News

Sorry Folks but I'm on my Wine Break !

PS: Good Points nevertheless Ari Jaan ;0) 

Ari Siletz

Thanks for your post. On the contrary, not only do I want Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi to take a position but I want him to take a more robust line against the IR. If he wishes to take a pacifist approach to the IR then I am entitled to disagree with him but that does not make me disloyal as Darius is suggesting. Darius's fudamental error is that he is trying to revise history (rather amaturishly with the aid of Youtube videos) to portray the Iranian monarchy as being similar to Western constitutional monarchies. Nothing can be further from the truth, Iranian monarchy was built on valor and charismatic leadership as Siamack Baniameri said on his blog. 

When one King was not up to the job the usurper would come along and take the throne away from him even if it meant committing fraticide or infanticide. The same was for Reza Shah. Don't get me wrong: He did what was right and saved the country from the worst dynasty Iran has ever had. 

Don;t expect Darius to answer the question because by he can't think for himself.  

Simorgh5555

Reza Pahlavi would not necessarily undermine his image as a potential constitutional monarch if he were to stick his neck out.

Darius, for now Simorgh seems to have you over a barrel regarding Reza Shah and the Iranian republic business.   

Simorgh5555 Pesarak Vel Kohn Neestya ? The CROWN makes it clear

Koshty Mano ...

Halah Ta Doh Toogooshy Behet Nazadam boro Betemarg ...

Darius

It is your understanding which is fundamentally flawed. By your own admission your viewpoints depend on what Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi makes for you. A constitutitional monarch is someone who accepts dissent and even encourages it because it is in the interest of a healthy society. You are no different from the crowds of fools who blindly followed Khomeini's every word because he was the 'Imam'.

The King serves his subjects and his country.  

Unpucker your lips, Darius. : ) 

You never quite answered my question: Was Reza Shah a traitor for plotting against the Qajars and even wanting to establish a republic?

As for asking foreign military powrs to intervene. Your French side needs answering:

 //www.normandy1944.org.uk/

Or  William of Orange invades England:

 //www.timelineindex.com/content/view/756

Take your time before answering. I understand that you need to ask HRH Reza Pahlavi for clarification first before answering.  

You may wanna be a SUNEJCTS ... I Just Know SUBJECTS ;0)

But Do feel free to lecture me on what I already have blogged on :

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

HISTORY OF IDEAS: Constitutional Government In Locke's Second Treatise (Yale University) 

PRAISE FOR REZA SHAH: Adjoudani Slams Lack of Recognition for Pahlavi Dynasty's Founder

But Sorry I am not going to go through all the arguments in detail all over again merely because you don't grasp the "concept" ...

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

What is certain however is that contrary to you Fereydoun Hoveyda (whose own brother was executed by the IRI) would Not endorse your suggestion of a foreign intervention to "liberate" Iran under the current circumstances because it has nothing to do with the situation in Libya:

Signed,sealed & delivered Casting the affirmative vote for Iran in approving the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 by Fereidoun Hoveyda

But then again in comparison to some of You confused folks he was definitively a Class Apart:

Fereydoun Hoveyda (1924-2006): A Class Apart by DK (payvand)

Take Care Pesarak !

Monarchy or not, doesn't matter

The French and the British shoud've done the job. No excuse for either.

If Sarko wanted to bring France to the forefront, he should've finished off what he'd started. But no. He made an idiot of himself, and he ridiculed France as well.

Too late now. 

Darius - Lessons about monarchy

The irony of it: a Frenchman/American telling ME about Royalty and Constitutional monarchs,

Sorry, Darius for all your reinvention of history Iranian monarchies were not built on a form of governance on the Europan model. I support and admired Reza Shah and Mohammed Reza but I am under no illusion that he was an autocrat. You are totally delusional if you believe different. 

For a proper constituional monarch to exist the monarchs private opinions on war and peace, law and order are not to be treated as official procolmations or shared by their subjects. if you believe that this should be the case then you are clueless as to your understanding of the machinations of a constitutional monarch.

Here are some references for you:

Bill of Rights 1689 

 //www.constitution.org/eng/eng_bor.htm

 //www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A700372

Ultimately, it should be the SUNEJCTS and NOT the monarch who should decide what the rule of the land is:

 Dicey Rule of Law:

 //www.constitution.org/cmt/avd/law_con.htm

The Parliament and not the King is the supreme lawmaker. So any difference I have with Shahzadeh is still perfectly legitimate and entirely within my constitutional rights.

Or do you believe that I shoud follow Shahzdeh(Reza Shah II) official positions even at the cost of my own life and be left hung out to dry like poor old Mr Hoveyda?

 //www.hoveyda.net/raji.html

Sorry not at any cost, Darius.

Was Reza Shah loyal to the corrupt Qajars? Was he a traitor for plotting against their overthrow or did he do the right thing according to his conscience and save his nation? 

All your tired Royal Forums and you have nothing to show for it. Not one bit of understanding.  

Nope Charles II Iroony Style ;0)

RESTORING PARTYING: Noroozetan Peerooz ;0)

Have a Nice Weekend ! 

Darius III

For in that case that should be done for each and every country in the region given what is taking place right now.

Oh and regarding Your last Question ! ;0)

To begin with it's Not shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi but Reza Shah Dovom ...

As to your question: 

 "do you need a statement of approval from Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi first before you make up your mind?"

Answer:

YES !

The Kings Speech - Official Trailer

A Question of Loyalty To My Sovereign... But that is Not a word that exists in your vocabulary does it ? Loyalty I mean ... Let alone an understanding of the word Royalty ...

Besides  I don't want to jeapordize my Chances of receiving a Knighthood ...

Franco Nero - C'est Moi

Human Rights and Nuclear is Not enough to wage War

For in that case that should be done for each and every country in the region given what is taking place right now.

But Maybe that is what you want ? World War Three ? ... 

I Don't ! 

Darius

Hold on. So if the Security Council (hypothetically) decides to pass a resolution allowing the use of force against the IR either on the nuke issue or human rights will you then support it?

You said before that you will not support a military action against the IR on moral grounds which I find strange because you are defending the Libyans for the same reason.

Can you think for yourself on whether or not to approve military action or do you need a statement of approval from Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi first before you make up your mind? 

Simorgh5555 I'm Against a Nato Action You Bloke What I support

Is a Military intervention of the French UK Coalition which already had a UN Mandate to Stop Gaddafi from Bombing his own People and they had all the legal arguments to interfere based on well established international laws.

NATO is precisely what is creating the mess in Libya due to American Bureaucrats !

The Hopes and aspirations of the Libyan and Iranian People may be the same but the Rules of Waging or Not War have nothing to do with a given people's desire of Revolution/Counter Revolution !

Go Read some basics in International Law before talking nonesense. 

Darius

Since you are an ardent defender of NATO actions in Libya why don't you support a similar military action in Iran. The hopes and aspirations of Iranians and Libyans are the same. 

Let Gaddafi Win a Major Battle before Cease Fire ? Classic !

You Bet ... Let Gaddafi Win a Major Battle and then start the Cease Fire Talks ... Classic Tactic ...

In addition the South African President is one of those "Third World" Champions of "Anti Western Colonialism" ... He is No Mandela ...      
                "A team of African leaders headed by South African President Jacob Zuma is expected in Tripoli and Benghazi later to hold separate talks with Col Gaddafi and rebel leaders."