Amir Parviz for secular monarchy

Amir1973, don't take things personally

When you see dishonesty and unsubstantiated ideas put forth, appreciate that even lying is creativity although negative and harmful and that if one does not make their point of view honest they can never succeed long term.  It's just a loser, even though like IRI it can win short term.

Amir1973, don't take things personally

When you see dishonesty and unsubstantiated ideas put forth, appreciate that even lying is creativity although negative and harmful and that if one does not make their point of view honest they can never succeed long term.  It's just a loser, even though like IRI it can win short term.

AO that was concise and well articulated

You think such points would help a person correct their bias?

Or no, as individuals we inherently need our biases to doubt and think? 

Mammad - On political freedom

There was far more political freedom under the Shah in Iran that there is under the Islamic Republic. I will explain why.
Under the IR, the government is factionalized. There are various groups within the Islamic Republic who constantly quarrel among themselves and fight for power. This gives one the illusion of political freedom. But these entities are all followers of the same party line and do not dare criticize the basic elements of what is without question a fascist, dictatorial regime. Even Mousavi and Karoubi made sure to declare time and again that they believe in Velafay Faghih and the Islamic Republic. That is because the slightest hint of dissent from those dictatorial principles will cost you your life in Iran. There are virtually no opposition parties in Iran, authorized or unauthorized, that challenge the Islamic Republic. Moreover, not a single opposition person who challenges the Islamic Republic is allowed to set foot in Iran under the threat of being charged as "mihareb ba khoda" and being sent to the gallows.

By contrast, under the Shah there were various, well funded, well organized organization and parties that challenged the fundamentals of the monarchical system. Examples are, of course, Jebhe melli, Mojahedeen Khalgh, Toudeh, Cherik Fadaii, Fadaiyan Islam, and last, but not the least, various Mullah operated systems and personalities such as Montazeri, Taleghani, etc. These people were all in Iran and operating relatively freely. Sure, once a while they were harassed and arrested for a few day or months, but for the most parts, their organizations thrived without much of a hindrance by the largely impotent SAVAK. They had rganization, funding, strategy, meetings, literature, books, publications, announcements, etc.  Can you imagine anything like that taking place in today's Iran with a group that is opposed to the Islamic Republic?!!!  Virtually ALL of jebhe Melli personalities were in Iran under Shah's rule, the same with all of the other groups. In fact, the only one of these guys that I can think of who was outside of Iran was Khomeini, and that was a pretty light punishment thrown at him by the Shah. Can you imagine what would happen if a Khomeini like figure shows up in Iran today? He will be hanging from a crane in a heartbeat. So, respectfully, your statement is completely wrong. There was much more political freedom under the Shah than there is under the Islamic Republic.

maziar 58

Good points all of them specially about votes. Now the same people are brewing up a new batch. You will see calls for "democratic" votes on "self" determinnation. For all parts of Iran in order to break it up into tiny regions.

I hope whoever is in control tells the "self" determination advocates to *** it. We see how Bahrain people have "freedom" and "self" determination. With Saudi goons shooting anyone who opens their mouth. It is all tricks and I would just as soon see the central government say a big fat NO to any such calls. In addition demand back all the old regions including the "Republic of Azarbayjan". If they say no then let the Armenians loose on them to gobble up the whole place. 

Then negotiate with Armenia to get back 2/3 of the "Republic. And let the Armenians keep the other 1/3. Same for Kurdistan. Gobble up the Iraqi Kurdistan in return for protecting them from Turkish attacks. Incorporate the whole thing in Iran and add to it the areas of "Republic of Azarbayjan" populated by Kurds. How about a popular vote in southern Iraq if they want to join with Iran? Same for Bahrain and Northern Afghanistan. If the West don't like it: tough!

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy Jan

With all due respect and admitting I preferred Shah. Your claims are not quite right about political freedom:

• 
  No papers shut down: Are you joking? I remember my favorite paper Tofigh being regularly shut down. If you got out of line you got shut down. 

• 
  judiciary was independent of politics  Nonsense judiciary was completely in the pocket of politics. Rulings were done on basis of connections. The only time you got justice was when no one was "connected". 

• Media was not censored: Yes it was! There was official censorship as well as self censorship. Again everyone knew Shah was off limits. Plus if you got too out of line you got shut down. Books; movie and even songs were regularly banned.

Given all of this I still prefer the Shah. But I want to be fair. There was plenty of political repression. Just not enough to make it unbearable. And there was no social repression. You could pretty much do anything as long as it was not political.

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Are you really from khorasan? or is there another reason behind the name?

The name Veiled Prophet is a historical name. After "Moquanna" the inventor of the "Moon of Nakhjab".  A well documented figure. There is a very good account of him in the "History of Bukhara" translated into English by Professor Richard Frye. I admired him from the day I heard about him in school back in Iran. He is a very interesting man; generations ahead of his time. He embodied how science could be used to create miracles. Plus he was a true symbol of resistance against Arabs.

I myself am a mixture of parts from: Khorasan; Lor; Azarbayjan and god knows what else :-) Born in Tehran.

Sorry chaps! I live by GMT and not by PDT :))

Just have time for couple of brief replies to couple of questions:

Amir Parviz:

I alongside our prime minister, Mr Cameron, condemn any ill treatment of the detainess by the Brirish army.

And yes I DO support British style (and British inspired) constitutional monarchy for Iran in all situations.  Our Iranian-American republicans are simply delusional for every system of governance when it comes to Iran/Middle East turns into a semi-monarchical and even a hereditary system. I say why not having the real McCoy?

Mohmmad Agha Sahimi:

"And, for your information, Mohammad Agha was in the U.S. when the revolution started. He never was in any demonstrations. He did support the revolution - and he still believes in the legitimacy of the revolution itself - because like millions of others he thought that the revolution will bring a democratic republic."

And so were Ibrahaim Yazdi, Sadegh Ghotb Zadeh, Mostafa Chamran and Mohsen Sazegara etc. Their only differece with you Mohammad Agha was that they finished their "studies" and jumped on the band wagon much earlier than you did. By the time you arrived on the scene, the party was over - LOL.

Also,

"There has to be a benefit for an opportunist, before you call that person an opportunist. "

I said "crass" opportunist old boy (as opposed to "subtle"). Look it up old chap.

Mammad you're entitled to your opinion

though that one was so far out, it was going to get challenged.  I feel it is not truthful, give me any source that can agree with such a view and their reasoning if you can not provide it, I am at least interested to know the thinking behind it. 

I admit I think it was the most out there comment ever on IC. Injustices today in the political realm are incalculably more today.

At least the old system can claim the excessive hold on power, was for a reason and benefitted many many more people, what is the benefit of IRI monopoly on power.

I don't believe I am even writing about this subject right now...

My view that you are brainwashed is not because your opinion is different its because I see on this sub topic you brought up..... as a fact that the IRI is a pure tyranny i.e. not serving iranians, no questions. 

And that is not how most of us living in Iran personally experienced the adminstration of the shahs time.

one after another

did the peoples had any parts in it ? you bet BUT that really didn't count for the part where the rullers were able to do all the cutting and sewing without anyone really being able to do or say any thing ;like recent history of ghajars giving away all of our northern territories to the tzars with 2 aahd nameh,and even during the good time of pahlavi giving away part of our territory and in both cases the west was encouraging us the TAJJADOD or show us your civilized !!

 like drawing a contract and have it signed by all parties involved and witness included (thats how turkman &golestan -chais) were taken away the northern states from us and later on the same tajaddod trick! pulled late shah's hand to accept a fair and democratic vote to have Bahrain taken away from us .

and again have the regim changed under the fals pretense of lack of total freedom and..

the naalin aaba government promised a greater freedom and free.......

and again Iranian fell victim .

* short story THE PEOPLES are here to stay and the Rullers are coming and going.

Maziar

O Professor,

I didn't claim to discover anything new in making a simple, self-evident observation that you are an adherent of a vicious and worthless political ideology that has caused tens of thousands of Iranians to be executed. Your politics is the stuff of filth and garbage, and your unsubstantiated claims are dishonest to the core (e.g. Iranians are enjoying greater political freedoms since the advent of the IRI in 1979 -- sure, whatever you say Professor). Unfortunately for you, this is America not the IRI, and your rubbish will not go unchallenged. Cheers!

Mammad I think political freedom was far more during shahs time

No papers shut down,

foreign media channels could freely visit the country and publish their work

no journalists were in jail

university professors were not picked by regime,

judiciary was independent of politics

No 500 plus executions a year to regime opponents under doctored up charges

Media was not sensored

Fear is much worse with these guys,

People say to me you can not express yourself in anyway politically

Society is regressing because political freedom is worse, not because it is better, these issue are all political in dimension.

The Respectful way to address my views is

pro constitutional monarchy.

Amir Parviz

You seem to believe that unless people are brainwashed, they will agree with you, or must do so. Now, some people may think that such a statement is by itself a manifestation of who the real brainwashed is, so I would be cautious in what I say if I were you.

Moreover, if you want people like me to continue commenting on your writings, you should set aside such languages, and statements such as "you do not know anything about." But, of course, if your goal in posting blogs here is to attract bah bah va chah chah, well, that is another story. You should declare it, so that people like me do not waste their time.

Mammad

AM1973

You have not discovered anything new. These have been my positions ever since I began commenting here. I am not here to please you or anyone else for that matter, but express my opinion. Live with it if you want to continue exchanges. If, however, your goal is to put down people like me, khialist baatel. I will continue expressing my opinion, and will not not look over my should because of you and your dogholoo! Politics is not popularity contest!

Mammad

Shushtari

You seem to be far closer to being a Bacheh Akhoond than I can ever be. You have run out of logical response, not that you had any to begin with! So, each time you open your mouth - or type and click - you demonstrate your true nature by using insulting words. That is so typical of a bacheh akhoond.

Mammad

GR

No I did not mean to imply that there was any political freedom during the Shah. But, our resident Shahollahi, Amir Parviz, is trying to see that to us, so it was in that sense that I used the word.

Mammad

this is my last response to our

resident bache akhoond:

whatever you and your family went through that makes you hate the pahlavis is your own business....but your feeble attempts to downplay their contributions don't fly, here or anywhere else for that matter.

you've got your opions and I've got mine, that's it......just don't try to rewrite history and insult others.

the majority of iranians 'mesl e sag pasheemoonand' for what their parents did to their country.....there was no wrong turn, just plain ignorance and sheer brainwashing......now go to sleep 

VPK question.

Are you really from khorasan? or is there another reason behind the name?

The Professor Speaks...

not everyone that operates within this system is a fascist

The Prime Minister of the IRI during the 8 years in recent Iranian history (1981-1989) which saw the most fanatical application of violence by the state against its own citizens and who is to this day an intensely loyal devotee of the founder and Leader of the IRI is NOT a fascist. But Moh'd Reza Pahlavi WAS a semi-, quasi-fascist. Okay, good to know. 

As terrible as the VF regime is, there is still far more POLITICAL (note, I say political) freedom today in Iran than there ever was during the Shah after the 1953 coup.  

In other words, the fact that the entire spectrum of non-Khomeinist political groupings inside of Iran (monarchists, liberals, secular nationalists, National Front, Fadaiyan, Mojahedin, Tudeh, etc, etc) have been either executed, assassinated, imprisoned, driven into exile or severely intimidated is an indication of the fact that there is more POLITICAL (to borrow the Professor's ALLCAPS) freedom in the IRI than there was under the Shah. The reason that the IRI has managed to do something that the Shah never did, i.e. totally destroy all organized non-Khomeinist opposition groupings for all intents and purposes through a policy of executions unseen under the Shah, is the truest measure of the greater degree of POLITICAL freedom under the IRI. Again, good to know.

Rahmaian, Mammad is just pure anti-monarchist it's not his fault

If I believed the same things he did, I'd be in the same situaton.  He's been so brainwashed he quotes me as a propagandist, you aren't going to take the deeply embedded lies from his mind by asking him to explain, he'll take his feelings to his grave, no one can help him.

The comment you quoted by mammad is so insincere, especially with all the papers shut down, foreign media channels blocked, true political prisoners created, journalists in jail, university professors picked by regime, judiciary not even allowing lawyers, 500 plus executions a year, etc etc.  what to say to such a comment?????

Sure Shah had many people called political prisoners, though they were the result of the cold war and many were terrorists.  Otherwse not a single one of those things I described were done even by the shah!

By the way Rahmanian, how about your input regarding my discussion of the politics of oil, in
the last few posts.  Would you vote for a constitutional monarchy?

Mammad, Qestions!

Here's what you wrote: "As terrible as the VF regime is, there is still far more POLITICAL (note, I say political) freedom today in Iran than there ever was during the Shah after the 1953 coup. This is not the first time I say this (before you jump and say ahaa!). This is not because those in power want to give the people freedom but because people, by paying a heavy price, have earned it." Although I do not appreciate such comparisons, since you have used the the comparative, "more" in this case, I assume you are implying that political freedom did exist before the revolution of '79 under the Shah. So, I would like to ask the following: 1. Do you believe there was political freedom under the rule of the Shah? 2. Can you give examples of such political freedom. 3. Can you give examples of the political freedom that exists under IR? 

Anglophile and Afshinazad,

How about you, upon reflection of the seriousness of our situation due to the politics of oil and the forces we face in terms of foreign exploitation and the power they have compared to us, would you be in favor of a constitutional monarchy?

Hey sister Yolanda, where are you?

How about your input regarding my discussion of the politics of oil, in the last few posts.  Would you vote for a constitutional monarchy?

Responses II

• Amirparviz: Yes well of course I would support a restoration of the monarchy
• Mammad: There may have been some signs of hope in the initial parts of the revolution. But it was all gone by the way Khomeini mismanaged it and Bazargan refused to take responsibility.

When you bring down a regime you got a responsibility to make a new one. Neither Khomeini nor Bazargan were up to it. Thus went the disaster of leaving the fate of a nation in the hands of children. A bunch of college kids without wisdom or brains.

Anahid, vildemouse, VPK, Amir1973, Soosan K, Shushtari

Moving along, since we know many Iranian people do not feel they made a mistake in 1979.

This last post of mine explaining the world of today, can you see why I support openly the system of a constitutional monarchy for Iran for now, brought about by a national referendum to restore Irans Freedom and Independence?

Vildemose here is a book with oil secrets in it

//www.scribd.com/doc/63434141/9/ENRICO-MATTEI...

Right now there are alot of lies on line by major news papers to keep their own people in the dark about neocolonal policies, they kill anything that comes in their way.  And have full control of misinforming using the media and congress.

The 10 trillion or so they are eating off Iran is Nothing if you compare the entire middle east, people should not know the real reason bush went into Iraq, a measly 2 trillion dollar investment will give them a 1000% return in 25 years, even though on the surface and on paper us companies got no contracts, they got everything they wanted from the companies the contracts went to.

They know the power of propaganda and so they have adjusted their style of business to be able to say the us oil companies no longer control 85% of the worlds oil as they do it all under the table.

Sadly if they win in libya and Egypt both major oil exporters then the new contracts will not be as good as the ones the so called dictators were getting after years of renegotiation and struggle, for their people.

They are ruthless.  The Arab spring is only orchestrated in oil economy strategic locations, the oil companies have the money to pay the cia to make sure they get the muslim brotherhood groups trained and heavily armed and backed by nato to finish the job against these dictators, hence democracy is their tool for manipulating first their own people and then the other people of poor countries to getting their way.

They can own democracies as they are corruptible, in a way that monarchies are not.  Thats the down side with their project for us, what good is it if the people are given the ability to choose and elect leaders if the choices are based on coercion(military superiority) manipulation and deceit.

God bless the Shah, his people were deceived and have no vision what the core issues than are against them economically are, or the tools they employ to control resources in their favor.

Amirparviz, I also saw standards of living of those around me

going up but some were still against the shah because of what happened in 1332.  i had classmates and teachers who had strong feelings against  shah. i saw some books being banned and then excitement of revolution. too young to analyze events too much. 

Anahid what did you experience for yourself?

My experience of the revolution was not a good one, the approach of first hating the shah as a person was being widely spread by many, the attacks were personal and trashing, I remember all the people aroud me openly saying things like once we get rid of this guy lets see what we can get a hold of, there is alot in this for us we'll do great.

Funny thing was that everyone was already doing great around us, all had good paying jobs etc and every few years our standard of living would keep jumping consistently.

I miss the balal on the road to shomal on days we would go to the beach, I miss the box of cherry and hendoneh you could could buy fresh from the farms and how nice was laboo...

I remember getting caught up in the mess and leaving afterwards as things started quickly turning south because khomeini the lier had to pay back his real supporters, which I discovered later on were not the people, but the media that had manufactured the revolution in part, because Iranians myself included were very suggestable and trusting.

These days some of us say we want nato to help us or the usa and sadly they just don't get it, they are good places to live but look at what they did to Africa when slave labor and raw materials for Europe were the key to the economy, now that has changed to 1st oil and 2nd weapons sales.  People that want war to remove IRI are clueless, we have all the people we need to get the job done in Iran and we don't need outside help, just politcal cover.  We are missing one thing and thats Unity, our disunity is rooted in the way they removed the shah in the past through betrayal and I think this entire post and our comments prove that to be the case.

1979 was no freak accident, neither was 2011 libya, egypt or tunis as the media reported.  They have been planning and organizing the muslim brotherhood for years now and the NGO's behind them.

 AMirparviz: Thanks. What

 AMirparviz: Thanks. What a tragic turn of events.

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt

Thanks Amirparviz for your comment addressed to me

I am glad that at least I was in Iran during those sensitive years. certain events that I saw with my own eyes, I can be sure of.