Focus Visually On Iran

Faramarz Jaan Nope I'm Saying ...

Our Shahbanou Was NO Frivolous Marie Antoinette

ROYALTY AND THE PEOPLE: Farah visits compatriots inflicted with leprosy (1970's) 


to Suggest feeding her hungry compatriots with "Cupcakes" as a solution to a nation's ills... 


No More than Our King a Louis XVI:

ROYALTY AND THEPEOPLE: Shah and Soraya Share meal with worksman's family (1956) 



And there is absolutely nothing to be proud of in a DEVOLUTION which at best Produced This:  

Farrokhzad Explains Khomeiny’s Green Book aka The Tozihol Massael

Where as The French Revolution at least gave the world this:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzIXdTw6ft0&feature=player_embedded

Itself Inspired centuries earlier by This:

RESTORATION:Britain's 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688 and the 'Bill of Rights'

Which Prompted This Fellow:

HISTORY OFIDEAS: Ian Davidson on Voltaire's "English Exile"

To Advocate Not a Republic but a Constitutional Monarchy for France.

Only to be totally misunderstood a few decades later by this Fellow:

VIRTUE IN TERROR: Maximilien Robespierre and the Reign of Terror (BBC)

So as to end up Two Centuries Later with Uneducated Ministers Like This :

ZADIG &VOLTAIRE: French Minister's Blunder on Voltaire's Persian Tale

In short that Clichés are Clichés !

What Matters in History is the TRUTH !

But that is something We Iranians refuse to accept let alone seek that Truth which ultimately is Not One Dimensional or Black and White but rather multilayered and Grey.

And the real reason for this lack of curiosity and intellectual Laziness has absolutely nothing to do with our quest for Truth let alone Democracy but rather our recurrent habit of finding excuses for our own insecurities.

anglophile

I'm sorry to have to decline that to you. But just to let you know, he and I are not/were not in the same front as far as the events of those years (or even now) are concerned, to the contrary of what Fatollah suggested.

Pro Democracy

Just adding that calling youself "pro-democracy" does not make you good. Anyone may go ahead and call themselves what they like. We had "Democratic Republic" of whatever in the Soviet Union. I am not convinced that JM is either democratic or good for Iran. Their past behavior except for Shapur Bakhtiya proves them to be quite toxic. In addition I am not sure democracy is always the solution. As amirparvizformonarchy has said many times it has not worked for people.

We had a "democratic" Russia led by a drunk. Now we have a "dictator" named Putin. Russia is prospering and the gangster oligarchs are back on a leash. Iranian people proved they are were not ready for democracy in 1979. I think it was a mistake to allow people to make the choice of Khomeini over Bakhtyar. Personally I rather had the military take over and keep things under control. Then slowly introduce elections as was done in South Korea.

You don't let a three year old kid decide their own fate. In 1979 people specially JM proved they lack the judgment of a three year old. Anyone who chooses Khomeini over Bakhtyar should not be voting. The recent posts in support of PMOI make me more sure than ever that JM has not got any better. If anything devolved to a point of no return. So no I do not support a democracy where JM would be running things along with Rajavi.

afshinazad

You are right. The one thing that gave away JM was this statement:

The PMOI concentrate all their attacks on the fundamentalist regime. I do NOT see the PMOI come here and attack the pro-democracy forces. But
I do see the monarchists come here and constantly attack the pro-democracy forces.

When someone is so blinded but hate to prefer PMOI to RP I am done with them. Done over and out forever. These people brought IRI to power. Then packed up; ran off and got jobs as "professors". I pity their students for real and would ask for my tuition back! 

Now Rajavi is the new hero of JM! Wonderful and so telling. I am speechless and in shock. What a democrat! Massoud and Maryam the new democrats. Great job JM.

Faramarz

You are right. The big problem here is this self righteousness. Yes Shah returned to power by a coupe. Yes he became very dictatorial. But he also did a lot of good. The problem is the some refuse to give him credit.

They just want to stamp their feet and say he was evil. They rather join with MKO than Monarchists. That tells me more about them than any other thing. Why not accept both Mossadegh and Shah were patriots.

Both in their own ways wanted the best for Iran. Both made lots of mistakes. Both were human and got power hungry. But no: you are either a saint or the devil. Nothing in between. And God help you if you say something against a saint.

Been There, Seen That!

DK Jaan,

Are you saying that there are no statutes of Marie Antoinette, Louise XVI and all the medieval figures in France, Machiavelli and so many Popes in Italy, Rasputin, Catherine the Great and Stalin in Russia, and Franco in Spain and so many more?

Here is Shout by Ottis Day and the Knights

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvDnG8TqPt8

What was so

shameful about Reza Khan? The fact that he removed Ahmad Shah who showed no interest in Iran. Or that he moved us out of the cave man days into modernity? Or that he actually had some respect for our nation.

Now his son the Shah was no match for him I grant you that. But even he was vastly superior to the IRI. How would anyone except a hate filled Mossadghi put them in the same boat. Alright there was a coupe we all know that. Yes Mossadegh was removed from power. A reluctant Shah was forced by Britain and America to take power. He became a bit of a megalomaniac. But he always loved Iran and wanted to advance it. Not like Khomeini who openly said let Iran burn for Islam.

Too bad the Mossadeghis are so filled with hate they refuse to see it. The only thing that will end this is time and age. Those who were 20 in 1953 are 78 now. Before long they will be gone and take their hate with them: thank you God! 

Faramarz Jan Aval Khodet Beeyah Faraseh Baad Nazar Bedeh ;0)

Faramarz Jan Aval Beeyah Khodet Faraseh Zedegee Kohn Va Bah Cheshmeh Khodet Bebeen Baad Nazar Bedeh ;0)

Sarkozy : casse toi pauvre con!

REVOLUTION DEMYSTIFIED: Truth and Lies Surrounding the French Revolution by DK

حرف مرد یکیست

One of the key character flaws of the Iranians is our stubbornness and self righteousness, especially when it comes to political discussions. Everything is either black or white and it is a zero-sum game. In other words, in order for me to win, you have to lose. And this blog is a good example of that.

Back in the college days when an American friend of mine was observing the heated discussions among a bunch of us Iranians, he said, “You Iranians don’t have opinions, you only state facts, all 10 versions of it!”

The late Shah and the late Dr. Mossadegh have both made significant contributions to Iran and Iranians. But the late Shah also made some serious mistakes. Let’s not try to portray one as Shemr and the other one as Emam Hossain.

Let’s learn a few lessons from the Europeans, especially the French, if we may. In every city or town they have the statues of the heroes and the villains, and that’s their history and they cherish that. They don’t take the bad ones down and only keep the good ones. I hope that someday Iran will be like that.

ARE YOU GUYS FOR REAL?

Who was a Mosadegh and as far as anyone want to explain what Mosadegh did for Iran and how the shah or the Brits or the American toppled him.Mosadegh was a person who hated Pahlavi because of Reza shah.Mohammad Reza shah: was a young king who every wolf like Mosadegh and people like him want to restore the GAJAR golden era or I should say Islamic and cleric power back on. And finally they did it 1979.This was the whole story about Mosadegh and the shah.Old zealous Mosadegh was not the person what everyone trying to describe him. He was from Royal family and Gajar blood line and his hate to Pahlavi is documented and anyone wants to deny it, willing to deny the reality.After all said who really give a boogie about Mosadegh or the Shah.What I don't understand you people like to tear each other a part for Mosadegh or the Shah, what a shame that you people don't care about today. and our people still fighting with their past history and even though everyone claim they know the facts and the history, Which everyone is lying about history and no one is telling the facts, history is true for those who they write it and how they write it and whose version is true?Do you know the facts about 1979 and how the Mosadegh group and commies and every other group who betrayed the nation and the country and that is why you have this debate. You people should understand what was reason for revolt against shah 1978, was is social and economical and educational problem, or was it political problem which no one even understood what was the freedom is or the democracy.For those who are young, you should blame Mosadegh and commies and Islamist and every group who were advocating democracy.For those who are close to 50 and plus, you should be ashamed of yourselves that you have destroyed the country for the freedom that you couldn’t even spell it nor the digest it.What someone is calling Reza Pahlavi a Moron?Is this person know RP in person and what he knows about him?Moron is a strong word and for someone who is claiming knows and studies history and advocating freedom and democracy.

What we do and what we don't know

What we do know is the fact that shah return to crown in 1953 after 3 days staying in Rome. What we do know is the fact that Iran under shah's smart leadership gained independancy from Brits by early 70's for oil extraction. What we do know oil university established and Iran had full control of it's oil by early 70's. What we do know is the fact that illetracy rate from 85% in 50's dropped to 45% in late 70's under deligent  effort of shah and his administration. What we do know is the fact that Iranians were well respected around the world when shah was on power. What we do know is the fact that Iran oil price reached to the highest of $40 per barrell by late 70's. What we do know is the fact that Iranians were happy in those days.

What we don't know the the other side of coin. If shah wouldn't return and mosaddeq along with Tudeh party were taking over the country and declared "Democratic Republic of Iran". What direction Iran would have been headed to?  What would have been happend then ? Tudeh party with 20,000 official members was marked as the stongest communist party in middle east in those days. Any rational person could easily guess what direction Iran would have been heading to if shah wouldn't return back then.

"including my father's"!!

May I have a reference for the gentleman?

(I WAS born then)

One of the best blog and conversation

Despite occasional jabs and insults.

On the whole, I believe if the Monarchs (some use Shaholahi) were willing to see our history more objectively and less stubbornly, we could learn and excel more in our struggle against the current fascist regime

Mehrdad

Hamburger Anyone ? ...

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaf6zF-FJBk

Fatollah

I didn't use the word "moron". Masoud did, but I can see why he did! : )

I base my opinion on the books I've read, on first-hand accounts of what happened then (including my father's), yes. Any problems with that? Were you born then?

I certainly don't base my opinion on 'only' Taghizadeh or Fereydoon Hoveyda, or Mohammad-Reza Pahlavi, no.

And honestly, there are events and things described in the books I've read that I don't remember anymore. Like what Sadighi exactly told Mossadegh or according to whom, and whether that is a reliable or a baseless claim, etc. Who cares? Okay Dr. Sadighi at one point opposed Mossadegh. So what? That makes who right and who wrong?

What I'm astounded at is the (and yes I call them that) shahollahi stubbornness after all these years to swallow some of the most basic facts about the Shah in general and his rule specifically. Incredible.

قافيه كه تنگ آيد شاعر به جفنگ آيد

Anyone opposing Parham's point of view is either Shah-ollahi, stupid or moron.

Now, Makki is a turned coat! Really? were you born then? were you actually there to experience the events first hand? were you part of the elite? Read Taghizadeh's memoirs about Mossadeq's stubbornness ...  or are you citing your dad's point of views? That's OK, it's an iranian trait too, we don't only inherit the genes, but political affiliations from them as well.

bless them all, even the corrupt majles deputies of 53! who were they? they are dead now!

No wonder why we are:
 هنوز اندر خم یک کوچه ایم

At least people like this honorable Iranian left us something to ponder on: //iranian.com/FereydounHoveyda/2003/September/Mossadegh/index.html 

Islamist "republic" and Pahlavis

The two biggest shamefull disgraces of Iran's contemporary history.

Dear Masoud, as always thank you very much for your well written comments, backed up by solid data exposing this unholy alliance of islamist fascists and monarchists in Iran's modern history which has dragged our beloved country to the sad state it is today. One day, I dare say soon,  people of Iran will be allowed to read the real history of their country and learn about the real patriots and traitors.. 

Long live Iran,

Long Live democracy, Republicanism and secularism. 

anglophile

There is no debate. It's all clear, actually.
Mossadegh doesn't need apologia. The Brits on the other hand, do!
It's not by sticking a picture of Churchill and speaking like James Bond 007 that you will ever prove a point, you know? Especially if there is none.

MK jan: Thank you. This is

MK jan: Thank you. This is a very convoluted part of our history. It needs to be written about and analyzed with fresh eyes. There are hundreds of books on American civil war. To this day, new books and analysis are being written about it, alas, we don't have this tradition in our culture.

p.s. I do agree with you that RP will not be great leader as Mossadegh or his grand father...

//thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-06-28/gordon-wood-idea-america

The latest book on American Civil War just came out a couple of month ago:

//thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-06-21/civil-war-americas-2nd-revolution

So you done some homework Parham :)

You know Kashani, you know Makki (very impressive indeed) and you even know Fatemi (just kidding) but did you also know a GOOD guy who was behind Mussadiq at all times named Sadiquie? As Mussadiq's home secretary he warned him against the illegality of the Majlis dissolution for the Shah could legally sack him.

If you know Dr Sadiquie and what Mussadiq replied to his warning then there is a point to continue with this debate but if not, then enjoy your apologia :)

MK

• You assume that is what the referendum says. But what if it did not. Again I repeat: who writes the questions for referndum. What if the question is: VF or MKO? What if the question is VF or Shah? These are possible.
• Regarding MKO. Just wait if they ever get to power your JM will be their next victim. Mark my words. The only reason they attack IR is because they are in power. If JM was in power they would attack JM.

Getting in bed with MKO is sheer stupidity. It would lead to total disaster and a lot of deaths. Just because someone says they are democratci means nothing. That group is looking for power and will fight for it. You should have backed Bakhtiyar and we would have real democracy. Instead JM opted for hatred and vitriol. Got in bed with the worst people in Iran just to spite the Shah. Because they are unable to get over their hatred and need for vengeance. That is why JM is never going to get to power.

Be my guest. Take Rajavi over RP. That is real brilliant and shows where JM is. After the 1979 disaster put your force behind Rajavji and make another mistake. No wonder Iran is a wreck. No thanks if this is democracy keep it.

Masoud, while we're on the subject

It would be interesting for me to know your opinion on this:

Why do you think on 28 Mordad, Mossadegh didn't call for people to go in the street and counter Sha'boon Bimokh and Zahedi's forces? It's been argued that he could have, for example, sent someone to the radio station which was down his street actually, and call people in to try and overwhelm the coup's mercenaries.

And a short note -- I wouldn't agree with you on the intelligence of Kermit Roosevelt. Actually, I see his bit in the implementation of the coup hitting a stiff wall on the 25th of Mordad. In fact, he was about to run away and declare forfeit. It was just Zahedi's action in the following days that made the success of the coup possible. But then it was the Americans that had planned the whole thing, true.

VPK jaan

VPK jaan,

1. You have every right to attack the PMOI day in and day out. Does that help the fundamentalist regime? Yes. So what you do actually helps Khamenei. You do so because you believe that PMOI is a dictatorial group.

Well, the monarchists are a dictatorial group too.

The PMOI concentrate all their attacks on the fundamentalist regime. I do NOT see the PMOI come here and attack the pro-democracy forces. But I do see the monarchists come here and constantly attack the pro-democracy forces. Also elsewhere, the PMOI do not attack the pro-democracy forces. They do a bunch of stuff to help themselves. The PMOI does a bunch of stuff that seriously harms the fundamentalist regime.

If RP and monarchists did what the PMOI did (that is stop attacking the democrats and concentrate their attacks on the fundamentalists regime here and elsewhere) then I would not say one single word against them. But if they attack us and harm the democrats, then we will attack back.

My statement was regarding "I despise fascists and stalinists" who was silent when others attack this or that opposition group but was upset that I counter-attacked one particular opposition group.  The point was that he would have to be consistent and critcize you for attacking PMOI and criticize all the monarchists who attack the JM and Mossadegh. 

The other point was if the monarchists attack us it would be crazy not to defend ourselves.

2. A referendum is proving the people to choose in a democratic and non-violent manner to decide what should be done in a crisis. Today, the referendum would be: "Velayat Faqih, Yes or No." After this referendum, then we could either have a second referendum or hold free and democratic election for a constituent assembly where the people would elect their representatives. The constituent assembly would write a constitution. And the constitution would be ratified or rejected in another referendum.

In the constituent assembly one of the first questions would be "republic or monarchy." Then there would be other issues such as parliamentary republic (with President elected by the Majles) or a presidential republic (President elected directly by the people) or hybrid (French system of semi-presidentialism). And another question would be federal, unitary, or hybrid. And on the electoral system, etc.

ALL issues could not be decided via referenda. But crucial issues could be decided with referenda in order to resolve an issue instead of violence and bloodshed. What Mossadegh did was right on the issue of referendum for the dissolution of Majles and holding new elections for a new Majles.

When Mossadegh is right, I support him. And when Mossadegh was wrong, I will criticize him.

Best,

Masoud

Masoud jan

I see what you're getting at re the constitution.

By the way, I laughed out loud at your justification for the use of the word "moron"!

And also, I think you are right by claiming that Kashani was head of the parliament when Tahmasebi was freed. I have to check that. But then there you go again -- another reason why that parliament needed to be dissolved...

anglophile

Many thanks for the compliment, but your answer is actually simple -- and that's where shahollahis usually go wrong:

This is not about personalities, it's about people and their system of government.

--> So, if the majles was a democratic one and stood by what it was supposed to stand by according to the constitution, it would be a good majles.
But, if the majles were an undemocratic one and did not stand by what it was supposed to stand by according to the constitution, it was a bad one.

As the latter case was the correct option to tick, Mossadegh dissolved it. As simple as that.

One short note, too: People, in arguing, forget time factors. For example, deputy X in the majles, in 1330, could have been a great guy. In the maentime, by 1332, he could have been bought by the Brits, softened by the darbar, had an argument with Dr. Fatemi and decided to be a mule about it, etc. That, in 1332, would make him a bad guy. (The bit about Dr. fatemi was a joke, just in case someone didn't get it)

Kashani turned coats. Heck, why cite Kashani, even Makki turned coats. It's not because at one point these guys were supporting you that you should forever consider yourself to be indebted to them and forget the benefits of the country and not get rid of them in the parliament, you know? What you're saying is absurd...

And just a bit of "evidence" on Tahmasebi...

This is from Khalil Tahmasebi himself. He says it was the majles that was behind his being freed (not Mossadegh). And we know who the majles was with...

//www.tebyan.net/index.aspx?pid=934&articleID...

Everyone Must say "sorry"

Dear Masoud,

the reason I responded to you is that I only read your replies. I haven't read others.

I do not subscribe to the ideology of PMOI. However, as I see PMOI now a spent force, I find it redundant to spend anytime attacking them.

I do wish to see monarchists and secular nationalists come together and build some form of concensus. Dr. Bakhtiar did it. Why not do it now? Today iran suffers becasue in 1978-79 Iranians didn't listen to Dr. Bakhtiar and played on just demonizing one side without taking the time to assess the situation free of emotions.

 Dear. Masoud, we can respectfully disagree. To use refrendum whenever teh government does't get its way is dangerous and ultimately undemocratic. In present Iran, calling for refrendum is a legitimate right because Iran doesn't have a democratic government or constitution. We can agree that the whole system is corrupt. Refrendum is the only solution. I am not sure 1906 constitution was so flawed that it couldn't work. Also, it is entirely undemocractic to hold refrendum only in the jurisdiction that the government knows it will get the desired result.

In my great state of New York, the legistalture recently legalized gay marriage, something i consider a human right. Opponents wanted New York to use refrendum so like in many other states the majority could impose its will on a minority.

In Iran, refrendum was used in 1979 to bring to power the Islamic Republic. At least if post-revolutionary government had been shaped by the laws of the 1906 constitution, maybe Iran wouldn't be in the abyss it is today.

 I thank you for your response. However, I respectfully ask that instead of us going into these circular arguments, can we agree that the 1953 events are complex enough that no one party is completely without fault? I've long had a problem with neither side accepting no blame. If the mighty United States of America is big enough to express "regret" for its role in it, why can't Iranians of all stripes and color and ideologies just say "sorry" and apologize to this generation of Iranians for not giving them a better life.

 I would like that, if all political players since 1953 - communists, nationalists, democratic islamists, akhoonds, pasdaran, savakis, mojahideen, monarchists, jebhe melli, all say they deserve at least some blame, apologize to Iranian people and promise to work together for a liberal, democratic iran and human rights.

If they don't all do it, either Iran doesn't deserve democracy or the groups of the past who share the blame for today's ills have no moral positino to be a part of democratising Iran. 

If I may, I propose we agree that

Parham jaan

Parham jaan,

The 1906 Constitution was mostly a translation of the Belgium constituion.  The Belgium constitution itself was modeled after the British unwritten constitution.  Those in the 1st Majles simply took a copy of the Belgium constitution, traslated it, and deleted and added a bunch of stuff (usully stuff about Islam and the necessity of the king to be Shia asna ashari, etc).  The British do not have one document called "The Constitution." 

Best,

Masoud

Parham you are too smart for your own good!!

So let me see  - when the MPs (who were "involved" with the British) supported Mussadiq they were GOOD,  but when the same "British MPs" told him he was getting too big for his own shoes they were BAD?! and had to be dissolved?

Please Parham come up with a better apology.

ps - And I thought you were a suppoter of the good old Dr :o))

Responses

• MK: Are you telling me I should not attack MKO; MEK; PMOI or whatever. Is that a democratic force or do I misunderstand you.
• If there were no monarchists, it would have been easier for the democratic forces to mobilize the modern middle classes. If my aunt had a mustache she would be my uncle. The Monarchists do exist do deal with it. If you are so "democratic" how about their rights. Maybe they would win 5 % of the vote but is that not democracy? Or is democracy what you want and others do not matter.
• Referendums are a joke and normally lead to nothing. What should it have on it? A "yes or no" or a a set of multiple choice questions? What if you don't want any of them. Who writes the questions and what happens if no question gets a majority. The whole idea of a referendum in a poorly educated nation is stupid. Mossadegh misused the referendum when he had no right to. A PM does not get to run around the constitution by putting up a referendum,

Here: what if someone writes a referendum: of either return to Monarchy or keep the VF. What would you vote for or would you not vote at all. What if the referendum says either MKO or VF what then? See it is flawed by nature and only works if it is written properly and I guarantee you it will not be so. If MKO wins there will be a referendum of either King Rajavi or die. If Monarchist win either back to Shah or nothing. I absolutely despise simple minded solutions like referendums.