of some sort on behalf of Islamist Regime. This has been pointed out to you by others on this site too.

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Faramarz, up early ay?

Right you are, but the mistake that I am talking about is to believe that anything good can come out of a religiously motivated - or hijacked - movement.

Iranians have put their trust in their religious so called leaders for too long, over 500 years, more or less. How could a nation be so naive to believe that these leeches would not look after only their own interest (and to some extent ideology) when the people (supposedly) gave them a carte blanche and practically a key to the coffers and eveything else in the nation.  

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

You are a propagandist, Amir Parviz

As I said, you constantly try to rewrite the history, a history that, except for a tiny minority, is settled.

1. Blaming the "mainstream media" for the fall of the Shah is absurd, to put it extremely politely. Yes, the oil price went up, but why don't you talk about all the weapons that the Shah bought with the oil money, and all the contracts that he was awarding to Germany, France and the U.S. to build 23 nuclear reactors in Iran by 1990, with 2 granted to Germany and 8 to the US in the initial phase? He was returning West's money that had been spent on higher oil prices. Plus, with the oil prices being higher, the Western oil companies were making billions more. All you have to do is looking at the balance sheet of the oil companies now. With oil around $100/bbl, their profit has gone through the roof. In short, the oil price being a factor is just a myth.

2. Ardeshir Zahedi, the Shah's former son-in-law and one of the closest confidant has said that the Shah's wealth when he left Iran was $40 billion [this is $40 billion in 1979]. The question is, how did the son of Reza Khan Savad Koohi, a dirt poor villager, amassed that much wealth?

3. Comparing Iran with the nineteen century Europe is ridiculous - I am sorry, I cannot find any other word. My thesis advisor - God bless his soul - once said, "Muhammad, never normalize yourself with zero." Normalizing with zero means dividing by zero. Any number, no matter small, when divided by zero will be infinity! That is exactly what you are doing.

4. The myth about Iran being this or that before the Pahlavis is just that, a myth. Only 14 years before the 1299 British-sponsored coup, Iran had a peaceful revolution and founded the first constitutional government in the entire Asia. Only 10 years before the coup, thousands died in the fights between forces of Mohammad Ali Shah and the constitutionalists to defeat his dictatorship. To advance, a nation needs first and foremost great leaders, and there were plenty before the Pahlavis, many of them murdered later by Reza Shah.

5. What the devil are you talking about? 25% royalty? When? Now?If now, you cannot be serious.

On the one hand we all say, "the VF regime has made $80-100 billion this year or last year from selling oil," and on the other hand we make claim about 25% royalty? $300 billion/year, instead of $900 billion? What are you talking about?

Let's do a simple calculation: On average Iran exports about 2.5 million bbl/day. Right now the average price for Iran's oil is around $90/bbl. On average a bbl of oil in Iran costs $6-7/bbl to produce. Deduct another $3 for other expenses, and so the net profit is about $80/bbl. This means $200 million/day. Multiply that by 365, and you get $73 billion, which is close to what we all say (because the oil prce is lower now). So, where is the 25% royalty?

6. What intellectual dishonesty? Reza Shah and his son did some good things for Iran, but way way way less than what people like you claim. I suggest you read "Great Britain & Reza Shah, the Plunder of Iran, 1921-1941" where the author brings out documents from the State Department's archives of that era, plus Britain's Foreign Office, to show what US and American Ambassadors where reporting to their government about Iran and the amount that Reza Shah was stealing.

There was, and there still is, not any misjudgement. There is no naivete. I was a university student in the 1970s. My family and I was had a very comfortable life. Yet, my entire family and relatives - save for a second cousin - were against the Shah. There was a reason! The REvolution itself was supported by a vast majority. Why?

To prevent future national failures we need to learn the history as it happened, not as the way we wish it had happened.

Mammad

Shah or no-Shah

Back in the late 70’s, the Iranian people were faced with an option, Shah, or no-Shah, and the majority of the population chose no-Shah. Now, how Khomeini got in the middle and did what he did is another issue.

My problem with the argument here is that it assumes that Shah would have lived for a long time and would have fixed all Iran’s ills if people would have stayed loyal to him.

Shah was a dying man when he left Iran in December of 1978 and passed away a year and a half later. With or without Khomeini, Shah would have been hospitalized in New York some time in 1980 and would have been brought to Iran to die at home later on that year.

Now imagine Iran of 1980, with a dying Shah, no democratic institutions, no mechanism to transition power, a weak Hoveyda, an 18-yr. old Reza in Texas learning how to fly, a nice but not strong Farah, armed MEK and Marxists on the streets going after Americans and on top of that Russians in Afghanistan to keep Najibullah in power.

A military coup, a Marxist takeover or a serious bloodshed would have been the end result. That’s why I place the blame squarely on his shoulders because as the person in charge, he did not do what he needed to do.

He just got on a plane and left.

Asked and answered

a long time ago.

The question that should be asked is:

Will Iranians ever learn from their mistakes and how many mistakes can we afford to make before "game is over"?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

amir....

I would not use the word, 'blame'

my point is that the shah could have handled things differently- that is a fact.

but your are of course right, that the iranians of that generation were sipping whiskey and cursing at the shah- and they fell for a semi-literate moron like khomeini!

I don't think the brave, educated youth of today would ever fall for an idiot like khomeini today.

bottom line, we all have our disagreements, but if we wan to free iran before we die- EVERYONE SHOULD COME TOGETHER WITH ONE GOAL- TO THROW THE AKHOONDS BACK INTO HELL, AND SAVE OUR VATAN- we can decide on the form of government, etc later

my wish is that the crimes of these butchers will be exposed- from cinema rex, to the last set of executions this week- the world needs to know you these animals really are! 

Responses of VPOK seems to me fair

for assessment of event in 1979 and removal of Pahlavi with Mollahs.

Great article with two quotations!

It would be more complete if we could add a third  quotation from Shahanshah Aryamehr the brave leader of the white revolution:

   " We have only one political party and that is  Hezbe-Rastakhiz , Those who are opposed to this system ,we shall give them their passports so they can get out !!!"

Responses

• Amirparviz: People inside Iran feel hopeless and afraid. They hate this regimes but are afraid of dong anything because of retaliation. You know what I maen. Rape; hanging; torture ...
• Amirparviz: People outside Iran are not united for reasons you see on IC. We still have people arguing about Mossadegh. There are many people with vested interest in the revolution. Mostly older people. To admit they made a mistake takes courage. It also means their greatest life accomplishment was for nothing. This specially applies to JM which built itself around worship of Mossadegh and hatred of Shah. Do you seriously expect them to come out and say "well it was a mistake": not gonna happen.
• Mammad: I agree it was not shining light but it was not darkness. It was in between and pretty good. My proof is that most of us would be living in Iran if the Pahlavi were still in charge in Iran. 

Mammad you put forward an interesting opinion

That the premise of Iran being Light before 1979 is wrong, certainly there are many that still agree with that thanks to the main stream media that unilaterally turned on the shah after the rise of oil prices he brought about.  Due to misreporting/propaganda he is still believed to have stolen billions and allowed torture etc. etc.

That opinion I would call the most extreme side of those that feel they made no mistake, and it is the root of the problem why Iranians will not Unite to fix their mistake and has them flailing in misery.

Don't make the mistake of comparing Iran and the Shah with heaven on earth and always finding them coming short.  To 1970's Western Europe he was lacking, but compared with 1870's Europe he was far far better.  Meanwhile he was bringing Iran out of the 12th century developmentally.

Compare Iran, with where it was at as a 3rd world country, illiterate, superstitious, backwards society, rapidly progressing and trying to get educated.  It was that kind of a society that defined the shahs period as darkness despite its true record.

Meanwhile, with great thanks to that opinion, which was not propogated originally within Iran but from out side, that today we have Iran receiving only 25% royalty on its own oil resources! 

Compared with 75% when Shah was in power.  IRI gets around $300 Billion a year from oil, not $900 Billion Iran would have got.  And it's that $600 Billion a year which adds up to more than $10 Trillion in todays money in only 33 years, why the Shah is where he is and the IRI are kept in place where they are, even with a concern of them getting nukes no one wants to remove them. 

To say Iran was not light, I feel is intellectual dishonesty, in light of where the shah was bringing iran from (backwardness) and under what other conditions he was coping with (the cold war & neocolonialism).

I also feel that there is a mixture of both pride and niavite that clouds our intellectuals judgement on this subject too, which makes them succeptible to manipulation. 

Pride-Iranians thought they could do a better job than the Shahs team for Iran.

Niavite-Iranans believe the free world wanted Iran to be a leading democracy (so Iran could charge them more for oil) as opposed to the truth, the west still doesn't want iran to be a functioning democracy.  

Shah was disingenuously judged by the west as dark in order to neo-colonialize Iran and iranians with all their character flaws and ignorance did very little to help themselves as they screamed for his death, which was really their own. 

Your premise is wrong

You say "we went from light into darkness." What light? A quasi-fascist regime like the Shah's was the light for you?

No, we did not leave the light. There was no light to begin with. We tried to get ourselves out of darkness - the reime of the Pahlavis - we threw out a dictatorship, but due to a variety of reasons - most of which had to do with what the Shah had done in the first place - the Revolution that had started so preomisingly, was hijacked.

So, the right question, in my opinion, is: Why did the Revolution made a wrong turn?

You keep trying to rewrite the history.

Mammad

shushtari it's good you are able to express Iranians FEELINGS

Many Iranians Feel that it was the Shah who Made a Mistake, it was his fault as the leader of Iran (especially people with a military background feel this way, but so do many people).  And so for this reason they feel that the Iranian people did nothing wrong and that of the 35 million of them from that period they were all right and just one person was wrong, the shah.

My view is that their feelings today are rooted in Blame and to a degree this is a good thing, because back then all these same people who were rebelling were doing it based on feelings of jealousy which is much much worse emotion to harbor.  So I feel Iranians have come a long way from being jealous people to being blamers.

However, it is still not enough to get us back towards restoring our freedom.  Blamers create their own sense of victimhood, they propogate the IRI.

We need to gradually rise above blame to a better place and that is raw ANGER, with a goal of getting back to LOVE.  I'll explain more on that later.

So the general direction of our mass has been

Jealousy ---> Blame ----> Anger (which will naturally happen once we can collectively let go of blame).

Without addressing your points for now, or explaining why this is blame, can you see what I am saying?

I agree with you,

the mass feels they made no mistake      Check

the mass feels it was the shahs fault       Check

they are trapped in blame      Check

no way out of their dilemma at this level of feeling     Check

amir

the answer is not simple, but I'll tell you what I think:

1. the shah did not want to spill blood, he left the country(which was a mistake, in my opinion)- the akhoonds will kill anything and everything to stay in power- in fact, they will burn iran to the ground, to stay in power!

2. khomeini had the backing of brits, carter, and french- there was a coordinated effort to demonize the shah and prop up the akhoond as a 'ghandi' figure! we don't have such an effort, they mullahs are giving away the oil for penny's and plundering iran and they have the backing of the blood sucking russians and chinese.

3. there is no real leader of an opposition- we need someone with cojones like reza shah- to set up a government in exile and actively challenge the akhoonds

there are many more reasons, but I think the mullahs have learned from the mistakes of the shah- and have created layers and layers of spies and agencies that watch one another and the people- unlike the shah's system where once he was gone, the army fell apart.

despite all this, the mullahs are definitely gonners- millions of youth who did not even enjoy any freedoms under the shah and who were born after this fiasco, absolutely hate the guts of the akhoonds and they want to be free, like the rest of the world!  all the bullets in the world can't stop such a force...

I just hope we live to go back and do something for our vatan!!! 

VPK, If thats true so why don't Iranians fix their mistake FIRST

and then go from there? 

You may think Iranians made a mistake, but too many iranians don't. The truthful answer to the question is NO, they do not feel they made a mistake.  I say this purely based on their actions today. 

Where is the OVERWHELMING UNITY to fix the mistake of 1979, of betraying the Shah? 

Many Iranians still won't unite behind Reza Pahlavi for a national referendum to have their say.

Instead their dialogue shows they are pursuing other agendas.  This shows they don't regret 1979 or they simply don't get it.

And to make matters worse they are incapable of feeling remorse, as if the faults in their character is not clear for the entire world to see.

Why is it we don't have any

Secular Republicans,

Religous Groups,

Marxists

Jepeh Melli etc etc

come out and say, we realize our mistake and we are united in having a National Referendum and will live with the result of the ballot box?

Re: My Question is did Iranians make a mistake

Yes

Pssssssssst

More than half my people have been born since 1979.

Can you make it up for them first?     peace out.........

Pssssssst

Let me make it up to you..................peace out..........