Letters * Support iranian.com * FAQ * Write for Iranian.com * Editorial policy August 22, 2002 PART III See Part 1 See Part 2 This month's letters by subject To top * Blatant falsehoods I read with interest several of the letters regarding the Bahais. It is amazing how blatant falsehoods have come to be taken as fact by some of the letter writers. One writer characterizes the Bab as "progressive," and Baha'u'llah as "narrow-minded." If that is the case, how is it that Baha'u'llah teaches elimination of racial and religious prejudice, gender equality, consultation, no clergy, a world federation, moderation, and avoiding contention? The accusations about the Bahai Faith being equally the product of the Russians (during the time of the Bab), British freemasrony (during the time of Baha'u'llah), and Israel (after 1948) are themselves ludicrous on their face. The 1930s clerical forgery known as the Dolgoruki Memoirs are one of the ongoing sources of these conspiracy theories. Bahais are forbidden by their own teachings to remove books from libraries, even if they are anti-Bahai (I am a librarian and pay attention to these things). So accusations that Bahais have managed to do this to eliminate a counter viewpoint seems far-fetched. Qurratu'l-'Ayn (Tahirih) was a Babi (which Bahais see as their spiritual heritage). When she removed her veil, one Babi man cut his throat. He was, after all, recently converted from Shiah Islam and was affronted by the appearance of an unveiled woman. But Tahirih's intent was to proclaim the abrogation of the old religious law and the institution of a new era. The Babis did not articulate a standing principle about freedom of women; Baha'u'llah made this explicit - He wrote "Women and men are equal in the sight of God." Throughout its history, Bahais and converts to the faith have come from all segments of Iranian society - clerics, merchants, scholars, laborers, farmers, middle class, etc. They are not primarily poor and uneducated. In fact, one of the often heard accusations is that they were all educated and wealthy. They have never been members of the Tudeh party - Bahais are forbidden by their religion to belong to political parties. If any Bahai does so, he is in danger of losing his Bahai rights. This accusation that Bahais belonged to Tudeh was concocted around the time of the fall of the Shah to justify calling the Bahais traitors. Israel did not establish SAVAK. SAVAK was an Iranian invention created by the imperial throne. The accusation that Bahais had something to do with SAVAK is absurd, since SAVAK was instrumental in monitoring the Bahai community and working with the Hojjatiyah (Anti-Bahai) organization. Again, Bahais are forbidden to take political posts, and any Bahai who did so would have been deprived of the privileges of membership. Hoveyda was never a Bahai, although his father had been a member. Recent scholarly works on Hoveyda in English make this abundantly clear. The accusation of being a Bahai has long been a favorite way in Iran to attack one's enemies. It is similar to the way in which people smeared reputations in the 1950s in the U.S. by calling their enemies "communists." The Bahai Faith didn't "move its center" to Haifa, Israel. Baha'u'llah was exiled successively to Iraq, Ottoman Turkey, and finally to Ottoman Palestine in 1868. Baha'u'llah passed away just north of Akko. His Shrine is the Qiblah (Point of Adoration for the Bahai world) and has been so since 1892 when the areas was ruled by Turkey, and during the British Mandate, and since the establishment of the state of Israel. If a different regime took over Mecca, would Muslims abandon Mecca as their Qiblah? Did Muslims move their center to Mecca for some political reason, or was it always there because the Prophet Muhammad made it the Qiblah? Bahais do not tell people to convert first before they tell people about the religion. One cannot become a Bahai and be formally enrolled without demonstrating that one has knowledge of who and what one is accepting. One of Baha'u'llah's principles is the independent investigation of truth. It applies to Bahais as much as to those who are learning about the Bahai Faith. One of the months in the Bahai calendar is called "masa'il" (questions). He calls for decisions to be made by consultation. These are strong counters to fanaticism, which is not a value or general characteristic of the Bahai community. Readers please investigate rather than repeating the same tired accusations and conspiracy theories. William Collins To top * How can a persecuted minority feel part of Iranian community? Behzad Yamini [See letter: Penetrate major government and industry positions] wrote that "Unfortunately the Iranian Bahais even outside Iran have amply demonstrated that they do not really feel as part of the larger Iranian community and stick to their cliques and have a secretive nature with their mahfels." One must ask how a minority that has been systematically persecuted for 158 years in Iran could feel "part of the larger Iranian community"? Moreover, there is nothing "secretive" about Bahai "mahfels." The letter-writer was referring to the Spiritual Assembly (Mahfil-i-Ruhani), the 9-member elected council in each Bahai community. The majority of members of the 1400 such Assemblies in the United States are not Iranian. These councils guide and administer the Bahai community in every locality. The members are known. Their decisions and deliberations are communicated to the Bahai community. Those councils consult with Bahai community members to learn what the community needs. They are the shepherds of the Bahai flock. In a religion without clergy, these bodies engage in pastoral care. All adult Bahais are electors and candidates for these councils. Regarding the use of the word "cult" - every new religion from God has also been characterized as a "cult" by those who opposed it - Islam included. Surely readers remember the verses of the Qur'an in which God tells how the beloved Prophet's critics called Him a mad poet and His religion an attack upon the established order. One must investigate to know the true from the false. One cannot do this simply by accepting the assessment of others or holding to what one has traditionally known. Baha'u'llah claims to be God's Manifestation (mazhar) for this time, but not the last of God's Emissaries. He has not told His followers to gather in compounds with guns; He has not told His followers to commit suicide or murder others; He has not told His followers to seize power and conquer the world with armies; He has not told them to wear strange costumes; He has not told them to abandon their families; He has not told them to give all their possessions to their leaders. What He has done is to show forth God's attributes, reveal the word of God for today, and, through spiritual power, begun the process of tearing down the barriers between religions and peoples. The characterization of the Bahai Faith as a "cult" reveals the writers' immense ignorance of the religion about which they claim to have knowledge. William Collins To top * Thinking of the heart Enjoyed your article [Heechee kam nadaaran]... my son sent your link to me thinking I might enjoy reading it. What can I say....? I'm a Bahai in the US... and have been a Bahai for the past 35 years. I'm thankful for your soil which gave emergence to the Bahai Faith. I'm glad you have brought up this question of why we treat human beings (our brothers and sisters) as we do. sPerhaps it will get some thinking of the heart started. Sincerely, Pat To top * So I can get widely published thank you once again for featuring my story [Coming back] and your kind words. i also appreciate some of the comments people have been sending to me. i will send you a short story very soon that i think you might enjoy. this summer i have been working on sending my stories out to magazines and literary journals so i can get widely published, and discovered! and iranian.com has been a great help. thank you once again. Azin Arefi To top * Qesaas ba arze salam va tashakor az site khoobetoon, khastam khedmatetoon arz konam ke man in film "Qesaas" ro didam va daghighan ham yadam hastesh. agar komamki az dastam bar miad dar khedmatam. baz ham motchakeram, Alaleh To top * The time, the place Dear, Whoever you are, [Reply to: Ungraceful] You are very much right. But at the same time you are forgetting the time & the place, which is essential for evaluating any historical episode. To ask such a question in public & loud from the other side of the long dinning table was at best mischievous & at worst out right insult. If HIS question was indeed genuine, HE could as well open it to me after dinner. The way HE handled himself in front of others needed a bit of arrogance. [Is it true?] Anyway the exercise of DIPLOMACY is a mater of discussion, bearing in mind, the time, the place & the other relevant circumstances at the time that it took place. This question came to me when the entire world was discussing the 2500 years celebration. It was talk of the town at those days. The Journalist in question could not have avoided all that propaganda & numerous TV programs as well as articles in journals & magazines. At the time it implied, at least to me that, HE was trying to undermined our nation, and there, as a representative of my country & my people I should not tolerate. I do not insist that I was right at the time, but you forget the natural human reaction in front of adversary, no matter in what poison one is, ambassador nor withstanding. It is probable that I was also carried away by the events of the time. Also pay attention to the remarks of Ambassador Lasides on this episode. What happened is a fact. I wrote it down as a part of our social history for the benefit of the coming generations. Indeed it could be discussed, analysed both ways. Thank you for your remarks. There is always a lessons to be learned for all of us. Best wishes & regards, H. Hakimi, Norway To top * From a book Regarding Arash Kamangir's comment [See: He couldn't have] about the Quote of the Day (August 8, 2002): Dear Mr. Kamangir, I found the quote actually from a book of funny quotes, so I am not sure of the exact source. However King Farouk was known for being a gambler and also had a great deal of humour. He was not deposed through violent means. And despite his deposition the Egyptians actually liked him. As for the quote Farouk was certainly trying to be ironic towards the British who were present in Egypt for many years and notably during his reign. Regards, Darius KADIVAR To top * I beg to differ Regarding Arash Kamangir's comment [See: He couldn't have] about the Quote of the Day (August 8, 2002): "Their will soon be only Five Kings left: The kings of England, Diamonds, Hearts, Spades, and Clubs." -- King Farouk of Egypt on being deposed Sent by Darius Kadivar Arash jan-e Kamangir, With all due respect I beg to differ with your statement. Your claim is based on assumption that King Farough could have said that between Feb. and July of 1952 which may not be the case. He could have uttered that quote long before he was deposed and as a prediction of his own and other world monarchs future. Or if he said this after Feb. 1952 (when England had a Queen and not a King) he could have meant a "monarch" when he said a "king" which is quite possible. Ben Bagheri Dallas, Texas To top * Making a good deal of money This book is a rip off. C'est n'importe quoi and he is making a good deal of money. I saw an interview of him and I really think he just wrote it to make publicity. Darius KADIVAR To top * CHILL! Dear Ms. Nemati, [Reply to: Glorifying American men] I have one word for you: "CHILL"! Ms. Michaelis's article [The art of cooking] was clearly labeled as "FICTION"... Hello? Am I the only one that saw this? There is no need to rip apart an author who is simply writing an fantasy piece for entertainment and amusement purposes, not everything is meant to be a social and political statement!! F.Y.I, I notice you never miss a chance to plug yourself in your harsh reactions and commentaries, it is widely accepted that a sign true beauty and intelligence , is when others state it about the individual, not oneself.. Take care and please try to relax, you take everything way too seriously. Respectfully, Rana Sadri To top * More sense to identify with the Japanese Re: Hashem Hakimi's "Is it true?": If it is the case that Persian kings ate with utensiles 2500 years ago, I fail to see what bearing that can have on our lives today, much less why that is something to be proud of. And if it were the case that we all ate with our hands, I fail to see why that would be something to be ashamed of. Eating with hands is one of a a variety of ways peope eat in different cultures (including some cultures in our own country). I also fail to see how "we" can possibly identify with Persian kings from 2500 years ago. If these kings were resurrected today, we would find their worldview and attitudes more alien than those of the Japanese or those of the Zulu. The same can be said of the Europeans whom Mr. Hakimi strangely identifies with their caveman ancestors. But I guess if "we" = "ancient kings", then "they" = "ancient cavemen". The whole notion of equating present day Iranians with the ancient Persian dynasties is flawed. It is flawed because (1) Over half of Iranians are *not* of Persian descent, (2) Our Persians are mostly descendants of peasants not kings, so they cannot lay a claim to the achievements of the kings (who, incidentally, exploited the peasants in order to create empires); (3) The temporal distance between us and those ancient kings is more significant than the spatial distance between us and, say, the Japanese. It makes as much sense for us to identify with the Japanese as it does with the ancinent kings. In other words, it makes no sense. Bahram To top * Why don't they care? THIS IS NOT FOR PUBLICATION OR I WILL FIND A WAY TO KICK YOUR SUSHI-EATING ASS :) Read your article on Bahais [Heechee kam nadaaran]. So how much hate mail did you get? Cause you sure didn't post that much of it on the site. The hateful few you did post were, not surprisingly, pathetically misinformed. And, though I'll admit I don't look at the site daily, I've never seen so many letters on one topic. I get so frustrated with how oblivious my Muslim Iranian friends are to the Bahai situation in Iran. Why don't they care? I'm floored by how little attention the so-called dissident media in Iran pays to the issue. Heck, even the mainstream global media folks are too scared to question Iranian leaders about the treatment of Bahais. So what you did was, seriously, brave. Thanks, N To top * Total world domination This is in response to a letter from FR seeking answers to 4 questions she/he posed regarding President Bush and Senator Feinstein's recent stand on U.S. policy towards Iran. Before I attempt to answer the questions, I assume FR recognizes that people like Bush or Feinstein probably do not know much about what is really going on, as they cannot possibly comprehend the complexities of this interdependent world. (Remember: The devil is in the details). Anything they say, or any policy they seem to espouse, is dictated by a team of "advisors" that set the U.S. foreign and domestic policy agenda. These directives are then turned into congressional bills and easy-to-chew statements written by professional speechwriters, and then given to Bush and Feinstein to orate for public consumption. Let's call the power-behind-the-ventriloquist: the "System". Answering FR's questions become easier if we look into the system's motives, as opposed to simply listening to GW Bush's sound-bytes or some California senator's bills introduced and passed by the Congress. I believe the system's main objective is to leverage capitalism for total world domination. In this light, let's tackle FR's questions. 1- Why Iran is suddenly getting so much sympathy from Bush? My answer: If the System's objective is to make oil deals with Russia and lay pipelines from Central Asian countries, it would play all kind of games with Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey, Iraq, etc. à simply to achieve its ultimate objectives. Why should the System care what kind of government rules Iran as long as the System's interest are achieved. 2- Why Feinstein hates Iranians so much? My answer: She does not know the difference between Iranians, Iraqis, Libyans or Syrians. The bill she introduced effected many countries, including Sudan and North Korea. Therefore, it could not have been a bunch of rich Iranians who lobbied her to do that. So, you ask why did she do it? Well, if you were part of the System, wouldn't you advise her to do that, given the post 9/11 politics of the nation, and strive for votes in the next election? 3- If Bush is sympathetic to Iranians, why does he stop their entry to the US? My answer: As shown in (1) above, he shows a little sympathy here, kicks you in the ass there. It all makes sense in terms of achieving the System's ultimate objectives. Frankly, you (Iran) is irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things from the System's point of view. Wouldn't you do the same if you had bigger aims, no matter what turn the events may take in Iran? The U.S. can encourage the Iranians to revolt against IRI, they can bomb the hell out of that country, they can boycott it for the next umpteen years. There are lot of options, and the optimum one will be chosen to achieve the System's ultimate objectives. Meanwhile, all options are kept open. 4- If Iran is the big terrorist country, why is Bush so interested in attacking Iraq? My answer: At this point, it is not clear which of the following 4 options US may exercise. Attack Iraq. Attack Iran. Attack both. Attack neither. The System will decide depending on the turn of events as they unfold, as well as the degree of cooperation by Europeans, Arabs, and other countries. Meanwhile, the System will make sure its objectives are achieved no matter what events take place. You can rest assured that almost all possible scenarios and outcomes are already being simulated on very large computers at NSA, DIA, Pentagon and the Homeland Security. I hope my answers did not offend the huge ego and the tremendous self-importance some Iranians attach to themselves. Sean To top * Do not belittle those who worked to advance Iran For your information most ex-ministers were not rich, and as in all countries, there were a few rotten apples. The rest were dedicated and hard working men and women, who after the 1979 revolution, were either executed in Iran (as were many others) or had to make a living working wherever and in whatever capacity to survive. It was often their wives who worked for their survival, whereas the men had a hard time finding jobs because of over qualification. Please do not belittle those who worked with dedication and patriotism to advance Iran, the Iran that was becoming a major player in that region and was advancing rapidly, albeit with political problems which were being addressed at the time. The mullahs had inherited a great country and look what a mess they have made of it all. Whatever you see and find in Iran now of any value is still the continuation of plans and projects begun under the late Shah and many dedicated ministers of the time. Shahla Samii To top * Religion can evolve into something better Mooness, [Putting down your own] Actions speak louder than words and are indelibly printed on our senses with a blood-red stain far darker than ink on the pages of a book. It matters less what you are taught and what you believe than what you do with it, how you interpret it. Sorry, but if all Islam shows us is "just angry faces, violence, chador, stoning, revolution, martyrdom, blood and..." terrorism, than that is what it will mean to us, regardless of what is written in the Quaran or privately believed by its followers. Belief in too many cases has nothing to do with everyday reality. It is a pretty dream, a distraction, a blind hope... nothing more. Not to underrate that value of hope to get us through dark, unpredictable times but in the end it is the earth on which we will still be standing until the day we die. Then what? Islam promises Paradise to men and servitude with eternally broken and remade virginity for women (sounds painful!) and that's only if you give up joy and freedom here on earth and fight tooth and nail with everyone who fails to adopt your religion. What a deal! You can keep it, thank you. For what it's worth, I feel the same way about most organized religions. I haven't found the exception yet, but suspect there may be one. Islam just stands out stronger at this point in history as a source of intense violence and repression, very much like the Christian church of the Dark Ages, of the Crusades, of the Burning Times, of Inquisition, the Pogrom... but not now. Religion can evolve into something better, something that can be lived with, even rewarding, just so long as it isn't put in charge of government or people don't believe it without question. That's when Hell on earth happens. Guilt, fear, and anger are the wrong elements to govern our actions. And yes, I have studied Islam. There is much of value in it, but too much control of everyday matters. It felt unnatural to me, like I had to choose between nature and faith, with intellect engaged, but sharply stymied. I was willing to adopt it for a while but soon realized I was engaging in a sort of needless self-flagellation. No point to it when I came to know myself and discovered I couldn't even believe in the half of it. Anyway, the end all be all of this rambling is that actions speak louder than words. If the religion you are attached to makes you look bad, then DEtach from it. Be moral and kind, tolerant and constructive, in your OWN right. Do that much even if you don't detach from the religion that has shaped your sense of who you are. Maybe if everyone did that, religion wouldn't get a bad name. Debra Johnson To top * Just plain silly I read Mr. Jahanshah Javid's article [Heechee kam nadaaran] as well as most of the letters in reply . There seems to be some some confusion with respect to Eid-e-Norooz and how it is celebrated by Bahais. The 21st of March is the first day of the new year of the Bahais caleneder. Bahais of Iranian descent recognize this day as both a national AND religious holiday. Iranian Bahais spread their 'sofreh-haft-seen' on this day just like any other Iranian, whether he be Muslim, Christian, or Jew. One of your commentators felt Bahais were trying to expropriate Eid-e-Norooz. This is just plain silly. Iranian Bahais are just as proud of their cultural/national heritage as any other. Thank you. Dr. Mehrdad Saririan Montreal, Canada To top * With all due respect, give us a break Shirin Neshat "Logic Of the Birds"... What logic? Reference to Attar? Give me a break. After I got over my initial excitement of seeing a multi-media production by a well known Iranian artist at the Lincoln Center, I felt intellectually and morally robbed of what could have been a inspiring performance. Logic of the Birds had nothing whatsoever in common with Attar's grandiose imagery and poetry. Although some of the images were breathtaking and haunting, the story line followed no logic. Susan Deyheim performance and voice was overwhelming or I should say overbearing. Her lyrics or should I say her babblings perfectly echoed the message that was delivered throughout the performance which can be described with one word "chaos". I attended the show with a number of my male and female Iranian friends. We all looked for ways to relate to the performance and somehow apply our experiences as Iranians, our knowledge of our history, our poetry to decipher the meaning of Neshat's work. But at the end of the day we saw nothing but a conglomeration of images by a confused artist who has lost touch with her heritage and certainly one who does not understand Attar's work. Although I realize that art often does not follow logic, yet one hopes that any piece of art can convey a meaning that one can relate to in some logical level. If her piece was to convey the magic of Attar's work, then she failed miserably. There was too much attention paid to the construction of the images, the dancing, and the singing that the meaning behind them was lost. One friend suggested that Attars' name was exploited for marketing reasons; simply to get people into the theater. Another who knows the artist well suggested that her work may have been degraded by her collaboration by other artists who have been using her name to propel their own careers. Regardless of our individual opinions, we all agreed that the performance was put together professionally and that Neshat deserved a big credit for attempting to merge different art disciplines; a difficult task indeed. After all, we are all a die heart Neshat's fan and have attended every show and exhibit she has put on. Besides, we like to support all Iranians artists. But what is the logic behind the images she portrays? Where is the story line? Where is the reference to Attar's work? With all due respect, give us a break, Miss Neshat. Regards Babak Mozafarian To top * The English needs work I read your piece in The Iranian, entitled "Alien, Observations about photons." The English version of the piece is written such that it is difficult, if not impossible, to understand. The Farsi version is a little better; however, not many qualified people can read and make a technical judgment about its accuracy and validity. Before I, or anyone else with technical background, can review and make a judgment about its validity with some degree of precision, the paper must be written in a much more scientific and technical English language, edited for readability, and it should be sent to one of the technical journals (such as, at least, Scientific American, or Nature) whose specialties are to receive, peer review, and if accepted, print highly technical and scientific material. Another matter that is not obvious to me is your personal technical and scientific background. In a sense, before anyone spends time reading and evaluating your piece, one must know who wrote it, what is the writer's background and experience, and hence, what is the possibility of the paper being correct, and at least without major errors. I suggest when writing a technical paper, you write who you are, and describe what is your scientific and technical background and experience. From the Farsi version, and the lack of coherent English version, I assume that you are currently residing in Iran. I will be happy to help if I can. Good luck to you. M.H. Farzin, Ph. D. To top * We don't need a leader, we need a mentality In reply to "All is needed is separating religion from governance", You are finishing your mail with: "It should be made clear to the likes of Mr. Mirfendereski that if Iranians are capable of reforming the current "mollacracy" into a democratic republic, they most certainly are capable of living with a constitutional monarchy similar to that of Spain, for example". Could you answer this: If we have a fully working democracy, why the hell would we want to have a monarchy? Do we have too much money to spend it on royal family? What does it give back in return? A Kosack family who changed his name to Pahlavi so that we might think they are ancestors to old persia? And then what? We make a bunch of families aristocrats so that the royal family wont feel lonely? And let them kiss each others hand and live on tax payers? If we do that then we are back to square one "baaz az no baazi az no". The corruption starts again and all of you royalists are to busy kissing hands that u dont care or dare to criticize your dear beloved king. What we need is a democracy as a system, but the monarchists as like as many other groups wants to feed us a leader. We don't need a leader, we need a working system, and mentality. Choghok To top * Distinguish between a republic and "this republic" Mr. Mirfendereski, My brief reply to your "Give this republic a chance" was published on the Iranian.com on 23rd July (under the title: All is needed is separating religion from governance). Without attempting to embelish my writing with gardening or gastronomical anecdotes or cheap "driving" metaphors!, I will go straight to the point. I reiterate that, as a "lawyer", your particular skill in writing lies in your being selective in the choice of references, quoting others out of context and, specifically, convoluting facts and issues. In your recent "BRILLIANT!" writing [The company you keep], you quote one admirer of your previous opinion piece as saying ...."[I] hope that there are people out there that will indeed give a republic a chance". Your previous piece, however, was about "Give this republic a chance". As a "lawyer" you should be able to distinguish between a republic and "this republic". You should know that the current theocratic dictatorship, shrouded in the kolah-e-sharee of "republic" is nothing more than a mockery of a republic and an affront to the ideal of republicanism. So, by asking to "give this republic a chance", you are in fact proposing to prolong the sufferings of Iranians and further devastation of every fabric of Iranian society. The issue with your "opinion" is not about the choice between a republic or monarchy. That choice is up to the people of Iran, and every individual's right to choose should be respected as a matter of democratic principle, as clearly stated in Prince Reza Pahlavi's book (Winds of Change). However, when you blatantly convolute the issue and state (in your well-brought- up manner!!) "...the ranting of the Pahlavi internet thugs is nothing short of a pataphysical sign of a failed Messianic movement .... they do not recognize any right for one and wish to dictate to all ...." - which is totally untrue, baseless and contrary to the principles of Winds of Change - and when you propose to "Give this republic a chance" while ignoring the obvious advantages of a modern constitutional monarchy (like those of Spain, UK etc) for an ethnically diverse country like Iran, and even make pathetic attempts to ridicule monarchy, you enrage your readers who love their Iran dearly and care about what happens to their compatriots in Iran. That is why, Mr. Mirfendereski, you receive the kind of replies that you do. Not because you are sworn to be loyal to republican form of government. Think about it. R. Sardar To top * Big difference What load of rubbish! [Long Live Iranian TV!] I suggest you stop watching TV for 1 hour and read the excellent article "Illusion overdose" by Leila Farjam in this very site. There is a big difference between NITV, Iran TV and Tapesh. Being young, raised and fed on American TV, although understandable, is not a good excuse for stupidity and lack of intellect. You say you are the future of Iran. I would rather like to think that the brave young people whithin Iran are the future. Keep watching the kind and smiling Shabkheez ... Manuchehr Ghezelayagh London To top * A lot of memories That was AWSOME [First night in Tehran]. Brought back a lot of memories! Write some more! Did you go to shomal? Shahanshahi club? Key club? Chattanoga? Etc....? By the way, it's meydoon = square (as in city square), Shahyad =(roughly) in memory of the king. TS32G To top * Everyone should be treated the exact way i was really touched by your article [Heechee kam nadaaran]. it seems that some one cares for us out there after all. you are really brave and honest. i always thought that persian's think we are not even human; that we are some sort of weirdoes. like myself i had no future if i was still living in iran. ok i'm a Bahai, and i believe in every religion, and i also respect them. i believe that every religion has the same symbols love, unity, peace and also i believe that all the prophet are the same, they are all messangers of god and they all say the same thing "to love one another, to respect one another". i have no idea why isn't like this? it's not fair for us not to go to university because we are bahais, everyone should be treated the exact way. anyway thanks again for your bravary and honesty. i'm 14-years old but i think i know a lot for a 14 year old. i hope you know what i mean. Love, Parisa To top * My mom, the Axis of Evil It is a bitter, bitter story of world's dirty politics, so you might ask what happened now. I am a young professional who got most of my education in Canada. I have been living in US for a while, working, like everybody else for number of years and paying my dues. Time goes by and we Iranian men don't get younger any more, so my quest of finding my loved one finally succeeded in love at first sight and later on we were planning our wedding. As part of this ritual, I have decided to get my mom -- a woman of fine qualities at sixty years old -- to come over from Iran and join our celebration. So I got busy with my immigration attorney preparing all sort of supporting documents for her. These days with Iran being the satanic axis, I did my best to avoid any shortcoming. I have sent over tons of paper work and she full of joy and hope goes to Dubai to apply for her visa. After two weeks of alaafee she goes for her interview and catastrophically she was denied a visiting visa. Major disappointment and setback for myself, for my mom and my fiancée who put her whole heart into this matter with me. You might ask why? Well, one given reason was that she has not traveled to US before, duhÖ if you and people like you who develop kashkee foreign policy don't give her a chance to visit, how can she come in here in the first place. I guess I should have tried to get her over here before 9/11. She might have been saved from being part of the bloody axis of shaytaan. Some times we wonder why there are so many problems in this world we live in... Rest in peaceÖ. Ali To top * Merely more desparate It is not so much that the guys in Iran are more porroo than the Iranian guys here, they are merely more desparate [Berim shomaal]. It is not your booty they are after, it is your green card. So if you go to Iran and they ask you out, ask you to go to shomal, or mahzar or whatever it is not you they are after, rather, it is where you can take them that they really want. M Dadsetan To top * Beginning of good dialogue As a member of the Bahai Faith, I really appreciated your timely and to the point article about treatment of Bahais in Iran [Heechee kam nadaaran]. Also, I wanted to thank you for your sincere concerns about the plight of Iranian Bahais. We do respect other people's religions, social or political view and we would like to be treated with the same respect. I specially enjoyed your article about Bahais not being bitter or not having a huge chip on their shoulder. I can say with all sincerity that I feel no malice toward others and specially toward our Moslem Friends (after-all most of us either have been Moslem or our parents or grand-parents were Moslems). Again a note to say thanks for your concerns and may this will be a beginning of some good dialogue between us all. Best, Farahmand Ziari To top * Guys, guys, guys! Dear page editor.This letter is a reply to "You frustrate me". You're right on the money sister. Oooh you've stirred a hornets nest with those comments allright!. What you complained about, what you personally experienced, what you wrote about was familiar to me.Yes there are some (I say SOME) Iranian men out there-be it in the US or in Iran-who suffer from over-inflated egos, who operate with a sense of entitlement. They say "women belong to men, loose women are to be had, I should have a cuddle when ever and with whom ever I fancy". You tell them "buzz-off" and they take that as a compliment and they press on. "Who does she think she is telling ME off?. Every body else has had her!. I'm not Bee Orz'e. I should have her too. I don't care what she says. I must have her now. I'm the man." Guys, guys, guys! (and a few over-sensitive dols); Don't go around tearing my limbs off.I'm an Iranian man too.I've witnessed, on more than one occasion, in streets of Tehran an unchaperoned (by definition a loose!) girl, walking down the street,being hussled by a guy who reaches out, cups a feel, shouting Okh Jun in her face, his friends loughing in delight. Later, another talented guy further down the street runs into the same "loose" girl, casually probes her orifice using his index finger(Angulak). This time its Oof jun.I can't blame any girl feeling traumatised afterwards. No I didn't participate in these sports.No I didn't help the girl either. Shame on me.So folks take it easy on this American(?) lady.Be fair. Some Iranian men(again SOME) are ignorant buffuns and dererve to be called "assholes". And why is it that no Iranian woman uses that colorfull word against a deserving Iranian soul? All women deserve respect.All are entitled to their dignity.That's ALL women whether they be American college students or Bahaiis. Regards, Parviz'e Shushtari To top * Stupendous array of convoluted clap-trap I have a complaint to make about your sense of judgement as a journalist. I refer to my own 'article' entitled "Standardization of standards". Although it makes a few lucid points, it is appallingly written. What a stupendous array of convoluted clap-trap. Simply atrocious. Do you just publish any old rubbish? Surely you should be sending people like myself back to the drawing board? Yours sincerely Marjaneh Zahed-Khorassani-Kindersley To top * Axis of Beauty Have you ever seen the ancient ruins of Persopolis, where once mighty and powerful persian kings would rule nearly half the civilized world from their giant throwns? Have you ever drivin through the great Alborz Mountains on a hot summer day to see the scorching sun bounce of the top of the STILL snow covered mountain peaks? Have you ever been along the white sandy shore of the Caspian Sea to feel the cool, refreshing breeze send chills down your spine? Have you ever walked into an old Iranian bazar to see shop windows overflowing with the kind of persian gold that shimmers so bright that you are almost struck blind at first glance? Have you ever seen an old traditional women in a store weaving together strands of colorful, fine thread in hopes of making the perfect persian rug? I didn't think so "Mr.President". So c'mon, don't be a hypocrit. Get away from your normal life and come and see this amazing nation and it's beautiful people for what they truly are and have always been, an axis of beauty. Niki Alekajbaf To top * I am criticizing an establishment Mr. Eskandari, [Tell us something new] And thank you for your response. In fact I am familiar with your website. I will visit it again, it did not help me to change my views of Ghajar as a Dynasty, yet this should not be taken personally by their offspring. Sir, I am not attacking your family. I am criticizing an establishment, just like one would criticize Kennedy's and Nixon's, this has nothing to do with the entire family as a unit or a clan. Being a member of that family you have been exposed to criticism all throughout Pahlavi's reign, but you exhibited more anger at me than 70 years of degrading of Ghajar by the Pahlavis. You ignored all the other comments I made and only became upset since my father very rightfully cursed at two Monarchies more than 40 years ago! If Ghajar family considers itself as a servants of Iran as perhaps any good citizen should do, they should also be willing to be exposed to certain criticism. We are not here to compare two dynasties with each other and comparative politics. Plus with the prevailing polygamy during the Ghajar and prior regimes, the siblings of those kings are so numerous that is beyond the subject of this argument. And I can not give all of them credit for being a great family, which they may be. As much as you can be a defender of your family, I do not wish to accept your unilateral decision to be defender of the Ghajar Dynasty. Each Iranian is as much entitled to defend or criticize the system as any member of the family. It's the system of one man one vote. We can not offer you more than one voice to only stand for your own deeds and of course your personal opinion. Beyond that I can not accept you as the voice of the Ghajars, nor can I be the voice of Kaveh Ahangar! Respectfully, Farrokh A. Ashtiani To top * Tell us something new Dear Mr. Ashtiani, [It's time to wake up] Thank you for your reply. Far be it from me to try to inhibit you from your freedom of expression. I was merely questioning your motives for your references to my ancestors. Given your reply, there is really no need for me to try to show you otherwise. You seem to have all the answers. Should you, however, be interested in hearing otherwise, be assured, that far from being what you portrait us to be, you would be hard pressed to back up any of your assertions in objective fact regarding the lack of patriotism of the Ghajars, or their alleged "loss of territory" or their "emptying the coffers of the country." And if you mean to cast aspersions, tell me Mr. Ashtiani, who can you point to who is faultless? And by the way, what does enjoying the company of French ladies have anything to do with the country? You should at least have the honesty of admitting that you too, not unlike an entire generation of people who grew up under the Pahlavis, whether you agree with them or not, are simply parroting that old tired line. Tell us something new, Mr. Ashtiani, and while you are at it, take time to ponder the facts of Iranian history somewhat more. Yes, Ghajars lost lands to the Russians. Has it ever occured to you that they also had won those lands before? Yes, they had to sign burdensome treaties with the Russians. Has it ever occured to you that those treaties are nevertheless masterpieces of diplomacy on the part of a country that was defeated by one of the superpowers of the day and had occupied Iran all the way to Tabriz. You take the far too easy route of blaming the Ghajars because it is convenient and because you feel you can do it with impunity and get a good laugh at our expense. That is your prerogative indeed, I just wish you to know that the party at our expense in no more free of charge. You ask me what "we" have "offered" for you lately. I submit that "we" are offering scholarly work to contradict exactly the kind of non-sense you propagate in the name of free speech. Should you wish to benefit from our efforts, here is our scholarly association's web site: www.qajarstudies.org. Most sincerely, Manoutchehr M. Eskandari-Qajar President, Kadjar Family Association To top * It's time to wake up Mr. Eskandari-Qajar, [You do not do yourself proud] I suffice to say that the damages inflicted upon my land and my country during Ghajar Dyansty was no less than what occurred during Pahlavi and the Islamic Republic combined. Don't try to inhibit us from our freedom of expression. I don't care how they do it in France a country that your ancestors were so proud of, I take my Persian heritage and stay proud to curse on any incompetent ruler who sold our country and went into debt with the Russian Bank just to be able to go and visit Farang! Please read the history of those you are so proud of. I care very little on how they do it in France. Isn't it time to stop thinking of French as your role models? We are in a different time zone if you don't mind me to remind you. I reserve the rights to convey the history and my memories to anyone the way I deem necessary [The Persian Tragedy]. You are welcome to express yours as well. But what have YOU offered us lately? I am not saying this as insult, but do set aside your aristocratic sentiments. The Ghajar gave away more land of our country than any ruler in the past 1,000 year! Please wake up and smell the roses! If it was not for brave, highly educated and respectful people like my father, we would never learn a damn thing about our history, why? Because people in your echelon think of themselves too good to associate themselves with anything non-Ghajar. On the other hand my family thought yours how to read and write. Have you heard of Abbas Eghbal Ashtiani? Have you heard of Miz Abdol Azim Khan Gharib? How many Ghajar Prince do you want me to expose whom spent their days and nights in Dar Abaad Palace in northern Tehran with French whores, emptying a poor nation's treasury? If it was not for handful of brave young women and men who spend days and nights without any expectations allowing his fellow countrymen express their thoughts and being devoted his career to this cause, we would still be sitting listening to astrologist who advised your ancestors to contemplate whether to fight with the enemy or "give them some land and let them go"! It's time to wake up. Thanks! Farrokh A. Ashtiani To top * You do not do yourself proud Dear Mr. Ashtiani: I just read your article in The Iranian titled "The Persian Tragedy". I am a descendant of the Ghajars that you choose to malign in your article. Could you please explain what purpose the phrase "And my father used to curse like you have not heard in any slum! Telling us how the same bullshit went on during Ghajar Dynasty, whose kings had no formal education," had in your article other than gratuitously insulting those who are long gone and cannot defend themselves? Do you sincerely believe that an individual who revels in relating that his father was a gutter-mouth, and who insults past rulers of his country, in order to elicit a chuckle or two from his readers, will ever be taken seriously by an audience and a larger world whose respect he seeks? You speak of nationalist sentiments. Do you think a Frenchman worth his salt would ever talk in this way about his country's past, no matter what his political beliefs today? I wish you well, Mr. Ashtiani, but, with what you say in this piece, you do not do yourself proud. Manoutchehr M. Eskandari-Qajar President, Kadjar Family Association To top * That was a little harsh First of all, I would like to say, that my letter was to anyone GUILTY of what I mentioned [I have done my research]. If you are not guilty,you are not responsible.There are immagrants who do contribute to society.... I respect and applaud them. They deserve very much to be part of our nation that is so deeply rooted in freedom. I will be the first to say that women in general,american women... need to choose a little wiser when it comes to a husband... but as they say, love is blind. Am I eminent or self-righteous? Not a chance....and far from being a racial antagonist.I am only speaking my mind and if the shoe fits,we have to be men and women enough to wear it.The only words I regret was get the hell out... that was a little harsh. Everything else I spoke of was the truth. We all know that actions speak louder than words, as well as statistics. Sometimes the truth can hurt us in places where words cannot. If you have a wife,whatever her nationality may be... just love her the way God would want you to. Those of you who are good husbands... God Bless You... you are few of the real men left in this world. Patsy Whitaker To top * Too genenral Your photo section used to be interesting. Now it's about everything (too general). Shouldn't you concentrate about Iranian subjects? We can get the rest from other sources. Thanks, Behnam To top * Insensitive to this very DEPRESSING effect I read about the woman who is unable to have orgasms while on antidepressant drugs. This is a common side effect of Paxil, Prozac and other drugs of that class. For some reason, doctors seem insensitive to this very DEPRESSING effect. I think if this woman stopped taking the drugs and talked with a counselor to help with her depression, she would soon be back to normal sexually. Her husband sounds like a very caring man. Ada Barrett To top * Be more selective After giving comments on Azam Nemati's writing and her narcissistic attitude, I recieved two mails from the lady, both foul-languaged and extremely insulting. She was trying to defend herself by calling me names and repeatedly mentioning her irresistible physical attraction: "I happened to be in a very good shape, I have beautiful brown eyes and a million dollar smile!!" The old lady not only lacks a sense of humor and is ill-tempered but is also a very negative role model and a fulse representative of educated,sophisticated iranian women. Although the motto of Iranian.com is "Noting Is Sacred" - which I truly believe in - and the site is an open tribune,but never forget that each and every piece of writing presented in this site may have an impact on readers from other nationalities. Is this what happens to be an iranian female writer? Ego-centeric,narcissist and rigid-minded? Are all middle-aged iranian women still seeking for attention like a teenager? I am once more asking Mr.Javid to be more selective with what he publishes, once again for the sake of his great site. Bahareh Vali To top * Superb work Dear Azadeh, I am an old photographer, but enjoyed looking at your art work tremendously [Ultimate concerns]. Superb work indeed. Best wishes & regards, H. Hakimi, Norway To top * 'O son of... Dear Mr. Jahanshah Javid Congratulations for your article, "Heechee kam nadaaran". 'O SON OF SPIRIT ! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away there from if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thine neighbour. Ponder this in thine heart; how it behooves thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.î -- Bahá'u'lláh (1817 - 1892) With loving regards, Mohiman Shafa, Brasil. To top * Mehran Abdolsalami I am looking for a friend who attended Alavi High School in Mashhad, class of 1974 (MEHRAN ABDOLSALAMI). Please contact me at maminian@satx.rr.com To top * Bahai books in Arabic You wrote: [Heechee kam nadaaran] "Bahaulla or whoever started the Bahai faith should be recognized as a very significant (if not great) historic figure in Iranian history. For God's sake his movement is flourishing in every corner of the world. And he wasn't an Arab like the other fellow." Did you know that his books in written in Arabic?!!!!!! Why would an Iranian (born and raised in Iran) be given a book in arabic?!!! You say: "Of course I've thought about writing something about Bahais for some time. I'm just fascinated by the fact that we -- nearly every non-Bahai Iranian -- do not really consider Bahais as Iranian." The reason is that , Bahais, choose to be silent about many issues that surrounds Iran and waht is happening there. They say ( ma dar siasat dekhalat nemikonim). They do not have any opinion about politics.....including what happens in Iran and in the world....You hardly hear from Bahai about issues that is affecting ( IRAN ) and Iranians... ( except Bahais)....you do not hear from them about their position on the massacres that are going around in the world such as in Palestine or Africa ....or other places...they choose to be indifferent.....this is in their ideology, I have heard this from many Bahai friends of myself and I cannot understand how can a " religion " blind you so much to what is happening in your world??even about common problems in daily living , they choose to be indifferent and silent as taught by their faith. A recent example would be the issue that all ( Iranians) of different faiths and background have been affected ( the Ban of visitors visa to Iranian-non immigrants)....my Bahai friends chose to be silent bc, they are not allowed to be involved in politics....... Ali-Zadeh To top * I was at that funeral I have to respond to "The OK mullah" by Siamack Baniameri. I was surprised to see you publish the piece of trash. You may say that is free press. So I guess you will publish mine. It may shed some controversy or open some eyes. That is all for more readers. I don't know if I was mad or sad, maybe I was disgusted or even disappointed. I could not believe what I was reading. I read it twice maybe three times before waking up my wife to read it too. It is ashamed from a promising young writer to get into a subject that he has absolutely no idea. I don't know what religion asks their followers to pray four times a day. Do you know? You cannot just start writing because you think you can write. You have to know what the hell you are writing about. Remember the saying? Little Knowledge is dangerous? But in this case no clue is fatal. The real story: I was at that funeral. It was a very hot Arizona day. A lot of people were there .The deceased was a very well known and liked man. One hundred plus degree heat would not stop anyone of mourners from coming to show their sympathy, and respect to the family. The mullah was not a typical Mullah. He was an Arabic young man and he conducted a very simple and brief ceremony. I remember seeing Siamak. He was standing in front row, very quite. Maybe he was getting inspired to write an article. His eyes were blood shut. Maybe he was mourning his father's passing. Now I have something to say: Siamak, I prayed and cried for your father that day. He was a good man. I pray to God to open your eyes someday. Meanwhile, get some books and read. Don't take anyone's words for granted. Obviously your knowledge of religions is extremely limited. Don't get offended. Don't let your ego slows you down. Go beyond all the bullshit -- and find the way. It took me 20 years to start understanding. I am not a preacher and I cannot help you. Only you can find the way. Please keep my name and e-mail anonymous. To top * That was funny! Dear Siamack, I just finished reading your piece in iranian.com on "The OK mullah", That was funny! I had not laughed for a while; that was funny, regardless of whether or not you made it up. Congratulations on such a writing capability, and imagination. M.H. Farzin, Ph. D. To top * Antidepressants are not narcotic I read with interest the advice you gave to the person who's mate is suffering from lack of libido. Although I agree with your overall comments, I disagree with some of your points. It seems like the person is depressed and her doctor has chosen to treat her depression as the first priority. For whatever reason the therapy is not working. You stated that long term antidepressant use may lead to substance abuse. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT THE CASE. Antidepressants are not narcotic analgesics. Although a stronger dose may be eventually needed, this would not be considered substance abuse. Secondly, this person must be told that most antidepressants bring loss of libido. This is a common side effect. This person can go to the doctor and ask for the newer agents which may have minimal loss of libido. keep up the good work Mahyar Etminan, Pharm.D To top * Might help explain Given that the reasons for U.S. support for Israeli incursions against the Palestinians is on quite a few readers' minds, there is a series of insanely best-selling American books (10 to date out of a projected 14) that might help explain the reason for U.S. support or at least provide a clue. I refer of course to Jerry B. Jenkins & Tim La Haye's series of Left Behind novels. The novels tell of a struggle between recently converted fundamentalist Christians to thwart the return of the Antichrist. Part of that struggle involves the Jews reclaiming all of Palestine, moving Al-Aqsa mosque, and rebuilding the second temple of the Dome of the Rock. Of course, the Jews all convert to Christianity, but that point gets swept under the rug. It might be tempting to dismiss the novels as fundamentalist idiocy. However, the scenario is one quite a few U.S. government officials accept. Co-author Tim La Haye was a prominent member of the Christian fundamentalist political organization The Moral Majority. Currently, he is involved with the most powerful conservative organization in the U.S., the Council For National Policy. The Council boasts among its members such familiar names as John Ashcroft, Tommy Thompson, and Oliver North. George W. Bush spoke before the group 3 years ago, but has continued to decline to say what he talked about. I'm not saying this thriller series is a blueprint for U.S. Mideast policy. But given the existence of, say, American fundamentalist religious organizations' sponsorship of Israeli West Bank settlements, I wouldn't be foolish enough to dismiss the Jenkins & La Haye books as simple trash. You don't suppose Al-Jazeera has heard of these books, do you? Sincerely, Peter Wong To top * My cousin Jasmin Tabatabai A friend of mine passed me your link. I love it. And thank you for making it possible. I saw a small link for Jasmin Tabatabai and would like to share with you and all the Iranians some more information about my cousin Jasmin Tabatabai. we are very proud to have her. http://jasmin-tabatabai.com/english/ Best regards and lots of love from germany. Afsaneh Tabatabai To top * Change must be though non-violent means The Islamic regime's malaise Recently two articles appeared in Iranian.com, which are worth commenting. The first one is by Guive Mirfenderski titled, "Give this republic a chance" and the other is by Hossein Bagher Zadeh, "Party's over". Mr. M. Who seems to be a knowledgeable person in the area of history gives the readers an overview on the ancient and contemporary history of Iran. And then in a polite way, after having visited Iran, he concludes that this Islamic Republic needs to be given a chance! He is among those somewhat naïve and wishful intellectual thinkers who have been brainwashed or are closing their eyes to the reality, those who still play with the notion that a regime as corrupt, cruel and fanatic as the Islamic regime can be in fact restructured or reformed. Mr. Bagherzadeh on the other hand gives us a thorough historical background of the reasons this Islamic regime, inhumane through the core cannot be cosmetically or otherwise changed for the many reasons we all know. When the Islamic Republic came into being following the 1979 revolution, those who remember their history well, know for a fact that the word Islamic was cleverly added to the word Republic. Iranians, en masse demanded the downfall of the dictatorship but no one in their right mind envisioned or asked for a regime, which would for 23 years, embark on the destruction of every hope and desire for a better life and one which would destroy all human values. \The Islamic regime in its totality, regardless of good, bad, or evil has done more harm to the people than all dictatorships of the past combined. A society has been created where the least voice for basic freedoms is crushed and or imprisoned. And those who are in prison are told to confess for "crimes" they have never committed, as in the case of Siamak Pourzand, recently. Students, journalists, human right activists and speakers of the truth are physically destroyed or put behind bars. Ironically, the criminals are set free. Every paper, which talks of the malaise of the regime, is silenced. Yet others appear and disappear. The clerics who in the name of the great religion silence the youth and reprimand them for desiring what all young people want, instead of creating jobs for them, have turned the youth of our nation into prostitutes and drug addicts. Poverty, economic destitution, corruption at all levels and unemployment at 30 percent have crippled the country. Yet the elite and the Mafia bands operating under the umbrella of "Bonyads" are free to put their hands on the wealth of the country legally and illegally. While the majority of the Mostazafin have become even more Mostazaf, the new Taghootis are now a band of clerics headed by people like Rafsanjani whose family is the nouveau riche of Iran. As the head of the Expediency council, he and his clique govern the nation. The President of the Republic, Mr. Khatami, has disappointed the people. Mere rhetoric on his part and the dialogue of civilization has only resulted in more jailing of the best minds of the country while Islamic thinkers are given the chance to come and study in the great Satan's institutions such as Harvard University and then preach us about Islamic democracy!This is yet another manipulation by the clever clerical regime. Iranians need and must change Iran though non-violent means. This is a must. For all of us, one revolution has been enough. Yet, change in Iran can only come about when the regime of the Mullahs in its entirety is questioned by the entire nation. I do believe that if today, free elections take place and if people were asked whether they would vote for a democratic Republic or an Islamic Republic, the vote would be for the former. To Mr. Mirfendereski and our great intellectual thinkers, I say, the Iranian people have given 23 years chance to this Republic and have seen the results. There is no more chance to be given. It is time for fundamental changes now. The Party will be over sooner than later! Fariba Amini To top * This shall pass on too Dear Hassan, This is my comment to your humorous article, "The Irooni way". Yes, sometimes between the lines of these satirical commentaries one finds gems. I want to reflect some of your writing here as an overture to what I have in mind: If you think about it, it's Aberoo that made Reza Shah angry at the Ghajar's after our humiliating loss to the Russians. It's Aberoo that made Mossadegh (a Ghajar funny enough) angry at the Pahlavis. It's Aberoo that made the Pahlavis angry at Mossadegh. It's Aberoo that made Khomeini angry at the Pahlavis. It's Aberoo that made the Iranian national team play so well against the US in 1998. Today It's Aberoo that makes Reza Pahlavi want to clear his family name. And it's Aberoo that makes the last remaining Ghajars left in the world call themselves "Prince" and "Princess" FarmanFarmaian etc. in the socialite circuits of London, Paris, New York and Oh! Allright, LA You pointed out to many interesting subjects. I was recently beleaguered by one of these "Shazdeh" as why I slightly criticized Ghajars in my recent article. I will be writing an article eventually to describe the difference between the word "Shazdeh" in Farsi and "Shah-zadeh." The former simply is implied to those chubby-looking-mustached spoiled-faced idles that roamed around Europe and smoked opium and played backgammon and used French words while speaking Farsi, thinking that by using French words it will bring them the lost respect. On the other hand a Shah-Zadeh is attributed to a man with characteristics far different than what was described above. As much as one can compliment himself as his ego may desire but to impose on others to accept him as Prince is nothing more than an act of spitting upward. No one can deny that with the prevalent polygamy that went on throughout the Ghajar Dynasty, even a former villager in Dar-Abaad, Shemiran was trying to convince us years ago that he was a 30% Shazdeh since his father used to go hunting with the king and attended his horses! This I suffice to say that there were and are many educated and highly respectful people among Ghajar family, yet there are also a few that go around and try to buy the respect and the notion of being called a Prince in particular in this country that basically shuns anything and anyone that wants to sell royal goods. Remember this country became the United States of America by following two basic rules that someday Iranians will have to follow: a) Kick the British out as violently as it was necessary b) Abolish the ceremonial titles Among the credits that I have to give to Pahalvi's Kings was that at least they did not practiced polygamy and if they had extramarital relationship which we care less, they did not go around and produce offspring in every city and during every hunting season. This limited our worries to only watch for a handful of people as Prince and Princess of Pahlavis but God forbid, it seems Ghajar Shazdeh(s) are still proliferating. Why? You may ask am I not fond of the Ghajars, well let me tell you: If my grandparents had murdered or conspired to murder the greatest politician of the past 1000 years of Iranian history Amir Kabir, then I would put may tails between my legs and keep a low profile and would not go around and call myself a "Shazdeh." The murder of Amir Kabir was far more damaging to Iran that all the lands that Ghajar gave away to Russia. As history produces the likes of Amir Kabir perhaps no more than one in a century for a nation. It's so ironic and yet comical that Reza Pahalvi whom indeed by the Iranian Constitution is a heir to the thrown and true Shah-Zadeh tries to convince everyone that he does not even want to be called a prince or a king, yet those 7th generation Ghajars go and create websites not to do any good for Iran but only to tell the world that they are Shazdeh! Bring on the backgammon, let's play a game as this shall pass on too! Thanks for your penmanship. Sincerely, Farrokh A. Ashtiani To top * Excellent choice Dear Mr. Zamani, [Escape] I want to thank Jahanshah Javid for his excellent taste and choice to give all of us the pride of seeing your work on the Iranian.com. I want to thank you for your choice of selecting Iranian.com and I am so pleased that once again I am able to see several work that I have not seen before. We have not seen each other ever since the late Ferydoon Moshiri and I came to your house in October 1997. I hope next time when visiting Los Angeles I would be honored to see you again. Best wishes and regards, Reza Moini To top * Gorgeous sights Dear Mr. Zamani, Yes, you really can "Escape" the mind by just imagining the gorgeous sights that you brought before the eyes. Thanks for sharing your great work with the readers of Iranian.com. With great admiration, Farideh Nedjat To top * What's so outrageous When I first read your letter [Ignorance in all religions] I was convinced that you had come up with a very important point: The fact that all (well, not 100% all) Iranians in one way or the other suffer under the clerical regime, not just the Bahais. You even did the math, one Bahai suffering compared to 1000 Muslims', it all made perfectly sense until I remembered a discussion that I came accross some time ago about a comparison between Stalin and Hitler and which one of the two was killed more people. The quintessence of that discussion was that there had been one fundamental difference in the way these two men chose who was to live and who was to die. Whereas Stalin, at least most of time, made people disappear who in some way crossed his plans (obviously that is not a justification), Hitler sent people to die because of their race, no matter how they behaved. See where I'm getting at? If an Iranian Muslim decides to to whatever it takes, to do whatever his corrupt government aks him to do, then he has a good chance to be left alone. A Bahai however may behave the exact same way as his Muslim counterpart and still end up being chastized. That's what's so outrageous about it: Just as Hitler never gave any reasons, not bad, false, stupid, hypocritical reasons, no, NO REASONS AT ALL about why six million Jews had to die, Bahais in Iran are treated differently for no reason; religion in my opinion is as much a reason as race. Kian Ramezani To top * Victors of 79 buried history Mr. Farrokh A. Ashtiani, [The Persian tragedy] I think the true title of an Opera that could depict the 1979 Islamic revolution could be Fausts "Mephisto" or "The Phantom of The Opera" a role quite fit for the Grand Ayatollah Khomeiny who many seemed to have seen on the Moon.In any case I think no Opera can depict the miscalculations, tragedies and horrors that followed the Crash of 79. History speaks for itself. your anger towards the late Shah and his shortcoming as well as that of previous political figures can be understood and have their justifications. Nevertheless it is easier to judge the events with the passage of time. It was probably more difficult to have been as "clairvoyant" as you today unless one could have had the talent of a soothsayer to see into the future. I am not a Shahollhi as some anti monarchists like to type cast royalists in general but I am a monarchist nevertheless and respect your views and judgments even if I do not totally agree with you. I do not think the Pahlavi regime was perfect, I don't think either that the late Shah was flawless, but what I do know is that the Victors of 79 wrote and buried the history of our nation in a matter of months. Two monsters of the 20 th century Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini probably summerized best the dillema of History. It is said that during a conversation between the two Men who were rarely inclined to deep philosophical thoughts One is said to have said "Man makes History" to which the other answered "History Makes Man". I leave you the benefit of the doubt to tell me which one is the author of which claim. Nevertheless I think both were in their way correct. That the Shah was a mystic is a fact, and like any political figure especially in the Middle East where as you know religion was certainly an important factor in a nations spiritual life, the Shah must have abused or relished in the confort of having been Chosen for a Mission: And that was to modernize his country and draw it into the 20th century.. In practice however he could have certainly used it in a more demogogic way, yet he didn't unlike the Ayatollah who succeeded him and who concentrated all his effort in destroying what had been accomplished and imposing his own Green Book as the life guidlines to the Iranian Nation by the force of the Sword. Iran with or without the Shah was a Muslim and highly religious country also surrounded by countries who were also using religion directly or indirectly as a political tool. I do not claim that one must necessarily justify this, but I dare you to name one Muslim leader in the Middle East to this day who does not refer to God or Mohammed to justify its policies especially in regard to their more traditional minded population. Nasser the Egyptian refered to the Arab people and wanted to promote Arab Nationalism in the name of Islam. Saddam Hussein sees himself as the descendant of the Caliphs of Bagdad, more moderate leaders like the Kings of Jordan Hussein and Abdullah II or the King of Morroco justify their right to the thrown by divine right by claiming to be direct descendants of Mohammed. Even if in practice they have a much more modern approach towards politics. True Mossadeg was in thought a secular minded politican, yet he also flirted with religion and muslim nationalism. Today even in Afganistan Hamid Karzai who wants to promote democracy after a horrible Taliban rule has yet to compromise with the religious heritage of its country by claiming that his regime is an Islamic State. The middle East being what it is an extremly religiously dominated land. As Reza Pahlavi puts it maybe the 1979 revolution was for Iran "a blessing in disguise". The major opposition to the Shahs reforms came from the Mullahs and the religious elite. The White revolution that brought the land reforms as you know led Khomeiny to protest in 1963 against the Shah. As Iranian journalist Amir Taheri puts it in a recent article entitled "The Death of Bin Ladism", "The first was a cynical misinterpretation of Islam that began decades ago with such anti-Western ideologues as Maulana Maudoodi of Pakistan and Sayyid Qutb of Egypt. Although Mr. Maudoodi and Mr. Qutb were not serious thinkers, they could at least offer a coherent ideology based on a narrow reading of Islamic texts. Their ideas about Western barbarism and Muslim revival, distilled down to bin Ladenism, became mere slogans designed to incite zealots to murder. People like Mr. Maudoodi and Mr. Qutb could catch the ball and run largely because most Muslim intellectuals of their generation (and later) had no interest in continuing the work of Muslim philosophers. Our intellectuals were too busy learning Western ideologies of one kind or another ó and they left the newly urbanized Muslim masses to the half-baked ideas of men like Mr. Maudoodi and Mr. Qutb and eventually Mr. bin Laden. Now, however, many Muslim intellectuals are returning home, so to speak. They are rediscovering the philosophical heritage of Islam and the challenges of Muslim political thought. And Maudoodi-Qutbism is now being seen as a pseudo-Islamic version of Western fascism." What Mr. Taheri says regarding Muslim intellectuals can be totally applied to the iranian pre 79 intelligensia.The Likes of Mehdi Bazargan, Sanjabi or less intellectual Sadeg Gobtzadeh, were themselves caught in this contradiction of wanting a French style Revolution and yet used religion to reach their goals. Bakhtiar unlike his predecessors was certainly more in phase with what we all claim out loud today that is a Secular Democracy. Most pseudo intellectuals of 79 were claiming the contrary, the departure of the Shah and the installation of an Islamic State. The obscure promises of freedom and Democracy which rallied intellectuals of all political spectrum (Leftists, communists, constitutionalists, liberals, the bourgeoisi etc .. ) were very quickly forgotten in the name of Allah and his chosen 13 imam. What was established as Mr. Taheri exposes was truly a Fascism Islam unpredecent in the History of Iran and muslim nations. The Likes of Bin Ladeen are a fruit of this. The burning of Cinema Rex blamed on the SAVAK initially was proven to have been actually formented by Islamic Militants. A similar tactic was used by Nazis when they burnt the Reichtag and blamed it on the communists and which led to their victory in 1933 and quite democratically. Even German Jews voted for the Nazis unknown of what was awiting them. But back to the Hitler and Mussolinis statements on History. One of my efforts on this forum and without claiming to detain the truth nor being an expert on the subject is to try to provoke debate and reactions on what we have come to take for granted. That is a biaised and practically "packaged" definitive version of the Islamic Revolution delivered to us Iranians by the IRI. The lack of feedback only possible today thanks to the internet and probably the passage of Time have allowed many testimonies. The 1979 Islamic revolution was the first "Live" televised revolution. Its impact on the Iranian psych has been similar to the traumas of the Vietnam War on Americans who also witnessed this dirty war through the Cathod tube. Violent images, expedituary executions and trials buried many realities before allowing them to even be devulged. My aim is in no way to revise History or justify the errors or crimes commited under the Imperial regime. I take it for granted that the SAVAK must have been a secret police with brutal methods as in many dictatorial regimes. What I do contest however is that what was proposed at first by revolutionaries as "THE NUREMBURG TRIAL OF THE IMPERIAL REGIME" was summerized to arbitrary executions. Most ministers including the most prominent of them Amir Abbas Hoveyda were executed without a just trial. others who had some luck fled. The justice of these revolutionary courts were a mokery of justice itself. The version of History delivered to the majority of Iranians not to say westerners was also a mockery of serious historic judgment. No one got a fair trial. Those who occupied responsible positions such as ministers or even agents of the SAVAK or its leader General Nassiri were executed by fear that they reveal secrets on the new leaders of the country. Others SAVAKIs as you put it were simply hired to form the Islamic secret Service the SAVAMA. Mr. Ibrahim Yazdi, Mr. Green Card slapped General Rahimi in the Face because he refused to reject his alligience to his King. No one got a fair and decent trial. I accuse the likes of Yazdi (and Khalkhali) who call for reform today to have buried the truth or what could have been the truth of History. I have no respect for them. And yet I believe that if they were to face an improbable trial, that they should be tried in all fairness. Something that their Islamic Law refused to give to the most miserable soldier. Yes Mr.Ashtiani, "The Persian tragedy" could be a good title for an Opera depicting the tragedy of the revolution in Iran. Yet I am afraid we cannot write a definitive version for this tragedy for it continues to this day. It is unfortunate to say that if their is indeed a revisionist version of Iranian history, it is certainly not one imposed by Iranian monarchists but by those mostly republicans who want to justify all the crimes commited by the IRI in the past 23 years as something necessary to pave the road to democracy in Iran. Monarchists are often accused of being romantics and that explains their attachements to the monarchy. However I find that the same can be applied to many republicans who are also transposing their romantic vision mostly inspired by the French Revolution but refuse to look at the true face of this regime. I do not believe in a total conspirancy theory that ousted the Shah, I do however believe that the Wesern governments of the Time were more than happy to see the Shah ousted for their own economic interests. They were to regret this very quickly with what was to follow. Iran under the Shah was probably a victim of corruption, yet it was not just that. We were not all hanging around like a bunch of powdered aristocrats with slaves to take care of us. We did not live in huge mansions with swimming pools filled with Oil as some western journalists would caricaturize iranians. The country was quite well off economically and jobs flourished. The situation of Iranian women was the best than any other country in the Middle East. The Iranian scenario was very far from that of a country like France in 1789. During the oil crisis their was a slogan in France "On a pas de petrole mais on a des idées", in other words "we do not have oil, but we have ideas" well this shows how much confusion was made regarding all the positive things done in the country by the previous regime but which were envied by the West. Why do you think many Iranians are bitter with politics and politicians? Some are as bitter as to wrongly accuse democracy and democratic values because they felt that the Western democracies abandoned us to the monsters of the IRI regime. I recently saw a Documentary on French Televison which surprised me: It was entitled: "Les Erreurs de l'Histoire: L'iran Le recit d'une revolution" by Patrick Jeudy i.e. : "The Errors of History: An account on the Iranian revolution" This was an account by a French journalist on the Iranian revolution which he had covered for three years in Iran. To summerize quickly It shows clearly that the mullahs and many revolutionary leaders tricked everyone including many foreign journalists. It is very interesting because he shows how much the events took a turn which no one predicted. The massive distribution of cassetes, the overthrow of the Bakhtiar government, the impotence of the Carter