Iran, USA & Ayatoilets. Ferocious views of an Iranian commoner

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Boycott the Islamic Regime "Elections"

Interview with HIM Reza Pahlavi conducted by Payam Azadi TV on February 15th 2008
See entire Interview here

Labels: , , , ,

Thanks for posting this.
Hi Saggezard,

returning your visit! :)

I am afraid I am not a supporter, a fan or a friend of Mr Pahlavi.

This man, has not worked for IRan's unity. His calling America to attack Iran and force a regime change in Iran is an evidence of his political illiteracy!

Iran will be well, surely without Pahlavis! This family (with the exception of Farah Diba) is uneducated; and I feel they are responsible for throwing us in the arms of Mullahs to begin with.

But, we are all Iranians, and we need to focus on our love for our country, and help it grow without hating each other.

Effective change, stable reform is one that comes with time, one that evolved. Revolution is the muse of the fool; I think.
Thanks very much for you comment Naj,

You say it right when you note Iranians should "focus on love for our country" it is clear after thirty years, I think, that the Islamic establishment has no love for Iran, neither will that love grow on them.

The pain that the current Islamic regime has been inflicting on Iran and most Iranians is unbearable and unacceptable by any ethical standard. I am afraid reform is not a solution since time is not going to be on our sides if we wait for it to happen, even if we wait for Mullahs to change for many generations.

I think Reza Pahlavi is a great symbolic and unifying figure for Iran. An impartial survey of Iranians can prove this allegiance. Do not get me wrong it would be simply poor judgment to think that any one is going to be able to fix Iran's problems single handedly and in one stroke of the wand. I think Iranians know that well by now.

"...there is another and greater distinction for which no truly natural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is the distinction of men into kings and subjects. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and bad, the distinction of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some new species, is worth inquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness or of misery to mankind."
Naj, cite a source, quote a sentence where Reza Pahlavi advocates/ed for a military attack on Iran. Why are you commies full of blind hatred? Cite one single reliable source for your stupid claim or just drop dead!
Good Afternoon,

Madam Lash, naj, spreads her love and venom where ever she can, more like the seagull approach, drop a few and then ignore and vanish. She is a soft propagandist for the Mollahs, then again Commies and Mollahs are the same bigots.
Interesting words anonymous quotes. Words of Thomas Paine a great revolutionary of the 18th century fighting the rule of the British in the new world. Paine's fight was against hegemonic powers of same kind, except that the circumstances of the time do not apply to Iran. Iran has a pioneering history of monarchy and not the enslaving and imperialistic type the English system espouses. Interestingly Paine himself calls us the pioneers of government based on monarchy: Heathens. Of course this view is based on his religious beliefs. Even today the theocratic system ruling Iran has elements of a monarchy. Quoting his book "Common Sense" is ironically fitting on my blog as I try hard to follow common sense fanatically and also I proudly consider myself an Iranian commoner, and commoners hold on to cultural identity like no other class, I accept any challenge to these points.
Hello Saggezard,

I did not intend to post as anonymous, I guess I just posted what I wrote too quickly without signing off. And indeed Thomas Paynes words apply to Iran and particularly people's (like winston and plateau) fanatical following of the Shah's son.

At the risk of being called anti-Iranian or some sort of Mullah apologist, allow me to respond to your assertion that, "Iran has a pioneering history of monarchy and not the enslaving and imperialistic type the English system espouses."

This might be true of the Achemenian Dynasty (i.e. Cyrus, Dariush, Xerxes, arte-xerxes), but surely it is not true of later rulers like the Safavids, Qajars, and others before them. The Safavids were a brutal regime - worse than the IRI could ever be. In fact, the ramifications of their rule still permeate Iranian society to this day. I am referring to their coerced conversion of the Iranian population to Shiism. It was the real epitome of "Islam or the sword."

The Safavids were not the only intolerant, close-minded, and arrogant rulers that have reigned over our country. But they are a great example of how a monarchical system could be abused at the expense of the population. Indeed, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So even if Reza Shah's son was to be some sort of benign ruler that would embark Iran on a prosperous trajectory; How can we be assured that his son or some other king in the future would do the same? We simply cannot and therefore should reject any sort of monarchical rule.

And you are right when you say the current system embodies an element of monarchical rule. But this shouldn't be an argument for a reversion to monarchy or to somehow suggest that monarchy has always been a part of Iran and thus should continue to be. One can say that slavery was a part of colonial America and the United States of America for the better pat of its history; should that be a reason to perpetuate the institution of slavery?

Mehdi Bazargan echoed your sentiment nearly thirty years ago:

"With the help of numerous details and arguments, we have examined the velayat-e faqih from every side, both in its rational-political aspects, and from the angle of the Qur'an, Islamic tradition, and Islamic law (sharia), and we must judge it as 100 percent destructive. From a political point of view, the velayat-e faqih is despotism and means a regression back to the state we had hoped to overcome with the Islamic Revolution. From a religious point of view it is polytheism (shirk) and a totalitarian personality cult (far'uniyat)."

So while their are many things about Persian history that we should duly cherish and pass on to our posterity, we should also take note of the shortcomings of Iranian history and apply those lessons to the future.

This is one reason why the younger Iranian population (myself included) is so disenchanted with the older generation and the ideas they perpetuate. We don't want the Shah, we don't want the mullahs, we want a government for us and by us!

So please, lets not consign ourselves to the fate that the political scientist Hegel so eloquently intimated: "that the only thing we have learned from history is that we haven't learned anything from history."

Hello Barmakid,

Thank you for your message and clarification. I respectfully disagree with you. My rationale, I say with confidence is due to the will of the people. The people of Iran overwhelmingly want a monarchy, it is not nostalgia or mindless mass frustration, an impartial referendum can prove this. Monarchy is in our blood, it may have its downfalls, but let us not be paranoid and get stuck because it could go wrong, yes, it can have failures like every system that mankind has created. Needless to say there are examples of modern monarchies that are more democratic than other systems.

In regards to quotations, there is a lot of things that a lot of people write and say, some by brilliant people and some lesser ones, I tend not to rely on or hold sacred any quotes, as a matter of fact I feel the same about complete volumes and fields of study. You quoted Hegel, he has also said many many other things, for instance in answers to why China and India exist when Persians declined he says: ”indestructible mountains are by no means superior to the ephemeral rose”

Hegel also goes further by saying that the birth of Persian empire was an unprecedented evolutionary leap for humanity.

I ask you one question. Why don't you create a blog? I sincerely invite you to please create a space where you can have all your views in one body. Your are well read, hold very interesting and strong views, holding a conversation is going to be a lot easier. I think it is crucial for all of us to write in a more organized manner, all of us who claim to be concerned about or interested in Iran writing more and discussing more is very important.

"And indeed Thomas Paynes words apply to Iran and particularly people's (like winston and plateau) fanatical following of the Shah's son"


I have found your previous comments directed at me, for example on azarmehr's blog, and now this one, and without my ever directing my comments at you first, at best, tedious.

So far, you have made a number of assumptions in regards to my beliefs and thoughts.

Unlike yourself I have a blog, and frankly, I couldn't give two hoots whether you think I am "fanatical" or not. But, when you choose a strong adjective such as "fanatical" about Shah's son, and deliberately mention my name, then, you should show relevant and specific proof to back up your claim, OK. Otherwise, you appear to simply want to stir the pot. Capiche?
Salam Saggezard,

Can I ask you what makes you believe that the Iranian population overwhelmingly supports the reestablishment of a monarchy? Even if this was the case, my response would be that universal truth is not measured in mass appeal.

One could also argue that 99% of Iranians supported the Islamic Republic when they voted for it instead of a Pahlavi monarchy. And look where that got them!!

We should take into account that 70% of Iran's indigenous population is under 35 years old, which means that a vast majority of Iranians have lived under no government but the Islamic Republic. They have no special affinity for the Shah or a monarchical system.

Emotive proclamations like "monarchy is in our blood" does not suffice, for me at least. We need to be more rational and less emotional in our analysis.

Anyways, you seem to be a very tolerant and level-headed individual; I salute you for that:) And thank you for your compliments and suggestions and for sharing those quotes from Hegel; I enjoyed them. So if I were to make a blog, would you do me the honor of dropping by? :)


p.s. Plateau, obviously you do give "a hoot" if you took the time to quote me and then write three paragraphs about my quote. And so you have a blog that - judging from the lack of comments - only you and your mom reads; get over yourself.
Can I just say that finally an Iranian has a blog without comment moderation!! Much appreciated :) since we all seem to live in different time zones. Not to mention that a number of people who have posted on this thread have consistently censored me on their blog :(

If one day you have a successful blog, which has more readers than yourself and your mom , as you said about Plateau, and Tritta (Salman) Parsi, you will realise why moderation is required. I don't think any of us censor any of your comments or anyone else's whose comments are not in accordance with our own thoughts. If anything we welcome a good debate, because it generates more hits.

We moderate the comments only to stop spam advertising and use of foul language and personal attacks on relatives of ourselves and others.

Just to give you an example, I rejected comments on my blog which insulted Ahmadi-nejad's parents.

As for your love of Mehdi Bazargan , another Salman Parsi of his time, and your fascination for his quotes, you are obvioulsy too young to remember. Bazargan paved the way for the Ayatollahs to take over by denying every opportunity available to the Iranian people to stop this tragedy. He was an incompetent politician who did not know when it was the opportunity to demand concessions and when he did protest and speak out, it was too late and he was powerless and irrelevant. If you want to one day be a successful politician, read his life story and do exactly the opposite.

You tell me you are a secular person, how do you then justify Bazargan's movement which refers to itself as meli-mazhabi (religious-nationalist)??? what does this stupid term meli-mazhabi mean? which mazhab are they talking about? Can an Iranian Armenian or an Iranian Jew for example join this wretched treacherous movement?!If not then how is meli?

Bazargan is a reminder of a generation who benefitted from Reza Shah's great ambitions for a modern Iran and were sent to the West to study technology and yet they came back interpretting the Koran!

One of Bazargan's many wasteful passtime activities was drawing a table of how many times the words in Koran were mentioned!
He was sent to France to study Thermodynamics on a government funded scholarship! Bazargan was the very manifestation of the idiots of the previous generation that got us in this mess. I strongly suggest you find yourself another hero!

You can compare me to any figure you dislike; Parsi, Bazargan, etc. whoever you dislike, that's who I am - if that makes you feel better.

My point in using Bazargans resounding statement is that, ironically, even individuals responsible for "paving the way for the Ayatollahs to take over," as you so eloquently put it, were actually cognizant of the immorality of the velayet-e faqih. I believe that that's what saggezard was referring to when he said their is still an element of monarchy in the system today and that's what I was responding to.

I don't know how you jumped to such a ridiculous conclusion that someone like Bazargan would be my hero. Get real.

"The wise man is he who learns from everyone [even if you don't like or respect that person]. The powerful man is he who governs his own mind..." (Ben Franklin) There are many things that we can learn from history and historical figures, and ever more fruitfully if we can do so in an unemotional way. When you act or respond emotionally to something, you are by definition responding or acting irrationally.

So my recommendation to you, good sir, is to tone down the emotionally inspired and rationally unhinged responses - do what you wish with it.

And for your info., I wasn't referring to you when I said I was being censored. I was referring to others who deleted everything I wrote besides the things they agreed with and have acknowledged doing so. So please don't be so quick to come to the defense of your middle-aged cohorts.

In conclusion, thank you for that infinitely unnecessary rant about Bazargan's politics. In fact, I'm going to unilaterally bestow you with the coveted interblog "MOST RIDICULOUS POST OF THE WEEK AWARD."

By the way, there is no excuse for censorship - even if it's Ahmadinejad's parents being insulted. Even if someone uses foul language, that is not an excuse for censorship - though one should have the good taste of not doing so. Language, profane or not, is an instrument of expression.

If it looks like a chicken, acts like a chicken, and tastes like chicken; it's a chicken.

Censorship is censorship.

Comment from you accusing me of not publishing your comment in my email box:

[Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:35:00 -0800 (PST)]:
barmakid has left a new comment on your post "Aryashahr Residents Shout 'Islamic Government we D...":

do not publish:

why was my comment not posted? are you censoring me? i'm not happy


and here in a comment to this post:

You put Bazargan on the same pedestal with Dr. Bakhtiar:

"I will not relent. While Bakhtiar (and Bazargan) surely deserve credit and acknowledgment, the Shah's son does not."

which gives the impression that you have a soft spot for one of the most incompetent contemporary Iranian political figures.
How does Bazargan deserve credit and acknowledgement after having steered the future of a nation to disaster? Please explain!


Re censorship:

I think there is a time and place for everything. Studying is very good but not if you go to a birthday party and start studying.

On my blog, I feel there is no need to insult anyone's relatives, nor for any spam advertising. it is not why I created that blog, if you want to call it censorship then so be it.

I look forward to when you come up with your flawless blog.

Also I don't think I compared you with Tritta (Salman) Parsi or Bazargan, did I? But you yourself give the impression that these are the people whom you admire and find credible.
Everyday I read all the blogs listed, sometimes agree and disagree with all of them, but reading it is for personal development and a learning process; I try hard to never get angry since it ultimately leads to hurting myself.

About censorship, since it is concerned with freedom of speech, I believe it also applies if people do not want to hear a point of view, we have the freedom or right not to hear something we do not like to hear.

Anyway I will write later, maybe tomorrow, since the Abgoosht is getting cold.
Another quick note, about why I believe people want monarchy, it is based on my observations, I can be wrong, but only a FAIR referendum can clarify that.
And what is for certain is that Iranians don't want Nehzat Azadi. They were free to field candidates in the Tehran Council elections few years ago. It was a disaster for them, hardly any votes at all and I did not hear no outcry even from Nehzat Azadi. Iranians just ignored them totally knowing their treacherous past record.

If I allowed trolls like you to post mostly nonsense, I'm sure I would have hundreds of comments.

However, I am quite happy with the numbers of hits and the more informed comments, which add value.

BTW, nice diversion, from "fanatical" to "no. of comments on my blog".
Hello All,

You see that Azarmehr, Plataeu implicitly admits that he deleted all my posts except for the ones he liked. Won't you back ME up in denouncing such actions, even if he has the right to do so? Ha! I can't imagine you ever coming to my defense.

Also, I figured the fact that you never posted my comment was an honest mistake because I never said anything that would inspire you to censor me. As you can notice, I still post on your blog. And in fact, it is the only Iranian blog that I consistently post on.

On to the substance: I stand by my statement that you published. The Shah's son is a pygmy; Bazargan and Bakhtiar, though different politically, deserve credit and acknowledgment. This credit and acknowledgment could be negative or positive; the point is that they made decisions and committed actions (whether you agree with them or not) that affected the lives of many people. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing, or about liking and disliking; it's about decisions/actions and their consequences.

All the Shah's son did was emanate from a royal uterus; those are his qualifications. I'm sorry, but we're looking for someone a little more qualified for this position, but thanks for taking the time to apply:)


p.s. Maybe you can take note of Ahmadinejad's English language blog, which doesn't censor foul language aimed at him!! Kind of Ironic, I know. Really though, I don't mind if you keep your blog clear of childish and foul posts, but when you have comment moderation on it makes everyone wait for you to approve posts and we all live in different time zones!! As I have no intention of starting my own blog, I will continue to lobby you for the total abolishment of comment moderation:)
Koshkeh ma-ham abgoosht dashteem vas-e nahar...khosh behalet!!

Unfortunately, I have been reduced to purchasing Burger King :(

As I replied to you on my blog some time ago ("About" section of it, regarding the two very long comments of yours, which you had copied and pasted from elsewhere & left in "About" section of my blog) I will not post comments, by you or anyone else, which are irrelevant or out of context for a section or a given post on my blog - such comments, at best, lead to confusion for the readers, in general, particularly non-Iranians.

I also suggested, in my reply to you in the "About" section, that you express your views (whatever they may be) under relevant and appropriate posts/topics. You chose to ignore. Like it or not it is my blog and I decide how to run it, while appreciating feedback.

For the record, nor will I post vulgar language or spam, etc.. (similar to azarmehr's views expressed in this thread).

In my assessment, and based on what I've read you post so far on various blogs (beyond azarmehr's and Sag's), you are mostly (80/20 rule applies) a troll (look for a definition of a troll). And, your type of argument and behavior are very similar to what I've seen with the IRI types (incl. NIAC), and including your denial that you support "an Islamic government".

You may choose to visit and/or leave comments on my blog, that is your choice. But, as far as I am concerned, you will not be given a platform on my blog, until and unless you try to develop some emotional intelligence, and stop looking for attention, never mind quoting Hegel or Thomas Paine, etc...

Also, when I told you on Azarmehr's blog that I don't believe you are 23 (not a compliment) I meant it, but what was implied (the nuance) went right over your head, and you said "it was an ENORMOUS compliment".

This is my last exchange with you. Enjoy your Ab-goosht and burgers.
Like I said, the fact that you still don't believe I'm 23 is an even more ENORMOUS compliment. Thank you Plateau :)

You know what though? You are right. I'm tired of keeping it a secret. I am an undercover IRI agent (commissioned by maktab-e rahbar) trolling around different blogs and cyber-spreading the revolution; what an idiot.

Now I can see why you refer to yourself as plateau; the growth of your intellect must have plateaued when you turned 40. You have nothing substantive to contribute you Shah shagger, so hallelujah that you won't be responding to me anymore.

I gotta say though, I will miss the attention you pay me - it's flattering:) And for the sake of our last exchange: "Time makes more converts than reason." (Thomas Payne)

First of all I am very sorry that Barmakid is not going to blog.

But more importantly I ask everyone to refrain from posting personal attacks at all, it would only snowball and takes attention from the objective, and I will stop anyone from such without prejudice. My objective for posting the Youtube video of HIM Reza Pahlavi is to bring more attention to the concerted and noble message by many elements of the opposition: boycotting the upcoming elections in Iran.

Now if anyone agrees or disagrees with the boycott post one word please: Yay or Nay

I will cast my vote shortly.

Thanks for your cooperation, in advance.

I never admitted that I censored your comments, what the hell are you talking about? I challenge you to post anything here if you want so others can see and tell me on which one of my blog posts to put your comment.

I explained why some of us have moderation on comments, didnt say I censored you!

I put your email here showing how paranoid you are thinking we censor you. I even replied to you saying which one do you think has not been published, let me know and I will publish it again. Why should I censor you?

Believe me I have always heeded the advise of my maths teacher who told me to beware of ideologies and people who do not like being asked questions.

You are making things up my friend.
Well, I kind of would like to see a boycott happen, but you have to consider the wisdom of such an act. I mean, has anything ever changed due to inaction? Though I suppose you can argue that this type of inaction is actually action; but I wouldn't agree:)

I can't be certain of what a boycott may accomplish, but we can take note of similar situations in other countries. Hugo Chavez's Venezuela comes to mind; the opposition boycott allowed all 167 seats to go to Hugo's party. It was a miserable failure.

So I earnestly ask, can you give me an example of a country where an election boycott was successful?


You are making things up! You will see that if you read what I wrote instead of just ranting and raving. I didn't say you censored me; I said:

"Also, I figured the fact that you never posted my comment was an honest mistake because I never said anything that would inspire you to censor me."

Hello Saggezard,

Sorry for posting so much, but I would like to share one other thought about effective methods of protesting. In my view, I believe the most potent lessons of opposition and civil rights protests can be learned from the struggle of black America. If you immerse yourself in their history and really empathize with them, you will uncover many effective ways to overcome brutal oppression.

There are political opposition movements (like in Venezuela, Belgium, and Kenya), but then there are civil rights movements. And in Iran, particularly for women and minority religions, the main issues have to do with civil rights.

Let me give one example of how women can achieve some of their desired civil rights. In the 1960s during segregation in America (when the pervading ideology was "equal but separate") black folks had to drink from separate water fountains, eat at separate restaurants, use separate restrooms, and basically face the worse kinds of violent racism that have ever existed. So what did they do?

Well, they would peacefully enter white restaurants and other "whites only" facilities and sit their until the police arrived. They would be sprayed with fire hoses and attacked by police dogs, but they did not relent. And the brilliant thing about it was, that so many of them would take part and purposefully try to get arrested that the jails could no longer hold their numbers! And with the advent of television, there plight was now being witnessed by the whole country, which had an enormous impact on the movement.

Women in Iran, who don't want to wear hijab, or would like to rent a hotel room without a man, should do the same in masses. Walk into a mens section in a restaurant or hotel without a head scarf and just sit their with the expectation of getting arrested.

And today, more than in the sixties, the rapid spread of information would work to their benefit. So if the police respond violently to peaceful activists, there actions would be seen and heard by millions within minutes or hours. They would undoubtedly win the sympathies of the people and inspire others to do the same - just as it occurred in the sixties.

Now I know there are more issues than women's rights, but this is just one example. With respect to elections, I truly don't believe boycotting would be effective; its an emotional response to rational problems. Now, if people were to peacefully block voting sites, or women were to go vote without hijab; this would be effective. The media and international election monitors will already be present; so why not exploit that? Why give the regime an opportunity to stall the lines and give the image of a participatory democracy? We have to play the game smarter and more courageously than those in power.

Now if Seyd Ali Geda's election gets the same amount of response as my tiny little call for a poll then I think things are going to be just fine.

I do not know if I am dreaming or totally live in fantasy but the idea of women showing up en mass at polling stations without the hejab blows my mind, I am euphoric. Well done Barmakid, excellent ideas. The radical acts that I always have been dreaming of towards the IRI. After all the tough ups and downs and differences in views I think we have something really interesting here. What would the Ayatoilets' reaction be? How are they going to respond to millions of women showing up with makeup, manicured and freshly made up hair and blow dried hair wearing colorful dresses? The only thing I can imagine right now is, if they had nuclear bombs they would drop them in the center of every Iranian city immediately. Or worse, perhaps this would allow Generals Najjar and Zolqadr to put their contingencies in effect and get a Military dictatorship rolling.

Hejabless acts would definitely be a good route of action for the long term and the type that should be conducted. But the costs to lives is going to be barbaric and tremendous at the beginning. This sort of work needs longterm planning and would not be viable for the upcoming election this month, unless people's receptiveness and also the opposition's receptiveness is not verified it cannot be operable this month. This problem would have been operational if there was unity and consensus among opposition to the course of action, towards the objective which is freedom of Iranians from the theocratic system and its elements. And of course the active participation of men and all other minorities in Iran is going to be essential. I like this type of ideas, it should be discussed further. I saw an old documentary about ten years ago about the entrance of black students into a university in Alabama and how the Governor of Alabama was seeking to prevent that while Kennedy and his brother who was Attorney General were organizing with the National Guards and large number of lawyers to crack Alabama's opposition to change.

But well done Barmakid, I like productivity and thinking like this. This is another reason why you should definitely blog.
Thank you for your compliments Saggezard. So, are you living in Iran right now? If so, what city? You write English well, so I assume you studied it in school or went to school in the UK or US maybe.

Well, I will be coming to Shiraz in a few months, maybe we can have some chai:)

ham vatanet,
I am sorry Barmakid, I cannot disclose any personal information, except that I did live both in the UK and USA and had a rough time across Europe to get there like many other Iranians running for their lives.

Have a great time in Shiraz, make sure to go to Chamran street which is a very nice road in the suburbs on top of a hill which gives you fantastic view of Shiraz and there are many great restaurants there with city view seating areas, have some Qashqai kabob for me.

I too actually think what you said is a good idea. Women taking their scarves in numbers while the cameras roll on and tell the world how they are arrested because of their peaceful protest. However, I always say what and how the civil rights movement must do should be decided by the people on the ground.

We can send emails and post on blogs as much as we like, but unless we are on the ground taking the risks with the people it will not happen. Dr. King didn't have anonymous blogs or send faxes, he was at the forefront of these protests himself and took the same risks, thats why people trusted him and joined him.

What we can do if we don't want to take the risks, is to make sure that those pictures and images get the due public attention. If the mass media ignore the news then we should be ready to publicise what happened in any which way we can.

So lets suggest the idea but let those on the ground in Iran tell us if its doable or not.

Keep on rolling such ideas though.

I will be on the ground within months:)

And yes saggezard, Chamron is a nice place; I have been there many times. I remember when there was only one or two restaurants there; oh how things change:)

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?