Anglophile

Iranians are still widely respected, IRI is not

Big difference !

@First Am., not all foreigners call Iran "eye-ran", far from it. You must've been to wrong places.

Yes, Iranians were classified as "White" in Apartheid regime.

Yes, you heard that right. Because of Shah's smart leadership Iranians were classified as "White" in Apartheid regime in South Africa. The same principal was in Rhodezia. Iranian students could register their names in the schools of white Europeans, but the other people such as Indians had to travel 50 miles out of the city to go school. As a result of this classification, one Iranian from South of Iran with dark complexion,  but with Iranian passport could travel in South Africa, without restriction.  He/she could received full previlege of European counter part, but Inidans, Pakistani, or Arabs with light complexion were treated as a2nd or 3rd class citizen in S.A.

The other nation who were classified as an "honorable white" was Japanesse. They were received full previlege of White European counter part because of their progressive and their modern country. Because Japanesse standard of living met the criteria of modern and progressive society, the apartheid regime classified them as "honorable white".

Please let me know what part of this historical fact appears as a vague so I explain it further.

P.S

Rhodezia change it's name to Zimbobwee in june 1979

"(Iranians were classified as a "white")"

I am sorry............I have no time for you........

During shah days, Iranians were respected around the world. ...

Unlike these days that internationally community look at Iranians like a "terrorist" or "piece dirt", during shah days, as a restult of shah's smart leadership Iranians were well respected around the world including communist country.

Leonoid Brezhnev was congragulate our shah every year during Norooz. Even though Iranian couldn't travel to USSR,but they were respected as a result of "Hamzistee mosalemat ameez". That was respect. First amendment probably didn't know that.

No need to mention that Iranians were not required to get a visa for entry to U.K in those days. Just take a ticket and jump into the plane and several hours later land in London airport. That was respect, First Amendment probably didn't know that.

NO need to mentioned that our shah had a great relationship with General De Gaulle. Because of their friendship,  Iranians were viewed as civilized and prosperous people in the eyes of French people. They repected Iranians once they came across from them. Frist Amendment probably didn't know that.  

No need to say that Richard Nixon introduced Shah of Iran as "friend of U.S" on T.V . The tape is still available. As a result of that,  U.S embassy in Tehran were willing to issue long term visa to Iranians. Americans were happy to see them in U.S. Older generation who were living in U.S can testify this fact. That was respect. First amendament probably didn't know that.

No need to mention that shah was warmly welcomed in Romania in 1973. In those days Romania was communist country. Our shah received honorable doctora degree from the hands of Romanian president. That was respect.  First Amendament probably didn't know that.

No need to mention that in the most evil country such as Apartheid regime in South Africa Iranians were classified as a "white". Unlike pakistanis, Indians and Arabs, Iranians  could travel everywhere without restriction. Iranians were receiving full previlege of European counter part. That was respect. First amendment probably didn't know that.

The list goes on please take a look at my previous write up here.

IRAN, DAYS OF GLORY

please let me know if you have any question.

Sincerely,

Siavash

"During shah days, Iranians were well respected"

Not true...........I lived then[dead now? :)) ], and I circled around this planet.......visited many many places, and met a lot of ordinary and not-so-ordinary folks...........half of my time was wasted on correcting their eye-ran for Iran........and telling them some lies, such as " no, no.......we have a parliament too"..............

During shah days, Iranians were well respected, not under Mullah

It is funny some people don't want to see the simple fact that Iranians were well respected when shah was on power. On the other hand, Iranians were looked down upon them when mullahs took power. What part of this discussion is vague and NOT understandable. Please any one with rational mind explain it for me. 

During shah days, even in the most racist, fascist ....(you name it) or rather in any country on the face of the earth, Iranians had high social status, but during mullahs, even in the most democratic, progressive counties such as U.S and U.K, Iranians were looked down like a dirt bags. International community look at Iranians like terrorists or homeless gang such as Palestinains. This is crystal clear. I am just curious to know what part of this relates to be politically bankrupt? Anyone who doesn't understand the differences between these 2 era in our history,please let me know so I explain further.   

وجه اشتراک ساواکیها و کهریزکیها!

نه تنها اهل فنّ متوجه این موضوع میشوند که ساواکیها از آزار و تحقیر جنسی‌ برای در هم شکستن زندانیان سیاسی استفاده میکردند، همانگونه که کهریزکیها راه آنها را ادامه دادند، بلکه متوجه متلک‌های شوونیستی کارگزاران ساواک و حزب‌اللهی‌های کهریزک در این مورد نیز میشوند!

همانگونه که بارها به کرّات آشکار شده، هر بار که طرفداران سلطنت فاسد پهلوی لب به سخن باز میکنند، شباهت چهره کریه خود و آن رژیم را با حزب‌اللهی‌ها و رژیم جنایتکار اسلامی بیشتر نمایان میکنند!

ساواک بر چاپ و توزیع ویرایش های مختلف حافظ نظارت داشت

خصوصا اگر این ویرایش توسط مخالفان  نظیر  شاملو و امثالهم انجام گرفته بود.

اهل فن " میدانند که سلطنت طلبان چیزی جز مشتی فاشیست نیستند."

گمانم حافظ هم ساواکی بوده!!

شکوه داشته دستش به جوانان زلف دراز نمی‌‌رسیده:

اگر به زلف دراز تو دست ما نرسد

گناه بخت پریشان و دست کوته ماست

اهل فنّ متوجه منظورم هستند (لام الف لام) 

The monarchists' political bankruptcy!

Indeed, this has been the longest conversation I've ever had about a family member with someone who has never met them! But then again, the Shahollahi crowd are so desperate and politically bankrupt that not only do they want to limit the right of those who don't share their views to move freely (which is one of the basic human rights), but to turn that into a reason to justify the lack of human rights and basic liberties under rule of Pahlavis.

More pathetic is taking pride in the fact that a now-defunct, fascist, racist apartheid system of South Africa supposedly exempted the now-defunct, despotic Pahlavi regime from its draconian racist sagregation rules. What an honour for a desperate, pathetic crowd!

When the illiterati compliment each other!

The most comical part of any Mossadeghollahi gathering, online or otherwise, is when they keep reaffirming each other's falsehoods and lame logic and give a pat on each other's back for "teaching those monarchists a lesson!!"

Funnier is when the gathering is conjoined by members of the Gauche Caviar (aka Champaigne Marxists). Our CommuMossaghollahis define their own terms and conditions and in their small world they become literati!!

They give Aramesh Doostar's "dinkhooei" its full meaning. 

Keep us amused Dinkhooyan.

LOL 

So when monarchist join the Nazi's march in Sweden, they're

putting their money where their mouth is?

Or are monarchists putting swastika where it really belongs, on their arms.

As Parham points out, not only you'll never understand what Democracy, rule of people, and freedome to chose means. You will also never understand what Workers' Movements means: It means the movement throughout the world. As long as you're active in the movement to improve working condition of the working people, you belong to that movement.

monarchists however have always belonged to the Facist movement, as they just recently proved by joining the Nazi crowd in Sweden.

They'll just never understand the concept of democracy....

... and that's all it is! End of the line.

Yes, Marx wrote his manifesto in heart of capitalism..so what?

The whole idea of Marxism is from European and western scholars. So what? The communist block was Utopia of our lefts. Is there anyone arguing with that? . Albania, China was role model of Maoist people and Soviet and easter block was the Mecca of Tudeh and fadaeyan (majority). Did anyone of these hypocrite migrated to their Mecca once revolution hit the country? No, none of them. They all choose "Free World" which was the same decision shah made on his 3 days staying in Rome in 1953. That is just simple and plain as it can be. I don't understand why some people just don't get it.

At least mullahs do the same thing they speak of it. Put your money where your mouth is. Even they write a will to be buried in a place close to Imam or Sahra Baghi. My Grand father who was wealthy and could offord wrote a will to be buried in Iraq close to Imam Hossain or Hassan. This is true believer and do what they believe.  Mullahs spend a lot of money to go to Haj or to go to Syria as a pilgrims.They love their idea of Islam and they show it in reality. NOT like some hypocrites who speak highly of Fidel Castro and Cuba, but they are not willing to live under that regime even one day.  

Luis Korvalan was the head of the Chili communist party. Once the coup occued (1973) he was detained by Pinocheh forces. Later he was exchanged with another prisoner in Soviet Union. He went to Soviet Union and lived there the rest of his life. That is true believer.  

Parham's logic.....LOL

"you could be on the left (as you could today) and live in other European countries" Parham

We have beautiful expression in that regard in Farsi.

مرگ چیزی خوبیه برای بچه همسایه

نه‌ برای بچه‌های من

Parham jan, these "experts" of world history don't understand

In today's world there's no "East" and "West." It's global. One unit, for all. According to World System school of thought, it has ALWAYS been like this.

Besides the fact that May 1st was born in the United States of America: Chicago 1886.

The Paris Commune, the blue print for everyone in the workers' movement, since 1871, was not created in Moscow or Beijing, it happenedin Paris. The "Occupy Movement" is only the latest chapter of this global phenomenon.

For some odd reason....

... Shahollahis believe deeply in the notion that if you were a leftist way back, you had to go study in the Soviet Union or in the Eastern Block to prove you were not fake! A number of people actually did immigrate to the USSR, but for some odd reason none of them ever really thinks that you could be on the left (as you could today) and live in other European countries! Heck, France had a communist party, and none of them wanted to immigrate to the Soviet Block as far as I know! Switzerland's Socialist party is one of the strongest parties in this country today. This is also the case in so many other European countries, such as Germany, Sweden, Italy,...
It was only in the US that the left was persecuted by McCarthy and the word "socialist" took the pejorative form that it obviously still holds today.
So no, "left" does not mean "Soviet Union"!

:Hypocrisy is what I meant Mr. Arjomand

I was trying to show you those who were critical of shah did the same thing shah did long time ago. He took the side with "free world" and your brother and people like him who were critical of shah did the same thing...taking side with Free world. Look your brother didn't apply for Moscow or Benjin University, but May be (I am saying may be)  he was talking highly of "reds". I don't know. I am just mentioning about hypocrites. Those who say don't drink starbuck because it belong to jews and at the same time they had starbuck coffee for their breakfast. Hypocrisy is what is I am talking about. Those are new form of Mirza Aghasi who back stabbed our people and put us in this mess. Did you read my comment about Milani? I thought I made it clear over there.

As a teenager I was curious about those who were in shah's administration, so I dig into it in those days. All those people were highly educated and smart. They were all possessed PH.D with high G.P.A from accredible university. That's why our country progressed. You look at that administration the same way you're looking at mullahs who can't even control their body odors. In conclusion, you're saying they are both the same. Both regime shah and mullahs are the same. Another example is : During shah's days Iranians were well respected everywhere. During mullahs days Iranians were treated like a piece a dirt. They were looked upon as homeless, poor nation such as Palestinians. To you this treatment and the other treatment are the same. To respect you or speaking highly of you is the same as treat you like a piece a dirt. They are both the same in your eyes. shah and mullahs are the same in your book.

    That shows very poor judgement, but I think  you're smart man and you have good judgement . The issue is something else. I think I have pointed out to you before. Hope you do something about it.

Re university applications!

Shirzadegan/Siavash..., What is your point? My brother applied for half a dozen universities, including Leeds. Does that mean he went to England? Besides, as I mentioned before, what is it to you anyway? Even if he did, why would he have needed your permission to do so? Are you the king (or queen!) of England?! Where in the UK laws require a political inquisition for attending school there? 

You are one desperate individual with little to say and too much time to waste on banalities! Wake up... Shah and his regime are dead and rotting in the wastelands of history! That means it would be humanly impossible for you or your likes to revive Savak, let alone extend its inquisitive activities to other counties. Then, why do you make believe that you could?!

P.S. You claim to have a good memory. So, why don't you put it to good use and find something positive to do with your time instead of sitting around and trying to find dirty laundry on other people?!  

Lie after lies caused the revolution happened....

 "Did you remove the bit about the Leeds U? Now, whose the liar (sincerely?)?! " Arj

There was a discussion between you and Vield prophet of khorasan. I also pointed out the fact that Iranians during shah's days didn't need a visa to U.K . In that comment also I mentioned in Aparthied regime in South Africa because of shah's smart leadership, Iranians were classified as "white". Unlike Indians, Arabs and pakistani who were restricted in their mobility and couldn't hang out in downtown Cape town, etc, Iranians didn't have that restriction. For U.K Iranians Just needed to take a ticktet and get on the plane, few hours later they would be in London airport. Inidans, Chinesse, pak, Arabs should have stayed in line in the front of Brits embassy to get a visa, but that was not the case for Iranians.

    In respond you said that your brother applied to Leeds university , but they asked him visa. Now, if you are not satisfy with the answer,  please let me know I will dig into the record and copy and paste it for you. As I said before, I have a sharp memory and I remember every conversation took place here on I.C.  

My intention of bring all these lies relates to the fact how these small lies leaded to the current mess. We can disuss more, please just let me know, I will explain further.

Thanks,

Siavash

Re mosht nemuneh kharvar...

My friend Zendanin, indeed we should be thankful to these individuals for exposing the flip side of the coin which the likes of Dariush Homayoun and RP have been trying so hard to erase from our national memeory! These clueless, vindictive Shahollahis expose the uncanny similarities of the modus operandi of Savak and Sarbazan'e Gomnam-e Emam Zaman!

Much like the Hezbollahis and Basijis, Shahollahis and Saltanat Talabs wnat to eliminate those who do not think like them and dare to chose a path other than the one their regime and their fuhrer (Shah/Emam) set for them! It's amazing to see that at this day and age, there actually are monarchists who still use the logic (or lackthereof) and lingo of the Basij and Hezbollah to villify dissent -- "Kharabkari" in Savaki lingo and "Fetnehgri" in Basiji terms!

You'd think that after all these years, passage of more than three decades and considering all the changes the world has gone through, these individuals might  have learned a thing or two about freedom of speech and democracy. But no way, not the Pahlavi worshippers, they stick to their story and hold HIM, "Alahazrat" the "Ariamehr" one infallible being whose words and deeds mean to them as what Koran and Hadis do to Hezbollahis!

That is why, still after the turn of yet another century, these creatures want to hold the exclusive right to tell people what books to read and what not! How is that any different from what Hezbollah is doing in Iran under IRI?! A 19 year old being arrested for reading a book, interrogated and tortured, is something casual and normal to them, as long as it's done by Savak not by Basij! Heck, they even match their Basiji counterparts in blaming the victim for the wrongdoings -- as if university students owe these thugs for their storming of campuses and snatching them away! A dispotic A-hole sitting on top of people's shoulders, hand-picking the members of parliament and selecting goverments on their behalf is fine so long as it's Shah, not Khamenei/Khomeini!

They even, while praising RP for "championing HR," regret that they didn't have the chance back in 1979 to massacre the leftists and Melli-Mazhabis (basically anybody but supporters of Pahlavis) in the same blog that supposedly supports RP's "stand for HR" and a bid to implicate Khamenei for breaching the same rights! Isn't that ironic?!

Indeed, as if this bunch are frozen in time and don't want to open their eyes to the reality that Shah's regime has been toppled for over three decades now, it has joined the history and collecting dust. Yet, they still seek revenge as if anything can bring that regime back! They refuse to wake up and instead do their best not to repaeat the mistakes of the past (as a nation, not just as the supporters or opponents of pahlavis) and make things right for the sake of Iran's future. No one dnies the fact that perpetuation of the Islamic regime is detrimental to future of Iran. But, using that as an excuse to whit-ewash the Pahlavi regime is equally as detrimental, for it helps this regime to dominate our nation for the foreseeable future due to lack of unity and by casting doubts on existence of a democratic alternative!  

--------------------------------------------

Shirzadegan/Siavash..., Did you remove the bit about the Leeds U? Now, whose the liar (sincerely?)?!

Public perception in 70's

It was fashinable to talk against shah in public back in 70's. That would have given imagine of being "intellectual" to the public. If some one was not against shah, he/she would have been marked as "uneducated".This technique is still being used by Fossile of those people on this site. Educated people should be against shah and monarchy. Unfortunately such a sick mentality and peer pressure created a army of 2 faces people in our socity back in 70's.. They were admiring and following western culture in their heart, but bad mouthing westerners and shah for being their follower or admirable of that culture. This troop of 2 faces (hypocrits) people were the main forces in toppling monarchy and creating such a mess that we are dealing with right now. They were using colorful words such as imperialism.... socialism ... mazadism and thousands koft o zahre mar without even knowning the true meaning of these words.

  Why did they do that?

   because to show to the public they were "intellectual" and "smart". If in Iran's history we had MIRZA AGHASI back stabbing our people, we had these idiots who were backstabbing our people in 70's. Their attire was copy of western attire such as suit and tie or long hair (which is western values) and their mouth was pro Mao, Marx or Lenin. They were bad mouthing western world as Imperialism but their passport had a stamp of U.K and U.S. They were critical of shah for being pro west or his decision in 28 mordad for being on side of "Free world", but they were copying exactly what he did in 28 mordad. They were critical of him, but they follow him and his decision. 

   Abbas Milani is one of the vivid example of this crowd. Apparently he was detained by Savak sometime for teaching Marx and Lenin materials in the university. Guess what happened when revolution occured? Did he go to Cuba?, China?, Albania?, USSR? or Mossadeq type of democratic government such as DDR? No, none of the above. He settled in U.S. He settled in the heart of imperialism. The same thing he was fighting all his life. He took the side with Imperialism. Forget all maxist idea and those societies which was created by mao, Marx and Lenin's idea. Not only that, if shah married 3 times with middle eatern women, Abbas Milani married an American women. He even went furthure than shah as far as affiliation with "western world" concerned. So what happened to all those fighting with imperialism or those colorful words?

 yes, "Death is good for next door neighbor child" as it said in Farsi.

We have plenty of these back stabbers on this site. They still trying to use the same tehnique... "being "educated" means being against monarchy". But it doesn't work anymore because people saw their deceitful technique for last 33 years.

 Unforturnately no one ever wirte something about this crowd who were new form of Mirza Aghasi. If Mirza Aghasi getting paid for back stabbing our people, this crowd were doing the same job free of charge. 2 faces coward who used lies and false propapnda to put our people in such a disaster.  

BTW,

   I was teenager when revolution happened, so unlike some idiots who think pro-monarchy means being geriatric I am still young and energetic with a sharp memory. I wish I was older when that mess happened so I could have some role in the future of Iran.

مشت نمونه ی خروار

فرهنگ گفتاری و سطح اطلاعاتی طیف منفور سلطنت طلبان سواد کوهی (منتسب به "پهلوی") بیشتر از هر چیز گواهی این است که چرا مردم ایران بر علیه حکومت فاسد و جانی آنان قیام
کردند. و هنوز پس از ۳۳ سال این طیف منفور منزوی نه تنها از اشتباهات خویش هیچ یاد نگرفته است، بلکه با پی روی از همان "فرهنگ" و منش ساواکی، رستاخیزی فقط به دنبال فرصتی برای یک بار دیگر از پشت خنجر زدن به مردم ایران میباشد.

Re WTF?!

Shirzadegan/Siavash..., any attempt at a reasonable exchange with you is like trying to engage a 5 year old in a political debate! What is your point in all of this?! why are you obssessed with my life, age, interests, and those of my family? Are you a Savaki? If you are, then no wonder why Savak dropped the ball so badly in 1979 -- because of people like you! If you're not, then what is this obsessiion of yours with my personal life?! You even stink at getting simple facts together and/or doing basic math! I had decided not to engage in any serious arguments with you, but you seem to be clueless on so many levels that I just point but just a few here:

1. I never said my brother went to Leeds U. or even any other school in England. Where did you get that? Show me where and when? Perhaps the old age is catching up with you and messing with your memory! Just like toddlers with limited attention span, you miss the main point and fixate on whether or not my brother had long hair?! Besides, even if my brother went to school in England, what is it to you? Would he have needed youe permission to do so? Why would he have needed to go to the USSR? What do you know about him? How do you know if he was a Marxist? Just because he was caught by Savak holding a book? In that case, half the 19-20 year old university students all over the world, including England, should've been shipped to the USSR!

Moreover, not all Marxists were pro-USSR, for many were actually against the Soviet system! How do you even know how my brother turned out -- a revolutionary, or perhaps a Savak collaborator? So, without even knowing the smallest thing about him, you speculate that he had bad-mouthed the Savak agents when being arrested for reading a book?! Even if he did, why shouldn't he? Was it against any law to read a book? Ironically, that is in most part the core of the charges against most students that are arrested under IRI by the Basij and hezbollahis (possessing banned books and resisting arrest or "tashvivh-e azhan-e omumi...)! What is it with despotic regimes and books that they are scared $!#less of?!

2. Being 9 in the beginning of the revoultion (that's early 1978 in Christian calendar, 1356 in ours), one would turn 11 (depending on the date and month of birth of the individual, which I'm not going to to disclose to you since I'm under no obligation to do so!) after the revolution, starting in March 1979 in Christian calendar (1358 in our calendar). I can't see what your beef is here... and what does that have to do with joining "kharabkaran?!" Are you out of your mind? A 6 year old joining "Kharabkaran?" Again, when and where did I say that?

3. Evidently, you have too much time on your hands, and/or are pathologically obsessed with certain commenters on IC. Otherwise, why would a meaniangless exchange of banalities that I might have had with another poster (Anglo?) here a few months back be of such an importance to you, so that it's been etched in your mind? For all I care, I'm not an authority in fashion, but if Anglo(?) says so, I take the compliment! :->

...

Arj, you lying metrosexual!

Mr. Arj and his contradiction statements

Dear Mr. Arj.

In one occasion you said that you were 9 years old when revolution happened. In another blog you clearly said no, you were 11 years old when revolution happened.

Now, in one blog from a lady who was asking public : what you were doing in 1974 as far as torture or imprisonment by Savak concerned. Year 1974, you were 6 years old.

    You responded it was the year of terror. Your brother with shoulder length hair was dragged by hair by police officer. (most likely he bad mouth arresting police officer which leaded to dragging him by his long hair). This incident appeared to you as a torture by shah and Savask.  Your father was advising family, never talk to anyone....it was a year of horror in the family.  

    At the age of 6 you felt the terror in the country and dream of joining one of those "Kharabkaran" such as Puyan or Seyahkal group.  

In another occasion you claimed you don't know anyting about fashion and Anglophile brought a document that showed you were talking about Goregio Armani and their products a week before that claim.

Did you say anti Pahlavi people are liars?

Sincerely,

Siavash

دوست ارجمند آقای ارجمند

دوست ارجمند آقای ارجمند

از شما بعد است که اینگونه صحبت کنید.

مثله اینکه کمال همنشینی دوست بی‌‌ ادب آقای

عینک در شما تأثیر عمیق گذشته.

من هیچگاه در صدد تررو شخصیّت خانوادی شما

را نداشته ام. آنچه که شما از خانواده تان نوشته آید

من فقط تکرار کردم. همین. مثلا شما باز گو کردید که

برادر شما موی بلندی داشت که افسر پلیس به خاطر افکار چپ موی بلند او را  کشید و در

جایی‌ دگری گفتید که او تقاضائ ثبت نام در دانشگاه لید در انگلستان را کرد.

از یگترف او چپ بود و از طرف دیگر حاضر به رفتن به کشورهای کمونیست را اصلا

نداشت. مثل مش قاسم در این سایت که همه عمر در کانادا زندگی‌ می‌کرد و هیچ حضر نبود

که یک روز در کوبا زندگی‌ کند ولی‌ همیشه از کوبا، فیدل کاسترو  تعریف‌های آنچنانی‌ می‌کرد.

این امر دود رویی باعث وضع کنونی‌ شد

باعث خنده است که این اشخاص از طرفی‌ از شاه به خاطر علاقه او به

کشور‌های غربی ایراد میگرفتند ولی‌ در عمل همان راهی را میرفتند

که شاه انتخاب کرده بود

.

ارتتمند،

سیاوش 

قهر قهر تا روز قیامت

Thanks for the laugh Parham joon!  

One gone, who's next please?

LOL 

توجه توجه

از آنجا که جناب نوکر اینگیلیسا دیگر چیزی برای گفتن بجز ”موش بخوردت”، ”خوب شد شاه یه بیت شعر به شما یاد داد” (که در واقع باید میگفت مصراع)، ”سلام به ابوی برسان” و از این قبیل متلکهای خنک معمولاً منتصب به شخصیت شخیص قمر خانوم ندارد (که صد البته خود جوابی بجز ”قربون مامان جونت بری” نمیتوانند داشته باشند)، بدینوسیله اعلام میشود که از پاسخگوئی به این سریش بی استعمال تا اطلاع ثانوی خودداری میگردد. باشد که شاید بتواند حرفی بغیر از مفت گویی برای استفاده خارجی حضار داشته باشد.
والاهی یحب المتجاسرین
ایرانیان دات کام، امرداد ۱۳۹۱

میانه روی راستین‌ یا مصلحتی؟

دوست گرامی‌ زندانیان، به قول مثل قدیمی‌ فارسی: "لاف در دیار غربت همچون گوز در بازار مسگر هاست!" این در واقع شرح حال امثال آقای همایون است که در بازنشستگی به یاد میانه روی و دفاع از دموکراسی‌ می‌افتند! البته کتمان پذیر نیست که ایشان از شاه اللهی‌های معمول همه روز به میزان متنابهی باهوشتر بودند و در نتیجه میدانستند که برای تبلیغ سلطنت چاره‌ای جز در پیش گرفتن ژست میانه روی و همگامی با اصول دموکراسی‌ نیست. 

حال اینکه در حقیقت این رفتار، گفتار و کردار افراد در مصدر کار است که به مواضع‌شان اعتبار می‌بخشد، نه الزاماً ادعا‌هایشان در خارج از گردونه قدرت! امثال داریوش همایون سالها در خدمت دستگاه‌های رژیم دیکتاتوری شاه شلنگ تخته انداختند ولی‌ هیچگاه حتی سخنی هر چند مختصر در تقابل با دیکتاتوری به زبان نیاوردند، چه رسد به دفاع از دموکراسی‌! اتفاقا، ایشان زمانی‌ که وزیر اطلاعات اواخر دوران پهلوی بودند، در خطابه‌ای فرمایشی برای معترضین خط و نشان کشیده و آنها را به سکوت فراخوانده و تهدید کرده بود که در غیر اینصورت از مشت اهنین برای ساکت کردنشان استفاده خواهد شد! پس به احتمال فراوان، اگر ایشان بر فرض محال دوباره به اریکه قدرت برمی‌گشت، دوباره هوادار استفاده از مشت آهنین میشد، نه‌ به دلیل میل باطنی ایشان، بلکه در گیر و دار بودن با یک نظام غیر دمکراتیک چاره ای جز استفاده از مشت آهنین باقی‌ نمیگذارد!

امثال ایشان و سلطنت طلبهای دیگر که به گونه طعنه آوری از عنوان مشروطه خواه عاریه میگیرند، تنها چیزی که برایشان مطرح نبود خود نهاد مشروطه (که مکانیزمی برای محدودیت قدرت و اختیارات شاه بود) بود، وگرنه در ۳۷ سالی‌ که محمد رضا شاه مشروطه را به تمسخر گرفته بود، دست به همکاری با او (آن هم به عنوان مسئول تبلیغات) نمی‌زد، حال بیان اعتراض جای خود دارد!

نه تنها همایون، بلکه هیچ سلطنتطلب دیگری را نمی‌توان میانه رو و یا هوادار دموکراسی‌ دانست تا زمانیکه آنها نه تنها جنایات و نقض حقوق بشر توسط رژیم پهلوی را محکوم نمیکنند، بلکه همواره به لاپوشانی و ماستمالی کردن این جنایات پرداخته و می‌پردازند. یک نمونه از این لاپوشانیها توجیه قتل و شکنجه زندانیان سیاسی در اوین توسط ساواک است که توجیه آنها اینست که آنهایی که در زمان شاه اعدام و شکنجه شدند کمونیست بوده اند که حقشان بوده! در حالیکه در وحله نخست، همه آنها کمونیست نبودند، و دوما، گیرم که کمونیست بودند، آیا صرف کمونیست بودن جرم و مستلزم شکنجه و اعدام است؟ همین خود بیانگر نگرش این دار و دسته در رابطه با رعایت حقوق و یا حتا قابلیت تحمل دگر اندیشان است!

----------------------------------------------------

سیاوش/شیرزادگن

از آنجائیکه شما اصول گفتمان متمدنانه را رعایت نمیکنی‌ (نمونه اش ترور شخصیت افراد خانواده من بدون آنکه حتا کوچک‌ترین چیزی راجع به آنها بدانی ‌ست!) من هیچ انگیزه‌ای برای تبادل نظر با شما را ندارم! موفق باشی‌