Top 10 questions that a Leftist does not have an answer for!


Farhad Kashani
by Farhad Kashani

Here are 10 questions that pro Fascism leftist loonies do not ever have an answer for! Asking these questions will immediately end the conversation with them. Through years of conversing with them, besides the fact that I find them absolutely lost and sadly brainwashed, I never got a decent answer, and actually in most occasions, any answer to the following:

1- According to all reputable neutral international organizations such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch and U.N, IRI has one of the worst records in political, social and economic freedoms, execution rates, freedom of speech, and others. What is your comment on these accusations? Do you think these are conspiracies? If so, why do you think the world is always united in conspiracies against IRI?

2- If IRI wants respect and international recognition, shouldn’t they earn it, instead of bullying others to get it? IRI’s official state ideology claims that all non-Muslims are pretty much doomed and are on this planet to be converted to Islam since Islam is the greatest thing ever happened to mankind, how come IRI earn respect like that?

3- Why is it OK for the U.S to establish relations with savage regimes such as the IRI, but you chastise it for establishing relations with some less-democratic countries during the cold war which they solely did to unite efforts against Communism, not to intentionally oppress the people of those countries?

4- What justifies the irrational obsession that IRI and you guys have with Israel? Please explain what has Israel done to Iran, the people, to deserve this horrible treatment?

5- Is it OK to justify genocide, human rights violations and oppression in some anti American nations in the name of Anti Americanism?

6- We haven’t been under direct foreign occupation since the Moghol invasion (except a brief period during WWII), although during colonial times, some foreign powers aggressively meddled in our affairs. Why have countries like India who have been under horrific occupation for centuries have advanced but we haven’t? And we still blame our shortages on foreign intervention? Is occupation worse than meddling in internal affairs of another nation?

7- Communism and Socialism have failed miserably. What justifies us trying them again?

8- How do you define “extremism”? What are the signs of an “extremist”? Is anyone who opposes tyranny reflected in the IRI regime, an “extremist”?

9- Why is it OK to criticize all religions except Islam? Following up on that, does any criticism of Islam constitutes “Islamophonbia”?

10- Should there be a clear difference between the people of Iran and the government of IRI? Or should the Iranian people pay the price for any IRI’s mistake? If not, do you still justify a differentiation?

11- Here’s a bonus question: does sticking your head in the sand and calling it “political correctness” so no one’s feeling get hurt, is enough to solve a problem?

I have grown old trying to get a rational response (sometimes a response at all!) from these people!!!


Recently by Farhad KashaniCommentsDate
Iranians have it far worse than Palestinians
Sep 30, 2009
Mesbah Yazdi
Sep 04, 2009
Neo Cons or Neo Comms: Who got it right on Iran?
Aug 27, 2009
more from Farhad Kashani


by Khar on

Thanks for remembering!

rosie is roxy is roshan

Q..slightly revised /(also w/secret message to dear moderator)

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

so many so many things you bring up, farhad brings up, each one could be a separate blog in and of itself. started drafting several replies so complicated don't even know if or when you'll come back to this thread started an interspersed reply to your last comments directed to me, all well and good but could go on forever. or not. so 

you say you think i always think i am discussing with an individual rather than an ideology. do not think this for one moment! KNOW it. i Know i am. or at least i always give the benefit of the doubt that i am. rarely have i been proven wrong. pleae re-read my comments on colonel hemayat and me on my other post below.

the "h" word. how did my friendship with this sewer-mouthed ultra-shaahi begin? because without knowing me, in the midst of the wild wild west constant shooutouts on these threads, very early on in my tenure here, he called me a "lefty hippie hypocrite" i explained to him that i'm not a hippy and asked him why he thought i was a hypocrite, because no one had ever called me that before.

basically what i got from him was that i had double standards, and that i condemned human rights violations on the part of the u.s.very loudly  but barely mentioned them and even excused them at times in the case of iran. i thought about it and i decided he was right and from that day forward i shouted equally loud camp x-ray and evin prison. it's the reason why i became so trusted by all the various 'sides' onsite so quickly. .until...a certain situation with which you are familiar emerged that has sadly turned my life here into a chronic pressue that as it may..

the point is that through the concession i first made to him, he wound up making the ones i spoke about below. no, the colonel was not an ideology. he was not some..manifesto.. with legs and a respiratory system

concesson. you made a major concession when you answered farhad's sarcastic blog. in return he made in my view one major and one significant conccession: he said okay to your reply to queston number nine and he quite candidly and simply said he didn't understand your response to question number three. yes he snarled in other parts of his reply to you but what did you expect with such a history of enmity between the two of you? did you not snarl too? that's irrelevant, it's...wallpaper..same ol' same ol'...cold leftover dinner..the only relevant thing was the concessions. because they're NEW.

concession by by one, two by two. peace between individuals, one by one, two by two.

apparently at that point you had a problem with him because you felt he hadn't acknowledged that the title of the blog was now wrong since he'd fully accepted your reply to number nine  in my view, by saying 'okay' (and also by not contradicting me when i said from now on he only had nine rather than ten questions he implicity acknowleged that. but if you needed explicit acknowledgment, why couldn't you just say to him at that point, will you acknowledge that the title is now wrong and then i can move forward with addressing your other nine responses to me, instead of lighting into him.

snarling is snarling, barking is barking.

q, you asked him in the subject line of your first reply, will you accept? by replying to you he ACCEPTED all your responses enough to debate them, but accepting doesn't mean he has to AGREE..much less to all TEN..that could only happen in some..alternate universe trek...

and something else that came up which for me was so crucial...farhad is not pro-Israel. he does not stress at this point in time this view for what he perceives to be strategical reasons which will  be more helpful to iran. now probably you disagree with those reasons, but if you think about it, structurally the strategy is not all that different from explanations you've given as to why you don't stress human rights violations within iran as much as you do geopolitical agressions emanating from the west so-called.

so much more to say, would be so much better the three of us saying it over a beer, you remember this, q? 


and one last thing: what else is there left to talk about, you ask?

everything absolutely everything

and that everything could also include nothing

at times silence, self-scrutiny and even soul-searching are best


Farhad Kashani

Follow Up

by Farhad Kashani on

Q and rosie,


Rosie, thanks for your civilized approach to create a mature environment for discussing these important points.


I have been very clear in my replies. Q insists that I have not since I have answered him with points that he does not approve of. Well, that’s too bad! Like Rosie said, I am being as straight forward as possible.


Q, question 3:


First off, as I believe I said in another question, there is a difference between the Iranian government and the Iranian people. The Iranian regime is unelected and illegitimate. Therefore, it does not represent the Iranian point of view. So, when I say Iran is savage, I obviously mean the IRI regime. When I’m talking about the regime, I mention IRI, and when about Iran, well, just Iran, as in the country, civilization and people. Second, the type of savagery that IRI represents is very different than the type of savagery that China and Saudi Arabia represent. Saudi Arabian government does not, openly and bluntly at least, support an ideology that is based on clash of civilization between Islam and the West. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia came out with a nearly perfect solution in 2002 when he offered a Middle East peace plan which includes Israeli withdrawal of Arab occupied land and establishment of free Palestinian state in return with normalization of relations with Israel. On the other hand, IRI has been beating on the “Israel needs to wiped off the map” drum for 30 years. I’m not saying whose right and whose wrong, all I’m saying is why IRI is acting so irresponsibility? At the end of the day, Israel has not occupied Iranian land, so, why is IRI acting like this? Also, shouldn’t the Iranian government operate based on Iran’s interests? Sure, all government do things that are not in the best interest of their people, absolutely, but IRIs irresponsibility has no limits. Others make a mistake here or there, a war here, a coup here, ,,,IRI has been awful, just horrific , no common sense or responsibility or civility at all, for 30 years now.


Israel – Arab conflict is one of the main causes of International confrontations in the world. Initially, one could view this as merely a border dispute or something in the China – Tibet nature of conflict, but, because of Israel’s attempt to portray itself as victim in media sympathizing to it, and because of anti U.S media and propaganda demonizing Israel to really unfair levels such as calling the country a “imperialist conspiracy for U.S presence in the Middle East”, the conflict has become global. There are many people in the Palestinian people’s shoes that you don’t hear about, for example, the Iranian people get far, and I mean, far worst treatment by the hand of the IRI than Palestinians get by the Israelis. But a I raised it in my other questions, crimes against humanity is being overlooked in anti U.S countries by the Left simply because those countries are anti U.S. otherwise, how can you explain the hell raised by Guantanamo (not saying whether the prison should be there or not!), against the horrible silence of world media about the thousands of far-worst-than-guantanamo Guantanamos in Iran, N Korea, Sudan, Syria, Russia, and elsewhere?


What is the real BULLSHIT is your attempt to twist definitions. That is a bullshit that you love. Let’s see, you say “china is far less democratic than Iran”? Well, let’s compare. Before you answer, does personal freedoms count as democracy?


The problem with people like you is that you come around and contradict your own selves because to begin with, you have invalid points! The reason I’m saying that is you have come to my conclusion which is relations are most of the times, not all the times, based on mutual interest. So it is people like you, not me, who interpret U.S relations with lets say Guatemala or Shah as “interfering in their affairs and holding them back”, where as, during the cold war, it was all about finding allies to fight communism. So, don’t blame Somoza or Shah’s dictatorship on the U.S. That’s BULLSHIT. Its Shah’s fault, not anyone else’s. Same now, if U.S has good relations with Saudi Arabia, is because the government of S Arabia and U.S have a common enemy, Islamic fundamentalism. U.S will support democracy when it’s not against its interest, as it should, but it does not “NOT” support democracy at all times. But U.S knows that is the people of those countries who need to rise up. Even Bush said, and before him Clinton, and this goes way back, when the people rise, we will be there with them. When Georgians rose, U.S was there with them, when Ukranians rose, U.S was there with them, when the Lebanese rose after Hariri’s assasination by Hezbollah/Syria/IRI forces, U.S was there with them.

Farhad Kashani

Q and rosie,    The

by Farhad Kashani on

Q and rosie,


The intent of this blog is to raise these questions and display left’s hypocrisy and inability to reconcile their stated claim of “progressiveness” with actual progressiveness. Left hides behind titles like that in order to make the non-left look bad, so if allegedly Left is “progressive” (which history and facts show they are not, rather, they hold “new” theories on how to enlarge governments role in society, enslave people using a method of dictatorial discipline and stand against basic human rights values such as freedom of speech, freedom of entrepreneurship and freedom to choose), then, non-left, which includes a broad spectrum of ideologies, as “regressive”.


In spirit of that mentality, they view the West and U.S specifically, as “corrupt” and “imperial” since the antidote of Left is what U.S, and most West Europe, but nowadays countries around the world, offer. With all their shortages, what the West and U.S have offered have not only worked, but it has proven to be a successful model for any true progress, at least, way more effective than what the Left has offered. The Left has been a miserable failure.


Now, on other hand, many individuals subscribed to the Leftist ideology, see themselves as “soldiers” if you will, in aggressively which includes bullying others  promoting Left’s ideology and participate in its propaganda. The Left has been much more vocal and active in politics than non-left has been. The majority of non-government controlled media in the world spits out Leftist or leftist-themed propaganda, even in the U.S. and the same is true with many political organizations in the last decade or so.  Q, I think, is a good model as one of those soldiers. The Bush era, and most specifically, the Iraq war issue, brought a golden opportunity for the Left to aggressively push for its anti America and anti democracy agenda. They thought Obamas’s election as the icing on the cake, not realizing that his election is the beginning of the end for them. Because they got it wrong. And offcourse that’s a different subject why and how.


I just wanted to mention these points since it relates to our conversations and the questions I raised. Now, to some of the most specific issues raised.

rosie is roxy is roshan

ps Q, I didn't insist, I implored. lol

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

It's not within my power to insist to any person, adult, teenager, or even child who is not under my absolute authority, and that means no one. (and perhaps least of all you. you are die-hardedly uninsistable. lol).

but thank you for responding to my imploring, begging, beseeching, and pleading. lol again

khaleh mosheh

Remebering the left

by khaleh mosheh on

rosie is roxy is roshan

Q, Farhad, Desi, Wondering:

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

Wondering Man: if you want to know about me and the music event in San Francisco, go to my blog here from last month and I'll be happy to answer you and if you want, to discuss it further: //

Desi/Farhad; Desi, your post and Farhad's replu raise a lot of very very important points and Desi, if you're still here and you want to go further with it, I will, so let me know. But could you first answer a fairly simple question: I don't know where you live but when you say you're on the left, do you consider yourself a 'liberal' in the American sense, which in recent years in the States is called 'on the Left', or do you mean you have pronounced Socialist tendencies (not 'socialized' as in socialized health care, but Socialist, which would include nationalization of certain large inustries and other factors.)?

Qumars, thanks very very much for the reply to Farhad. As i'm sure you know, i agree wholeheartedly with more or less everything you said. although obviously not with the tone you sometimes used (but don't take offense, I'm sure this comes as no shock to you). I'm going to write a response to it as well as to the second half of the post below it which you addressd in part specifically to me As I know you, you'll at least read it. As i said below, points have been raised here which touch on the points i wanted to raise between you and me anyway, and had told you I would. They might perhaps better be addressed on your new blog, which I liked very much btw, but I want this one to be the last blog I post on for the foreseeable future so that I can 'reset'. (permanently or not remains to be seen).

Farhad, I'm going to address the post you wrote to me with the points about socialism. I'm also going to briefly address the other nine questions that Q didn't answer satisfactorily for you, from the original blog. whether you think it 'count's or not for a non-Iranian to do so, you did say 'left' as oppose to 'iranian left' and i think what i have to say is extremely important for the iranian context it means more than anything else to me to be able to chip away somehow at the eternal rift between center-right and left, so-called, whether iranian or global, so i'm going to do it. In fact i'm going to start with it.


Allright, just #3 since you insist, Rosie

by Q on

original question 3:

Why is it OK for the U.S to establish relations with savage regimes such as the IRI, but you chastise it for establishing relations with some less-democratic countries during the cold war which they solely did to unite efforts against Communism, not to intentionally oppress the people of those countries?

My answer was addressed to the US. When I said "You", I don't mean Farhad Kashani, I mean "one", like "you can't teach an old dog new tricks."

The first part of the question assumes a moral litmus test for "US" behavior. You are implicitly saying that Iran is "Savage" so US should not have relations with it.

My answer is that this is hypocrisy. Because US has relations with many "savage" countries. Iran is not the worst by any measure. But even the most western biased measures of democracy, human rights, etc (I say biased because they somehow do not count things like wars in Iraq or killing innocent children in Gaza), have countries like China and Saudi Arabia at the same and frequently worst violations.

US has "relations" with these countries (no need to even get into Cold War discussion, which you are not presenting accurately at all).

This is clearly hypocrisy which is what I said in my answer. So, if you (Kashani) are concerned about US having relations with a "Savage" regime like Iran, you have no argument so long as US continues to have relations with many other Savage regimes before, during and after the cold war.

This, of course, is proof that US acts not on moral grounds, but on grounds of geopolitical and economic interest. Having relations with China and Saudis is currently to the benefit of US, so "savagary" be damned. A large part of the benefit is the dollar dominated world economy that these two countries uphold. US isn't spending $Millions broadcasting propaganda to Saudi Arabia or China is it? US isn't sending 4 Aircraft Carriers to the coast of China, is it? In terms of conventional or tactical threats, China is a far bigger one than Iran will ever be, and it's state-dominated ideology is far more anti-US, and far less democratic than Iran. In terms terrorism and asymmetrical threat, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are far bigger threats to US than Iran will ever be. Both countries have horrible human rights and democracy records. These are just a few examples there are over a dozen more I can come up with.

So, basically, it comes down to this talk of "Savage regimes", "democracy" and "threats" is a bunch of bullshit.

I'm not even getting into the third part of your question that has a immoral premise which basically says "It's OK to do bad things if it's for the purpose of fighting communists." Forget that, we don't even need to go there.

I don't know if I can make it any clearer. I thought the original reference to hypocrisy was plenty clear.

Now, you can follow up with Rosie on the other questions. I've done my part. You can of course continue to disagree but you can no longer say "they never have an answer".

rosie is roxy is roshan

okay kashani (first of all the shift key, it's almost dead..)

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

okay kashani, just in case you and q reach an impasse:

do i count for the other nine? i'm on the left but i'm not iranian. does it matter? i can quote hafez in persian i know about reza shah an the cossack brigades and hitler. i know about kermit roosevelt and mossadegh i've translated forough? i've been accused of being an apologist i am. i've been yelled at from all sides for devending muhammed reza i've been yelled at from all sides for my overwhelming devotion to the delara campaign at expense of all else. do i count?

because if i do, if the debate between you and q reaches an impasse i'll try to field the other nine questions but on my own terms, from scratch.

rosie is roxy is roshan

He did, Q. He got point number 9. He said "okay" .That

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

has permanently changed his laundry list of questions to the Left forever. It's a potential watershed and you're spoilng it. lNow, he thinks he got the other eight and you don't, and that's pretty much par for the course,  But he got number nine.  And he ASKED you to explain number 3.

And you have to admit that he q'd in the blog an you a'd , which was great of you, and then he a'd you, and now you won't a him. Don't do this, please. So quite right there are eight of your viewpoints he didn't get, and thinks he's right and you're wrong for the mostpart,'s one Farhad ADMIITS he idn't get.  Number 3. I already said way down below why not start with ONE question? well you already resolved number 9 so how about number 3?

The man asked you politely for a simple explanation. He admitted he simply did not understand you. he didn't project anything onto you and he didn't make any assumptions about what you said. The ONLY aasumption he made was that he's not a hypocrite.

To be hypocritical is HUMAN, Q, we ALL are, to greater or lesser degree. To not know one is is also human. we all do this. me, you, desi, koroush, irandokht...this fish, forget HIM, he's the WORST hypocrite of all. lol. so why don't you explain to the man (snarling, no're barking now an you're biting too.) why you beieve he's being hypocritcal in number 3, because i assure you he honestly does not know.

And even IF you explained it to him 47 times before and he didn't understand you, this time has the potential to be DIFFERENT Q, because you both made progress in understanding each other. But you're dropping the ball, Q. Please don't drop the ball. Just TRY. a working hypothesis, that you can both make some progress on number 3. What's the skin off your teeth?.

3-     I don’t think I understood what you mean and I certainly don’t see any hypocrisy in that. I think was very clear in what I meant, so please clarify.  

I'm not done with the rest of your post to me, Q, and i'm going to intersperse reply to it now, but I wanted to get this one in right awy. 

 -OOrchestra seats. Could we call this the end of an intermission and move on?

3-     I don’t think I understood what you mean and I certainly don’t see any hypocrisy in that. I think was very clear in what I meant, so please clarify. .


Kashani, I'm not sure you got any of it

by Q on

first of all,

One point, Q has called me far worse names and all I did was in self defense.

Please provide evidence of this, of me having called you "far worse names" unprovoked.

Second, Rosie, I don't think that question has been a success. I think you always want to see any issue as between two people rather than two positions. Some things don't lend themselves to synthesis and it would be wrong to churn one where unwarranted.

What I see from Kashani is deliberate (or pathological) attempts to ignore part of my response, or bring the discussion down to irrelevant observations about himself or continue his hateful stereotyping. For one thing, in any real debate, a resolution is presented a case is layed out, and rebuttle is given. After that, no new arguments are allowed. By contrast debates on (to the extent that anything can be called that) are full of new arguments and straw grasping. There is no incentive for them to ever end.

I gave answers, he's not accepting (big shock!). The title of his blog has been proven wrong. He needs to acknowledge he was wrong on this at the very least. Otherwise, it is a recipe for a big waste of time. What else is there to talk about?

rosie is roxy is roshan

Q, Farhad, old dog, new tricks (orchestra seat..)

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

Following the ten questions plus the extra credit one, Farhad closed by saying:

I have grown old trying to get a rational response (sometimes a response at all!) from these people!!!

 Qumars replied:

 We agree on one thing:

I have grown old

They say, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." This is an apt observation about those whose mentality and world view hasn't moved beyond the late 70's.

We agree on one thing:

I have grown old

They say, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." This is an apt observation about those whose mentality and world view hasn't moved beyond the late 70's.

.Farhad then replied:

Here’s my suggestion, get out of the colonial era.


Rosie observes:

Me too. I have grown old. I must henna my hair again. The grey is showing Qumars, you have just taught an old dog a new trick! Farhad has been asking TEN questions to the "Left" since time immemorial. You have now reduced it to NINE (The extra credit one doesn't count, Farhad)

Now, you two can snarl at each other all you like (and indeed you both do) but as long as you don't start to bark, the debate shall remain an unqualiied success. Ten per cent is not zero, it's not. This is a big new trick for Farhad (no cheating, Farhad, don't add a new question next time you ask the list. It's now permanently down to NINE).

You say colonial, you say 1970's, Potayto, potahto. I dunno This is such a momentous occasion I feel we're all right here, right now, on May 30, 2009. And I have orchestra seats!

My suggestion: since we now all know that you CAN teach an old dog a new trick, how about considering that it's probably a lot harder to make a new dog with old tricks?

So..snarl away! As long as you don't bark or bite.  I can't WAIT to see Q's reply.


ps q, you owe farhad one new trick


Ms Rosie: did you attended the party in SF?

by WonderingMan (not verified) on

I'm curious. If you did please elaborate.

rosie is roxy is roshan


by rosie is roxy is roshan on

farhad wrote, in bold; 

Your points are well taken.

i'm so glad.


One point, Q has called me far worse names and all I did was in self defense.

 totally beliieve that that's your perception and is either partially or perhaps completely true (although few things in our perceptions are completely true), but i am not usually concerned with the past here, only the present. water under bridge is best since q is amenable (just look at his subject line to you..) and so are you.. you do realize, don't you that you now have only NINE questions  "left" unanswered. carry on.  ;o)

 If anyone wants to bully, he needs to be bullied back.

don't agree but let's leave it for now as a side issue, for a rainy day.. 


So, bottom line, if they want to exchange ideas and thoughts in a civilized manner, I’m all for it, and if they wanna fight and insult, I’m all up for that too. They should not be thinking we’re weak. It’s for them to choose. WHO is this us and them of which you speak? who is this 'us'/ you & me, the center-right, the i.c. bloggers, humans, iranians...? clump, clump. lol. 

rainy day. 

Also, another point, the red scare is over, but Socialism is “attempting” to resurface. etc..

okay this is polemics rather than mediation so lemme think about it and write you a more considered, structured post.  

I do appreciate you trying to create a mature discussion on this

i appreciate you, you're doing the same. thanks so much.

rosie is roxy is roshan

Wondering man: ask me!

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

I'm right handed. Does that mean that I'm RIGHT or just ON the right? Whatever you think, you're right, unless there's something discuss

There's someone here on this thread who I think is on the "left" who always used to ask me what side I'm on during the Gaza thread wars My reply was: during the ping pong of a debate, I'm always on the side of the ball  :oP



Mr. Kashani: I'm left handed, does it make me a leftist?

by WonderingMan (not verified) on

Please advice.

rosie is roxy is roshan

Orchestra seat???? rooting

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

Questions #4 and 9. Unqualified successes. sad afarin!

I thought the most loaded questions were the ones that would involve Israel and/or Islam, consiering the history of the website discourse since blogging began. It seems there has been some kind of breakthrough here please do not underestimate 

Regarding question 9, it is now possible to procede to a discussion of the difference between islam and Islamacism which hat certain factions of both the center-right (and for thaat matter the for lack of a better word Middle eastern left) fail to adequately grasp and which is fundamental to any productive discussion about iri That is a big achievement

Regarding question #4, this brings to mind an old site friend of mine, colonel hamayat, "ultra-shaahi" back in the days of the 'wild wlld west". he was pretty much universally despised by the for lack of a better word center-left and all kinds of assumptions were projected onto him. he and i happened to get on very well because he was the first person who accused me of apologism and i conceded that there was truth in it. after that he conceded that the shah did torutre (he'd been in denial about that, poor thing..).

no one but me on this center-left so called  seemed to be able to hear that he was a pacifist and completely against any and all foreign military intervention in iran. finally people heard him due to our conversations and were able to take him into the fold. he expressed his desire to make amends with all factions before he died-to apolgize and forgive everyone. He as 78 i haven't seen him here for over a year and a half i hope that wherever he is, either with us or watching us, he's in a better place. he made this website a better place and i miss him very much.

It also reminds me of Jamshid i remember how jamshid one day said that socialism is an ideology which interests him very much. i was hoping that conversation would continue but unfortunately i had to go on one my..furloughs (dear moderator.).

It also reminds me although less so of kadivar during the gaza thread aars, so many people in the Left seemed to assume he was anti-gaza and pro-israel incontrovertibly and they'd go ballistic and he'd go ballistic, and boy oh boy when dk goes ballistic..he goes whole hog.

those blog threads during the gaza wars were like a pressure cooker, a hall of mirrors. however on a lonely article written by some kind of expert outsie the inccest fest on gaza, among four other commenters, golfish and me,dk  was highly critical of israel and knew all kinds of details about their operations, which he did not approve of. no one ever gave him a real chance to say so in the blogs. but it's the truth.

we're not clumps. you see q, farhad seems to see us on the left as a clump but...we do the same thing to the center-right. the thing that unites us all is that we're human it means that we all to some extent have tunnel vision and it ALSO means that FUNDAMENTALLy all but the MOST diseased minds value above all else the life and well-being of us all and if we could have our druthers, that's what 99.9% of us would want most of all.


hezar afarin!

Farhad Kashani

Desi jaan,    Ideologies

by Farhad Kashani on

Desi jaan,    Ideologies and systems evolve. Secular democracy doesn’t have to mean “Leftism”. You apply principles that are in the best benefit of your country while preserving human rights values. You always have to maintain a balance aziz.

First and foremost, you should think of government as your employee, not your boss. Government shouldn’t tell you how you suppose to live your life socially, economically, politically. Government officials have to be elected and serve a term, and economic freedom and entrepreneurship is a keystone to individual freedom and open market system which empowers people and creates strong economies, self responsibility culture and competition for the better and advancement. That’s not what Socialism tells you however.   



However, you can employ and designate your government to provide healthcare and basic living needs. You should have government oversight over economy and entrepounership. Sure. 

You always have to maintain a balance.     

Farhad Kashani

IRANdokht,   Cute!

by Farhad Kashani on




   KoroushS jaan,  

Thanks aziz.



  Rosi is roxy, 

Your points are well taken.


One point, Q has called me far worse names and all I did was in self defense. If anyone wants to bully, he needs to be bullied back. So, bottom line, if they want to exchange ideas and thoughts in a civilized manner, I’m all for it, and if they wanna fight and insult, I’m all up for that too. They should not be thinking we’re weak. It’s for them to choose.


Some of them have this bully mentality and they miscalculate at times that the person they’re trying to bully is the wrong person to be bullied! That’s offcourse besides the essential question: when are they going to grow up?


Also, another point, the red scare is over, but Socialism is “attempting” to resurface. Just look at Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Spain, and elsewhere. I’m not saying they’re going to succeed and I’m not getting into why they are attempting to resurface and how and things like that, but Socialism, like most other ideologies will never go away. We still got Fascism in the world, and Nazism, and Islamic Fundamentalism, and Anarchism, and right wing dictatorships, all of them are still around, and will be around. What needs to be done is minimize the threat of the dangerous ones.


I do appreciate you trying to create a mature discussion on this.



With all due respect and

by desi on

With all due respect and it has been a few decades since my poli science 101 class.  But here's how I understand things at a very basic level.  The current Iranian regime is a theocratic, reactionary conservative form of government.  Hence it's to the far right of the political spectrum.  Fascism by definition is the far right.  It is a single party system.  Much like what Iran currently is.  To depart from its current system Iran would have to become a secular democracy.  Secular Democracy you say?  Well that in fact would hover squarely in the left.   Farhad, I'm thinking since you're so vehemently against a theocratic, conservative reactionary form of rule.   You should then perhaps think of joining some of us here on the loony left. 

To answer a couple of your questions in a nutshell:  The IRI does what it does for the simple fact that to my knowledge theocratic governments have always failed miserably.  They know they're failing miserably which is why much like other fascist and or totalitarian regimes they needed to use scapegoating to rally a base.  The IRI uses anti-Israeli and anti-"Western" rhetoric and tyrannical draconian means to oppress its peaple to deflect from its own failures.  The FAR-RIGHT has a history of doing this.  

Farhad Kashani

Q,   1-     First,

by Farhad Kashani on



1-     First, let’s make sure we’re distinguishing Iran, the people and civilization, and Iran the government. That’s crucial and it’s an issue that tends to be overlooked. Because we have to see whether they have problem with us as people and civilization, or with us as in our government. Second, how do you think IRI has been mistreated and why? The country of U.S has given refuge to millions of Iranians and in the words of their statesmen, ranging from Bush to Clinton to Obama, they have high respect for Iranian civilization. Asking IRI to act civilly and stop inspiring terrorism and clash of civilization is not mistreatment. If the world let all regimes with different ideologies slide with their destructive behavior, the world will be doomed. So please describe what you mean by Iran being treated differently.


2-     You claim I live in the 70s, but it appears that you live in colonial times! The root of your misunderstanding of realities in today's world stems from the fact that you either don’t see or understand global terrorism or see it as a “conspiracy” for the West to get “cheap oil” or something like that. In today world, invading a country is not the the only way that one’s civility is measured. The world has changed since 1979 with the establishment of the IRI regime when they introduced a new form of international intervention and meddling, Islamic fundamentalism/terrorism. Also, IRI’s declared mission and ideology is what I said. All you gotta do is listen to them, or read their constitution and things of that nature. I don’t even think they deny that, so not sure why you do. Khamenei’s clown Ahmadnizhad constantly says that IRIs mission is to bring men closer to the path of “Imam zaman”. If you really don’t listen or read their publications or watch their TV or if you actually haven’t been to Iran since 1979, I strongly, and I mean strongly, encourage you to do those.


3-     I don’t think I understood what you mean and I certainly don’t see any hypocrisy in that. I think was very clear in what I meant, so please clarify.


4-     News flash: I am anti Israeli. Maybe all your friends on this site who say I’m an Israeli with an Iranian name don’t know this, but I refused to wear an IDF shirt that I was given to by someone since I told him I wont wear something that represents killing innocent people. Here’s where I strongly differ with you: I understand, and apparently you don’t, 2 things: A- IRI anti Israeli stance has nothing to do with its love for the oppressed Palestinian people. IRI wants 1- to divert attention from itself to claim Israel to be the real threat, and not it. 2- To gain support among young Muslim and Arabs to act as it’s global jihadi force. That’s how Hamas and Hezbollah and all the extremists who receive support from Iran in Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Egypt, Afghanistan, Algeria and elsewhere operate. Based on IRI inspirational and material support. So I refuse to fall into IRIs trap. Once we have a free and democratic Iran, I will be the first person to bash Israel, but I would not do it in a way that my country gets hurt or develop public media outcry against Iran or to make enemies around the world for that stance. Obviously since IRI is not elected nor representing the Iranian people, it sees itself not responsible to Iranian people. So it does as it wishes, and if anyone speaks out, he or she is gone.


5-     One point to make here, you are not politically neutral. Because as we can see, almost in every answer you drag America and Israel into the discussion. That shows you have prejudice. And I have no clue what you talking about America’s genocide. And if you wanna open the history books, I suggest you don’t, because most countries and cultures at some point of history are guilty of those crimes. Everyone has skeletons in their closet.


6-     Just go to any reputable and neutral source and you’ll see the night and day difference between where India stands in inflation, unemployment, technological advances, respect for democracy, freedom of speech, and others, and look where Iran is at. No comparison. Just lately, India’s election was called the biggest celebration of democracy, Iran’s so called “elections” however, is the biggest insult to democracy. If Iran had the 1 billion population India has with the IRI regime in power, Iran would’ve been history. And I’m really not sure how can you claim that economic conditions under Shah was worst than now? You can’t be serious. I despise both shah and Khomeini, considering Khomeini to be a million times worst though, but IRI is importing if anything more now than it was during Shah. And I really don’t think I need to tell anyone how bad the economy is. Mehdi Karoubi, not Farhad Kashani, recently said that Iran is on the verge of fall because of horrific economic conditions. Khamenei himself talks about faghr, fesaad and tabeez (Poverty, corruption and discrimination). Offcourse he’s trying to say that economy should be the priority in order for people to stop talking about the lack of democracy, which is the root of all Iran’s problems. He’s diverting the subject. But he’s right nonetheless! He can’t even deny it.


7-     Socialism is not working. Leftist media and leftist like Michael Moore and Jon Stewart want to make you believe is working. Unemployment is way higher in Europe than it is here, productivity is less, GDP is lower, and they got all these resources with much smaller countries and no such things as war expenses and things like that. Do you know how many Europeans and Canadians move to the States? If they’re life is better so much over there, why do they move here? Have you been to FL or NY or CA? And I think you’re kidding about Latin America! Just one stats, Venezuela and Iran are among top 5 worst inflation rates in the world. And in Venezuela, it has skyrocketed since dictator Chavez took power.


8-     Extremism is taking actions to an extent that become destructive and stand politically, against human rights principles. It’s also taking positions that are exaggerations and stand against tolerance and civility and humane behavior.


9-     OK.


10- Bus drives and soccer players don’t make policies in Iran. Only, estimated about 200 people, whom are IRI goons and thugs, and have been rotating different high level positions within the clergy establishment and the military for 30 years now, are controlling the destiny of Iran. So, its you whose is oversimplifying, not me. Iranian people need to survive, yes, and if I lived in Iran, I had to adhere to some of their unjust laws also, but that doesn’t make me an accomplis. If Israel drops a bomb on Iran tomorrow because of IRIs irrational stance against Israel and the constant threats and bullying and asking for its removal, its not the bus driver’s fault, its mainly Khamenei’s, as the dictators, and the other 199 or so more or less, and people like you who support the regime and justify for it, fault.


11- What on earth are you talking about?


Here’s my suggestion, get out of the colonial era.  


rosie is roxy is roshan

I had a great idea for the debate! I think Farhad should

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

choose ONE question to start off with and I think it should be one that is not too loaded. i think that would mean avoid questions involving israel and/or islam for time being.also questions like number one which are actually more than one question.

i tried to intersperse my comments in q's replies. hopeless would take forever what is the point of tackling ten questions at once until/unless it is certain that at least an IOTA of trust and common ground can be found in what the blogger deems the simplest and least volatile one? think about it

well i am all alone here, so i will go back to cleaning my apartment and keep checking the blog to see if either of you pop up  

whistle while you work.. lol

rosie is roxy is roshan

ps My intitial reaction (below) and my response to the actual PS

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

ten questions will probably be for lack of a better word, less "linear" and categorized than either of yours. Deal with it. LOL Probably it's in no small part because I'm a woman and it's a combination of thousands of years of nature/nurture (chromosomes and acculturation). Hell, we have dealt with you guys for  millennia of civilization so-called whose greatest contribution thusfar has been the a-bomb, Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl and the incipient extinction on earth..Computers, cures for some cancers, so what,  if no one may be here in a hundred years except for Mad Max and the cockroaches? IMHO, you could both use an injection of  a dose of pussu power  into the discourse LOL. '(When syllogism keeps butting head against syllogism perhaps it is time to find  new language".--Me...sigh...).So please bear with me as patiently (and irritatedly) as I havee borne with both of you for five thousand years. lol

ps !: //

rosie is roxy is roshan

All in! Q, if you re here, I'm down! because../ Sorry about the.

by rosie is roxy is roshan on


Q, I'm down because this blog touches on all the points I needed to discuss with you anyway Q. as i told you I needed such discussion in  my last blog. And someone like Farhad would be someone I would bring up to you in that discussion. Here's why: 

 You and I both believe that the ultimate goal of all politics should be peace and the well-being of all people. i believe that peace  is a  process that,  is best arrived at as I ofteh say "one by one, two by two." This is because governments have always served their own power agendas, and it is only when the people take the power that we will reach the next stp. In order for that to happen, individuals must t understand the ccommon ground. As you know, I believe the Internet should be the ideal vehicle for this as it provides for understanding between individuals on threads but with a global readership  I know,, I know, Q, we've been here before, you have trouble trusting him (and         vice versa lol). Let me try to do the trusting for now. If Farhad abscons, let's you an I have the iscussion about agency here on his blog this weekend, deal?

Anyway, so in my view the greatest triumphs that could happen in the political arena is when even just two people of apparently diametrically opposed ideologies are able to find that they have some common ground. Even one iota is a great achievement. However, concessios must be made.

Here are a couple of examples ofwhat I mean by concessions; being necessary. They are mainly a question of language: Q: When Zion showed the cleaarly staged videos of sasaults on Palestinians from "Pallywood' last year, people said, "so what,? israel is worse with propaganda" instead of just saying, "I agree. Even though Israael is worse, Instead of just: falsifying news information is wrong, even if it's only ten films. They are widely seen it's just plain wrong."' No oneon our Left woud concede. What happened? Zion got worse and worse, nore and more closed (and, yep,

Here is anoher example; Farhad, you talk about the loony left and yet you ask questions wihich are fair and reasonable civilly.  Is there a better word? Obviously you seriously seek annswers. Yet you are creating a feedback loop. The more you use that language the madder most of us get, reinforcing your perception of loony, which makes most of us..etc. etc. ad infinitum.

(Farhad,Could you concede (not outloud but to yourself) that actually it's kind of nice of Q to answer yu carefully here when you just de facto called him insane?;o)

The next thing you know, worse anger, resentment on both sides are brought to the polls. The next thing you know all over the world leaders are winning with polarized viewpoints and agendas. The next thing you know a child has lost his eyesight in a bombing. i believe t THE ULTIMATECOMMON GOAL of every normal person is to prevent that from happeng. What could be more important than that? At heart most of us are the same regardless of ideology. Aren't we?


This whole question of the "left', Farhad, is far more complex than I think you think Because there are so many factions which call themselves Left and they all have at least some legitimate basis for doing so..We are not a clump any more than the center-right is. Farhad you appear to be clumping us. I am not Q, I am not Mammad or Soraya or Ayhab. I am certainly not Jaleho. You are not Jamshid or Faramarz or Anonfish or Rashidian, Kadivar or Zion. You're not. Could you at least accept as a working hypothesis that we constitute a broad spectrum? It wouldhelp enormously in answering your questions. I'm not Q.

Furthermore, the question of Islamacism throws a monkey wrench inot the works which makes the question of what is Left an especially thorny and problematic issue vis a vis Iran and the entire Midle East (hence, planet). Farhad, Q and I have been dealing with exactly this  rift and it is the main reason actually i decied to stay on the thread,

I am avery flexible about concessions because my view of the Left's role, as a moderate Socialist is to provide a counterbalance to the right. This is only realistic view in the 21st centur imhoy, Microsoft isn't going anywhere so there will be no Glorious Revolution. Thank god. There, you and I concur on the thank god.. The future is in mixed economies, we see them emerging in eEurope and Latin america  Farhad, THE RED SCARE IS OVER. It breathed its last breath with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the transiition in China to state capitalism.

(Probably i'm so flexible in polemics largely because my mother was/is an atheist an my father a religious jew who died an Orthodox. It was a difficult childhoo because of it but in the end I think I was very fortunate to have beeen brought up with that rift. It made me flexible.)

Q, if nothing else, we can make progress between us. I know it. I feel that now that we have arrived at a lshare anguage to scrutinize the rift that apparently separated us, we will be coasting. It is one term only that was missing: 'agency.' It eliminates the use of "apologism" on my part, which is a destructive term I apologize for using it. lol. (and that covers the labor issue too...)

Okay, now I'll read the blog an Q's post more carefully and maybe we can get to the meat of the matter. Just one IOTA of common ground??? Maybe? lol


Farhad, I will answer, but will you accept?

by Q on

1. Yes, it's a bad record. No, it's not a conspiracy. So, if you assume the US/UN/West, whoever you want, are moral actors, then they should treat Iran, just like they treat all the other countries with bad records: i.e. China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, All of central Asia, Pakistan, Turkey. You don't want to hold Iran to a different standard now, do you?

2. Your first premise is subjective and self-serving. Given that Iran has not invaded or started any wars in the past 300 years, it hardly qualifies as a "bully", especially when compared to US and Israel. Iran deserves as much International recognition as any other country in the UN. Even if we take your flawed definition of bully, then if there is some kind of "anti bully" clause for "recognition" then, it would logically follow that US and Israel should be recognized even less than Iran. If that happens, you may have a valid argument.

Your second premise upon the first is wrong. History shows that Bullying works just fine. Look at Israel, China and US as examples.

Your third premise is wrong: that's not IRI's "state ideology".

3. I just hate the hypocrisy. Either establish "relations" fully according to some moral principle that you espouse in which case US would have to break off relations with most of the world including it's largest economic partners, OR don't pretend morality is the reason you are doing it. We all know the real reason: global economic control.

4. What have the Nazis done to your or to Iran? Why don't you love the Nazis? Should every act be based on revenge of 'what was done to me?' If that is so, you are in agreement that IRI is right to say "marg bar America" all the time for the intereferences that America did to Iran. And nearly all Iranian immigrants (like you) should have no gripe with IRI. They are completely outside it's control.

5. No. Just like it's not OK to justify genocide and war conducted by America and Israel.

6. Your premise about India is wrong. In many many ways India is behind Iran. The widespread poverty and injustice is INCOMPARABLE to Iran. All the social problems with child labor, slavery, prostitution, drugs, corruption and regional insecurity are more prevelant there. But just like other US allies, you don't see their problems on TV, so gullable people think it's all good. Iran has oil and is therfore subject to more attention from neo-colonist powers. These powers have brought India into the global economic order (investments, trade, intellectual property, etc.)

Occupation is not important. It is in fact a drain on resources for the occupying country, and a political headache. A much BETTER solution is puppet governments and economic domination. So, Iran is not necessarily better off just because Iran wasn't physically occupied during the Shah's regime. It was mroe than sufficient that Iran was buying all kinds of overpriced goods and weapons from America, and running a debt doing so at the same time serving as a hub for anti-soviet activity and carrying out political policies of the US in the region.

7. I'm not a communist but a form of Socialism works just fine in Canada, Europe, Latin America and Japan. That's what justifies it. This is a silly high school question. All governments are socialist to some degree including America.

8. "Extremism" to me is being unfair and unreasonble in your approach and failing to see your own irrational single-minded ideology behind your own actions. Many Iranians abroad who have little clue about todays Iran or Iranian people pretend to know exactly what is wrong, what the "root" of it is, and how to fix it better than Iranian people themselves. That's not just extremist, but also arrogant and stupid.

9. It's not OK. But criticiaing ONLY Islam shows a bias that is an indication of an islamophobia. If all you did was criticize Jews, you would be called antisemetic. It's the same thing.

10. All people are to some degree responsible for their own governments, Iran included. There can be a rhetorical difference between people and government of any country, but there often can't be a practical difference. Who exactly is part of the "government" ? Millions of people are on the IRI "payroll", from bus drivers to school teachers to military people. What about soccer players? TV workers? fire fighters? Police? Basijis ? Elected officials? Appointed officials?
This question is often asked by violence-obsessed short sighted people who are looking for a clear "class" of iranians they can lable and say should be killed or punished and everyone else is innocent. This gross oversimplification is largely done to satisfy egoes or desires for revenge which is why it will never lead anywhere. Sorry, the real world is not that simple.

11. It sounds like you have stress you are looking to relieve. You have insulted your reader by putting your own response instead of theirs.

We agree on one thing:

I have grown old

They say, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." This is an apt observation about those whose mentality and world view hasn't moved beyond the late 70's.

rosie is roxy is roshan

Orchestra seat.. / Irandokht-it IS very interesting

by rosie is roxy is roshan on

Well i have one an a half feet out the door so why don't I just take an orchestra seat here and listen and learn?

As Khar points out, Irandokht, you're a very wise lady So since you've just told Farhad he's asking the wrong people, the relgious "right wing", do you consider yourself on the "Left"? Because if you do, you must be one of the right (I mean Left) people that he should ask.

So why don't you just choose a question or two and answer him?    After all, you took the time to read his blog, and it's pretty long, and to post something. So why not a reply to at least one question?  

Maybe it's because you don't consider yourself on the Left. If not, perhaps you could explain to Farhad why not, just so Farhad can have a clearer idea of what Left actually means? People could learn a lot. Aren't you glad I asked now? :o)

ps Farhad, maybe in future it'd be better to leave out the word 'loonies', just for the sake of the discussion taking off.


Farhad kashani

by KouroshS on

These are some excellent points and questions.

I am sorry that you have to deal with some people who only have developed a superficial view of issues and are biased and devoid of an open mind and a clear judgement.

Good job mister:)


Which is it Top 10 or Top 11?

by Khar on

To answer all your questions very simply, it seems you have alot of time on your hand to waste and have to ask you one question myself; what connection do you find between Gooz and Shaghigheh?

PS. Listen to IRANdokht she is a very wise lady!


Israel rules ... IRI sucks

by Anonymous Israel Lover (not verified) on

1. Cause Mosad torturers are more handsome;
2. Well jews are the chosen people, daaah;
3. US loves Israel and pays $50 billion a year to show;
4. We love Israel cause Israel loves us, to death;
5. USA USA USA ... love it or leave it nigggger;
6. India is so beautiful, you can almost walk around the corpses in the morning;
7. Capitalism has loved me every which way, and I have a bank account to show for it;
8. Excremism is like a mixed up drink made by stiring half IRI and half Israel;
9. Cause Islam lets you get 4 wives dude, daaaah;
10. Differentiation is the opposite of integration, you know like the apartheid in Israel ;-)


very interesting

by IRANdokht on

Since the government of IRI is run by religious fundamentalist right wing, I believe the reason you never received an answer is because you are asking the wrong questions from the wrong people.

Aren't you glad you asked now?  :o)