Majid Naficy

Don't under estimate Mr Naficy's "zerangi_e esfehooni" :)

It is amusing to see that despite many transformations Mr Naficy has gone through since he has taken up residence in California particularly in his so called "approach" (as Ms Shorts likes to call it) to his one time revolutionary ideals there is one thing that still has not changed in Mr Naficy's "approach": zerangi esfehooni (or mard_e_rendi). 

He is offering (a deal) to the residents of the three swing states of Ohio , Florida and Iowa (their total share of votes in electoral college coming up to 53) to have his Californian vote (with 55 votes in electoral college and a strongly Democrat state) switched to Romney if they voted for Obama. One needn't be a genius to realise that with California firmly on the side of Obama it make no differece if Naficys of California vote for Romney but any vote in those "tossup" states can make a difference one way or the other.

As they say: Once an esfehooni always an esfehooni (though some may call this khar zerang).

MRX - I respectfully disagree ...

I remember 4 years ago, every one of my 6 businesses under tremendous pressure! Nearly filing for bankruptcy on the back of the policies promoted by "W". Factually, the Republicans have created fewer jobs historically, and lower levels of economic growth....almost by a factor of 2 to 1. Democrats are NOT socialists, they are not far lefties - they promote progressive policies that promote opportunity.

Republicans have become the party of the American Hick, the religious nut, the American Taliban if you will ...fat, maybe even obese ...ignorant as a dog...anti-immigrant, anti-muslim, and anti-Iranian. Read my blog posted today about Republicans controlling the 10 poorest states in America. And Republican politicians do NOT do much more than support two industries: the oil indusrty and military contractors.

Don't be fooled by Republican rhetoric. In truth, in actual fact - they have basically bankrupted America with irresponsible policies and will bankrupt you and your business like we all went through in 2008.

It is easy

to give Obama another chance if you work for government, state, educational institutions and any other organization that lives off the government, but if you are in a dreaded private sector like some of us, who has to compete day in and day out and see how louy  buisness enviornment of today is well you think twice!

By the way enough people have said it, but obama's appeasement of islamists of all forms  is discusting, not to mention his response and inactivity and lack of even basic compassion for 2009 crisis in Iran....

And When in France AyatWC!

The preferred aperitif is Pastis, mixed with water at the table 1:5 ratio.

Aperitifs and Digestifs etiquette

You can be forgiven for not being an Anglophile but never advise one on English etiquette :)):

Learn from the ultimate source in English etiquette:

//www.debretts.com/etiquette/food-and-drink/aperitifs-and-digestifs.aspx

Hey Anglophile - Brits drink Sherry after dinner...

we have a lot more in common then you might imagine.

Darius - You and I have similar goals ...but different paths

I agree eith you about NIAC, and for sure i have been a very loud anti NIAC advocate. I have writting literally dozens of blogs about that. I also agree that we must restore Irans dignity.

But the only way to do that is "together". It won't be done by imposing an agenda on others. My fear is that staunch Monarchism without any guarantees of it not turning into Royalism (i.e. unimpeded Royal powers) may not have much of a following.

If you can show me HOW Monarchy in Iran can be restrained from taking on absolute power - then I for one will at least listen and NOT reject it out of hand. 

Its about solutions....not imposing a point of view. And Darius I am your friend even if you don't want any. The first sign of friendship is feedback. I give you feedback. And feedback is a gift. Think about it ...if you are walking arround with your zipper wide open it will only be your family or friends that will tell you to close it up. Feedback is a gift.

Dear Ayatoilet1

There are several interesting points in your comment that I would like to take them up with you particularly that I have been honoured with being mentioned in it.

My good friend Darius may respond to your points in due course and I have no intention of speaking on his behalf as he does it best himself but some of the issues you have raised are not consistent with the common understanding of such terms as Monarchy, theocracy, republicanism, etc. and this is where I thought to chip in.

I don't think any of us here will ever switch from our present belief system (that is if we have any) to a different one by being persuaded, or influenced as you put it, by reading these blogs. At best we may pause and question our beliefs and at worst we take a defensive stance even before reading the blog. We may convert to a different set of beliefs if we choose to find the "facts" ourselves. I say "facts" is double quotes as even our facts are not agreeable with each other. Now let us examine some these "facts."

Barack Obama's policy towards the Islamic republic has been that of negotiations from an appeasing point of view and not a commanding one. In the meantime the Islamic republic has bought another fours years of time. They are four years closer to their target than they were in 2008. Now you bring up the question of theocracy. If we go by your definition of theocracy, then America is a theocracy be it under a democratic administration or a republican one. Can you name one president in the history of the US who has not signed off his speech with God Bless America including the last one?

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=R92rwokGnuk 

Whereas in a Monarchy that the United Kingdom is the British prime minister who is the equivalent to the American President, never involves God in his work (once Tony Blair, a labour premier incidentally, thought to end his speech with God bless Britain and was abruptly reminded by the civil service that "we don't do God"). Religious extremists are in both parties. If we have GW Bush in one party then we have Jimmy Carter in the other (Andew Young famously called Khomeini a saint!!). All these aside, theocracy is ruling the country by divine guidance. Unless you stretch the meaning of the term by a very rich imagination the US is not a theocracy.

We all know that neither the republicans nor democrats have a passionate desire to call for a democratic or humanistic rule of law in other countries unless it serves American interests. And perhaps rightly so. The selective calls by the US adminstrations for regime change in the dictatorships abroad in the recent years are witness to this claim. Where Mubarak and Gaddafi are called to step down, Assad (until recently) Ahmadinjad and Bahreini and Saudi leaders are tolerated. 

Lastly,  I am not aware of any differences between myself and Darius apart for this one: Darius in a truly French style drinks port before the dinner as an aperitif whereas I help myself to it the British way and only after the dinner. c'est tout :)

ayatoilet1 If I were you ...

I'd leave that to the judgment of the readers of this thread as to who is failing and who is not !

I don't care for friends ... I never wrote on this website for the past 12 years to that purpose ... Is this about a celebrity contest or what ? ...

Thanks but No Thanks ! 

As opposed to You I am not running for any of the Two Candidates ... I am running for the Restoration of IRan's dignity, self respect and Lost Glory which I intend to see Reinstated.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEOJWSXeU6Y 

You EYE RANIANS are no different than the Treacherous Lot running NIAC whom you empowered by not standing up against them and refusing to stand and support Your Legitimate King all in the name of the events of 1953 which none of us here were old enough to witness firsthand and definitively not that fake namaknashnas Zoroastrain Swedish National who was barely 5 years old at the time of the revolution.

All the more the more that any exposure you got to the west you got it thanks to their educational system and owe it entirely to the Pahlavi Dynasty's efforts of bringing our country out of the Middle Ages without which you probably today wouldn't be in the YOU ESS OV A but in PUTIN's RUSSIA or some other Miserable East European country.

As Such I don't think you Namaknashnas folks are entitled to the slightest consideration in a Post IRI Iran if ever we get there.

You Sold Iran to the Tazis running our country and in my book you betrayed King and Country instead of standing Up as Rostam would in the Shahnameh by siding with your Sovereign Reza Shah Dovom !

You are an artificial Schizophrenic Entity who in less than One Generation have been absorbed, repackaged into accepting to get dissolved like Sugar into the american way of life as a Formatted product with absolutely no memory of your past, your culture or connection with the pain and sufferings your fellow compatriots are going through back home for the past 3 decades.

Bebin TV survey of Iranian Americans on their knowledge of Iranian History and Culture

Hence your desperate efforts to rewrite history to fit Your own Ideological purposes.

You folks have more in Common with Trita Parsi and NIAC's treacherous lot than I ever did with the Tea Party ...

For you info Mah mesleh shoma EYE RANIANS ha Shekar Neestem keh dar Chayee Hal Besheem  

AIN’T NO ‘SUGAR BOY’: Khosro Fravahar Slams Esmail Nooriala's Call to Curb Revolutionary Zeal

Iran Harguez Nakhahad Mord !

Best,

DK 

An Unapologetic Monarchist !

"A Country that Loses it's Poetic Vision is a Country that faces death"-Saul Bellow.

Darius-Khan, You are failing miserably ...

If your intention by blogging on this site is to persuade people to support your point of view, you are failing miserably. The keys to winning friends and influencing people is to share your perspective in a clear, respectful and above all coherent way.

But, your blind support for the Monarchy - and general anti-obama stance are simply not consistent with your view about the regime in Iran. If you have the theocracy in Iran, then you MUST oppose the theocrats inside the Republican party - the religious right. Believe me they hate Iranians, they undermined the Shah when it mattered, and above all have secretly supported the Mullahs and maintained links with them througout the past 30+ years. You just did not see it. 

And Anglophile did not really (a) support your point of view or (b) have an extended argument to support your point of view. I have read Anglophile's other blogs and I don't think there is full agreement there with your positions.

Finally, I do like reading your blogs. I just wish they were more coherent and easy to read.

Well Argued anglophile jan ; also checkout Milani's U-Turn ;0)

Although I sympathize with Mr. Naficy's personal loss and challenges which is his "jardin Secret" ... 

May it be reminded that he and his likeminds were not the only ones to suffer collateral losses ...

BOOK: EVEN AFTER ALL THIS TIME By Afschineh Latifi ( A Memoir )

When it comes to their victimization they are all over the place and are the subject of all attention in the Western Press but Our "martyrs" on the otherhand count for nothing ? ...

ROYAL MARTYR: Prince Shahriar Shafiq Remembered 

Just came back from the Screening of ARGO and noticed the hypocritical and symplistic introduction to IRan's so called century old struggle for 'democracy' ...

I can say that intro of an otherwise entertaining film is Worthy of the Toilette Paper which covers our other eminent Pro Obama commentator on this thread ... If you see who I am talking about ? ...  

Cheers Mate,

DK 

PS: Apparently our dear shahbanou ( according to the movie's Intro ... endorsed in the end by no other than Jimmy Carter himself) loved taking Milk baths, Mossadegh was a Secular Democrat and the Shah would take children from their mothers and kill them ... stay tuned for my review ;0)

PSS: Speaking of Milani I Look forward to your observations on his Latest U TURN in the following blog:

MILANI’s U-TURN: Abbas Milani’s evolution from Pro Bush to Pro Obama 

Our Revolution and Monarchists brazen distortions of history

Historical fact of the matter remains that despotic monarchy in Iran was the only force responsible for destruction of Iranian democarcy through:

- Overthrowing of Dr.Mosadegh's legal government, and destruction of Iranian Civil Society.

- Establisahment of a single party fascist system by creation of Rastakhiz party,

- Crushing of Nationalist and Leftist forces,

- Augmentation and assistance to extreme right religious forces in pre 1979 Iran; see SAVAK's hand in glove cooperation with Hojatieh,

- Only an illiterate blind fool (like an x-SAVAK agent) can not see the difference between all the promises/lies that  Khomeini made in France and the actual deeds when he was in power. 

- Above and beyond all other factors shah and his violent and corrupt rule were the main reason why we ended up with khomeini.

- In the past 33 years monarchists have shown, in every single opportunity, that they have not changed a bit from their fascistic origins, and have stayed true to their roots, as unrepentent fascists that they were back in 79. Thus their long term isolation from Iranian people.

- Last but not least; monarchists hate Iranian people after all these years. Iranian people have the exact same sentiments for them in return. Cheers

"Our revolution" Ms Shorts?

Thank you for sharing your revolution with me but if you don't mind I must be excused from accepting this "honour"! Also I must thank you for providing the link to Mr Naficy's "approach" to your revolution. Although I had already read Mr Naficy's "touching" account of his emotional ups and downs long ago, your link reminded me of the pathetic bankruptcy of the leftist movements, in all their shades and colours. Mr Naficy's lament is nothing but a requiem for this tragic failure. Same is true about your "hijack"apology for the leftists rallying under the banner of Khomeini's leadership. Another failed theory.

Mr Naficy's words and work exude post-traumatic depression and it depresses me whenever I am reminded as to how a bunch of  ideological bigots could get it so catastrophically wrong. At least a number of Mr Naficy's ex-comrades have awoken to the fact and admit it that they were wrong or that they "didn't know" - Abbas Milani and Esmaeel Khoee to name but a few. But not Naficys of this world. 

Is is it not ironic that Mr Naficy chose to seek refuge (and obtained it) in the very land whom he despised and regarded as the true enemy of Iran's revolutionary movement i.e. America and not in Peykar's utopic land of Albania? Is it not also ironic that the same unrepentent ideolouge who believed he had to bomb and blast his wasy to reach freedom from the Shah's regime, is now advocating negotiations, through a second Obama administration, with the Islamic republic, the very regime that has killed his own wife and brother, plus hundreds of thousands of others? The word that springs to mind is: Hypocricy!

Darius-Jan - Here is some honest feedback

I look at your posts all the time, and I find them very confusing. They are packed with links, and limited text. I (personally) do not want to constantly connect to the links and leave the page or site I am on....i.e. work my way back.

Your job in puting up posts HAS TO BE to filter the information provided elsewhere and provide us (the reader) with a summary. What Americans call the "cliff-notes version".

Its a very lazy style of posting. If you have something to say, say it. Don't have someone else say it for you. If you have a point of view - share it directly. Stand up and voice your view - based on everything you have seen or read. Cut and paste from another site if you must....BUT LAY IT OUT FOR US TO READ BY JUST SCROLLING DOWN.

Now, I do know and understand the difference between a royalist and a monarchist. But - BIG BUT - look at your links. Its Royal this, Royal that. And my big fear is that a monarchist today, will become a royalist tomorrow....when given power. How can anyone be sure, given the history of Royals in Iran, that they will protect and maintain true democracy even if under a constitutional framework in the future for the people of Iran.

Finally, I remember one of the boys on this site accusing me of being anti-semetic because I was criticizing Israel. And he said basically and anti-zionist today will become an anti-semite tomorrow. That is how they view things.

And I think its a classical issue politically. Its a profound issue. How do you place 'red lines' and ensure people don't cross them with effectiveness. And I struggled to explain my views to them, but I know my views are firmly against racism and hatred of any group. However, the issue for me was how do I give them confidence that 'slippage' won't happen. They are correct to fear it, and I must find really strong, credible and powerful ways to persuade them that 'slippage' cannot happen.

And I think slippage from Monarchist to Royalist is a critical issue for Monarchists. How can you avoid it? Why did it not work in the past? When I see royal this and royal that in your links it does NOT portend confidence or credibility to your position. 

Obama is Leader of the 'Third World' Not the 'Free World' ...

Hugo Chavez prefers Barack Obama to Mitt Romney

Related:

SHADDAP @ YOUR FACE : Hugo Chavez renews support for Assad, brands rebels ‘terrorists’

I'm Not a Royalist Toilet Turban ... I'm a Monarchist !

Not surprising for a Jomhurykhah ( Secular or Not) Schizo like you not to see the difference ...

LIMITS TO HAMBASTEGHI: Fravahar on impossibiity of Rallying Jomhurykhahs (Secular or Not)

But Maybe if you did your homework you would ...

ROYAL FORUM: Explaining the Concept of a Constitutional Monarchy to a Staunch Republican 

Including on your Not so "Highjacked" Joon Joony "Devolution" ... 

Mashallah Ajoudani on Intellectuals and the '79 Revolution

Constitutionalist's Rebuttal of Republican Assessment that Revolution was "Highjacked"

Darius, I don't understand why Royalists support the republicans

Okay, Carter screwed up; but the real force protecting the Mullahs have been the Republican Party. From Reagan to "W" - the Republicans and the U.S. Christian right has maintained very strong links with the Mullahs in Iran. Its a simple fact.

Ask Ollie North, or McFarlane (who I bumped into a few times). The weakest sanctions on Iran, and the most amount of trade with Iran has always been under Republican presidents.

Larijani and his brothers are (a) not Iranian, and (b) agents. Just listen to how they speak both Farsi and English. Listen carefully. They are arabs, born in Iraq. UK educated.

THe people that in the end screwed the Shah the most were Republicans who did NOT stand by him when Carter was proposing a change. They threw him under the bus; and then tied in with the Mullahs. Its a fact.

Love & Revolution

Our Revolution of 1979 was hijacked by Khomeini and Majid Naficy was against his regime from the begining. You may read about his approach to the Revolution in a piece entitled "Love and Revolution" published in this site:
//iranian.com/main/2008/love-and-revoluti...

Romney's Horse Can't Run!

Anybody who enters a horse in the Olympics to compete in "Dressage" is not tough enough to be the leader of the free world!

Voting for Obama Equates Voting for Larijani and you know it !

Larijani: Iran prefers Obama - Israel News, Ynetnews

The entire Presentation of the Western Press is flawed in that they want to blame everything on Ahmadinejad as the only obstacle to US Iran normalization and with the not so innocent intention to sell Iran as no different from Castro's Cuba and that Iran is actually a 'democracy' and that the mullahs are "nationalists" ...

The West and americans are wrong on Both accounts ...  

They have gone as far as ridiculously compare the Larijanis to the "Kennedy Brothers of Iran":

The «KENNEDYs» OF IRAN: Fareed Zakaria interviews Muhammad Larijani (21 Nov. 2010)  

And YOU EYE RANIANS are Falling for it Once More Time just as YOU Did for the Green Boloney Movement :

Romney the trust fund kid.

Romney is not different from mullahs in Iran.  Corrupt, dishonest, and ruthless, a phoney with no real character or integrity.  He is not even good enough to be Obama's butler, let alone rival.  

My choice is clear!! too bad I do not live in one of the toss up states.  

Well Put anglophile Jan ... ;0) ...

I voted for Obama Once ... He needs to deserve mine this time round ! 

How about this deal Mr Naficy?

Your support for Reza Pahlavi in exchange for my vote for Obama. At least this way you may redeem your past's unrepentent support for Khomeini's revolution.