Iranian Liberal Democrat

masoud khan....

by shushtari on Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:47 AM PDT

I wonder what you think of reza shah's contributions in modernizing iran, and pulling out of he hell which was created by the thieving qajars for 200 years....

 

I wonder why you have not 'researched' the plunder of iran at the hands of the mullahs????? is that not more relevant??

 

how much have iranians and iran lost in terms of wealth, opportunity and respect at the hands of the mullahs for the past 31 years.......

you should spend your time 'researching' this subject, as iran owes a great deal to reza shah for his efforts to bring it into the modern world.

 

It is very peculiar that you are trying to focus attention on this subject while our country is being destroyed by the akhoonds! 

Thank You Kazemzadeh,

by Q on Sat Aug 07, 2010 05:29 PM PDT

this analysis was badly needed.

I firmly believe in order to move forward in any meaningful way, we have to be able to see reality in an objective, rational way and get out of this vicious cycle of minimizing and excusing the crimes of those we promote and maximizing the faults those we are against. This is the exact opposite of the Monrachist MO.

I joke with some of the die-hard Monarchists who seriously try to say "Shah earned his wealth" (many believe it even now) by saying that yes, he must have been a nightly cab driver, after having done his Kingly duties during the day.

Unfortunately too many Monarchists either cannot or will not be objective, partly because their entire appeal and political viability (such as it is) depends on nostaligic "feel good" emotionalism, not the truth. And partly because they grew up in a cacoon of Pahlavi mythology that rewarded them for their loyalty with massive wealth and prestigue. If they affirmed the lies, they became "insiders" and successful, if they didn't, they wouldn't be promoted. Naturally, they started believing what was good for them in the pocketbook, and teaching that to their children and now they cannot escape from it.

I personally think RP and the Monarchists could go much further if they actually take responsibility for established facts of history, come clean with their accounting of how much money they have taken from Iran, and present themselves as a new alternative, not the same old alternative, already rejected by the Iranian people in an overwhelming way.

MK

by oktaby on Thu Aug 05, 2010 07:57 PM PDT

You are welcome.

Improvements welcome but not expected. You made up your mind before research began.  

OKtaby

Thank You

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Thu Aug 05, 2010 05:19 PM PDT

Ahura jaan,

Thank you for your kind and generous comments.   

Best regards,

Masoud

　

=======================================

 

Dear Oktaby,

Thank you for your "Fair and Balanced" reporting.

Best,

Masoud

　　

Brother Ahura, your Dr. MK's evidence holds as

by pastor bill rennick on Thu Aug 05, 2010 04:58 PM PDT

much H2O as the evidence put forward by the flat-Earth society on the flatness of the planet Earth!

Sir. planet Earth is an sphere!

 

Dr. Masoud Kazemzadeh, A Head and Shoulder Above the Crowd

by Ahura on Thu Aug 05, 2010 04:51 PM PDT

There is a wealth of information that you have posted in this blog and in your responses to comments by the readers.  Fair minded individuals have a chance to examine the documents and draw their own conclusions.  You truly stand a head and shoulder above the crowd here, Dr. Kazemzadeh. Thank you for your efforts and dedication in compiling this work, and your polite responses to all inquiries including the offensive ones.

The presented documents and writings could only be refuted by producing evidence to the contrary or pointing out the fallacy in the arguments and the conclusions. Attacking the writer and using vulgarity not only fails to disprove the findings but shows the weakness and the caliber of the individuals engaged in such actions.

Mr. Reza Pahlavi and Mrs. Farah Diba Pahlavi can easily make their wealth and inheritance a public record and refute the looting allegations.

Pretty low

by oktaby on Thu Aug 05, 2010 08:53 AM PDT

quality and persistently so. You are skating all over the place MK. The quality and intent of Rostam's argument on several comments is infinitely stronger & more balanced than the haphazard stuff you try to pass as research. If you had a modicum of fairness, you would have left it alone a dozen comments ago. This is not about Monarchy & Pahlavi's. They did take like all do; East, West, North & South. It is not about JZM either that you try to resurrect and doing such a poor job of. It is certainly not about history.

It is about your fixation, low quality and inability to conduct balanced research even at low quality. I feel sorry for any student that you teach. Lack of credibility mixed with inability to learn & improve is a dangerous combination.

OKtaby

for Rostam; what GDP measures and what it does not measure

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Thu Aug 05, 2010 01:34 AM PDT

Dear Rostam,

The piece that you or another person wrote contains major problems.  Let me mention one minor and one major problem.

 

Minor Problem　

1. The piece does NOT provide what Iran’s GNP (or GDP) was. The piece provides the GDP of Turkey. Then it claims that because Turkey was more advanced than Iran, then Iran’s GDP must have been lower than that of Turkey.

You or the author HAS to provide the GNP or GDP of Iran.

But the GDP of Iran is NOT very relevant to this discussion.

　

Major Problem

2. The GDP/GNP measures the goods and services produced in a country. It does NOT measure the value of wealth in the properties. Let me give an example.

A farm that produces wheat (or potatoes) contributes what it sells to the GNP/GDP. For example, that farm sells $1 million of wheat, then the GNP/GDP contribution of this farm is $1 million.

But if the owner sells this farm, he may get $20 million for this farm.

　

Now, if a guy (e.g., Reza Shah) comes in and steals this farm. And then sells this farm for $20 million. He (e.g., Reza Shah) can transfer $20 million to his bank account.

　

If someone comes and says hey the GDP contribution of this farm was $1 million between this year and that year, and this comes of total of $17 million for 17 years, how could you say this person could have looted $20 million from this farm?

　

The Majd book relies upon documents that directly state or guess how much Reza Shah had in various banks. The sources that contributed to Reza Shah’s account come from many sources some of which may not be measures by the GNP/GDP. Bribes (from foreign and domestic sources) are not part of the GDP. Much of the actually production in 1920-1940s were not measured well. So a land may have produced a lot of profits, but the state was not developed enough to measure this. So the actual GNP was much higher than the official data suggest due to under-reporting and the lack of ability of the state to measure them.

　

I hope this is helpful.

Best regards,

Masoud

 

tafreh naro!

by Rostam on Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:43 PM PDT

How did Majd came with $250 million dollars when the entire GDP of Iran from the 20s, 30s and half of 40s was $440 million?

Instead of critisizing Majd for his BS work (such as the above numbers), you praise him. You are not an impartial researcher. You are biased.

You sound more like Islamist or Monarchist thugs and their gang of "scholars". Does it make any difference that you wear Mossadeghi clothes?

You are very disappointing. You have lost credibility and respect.

On Reza Shah's Bank Accounts

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:08 PM PDT

Dear Rostam,

Dr. Majd’s book is published by the University Press of Florida, which is a highly respected university press. The process by which scholarly presses publish is that they send the manuscript to at least two anonymous referees, who are scholars that are regarded as among the top scholars in that particular field.

In this book, Dr. Majd provides extensive documentation, mostly from American diplomatic internal correspondence between their representatives in Iran back to the State Department, as well as other documents in the U.S. government sources (e.g., FBI). He has even published some of these evidence in the book (which is quite rare, because it is much more expensive than regular pages and the presses like to avoid them).

I am including the link to page 305. The chapter in pp. 305-330. The endnotes are pp. 407-409.

　//books.google.com/books?id=rabPD_Arfy8C&pg=PA305&dq=Mohammad+Majd+Great+Britain+Reza+Shah+The+Diversion+of+Iran's+Oil+Revenues+and+Reza+Shah's+Foreign+Bank+Accounts+Chapter+Twelve&hl=en&ei=A1NaTK6RDYH68Abv35yCAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

　　

The google book, does not have all the pages in its site. Readers can look at what is available and judge for themselves. They can also get the book from a library or purchase it. Read it and see whether or not Dr. Majd conclusions correspond with the evidence that he provides.

　

Best,

Masoud

　

Dr. Kazemzadeh, read carefully:

by Rostam on Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:16 PM PDT

You are so biased that you are rendering yourself to a low level of intellectuality. In your haste to crush the Pahalvis in any ways you can, you even go as far as using the bankrupt Dr. Mohamad Majd as a reference to prove Pahlavis's lootings.

The lands of Dr. Majd's father (whiche were stolen to begin with) were taken away by Reza Shah, what else do you expect him to write about the Pahalvis?

In his book, Dr. Majd claims that Iran's population in 1914 was 20 millions. But it wasn't. It was only 11 million. He exagerates the number in order to make his points in the book.

In his book, Dr. Majd claims that in 1941, Reza Shah had $250 million dollars in cash in various foreign and domestic banks.

Copies and pasted from another comment:

Let's analyze this claim a bit:

First, we'll need to know how much was there to steal from. Knowing Iran's GDP during Reza Shah's reign could help figure this. However, it is very difficult to know the exact GDP of Iran in those times. But nevertheless, it can be deduced with good accuracy based on other available data.

Turkey's total GDP from 1923 to 1941 (adding all years) was $630 million dollars in 2009 dollars. (The World Economy by Angus Maddison, here is a link to the relevant page of this book:  //books.google.com/books?id=6pypmvICANIC&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157 

and here is a link to convert dollar amounts to 2009 dollars: //www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm )

As we all know, Iran's economy was lagging behind Turkey in those years. Even if we assume that Iran's GDP was 70% of Turkey's in those years (it was much less), then Iran's total GDP from 1923 to 1941 would have been approximately $440 million dollars in 2009 dollars, adding all the years.

The author claims that $250 million dollars, $3.6 Billion in 2009 dollars, was taken away by Reza Shah. How can this be when Iran's ENTIRE gdp for the sum of ALL the years from 1923 to 1941 was only $440 million in 2009 dollars? How did he pull this?

Or is it that Dr. Majds "credible" American documents were not so credible after all? Do they even exist, or did he outright lie by fabricating these "credible" documents in his mind in order to feed them to the readers?  

I am sure that Dr. Majd or the author would jump in and say things like, errr... we meant to say $250 million in 2009 dollars, not in 1941 dollars. But even then, this would only mean that more than half of the Iran's ENTIRE gdp sum from 1923 to 1941, was CONVERTED to cash and transferred to Reza Shah's foreign and domestic banks!!  

How ridiculous is this? Dr. Majd, the author of this blog and his cheerleaders should answer it to themselves, not to the rest of us, because we already know the answers.

Dr. Kazemzadeh, what do you have to say now about your "reference" to Dr. Majd's worthless claims? Shame on you, a Phd, for using a worthless book as your reference.

Simply put, in order to crush the Pahlavis, you are willing to sell your own credibility in public.

P_J

by AryamehrNYC on Wed Aug 04, 2010 08:43 AM PDT

Please provide substantive documentation about this $52BB you claim was looted from the Imperial coffers.  Posting hearsay you overheard whilst serving tea in your mother's office in Shahreh-No is not a valid source. 

Until then, please refarin from posting your Verbal Diarrhea tirades any further.

Majd Book

by AryamehrNYC on Wed Aug 04, 2010 05:53 AM PDT

Dear Sir,

I respectfully have to doubt the excerpt of the book you have posted by Mohammad Gholi Majd.  As history has dutifully shown, Great Britain had an enormous "hard on" for Reza Shah as he dared to challenge the D'Arcy Agreement.  It is also a known historical fact that the British government made it their number one prioroty to defame and discredit Reza Shah to the extent that they would be able to replace him as Shah with another one of their Qajar lackey's who would serve their financial purposes even further. 

Posting such historical untruths, and pure propuganda I might add, serves as another futile attempt to further defame Reza Shah to the relative uninformed reader and detract well-deserved credit from the accomplishments he made for Iran whilst in power. 

KM

by Rostam on Wed Aug 04, 2010 05:18 AM PDT

You keep referring to the necessary "hard work" required in order to create a meaningful coallition. The "hard" work necessary is due to people like Sakooyi, you and others from different camps that keep attacking and accusing each other.

If these kind of people are removed from the equation, the much needed unity could be achieved.

Your way which is clouded by the heavy burden of baggages you carry from the past make your approach and mentality too "small" to be of any significance. You must learn to grow beyond these baggages. You must learn to grow beyond the past. You must learn to grow beyond hate. You must learn to grow beyond rigidity and fanatism.

Those who think like you are not qualified to even talk about a coallition, let alone lead it or participate in creating it. As you read these lines, a new breed of leaders are shaping and forming in Iran and abroad as well, which unlike you, they can think "big" and be free of baggages of the past, and therefore be more creative, innovative and effective.

In time, they will sweep fossilized people like you away, replacing you and creating an atomsphere of true hope and possibilities, and breathing a new life in the opposition.

To all fossil monarchist, Jebheye Mellist, communist or whatever: You have failed us for 30 years. Now step aside please and open up room for new people with new ideas and new visions to come forward and take your place.

Signed by a frustrated Iranian who is tired of fossils and their failed and "small" mentalities.

P.S. Again, my apologies for being blunt. There is no more room for "taarof" anymore.

Rostam

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Tue Aug 03, 2010 04:14 AM PDT

Rostam jaan,

1. I disagree that we could not walk and chew gum at the same time. This is our prime difference. If you think spending 2 hours reading my blog has such impact on Iranian politics, all I can say is that I am flattered. Unfortunately, I don’t think the Iranian population is waiting for my every word. And certainly spending 2 hours gaining a set of information and analysis could not have bad impact on the struggle against the terrorist regime.

2. In my analysis, and strategy, I propose the alliance of all pro-democracy forces. And I have been working soooooooo much on this.

3. Another major difference between you and I is that we differ greatly on our analysis on the monarchists. You seem to think that RP is for democracy. That his only problem is that he is biorzeh. I hold a different analysis. I have already made the argument. I believe that the monarchists are a terribly dictatorial force. You have the right to disagree with my analysis. I believe that my analysis is correct.

You think that merely because RP says that he is for democracy, therefore he is for democracy. Well, Ahmadinjead says that he is for democracy. And Khamenei says that the majority support him. So does the PMOI. So does Khatami. You believe Reza Pahlavi. I do NOT.

　

4. If YOU advocate the coalition of all opposition groups, then en goyo en meidan. You can start by monarchists and the PMOI. If you succeed in this coalition, then you can get this coalition to expand to include the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdestan. Then, you can get Komelh. Then, the Jondollah. And then the Hezb Kommunist Kargari. What is stopping Reza Pahlavi from doing this coalition? What is stopping YOU, my friend, from doing this? I am not stopping you or Mr. Pahlavi. Good luck.

　

5. Our strategy is to get all the pro-democracy parties, groups, unions, syndicates, as well as individuals into our pro-democracy coalition. I can tell you this is very hard work. This is very hard in our political culture. If you have not actually sat down with other leaders of opposition parties, you have no idea how hard this is. This is the first step and I do not know what language to use to convey the hardness of this task.

You might think that all one has to do is to proclaim: "all Iranians unite." Talk is cheap. Actually, mere talk with no plan and no hard work simply creates illusions. Illusions will create disappointment.

You have good intentions and are a decent person. But you do not realize how one goes about making coalitions. I hope this is helpful. I like people being blunt. Honesty is the best policy.

　

Best wishes,

Masoud

 

KM: You are wong in all counts

by Rostam on Tue Aug 03, 2010 03:18 AM PDT

Let's start:

You wrote: "I can assure you that we can walk and chew gum at the same time"

Wrong. We cannot walk and chew gum when we are under fire by our enemy (IRI) from all directions, when we have such limited resources and when we are so dispersed.

You wrote: "correctly praise Dr. Bakhtiar for doing the right thing: to warn the people that Khomeini was worse than the Shah. What I am doing in this blog and also in this other blog"

You want to warn us that Khomeini is worst than the Shah? In 2010? By attacking the dead Shah? Are you kidding?

You wrote: "I think the amound of information and analysis gained from 1-2 hours would not divert the attention of the movement to overthrow the fundamentalist regime. Does it?"

Yes it does. In fact this is the IRI's strategy. To divert our attention with just about anything, left and right. Dr. Kazemzadeh, trust me, the people of Iran are already informed and don't need to deal with irrelvant things such as the wealth of Mossadegh or the Shah. That 1/2 hour could be and must be spent on more pressing issues.

You wrote: "Dr. Mossadegh did NOT steal from anyone. He did not even take a salary when he was Prime Minister. He even paid for the foreign trip as prime minister out of his own pocket. Yes, he was of the nobility and inherited some."

The same could be said about the bi orzeh Reza Pahlavi. He did not steal from anyone, has no salary and spends out of his own pocket for traveling. And yes he was of nobility and inherited some. So what's the difference with Mossadegh?

If you point to his father, I'll point to Mossadegh's father. Where did Mossadegh's father or grand father got their money? It will inevitably lead to some Ghajari taking (read: stealing) lands by force from poor peasants. This was the norm in Iran for centuries upon centuries.

You wrote: "And he (Mossadegh) spent it for the national interest of Iran. In other words, Dr. Mossadegh sacrificed his wealth for the national interest of Iran."

By paying out of his own pocket for a couple of trips? And by not getting paid for couple of years and living off of his own riches? You call this "sacrificing his wealth for the national interest of Iran"? Come on Dr. Kazemzadeh, come on. This kind of reasoning is beneath a holder of a Phd.

You could have had an argument if Mossadegh "returned" all of his stolen riches and wealth to the people of Iran.

You wrote: "The fundamentalist regime actually did a full investigation into the wealth of his grandson Dr. Matin-Daftari and found that he owned very very little"

The regime can launch a full investigation on the wealth of some Pahlavi grandson and find out the same. Do you see the parallels here?

You wrote: "One could not be both advocating a constitution based on republican democracy and communist one-party state, as well as a Pahlavi dictatorship."

Pahlavi dictatorship? When did Reza Pahlavi advocated a dictatorship? Again, I am not fond of this bi orzeh Reza Pahalvi, but I know he does not promote dictatorship. Again, come on Kazemzadeh, come on.

In 1979, Jebehey Melli failed Iran as much as did the Shah and many other groups and individuals. You cannot feel that you and JM are the only ones entitled to evolution and change for the better, but all others are not.

In fact monarchists have evolved a lot more than JM has!

You wrote: "Actually, JM is the only coalition in our history that has had a diverse group in its ranks."

This is a patently false and self-serving statement.

You worte: "In conclusion, coalitions do not come about by simply yelling and shouting. They come about with hard work. They take many many hours and working together."

Tell me about it! So perhaps now, you'd better take your own advice and stop yelling about the shah and instead start learning to work together to free Iran.

And my conclusion is that as long as there are people like you (whether JM, monarchist, socialist, or whatever) who spread poison, rumors, "nefaagh", lajan parakani, hate and doubt among people, we'll never be able to free Iran. The opposition must first get rid of the likes of Sakooyi (monarchist camp), you (JM camp) and other inept individuals who for the past 30 years have been the greatest obstacle in achieving unity against the regime.

My apologies for being blunt.

For Rostam

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:39 AM PDT

Dear Rostam,

Thank you for your note. Let me respond to your concerns.

1. I can assure you that we can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is our primary task to get rid of the fundamentalist terrorist regime and help establish freedom, democracy, and human rights in Iran. This struggle against the fundamentalist regime and the struggle to establish democracy are our main struggle.

　

2. One of the main lessons of the 1977-1979 revolution was that our intellectuals did not do their task – that of informing the people – of the problems with those that opposed the Shah such as Khomeini. You, yourself, correctly praise Dr. Bakhtiar for doing the right thing: to warn the people that Khomeini was worse than the Shah. What I am doing in this blog and also in this other blog

//iranian.com/main/blog/masoud-kazemzadeh/oriana-fallaci-interview-mohammad-reza-shah-religion

 

　

is the same. The more information and analysis the people have the better our decisions will be. We should not fear more information and more analysis. It is not necessary to close our eyes, close our ears, close our minds, in order to fight against the fundamentalist regime more effectively. Actually, the more info and the more analysis, the higher the likelihood that we could choose a better strategy and better tactics.   This is ONE blog.  It takes at most 1 or 2 hours to read it.  I think the amound of information and analysis gained from 1-2 hours would not divert the attention of the movement to overthrow the fundamentalist regime.  Does it?

　

3. Your question on Dr. Mossadegh’s wealth is fully 100% legitimate. Dr. Mossadegh did NOT steal from anyone. He did not even take a salary when he was Prime Minister. He even paid for the foreign trip as prime minister out of his own pocket. Yes, he was of the nobility and inherited some. And he spent it for the national interest of Iran. In other words, Dr. Mossadegh sacrificed his wealth for the national interest of Iran.

The fundamentalist regime actually did a full investigation into the wealth of his grandson Dr. Matin-Daftari and found that he owned very very little. .

　

4. You wrote: "

Secondly, as once my dear friend Jamshid said, Jebheye Melli will always remain a small and limited "Jebheye Mossadegh" and never become an expanded and contender "Jebheye Melli", as long as the retarded brains of its members don't realize that in order to truly be "Melli", they must encompass and embrace all segments of the Iranian society, including its large monarchist population, communists, socialists, and many religious groups, so long that they are not involved with the support of the IRI regime."

　

　

MK: JM is one organization. The JM is not a totalitarian entity. What we want is the establishment of a secular democratic republic, where ALL parties are free to have their own organizations, their papers, and participate in 100% free and democratic elections. It does not make sense to have a political organization that includes right-wing policies as well as socialist policies as well as communist policies. One could not be both advocating a constitution based on republican democracy and communist one-party state, as well as a Pahlavi dictatorship. We can, and we HAVE defended the human rights of the monarchists in 1979 when all others wanted to summarily execute them. And we defended the human rights of the communists in 1970s when the Shah was executing and torturing them as we did in 1950s.

　

Actually, JM is the only coalition in our history that has had a diverse group in its ranks. Most of us are liberal democrat, but we have social democrats as well as some democratic Marxists, as well as Islamists who accept the separation of religion and state. We have had this since 1949.

This is very significant considering the political culture of Iranians that comprises excessive divisiveness. In the past 2 years, JM inside Iran as well as outside Iran has been working very hard to bring together diverse groups and individuals. We have had some success. Inside although things had some difficulties and did not fully succeed, this was achieved:

//iranian.com/main/blog/masoud-kazemzadeh...

　

//melliun.org/opos/09/05/26komiteham.htm

　

　

I can tell you that JM-Abroad has been working very hard in the past 2-3 years and supporters of Dr. Bakhtiar and JM-Abroad are now working hand in hand.

　

　

//melliun.org/

//melliun.org/sazmanhn.htm

　

　

In conclusion, coalitions do not come about by simply yelling and shouting. They come about with hard work. They take many many hours and working together. I would say that we have succeeded in this more than ANY other groups. Could you name one other coalition that several real bona fide groups have created a coalition?

It is easy, indeed very easy, to use demagogic language. One has to be honest with the people and truthfully tell them about obstacles and problems. Actually, we need to be weary of those who make false promises. Please simply look and see what group works hard and actually brings other groups into unity.

　

With best wishes,

Masoud

　

　

P.S. If I missed any point in your post, please remind me, and I will try my best to respond.

　

سقوط و انحطاط جبهه‌ ملی‌...

Rostam
Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:35 PM PDT

... is now complete by the new JM generation.

First let me tell you that I support a republic and I think monarchy is an outdated, outmoded and fossilized system. I will not vote for Reza Pahlavi, even as a president, because he is ineffective in politics in general.

But what about Jebheye Melli (JM)?

The old generation JM paved the way for one of the most ruthless dictatorships Iran has seen. Who can forget Sanjabi, Bazargan and the rest of the gang that cooporated with Khomeini in order to overthrow the Shah without any attention to the possible disasters that were awaiting?

Didn't Bakhtiar repeatitevly warn them about it? Did they listen? No!

Now, let's take a look at the second generation JM, people like Dr. Kazemzadeh...

While our country is burning, while rape and murder is imposed on our people, while Iran is being looted and butchered, while political prisoners are rotting in prisons, while Iranians are indignified with stonings and amputations, what does the new generation JM does?

khalak zanak baazi, gossipping and similar things. And do so about a man who died 30 years ago. This is the low that JM has fallen today. This is why the subject of my post reads, "The fall and decay of JM."

Instead of focusing on the burning and urgent matters of today's Iran and providing us with solutions, JM supporters engage in the art of gossiping about the Shah's wealth.

Well, what about Mossadegh's wealth? Where did he get all his lands and money, which rivaled that of the richest men in Iran? Do you see where this stupid behaviour take us to? To nowhere. To a bombast.

Dr. Kazemzadeh, you are detached from the realities of Iran. While teaching in an air conditioned classroom here in the US, you are detached from the pain and sufferings that the people of Iran are enduring.

Secondly, as once my dear friend Jamshid said, Jebheye Melli will always remain a small and limited "Jebheye Mossadegh" and never become an expanded and contender "Jebheye Melli", as long as the retarded brains of its members don't realize that in order to truly be "Melli", they must encompass and embrace all segments of the Iranian society, including its large monarchist population, communists, socialists, and many religious groups, so long that they are not involved with the support of the IRI regime.

Dr. Kazemzadeh, you are the embodiment of JM's decay. And that's that.

on Shah's Subservience to Foreign Powers

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:57 PM PDT

//www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2010/08/100802_shah_anniv30_sarkoohi_nahavandi_book.shtml

 

در گزارش نهاوندی شاه به رغم دانش گسترده درباره سیاست خارجی از وضعیت داخلی کشور کم رین آگاهی ندارد. اطرافیان نیز می دانند که با گفتن واقعیت ها مجازات خواهند شد. بر اساس این گزارش شاه به رغم ادعای ناسیونالیستی از آمریکا و انگلیس حرف شنوی دارد و معتقد است و به صراحت به نهاوندی می گوید «اگر آمریکائی بخواهند می تواند هر کاری که بخواهد بکند.»

نهاوندی از شاه نمی پرسد اگر نخواهند چه؟ اما جواب معلوم است. شاه در بحرانی ترین روزها نیز نظر سفیران آمریکا و انگلیس را بر مصلحت و سود کشور و خود و خاندان خود و بر نظریات همه مشاوران و مقامات خود ترجیح می دهد.

زمانی که نهاوندی از شاه می خواهد تا برای آرام شدن بحران با فساد مبارزه کند شاه به او می گوید «تا هنگامی که آمریکائی ها از من پشتیبانی می کنند می توانم هر چه می خواهم بکنم و هیج کس نخواهد توانست مرا از کار بیندازد، آمریکائی ها هرگز مرا رها نخواهند»

چند ماه بعد شاه به جای توجه به طرحی که نهاوندی برای کنترل بحران ارائه می دهد به او می گوید «شاید اوضاع بهتر شود سرگرم گفت و گو با آمریکائی ها هستم که پشت همه تحریک ها هستند.»

شاه به دستور آمریکائی ها «طرح خاش» را که طرح ستاد ارتش برای سرکوب انقلاب بود خنثا می کند، چرا که «سفیران آمریکا و انگلیس از شاه می خواهند که [غلامعلی] اویسی [فرماندار نظامی تهران] را کنار بگذارد».

راه پیمائی تاسوعا و عاشورا از گره گاه های انقلاب بود. برگزاری این دو راهپیمائی، که روز دوم به دلیل اطمینان از منفعل بودن ارتش با استقبال گسترده تر رو به رو شد، قدرت مخالفان شاه را تثبیت کرد.

ارتش در این دو روز منفعل ماند چرا که به گفته شاه «آنتونی پارسونز (سفیر انگلیس در ایران) از من خواست اجازه راه پیمائی بدهم »

 

 

for Robert

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:55 PM PDT

Robert,

　

Let me answer your points from the last one, first.  I will try to answer all your questions.

　

　

R:

One final point: I assume you are an anti-monarchist and definitely anti-Pahlavi. The best you can do to return this alleged "loot" to Iran is to follow Reza Pahlavi back into a democratic Iran. Either he'll be king or as he has said a private citizen in a democratic Iranian Republic. I assume he'll take the loot back with him being a creature of luxury and all. Then you can sue him in a court of law and present all your youtube clips and text excerpts as evidence.

　

MK: I am secular liberal democrat of the National Front. The notion of constitutional monarchy with Pahlavi is false and dangerous. Why there cannot be a democracy with Pahlavis in a constitutional monarchy.

1. In order to establish the Pahlavi monarchy by a referendum, they need to have at least 50% plus one of the votes. Anyone who knows much about the Iranian politics, knows that the Pahlavis have only a small fraction support. My estimate is that the Pahlavis have the support of somewhere between 5% and 10% of the population. There are large number of indicators one can look at. For example, several years ago, the Daftar Tahkim Vahdat at Amir kabir University held an internet poll for its students. About 6% said they were hard-liners, 4% said they were reformists, 5% said they want return of monarchy, and 85% said they want "a democratic republic." Last week, another poll was published by Kaleme that was apparently leaked to it. It was conduced by Jihad Daneshgahi for the regime.

//www.kaleme.com/1389/05/02/klm-26668

see Table 12

15.7 % want the status quo

49.4% want gradual reforms

34.6% want fundamental change

0.3 don’t know

　

　

The 35% who wants fundamental change includes monarchists, communists, PMOI, and secular republicans.

The 49% that wants gradual change does NOT include monarchists and PMOI. It does include many in communist groups and among secular democratic republicans. And of course the reformists and melli-mazhabis.

The 16% are the hardliners.

 

Monarchists are only a fraction of this 35%.  I think my estimate of 5 to 10 percent is quite accurate.　

 

So, if the monarchists constitute a minority of the population, how could they win a referendum? The answer is that they cannot.

ALL other political groups among Iranians intensely hate and oppose the monarchy. The only way Reza Pahlavi can rule is by a vicious violent dictatorship based on brutal repression of the Iranian people just like his father and grandfather.

　

　

　

2. Great many of Pahlavi monarchists are quite fascistic and terribly dictatorial. They are unrepentant for the dictatorship and repression of the Pahlavi tyranny. Most of them say that the problem with Mohammad Reza Shah was that he did not kill enough people. In other words, the social base of the Pahlavis is terribly dictatorial. Very few monarchists say that they problem was that the Shah did not release the political prisoners and respect the constitution and allow free and democratic elections. Very few (if any) Pahlavists condemn the 1953 coup and the collaboration of the Shah with CIA against the national interest of Iran Very few condemn the utter puppet nature of the Shah (some deny it). Please see this

//www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2010/08/100802_shah_anniv30_sarkoohi_nahavandi_book.shtml

 

 

Please see how Nahavandi explains the mind of the shah. See what the shah says. Mohammad Reza Shah regarded himself to be ruling because the U.S. (and before 1953, the British) so wanted.

　

Should we believe the words of Reza Pahlavi about being for democracy and constitutional monarchy. The Pahlavis have a history of brutal dictatorship. When they did not have total power, they TALKED about constitution and as soon as they could they established their tyranny. This tactic was also used by Khomeini; when in Paris he talked about freedom and democracy; as soon as he could he established his brutal dictatorship.

In his interviews, Reza Pahlavi refused to condemn the brutal dictatorship of his father and grandfather. How could someone be for democracy but not condemn the brutal tyranny in Iran???????

The Pahlavi regime was a type of regime that was possible under the global conditions of colonialism. The British helped bring Reza Shah to power to serve their interests. And got rid of him when he did not do what they wanted. They also put Mohammad Reza Shah to power and returned him to power in the 1953 coup, and helped him in power for many years.

The overwhelming majority of the Iranian people regarded Mohammad Reza Shah as puppet. That is why the main slogan of the revolution was esteghlal, independence. Today, the overwhelming majority of the Iranian people want to get rid of the fundamentalist regime. But as far as I am able to see, the overwhelming majority do not want to lose our independence. Reza Pahlavi is regarded by many as a puppet of foreign interests.

　

In sum, I do not see a constitutional monarchy in Iran’s future. If there will be a return of Pahlavi monarchy, it will cause a prolonged bloody civil war. That form of regime is like trying to bring back a dinosaur to life. It will cause terrible terrible damage to Iran. Similar regime in the world were either overthrown in independence struggles, evolved gradually, or remain in power via repression. Iranian people want freedom of expression. And they will want to publish about the puppet nature of the Pahlavis, about their brutal dictatorship, about their looting of others’ wealth, and .... The point is that the Iranian people did not, and do not, regard the Pahlavis as legitimate. The Pahlavis need to hear the voice of the people. Obviously they did not hear them before.

　

My blog was to make a point. The Pahlavis can easily publish their tax returns. Reza Pahlavi, Farah Pahlavi, and Ashraf Pahlavi should publish their wealth. Reza Pahlavi has taken the oath to be the next king and has not renounced his oath. Do we have the right to demand that at a minimum the Pahlavi family members should publish their wealth? Reza Pahlavi does not have job, does he? Farah Diba does not have a job, does she? Is this legitimate to demand that they release documents proving how much money they had in 1979?

The larger point is this. There is no way that the majority of the Iranian people will vote to return RP to power. Pahlavis represent repression, dictatorship, financial corruption, and subservience to foreign powers. The fundamentalist regime BENEFITS from having Reza Pahlavi as face of the opposition. Why? Because they can say that the opposition is led by those who were nokar of the foreign powers, those who had SAVAK, those who looted Iran.

The fundamentalist regime will use the presence of Reza Pahlavi to undermines those forces who represent independence, freedom, democracy.

Now imagine what can Reza Pahlavi do that would harm the IRI? If tomorrow RP renounced monarchy, that would be hugely harmful to the IRI. The Pahlavis have an ugly record which is used by the IRI to attack the rest of us.

I am primarily interested in seeing freedom and democracy in Iran. The Pahlavi family loot is not my primary concern.

　

　

 

　

　

Now back to the other stuff.

R:

Your youtube clip contained nothing but allegations made by IRI during the hostage crisis. I don't know if what the IRI was alleging is true or whether they were talking about the assets frozen by the US. You might understand that the IRI might have preferred to call some of frozen money Shah's "loot" (to use your term) instead of "money we lost because we took diplomats hostages".

　

　

　

MK:

It was the provisional government that began the process of attempting to get back the Pahlavi loot. Because of the moron Khomeini and the moronic action of the fundamentalist terrorist students, Iran lost the possibility.

After the terrorists took hostages, the U.S. government froze the assets of the Iranian government in American banks. They were about 12 billion dollars and were about proceeds from the sale of oil. These funds had nothing to do with the Pahlavi family loot.

　

　

　

　

R:

　

As I said I don't dispute that Reza Shah took over land. To allege he overtook some of Iran's "industry" is laughable since Iran had no - I repeat - no industry during the Qajar era.

　

　

　

MK: on page 149 the text states:

　

Majd directly quotes Hart as stating: "He [Bushehri, an Qajar Prince with land and industrial stuff] also established lumber mills in the north which produced ties for the railroad building project in the section. Word came to the Shah that Bushehri was making a profit in selling in this way indirectly to the Government and confiscated his river and gulf transports, his mills and timber in Mazandaran. All confiscations are made in the name of the Shah and the property so taken passes to him, not the government."

And the above was from his admirer.

　

　

　

Majd states: "Bushehri’s case is particularly interesting because it confirms that Reza Shah confiscated not only agricultural properties, but also industrial mills and even river and sea transportation."

　

　

　

　

　

R: 1. You have to offer some evidence that that the allegations in the texts and clips are true (it would help if you stop citing IRI's allegations or 30 yr old information included in works whose main purpose had nothing to do with the Shah's wealth.)

　

　

　

MK: Actually Robert Graham is highly regarded. He was correspondent for the Financial Times, one of the most respected business publications in the world. He was based in Tehran between 1975 and 1977 for the Financial Times. This is well cited by other scholars. He lists large numbers of Shah’s properties (i.e., LOOT) from banks (Bank of Omran) to insurance companies, to hotels, etc.

This is a HIGHLY credible source.

The Times magazine uses Graham in this article on our very subject:

//www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,912545-8,00.html

 

　

　

　

　

　

R:

2. Crucially, You have to offer some evidence that the "loot" remained under the control of the Pahlavi family after the revolution. We are talking about billions here. All I've seen of the Pahlavi wealth in reports is a well-appointed house in (I think) Virginia.

　

　

MK: The Swiss banks do not easily share the information on their accounts. The "some evidence" I presented included the news report. This is the job of journalists to ask and demand from Reza Pahlavi, Farah Diba and other Pahlavi family members to show their tax returns.

　

　

　

I hope I answered all your questions.

　

Best,

Masoud

 

　

Just Remember How They Lived

by HHH on Mon Aug 02, 2010 09:30 PM PDT

Reza shah was a soldier, lived like a soldier and died like a soldier. Never saw him roll in luxury and eat lobster while playing with his collection of jewels.

Mohammad Reza shah lived in luxury but mostly just symbolic, his palace was an old building, his crown was a loaner and his uniform not much fancier than my father's. So he took a few millions to look a little like Queen of England after her few billions. As if there is a poor king somewhere in the world. There isn't, not even in the poorest parts of Africa. If they live like a peasant they'd be called an "actor" (like Ahmadinejad) and if they show luxury the'd be called a "Thief".

Reza, the crown-prince of Dream-county is an average rich man with a few millions, like hundreds of average "bazari" Iranians in LA. He's no Bill Gates.

Allegations by IRI

by robertborden54 on Mon Aug 02, 2010 08:57 PM PDT

Masoud

Your youtube clip contained nothing but allegations made by IRI during the hostage crisis.  I don't know if what the IRI was alleging is true or whether they were talking about the assets frozen by the US.  You might understand that the IRI might have preferred to call some of frozen money Shah's "loot" (to use your term) instead of "money we lost because we took diplomats hostages".

As I said I don't dispute that Reza Shah took over land.  To allege he overtook some of Iran's "industry" is laughable since Iran had no - I repeat -  no industry during the Qajar era.  Kasravi is an admired man for many reasons, including no doubt because he stood up to Reza Shah's irregular economica activities.

I have the utmost respect for Abrahamian's work.  Just bear in mind that he comes from a decidedly leftist point of view and the work you cited was written in 1982.  While his analysis of the social and political development of Iran between the constitutional and Islamic revolutions is full of valuable insights, I doubt he had access to any reliable sources for his claims regarding the Pahlavi wealth.

Finally, as I mentioned you posit a thesis in this blog that the source of the "Pahlavi loot" can be traced to the clips and texts that you have cited.  This of course is excellent for propagating rumours, but it doesn't stand the test of the most elementary level of scrutiny. 

1. You have to offer some evidence that that the allegations in the texts and clips are true (it would help if you stop citing IRI's allegations or 30 yr old information included in works whose main purpose had nothing to do with the Shah's wealth.)

2. Crucially, You have to offer some evidence that the "loot" remained under the control of the Pahlavi family after the revolution.  We are talking about billions here.  All I've seen of the Pahlavi wealth in reports is a well-appointed house in (I think) Virginia.

One final point:  I assume you are an anti-monarchist and definitely anti-Pahlavi.  The best you can do to return this alleged "loot" to Iran is to follow Reza Pahlavi back into a democratic Iran.  Either he'll be king or as he has said a private citizen in a democratic Iranian Republic.  I assume he'll take the loot back with him being a creature of luxury and all.  Then you can sue him in a court of law and present all your youtube clips and text excerpts as evidence. 

additional help for Kaveh

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Mon Aug 02, 2010 08:45 PM PDT

Kaveh,

I had assumed that my explanation was not too complex. Let me explain it so hopefully you could understand it this time.

　

This is what Robert wrote:

1.

"What is really documented in the links (and I did read them), is that Reza Shah expropriated a lot of land (not from "the people" but from various Qajars and provincial notables). This is understandable since he needed to take away the economic base of the semi-feudal Qajar rule."

　

Masoud: See, Robert is saying that Reza Shah took the land and property NOT from the people. That Reza Shah took the land and property from Qajars and provincial notables.

How does one show that Robert’s interpretation is wrong. It is  simple. One has to show that in fact Reza Shah stole land from those who were not Qajas and were not provincial notable. This requires that I produce evidence that in fact Reza Shah stole the land of those people who owned small parcels of lands. This is what I produced, with links to the original book:

　

　

p. 153

And Kasravi lost his provincial judgship soon after ruling in favor of a group of small landowners who had been dispossessed by the shah.

　

　

So, by providing evidence that in FACT Reza Shah stole land from small landowners, I proved that Robert was WRONG.

　

　

2. The second primary point Robert made was this, in Robert’s own words:

　

"The blog's hypothesis that the links provide evidence of this alleged Pahlavi loot is ridiculous since there is no evidence that the wealth described was transferred by the Pahlavis into their own control in anticipation of leaving Iran"

　

　

Masoud: Let me explain what Robert is alleging. Robert is admiting that in fact Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah did in fact steal stuff, but that they did not take the money [i.e., loot] out of Iran. How does one prove that Robert’s assertion is false. One has to show that in fact large sums of money were transferred out of Iran and into Pahlavi family bank accounts or that they purchased expensive property outside Iran. This is what I wrote earlier.

　

　

　

"A sympathetic biography, published in the West, admits that on his abdication Reza Shah left to his heir a bank account of some £ 3,000,000"

　

The figure comes from Donald Wilber, and I provided the footnote to the book by Donald Wilber (which was in Abrahamian's book). Wilber was one of the CIA agents who was part of the CIA coup in 1953. Some scholars believe that Wilber actually forged the famous farman dismissing Dr. Mossadegh. Wilber implied this to Professor Abrahamian. Wilber had great admiration for Reza Shah.

　

　

In my direct response to Robert, I also included the video of the news report which states that in their Swiss bank accounts, the Pahlavis had about 4 Billion Swiss Francs in 1979. This is B as in Boy. This shows that Robert was wrong in his assertino that the Pahlavis did not the loot out of Iran. This video states that the Pahlavis took part of the loot (and 4 billion US dollars is LOOT) out of Iran. In addition, the Pahlavis owned several villas in Switzerland.

　

If you have not watched this brief video, please watch it. It will help you understand. It is only 2 minutes and 41 seconds.

　

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl7jY3xywM4&feature=player_embedded

 

　

　

　

I hope this explanation can help you understand. If this is still too complex, please let me know and I will try to explain in easier form.

　

Best,

Masoud

 

To "those" that are RETIONALIZING the Pahlavi theft!

by P_J on Mon Aug 02, 2010 08:24 PM PDT

Folks!   Where is the BEEF!   Stop the rationalization and get into proving MK wrong...with proof not bunch of nonsense conclusions.   Shouldn't living in the lap of LUXURY as Pahlavi(s) have been doing, for the past 30+ years give you a clue!!!   Where all this money is coming from, if not the Billions they EMBEZZELED!  

These criminals left Iran’s treasury empty!   Central Bank of Iran put the embezzled amount at $52Billion.   Yes! $52Billion!   This information was distributed on a pamphlet that had itemized account by account!   With Ashraf, having taken record amount of EMBEZZELED money, sending out two cables each $850Million, I remember that quite WELL.   

 

Had it not been for an IDIOTIC action of hostage taking, by a group IMBISILS the entire international community would have been siding with the poor Iranians against these THIEVES! 

Masoud,

by Kaveh Parsa on Mon Aug 02, 2010 07:54 PM PDT

your initial (and repeated) response to Robert shows clearly that you haven't addressed his points, so I guess, I'll repeat Robert's piece again.

:-) 

"Understanding what is really documented

What is really documented in the links (and I did read them), is that Reza Shah expropriated a lot of land (not from "the people" but from various Qajars and provincial notables).  This is understandable since he needed to take away the economic base of the semi-feudal Qajar rule.  Maybe he also benefitted from it during his 16 yr reign that transfroemed Iran.  Subsequently Mohammad Reza Shah re-distributed much of the land to peasants (in part during the reforms of the so-called "white revolution"). 

On the issue of the Pahlavi Foundation, much of its wealth (wherever it came from) was intact after the revolution.  It was turned into the Alavi Foundation by IRI.  Evidence of the Foundation's continued wealth came out recently in the US when the Federal government went after the Alavi Foundation activities.  It emerged that The Alavi Foundation was the proprietor of multi-billion dollar real estate assets in New York.

I have no doubt that there were massive financial irregularities during the Pahlavi era.  This isn't very unusual in rapidly expanding developing economies.  But to say they looted the country (i.e. left the country poorer than they had found it) is unfair and comes from pure blind hate or some weird sense of jealousy. 

The blog's hypothesis that the links provide evidence of this alleged Pahlavi loot is ridiculous since there is no evidence that the wealth described was transferred by the Pahlavis into their own control in anticipation of leaving Iran. All the evidence that exists on the sources as described by the links in the blog point to the contrary: The land reforms of the shah and the recently revealed financial status of the Alavi Foundation. "

groundhog day

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Mon Aug 02, 2010 07:38 PM PDT

Kaveh,

 

Since I responsed to RobertBorden54, and you repeated his post, then I should do the exact same.  Here is my response to him:

 

 

RobertBorden54,

Actually there are a lot of reports that the loot (wealth taken illegitimately, by force, and extortion) was transfered outside.

In this news report it states that in Swiss banks alone, they Pahlavis had about 4 Billion Swiss Francs.  This is about 4 Billion (B and Boy) US dollars in the 1979 money.

 

 //www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl7jY3xywM4&feature=player_embedded

 

Reza Shah also stole from small land owners and well as those with industries.   In fact Ahmad Kasravi lost his job because as judge he did not go along with Reza Shah stealing the lands of some small owners. 

 

I hope this is helpful.

 

MK 

 

 

==========================

 

:-) 

 

robertborden54

by Kaveh Parsa on Mon Aug 02, 2010 07:13 PM PDT

Robert,

what you have written is so right that I just thought, it needs to be repeated.

"Understanding what is really documented

What is really documented in the links (and I did read them), is that Reza Shah expropriated a lot of land (not from "the people" but from various Qajars and provincial notables).  This is understandable since he needed to take away the economic base of the semi-feudal Qajar rule.  Maybe he also benefitted from it during his 16 yr reign that transfroemed Iran.  Subsequently Mohammad Reza Shah re-distributed much of the land to peasants (in part during the reforms of the so-called "white revolution"). 

On the issue of the Pahlavi Foundation, much of its wealth (wherever it came from) was intact after the revolution.  It was turned into the Alavi Foundation by IRI.  Evidence of the Foundation's continued wealth came out recently in the US when the Federal government went after the Alavi Foundation activities.  It emerged that The Alavi Foundation was the proprietor of multi-billion dollar real estate assets in New York.

I have no doubt that there were massive financial irregularities during the Pahlavi era.  This isn't very unusual in rapidly expanding developing economies.  But to say they looted the country (i.e. left the country poorer than they had found it) is unfair and comes from pure blind hate or some weird sense of jealousy. 

The blog's hypothesis that the links provide evidence of this alleged Pahlavi loot is ridiculous since there is no evidence that the wealth described was transferred by the Pahlavis into their own control in anticipation of leaving Iran. All the evidence that exists on the sources as described by the links in the blog point to the contrary: The land reforms of the shah and the recently revealed financial status of the Alavi Foundation. "

Brother Masoud, we need real and reliable data to believe you!

by pastor bill rennick on Mon Aug 02, 2010 07:01 PM PDT

These links and books you are quoting here won't hold any water in any court any where in the world.
I give you an "F" or a "D-" at best as a grade! You need to do better next time.

May I suggest when you go back to school for fall semester you should ask your students to write a term paper and maybe they will do a better investigative job on this matter than you and then you can publish their paper but with your name as the main author!

 

barking up the wrong tree

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Mon Aug 02, 2010 06:51 PM PDT

LL,

Actually, no, Reza Shah and Mohamad Reza Shah did not steal any of my family’s properties. My father and grandpa were both medical doctors (prominent physicians) and thus pretty safe from the Pahlavi lootings.

 

:-)

　

I am presenting these for educational purposes.

　

Best,

Masoud

This is so silly

by Louie Louie on Mon Aug 02, 2010 06:43 PM PDT

You have lost your credibility, shame on you!

After all these years instead of talking about all the more important issues, you're stuck on something that happened 60 years ago!

what is the matter, they took your dad's land and you are bitter about it?

Well, they made my dad sell a land much lower than it was praised because they wanted to build a highway, so should I do jero vajer for something that happened 40 years ago?

Grow up!