...................... Letters * Benefit auction * Support iranian.com * FAQ * Write for Iranian.com * Editorial policy February 2 2002 * I want to be alive to celebrate VICTORY DEAR readers, I am a 40 year old woman. Mother of two of the most beautiful children. I have everything to live the best in the United States. I left my country 16 years ago and had no choice. My life was in danger. For what is happening in my country at this time, I can't stop thinking about my people. How much suffering. Where is the justice? Why no one help them? ["Iran next?"] Stop this religious government and bring the freedom back to our homeland. I hope I don't go crazy. I want to be alive to celebrate that VICTORY. Sara * What should we do? I read Mr. Zangeneh's article "Iran next?" with great interest and was actually hoping someone would bring up this topic especially following President bush's "State of the Union" speech the other night. I do have to say that I agree with part of Mr. Zangeneh's conclusion that striking Iran will prolong the demise of the Islamic Republic. But I don't believe that "tightening the sanctions" would resolve anything but a greater hardship on the Iranian People. The main question remains, in that, if US decides to strike Iran, what should our reaction be? Should we lay low and let things happen or do we need to do something about it. For myself, as I stated above, I oppose any strikes against Iran, but have not come up with an answer as to what should we do. I was hopping someone may have a good idea on this subject. Hope to hear from you folks. Thanks, Mehdi Amini * Let them know you support intervention While I agree that the current regime of Iran is completely ill-suited to rule Iran. I don't believe that U.S. military intervention would "prolong" their rule. ["Iran next?"] The single best thing that the U.S. could do for Iran at the moment is help to work with responsible democratically minded individuals who wish to see the overthrow of that worthless theocracy, and replace it with a democratically elected party which works for the best interests of Iran. The people of Iran have to realize that freedom and modernity is not going to come easy. They need to mobilize themselves, even at the underground level, to do away with the current system of government and reign in a stable and lasting democracy. They also have to stop hating Israel and involving themselves with the affairs of Arab neighbors and go on to focus on modernizing the country and advancing its development. The Shah may not have been a good ruler, but I believe the Islamic "Republic" of Iran was even worse. Wake up my fellow Iranian-Americans! Write your Congressional representatives and Senators and let them know your dissatisfaction with the current position of the U.S. with relation to Iran. Let them know that you support intervention in Iran to dispose of the IRI and help put in power a system of government that will be beneficial to our brothers and sisters back in Iran. - Cia Tahmasebi San Diego, CA * The only hope Mr. Zangeneh's assertion that the ruling mullahs in Iran are instigating an attack against Iran in hopes of crushing reform may have some merits ["Iran next?"]. However I would like to suggest that it is entirely in the interest of the United States as well to crush reform in Iran, purely out of self interest (i.e the need for potential adversaries inherent in the "missile defense" corporate welfare program). One reason that Mr. Bush included Iran in his "axis of evil" remark in the State of the Union speech may have had to do with the fact that lately Iran has been cast in a positive light (for the most part) by the mass media, therefore the need for an escalation of the rhetoric was in order. My point is that Khatami is just as much a nuisance to the US as he is to the conservative mullahs, perhaps even more. The only hope for a positive outcome in Iran at this time is for Khamenei to put aside his personal ambitions and allow reform to accelerate at a much higher pace, despite the fact that the US may attack Iran.. Shahram Mostarshed * Why Iran all of a sudden? A letter I wrote to the Washington Post: Dear Editor: As an Iranian-American, I am disappointed in the President's State of The Union address. I went to bed the night before thinking that at last after 20 years the icy relations between the U.S. and Iran were thawing, to wake up to headlines in the Washington Post including Iran in an "evil axis". ["Iran next?"] The President's speech writers took a word from Reagan's evil empire speech about the then Soviet Union and added a word from one of FDR's speeches about the WWII axis countries of Italy, Germany, and Japan, and came up with the term we are going to hear a lot about in the next few months. Why was Iran included all of a sudden? Didn't Iran actually support the U.S. war on terrorism in Afghanistan by even stating they would assist any U.S. pilots that may be shot down during the bombing campaign and which may have sought refuge in Iranian territory? Didn't Iran's foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi just shake hands with Colin Powell a few weeks ago at the U.N.? Iran was added in the President's speech because of their support for the Palestinian cause, and their outrage at Israeli policy towards Israel's second class citizens, the Palestinians. Any country that says "boo" to Israel has to accept the fact that they will be branded a terrorist or evil. A nation cannot be branded evil-- people are evil and commit evil acts. Isn't Sharon evil for allowing the killing of innocent women and children with U.S. supplied F-16s? I wouldn't mind seeing Israel added to the axis-list in his next State of the Union address. If there's no room in the list, we can remove Iran from it. Sepehr Haddad * My question is simple When Ayatollah Khomeini called the United States "The Great Satan" many laughed at his comment. These days however, many may even agree with him. At his state of the Union Address, George Bush Lashed out at three countries including Iran and referred to them as the "Axis of Evil" ["Iran next?"]. This at the time where Iran has been fairly cooperative to the relief efforts in Afghanistan and has held a relatively low profile during the years. Such a comment during such times is similar to trying to wake a sleeping wild dog by poking into his eyes with a stick. It was unnecessary and unfounded. What prompted bush to make such comments are allegations that Iran may have helped rival leader in Afghanistan to stir up instability in the region. In addition there was a recent seizure of arms to the Palestinians that was allegedly sent by Iran. In fact there hasn't been any evidence for any of these allegations. What bothers me about the second incidence is again the one sided support for Israel that the US has shown time after time. My question is simple. How come it is perfectly all right for the Israelis to buy US made F-16 and kill innocent children with the two Ton bombs that come with them, but when the Palestinians want to purchase arms to defend themselves, that is called an act of terrorism. What happened to the phrase in the US national anthem "Liberty and Justice for all"?. United States never really reveals any information about the source and the credibility of the allegations it makes. In fact there isn't any evidence that confirms or denies any involvement by Iraq, Iran or North Korea in the September 11 incidence. It seems like Mr. Bush has really not learnt his lesson about the catastrophe of the September 11. Not once did his administration looked deeper in the to problem trying to figure out what generated so much hatred from a bunch of psychopaths to commit such a horrific act. Not once did the administration asked why was this act not committed against Canada, Sweden or even the United Kingdom. Could it be because of the one sided support that the US has given to Israel?. Could it be because the US is always trying to bud in to every countries problems and try to portray a big bully? Let me ask you this. If Iraq had invaded Iran wouldn't every single one of us try to drive them out of our country by any means? I bet that Iran would have sixty million suicide bombers ready on stand bye to defeat the enemy. When Palestinian children grow up seeing their loved ones massacred by Israeli (American made) planes, tanks and guns, out of a pool of a thousand, it wouldn't be hard to find nineteen who are willing to kill themselves to take revenge. With his latest comment Bush has not only gone too far but he has irritated a few of his allies including the Europeans and the Arabs. It is very evident that his administration loves war. Lets face it was GW who signed the bill to allow every Texan to be allowed to have a concealed weapon. That means that the person in front of you or behind you in a grocery store can be packed with a 357 and lets hope a look, or any minor thing doesn't irritates him or her. This is a president who is backed by and probably supported by the gun industry. What better way to make create more jobs in those weapons factories by showing them off in a little conflict like Afghanistan or any other conflict in the regions. George Bush better consult with the only level headed advisor in his cabinet, Collin Powell, before reading another one of his speeches. Babak Peyvandi * Opportunity to get rid of these vermin I have to respectfully disagree with your entire concept that the mullah's tyrannical reign would be prolonged following a US led strike ["Iran next?"]. You obviously have only been reading the state controlled media, and not been in contact with the ordinary citizen that views these mullah's the same as the west does. Our compatriots witnessed what can happen when the west decides that a "lawless regime" endangers the security and sovereignty of the world: THEY WILL BE ELIMINATED. God willing, the same fate will hold for the mullah's as it did for the Taliban. Our fellow countrymen are waiting for this exact opportunity to rid themselves of these vermin! It is time we play the hardball game, as it is the only activity these tyrants understand and fear! ZENDEHBAD IRAN! Regards, Babak Kalhor * My fear Shariar Zangeneh ought to be congratulated for his beautifully written and informative piece ["Iran next?"]. However, I would suggest the following for consideration: I have found through many scores of living experience that to be completely effective one has to be genuinely fair and, as far as possible, accurate. To appear unfair, or worse inaccurate, endangers the intended impact of the message and give ammunitions to the very people one justifiably tries to attack. As an example I have problem with his assertion that "The 23-year reign of the Ayatollahs has been a resounding failure in every imaginable aspect....." Please allow me to elaborate. A clear distinction has to be made between the reign of the Mullahs and the efforts of the Iranian people. There is no question that wherever the Mullahs have been in control, or even marginally involved, the result has been a catastrophic failure. However, the past 23 years through the efforts of dedicated Iranians, we have witnessed a universal education with a literacy rate above that of Turkey and India. No small feat! We have seen the distribution of power (Gas and Electricity) to unbelievable corners of the country. We have seen, after the demise of Khomeini, the enormous success of the Family Planning resulting in a population increase rate of only 1.25, the lowest anywhere in the world. In construction industry, including Pipelines and Refineries of all sorts, the achievements have been remarkable. We have done away with the complete reliance on International Contractors. (On a slightly different field we should remind ourselves that over 60%, yes sixty percent, of all the Kuwaiti Oil Well fires were extinguished by the Iranian experts?). I could go on and on with the list of achievements, none anything to do with the Mullahs, but a lot to do with the Iranian people's true ingenuity. My fear is that his sweeping statement (quoted above) will give rise to some Mullahs or their scant supporters to claim some or all of the people's achievements and thus give Mullahs some mistaken legitimacy. Mr. Zangeneh is correct in his analysis of the Chinese influence. However, with the lack of a land connection to Iran and the chines maritime weakness, theirs in Iran is always going to be a second rate commercial influence. It is therefore not the Chinese influence that we should worry so much about but rather the loss of the U.S. influence. This is particularly true when you consider the substantial European investments in Iran to the eventual detriment of both the United States and Iran. The Mullahs in an attempt to counter the Americans are giving the store away. Not a week passes by that you do not see a new project financing undertaken by one of the European countries. In economic matters allies are as dangerous as pseudo adversaries, if not more so. Sincerely, Hashem Farhang * Chilling Excellent piece of writing ["Iran next?"]. Especially interested in the part about the nuke. Chilling. Evan * Smacks of tyranny Thanks for the nuggets ["Iran next?"]. I do agree, Bush saying "If you are not with us, you are against us" smacks of tyranny. Fortunately, in the U. S. , it's a 4 yr or 8 yr tyranny ( except in the days of FDR which lasted 10 yrs- not 15yrs or 37 yrs!). LOVE, Uncle Parviz * Does he know where I-ran is "The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons," said Mr Bush. ["Iran next?"] He specifically named Iraq, North Korea and Iran, and spoke of an "Axis of Evil" threatening the world's peace. He said terrorist training camps still existed "in at least a dozen countries", but did not give names. Well, the great man spoke again! George Bush. The president of the civilised world! made another great speech and the people of America applauded and sang God bless America! How fantastic! Listening to his speech and reading it later made me feel so angry and depressed at the same time, that I thought of writing to you and ask the readers wheather they feel the same? Why doesn't he stop blaming I-ran for everything? Does he even know where I-ran is? Does he know that the people who blow up the world trade centre were NOT from Iran? Does he know at all that Iran had nothing to do with September the 11th? or he is stupid? I am sick and tired of all this really!!I think the part of his speech about Axies of evil must have been written by Ariel Sharon himself! what do you think? I think Iran had handled the situation brilliantly after September the 11th, and it is unfair to be picked on by a great big bully like America all the time. Nila * Must never be a consideration I have received 60 E-Mails thus far from the most kind and wonderful people ["Death of a saint"]. Your allowing me time and space to be heard is the kindest from all hope offered me by any friend . So many of the folks ask specific details of his last months etc. I feel many are suffering as well to some degree (as a matter of fact at least 20% state they are or have considered sucicide) I have taken hours answering all, I want everyone to know that sucicide is not only the answer, but must never be a consideration. If they knew from someone such as myself and how they effect family , they could see the devastation and possibly feel it , thus helping them somewhat to keep these thoughts very distant... I think it would also bring us who fail to tell those we love so dearly just what life without them would be , and just how having them in our lives makes it all worth while. Just as President Nixon said to Mr. Kissinger before conseding to impeachment..."Henry do not ever be too proud to get on your knees and ask god god for help" , "nor should you ever be too proud to show your love to those who are your life" Don't wait until tomorrow, it might not come for you both, and here there are no second chances... Mrs. Ajudani * I admire your courage Dear Mrs. Ajudani: Thank you for being extremely open and vulnerable. I admire your courage to speak about one of the most difficult topics: suicide, especially of a loved one. ["Death of a saint"] What instantaneously evoked in me as reading your piece was that having the utmost opportunities to go anywhere in the world is not an indicator of our happiness or contentment. One might be able to set foot anywhere on this planet, but not be able to tolerate entering one's inner home. I hope you are not feeling guilt/shame/or blame towards yourself and God bless. Kind Regards... Leila Farjami * The "why?"s and "If'"s The perplexity that we are left with in such moments as the painful fact of the suicide of a loved one is at least as powerful as the pain that we experience ["Death of a saint"]. The "why?"s and "If'"s go on forever hunting us and we seem to not be able to accept the idea that there are secrets that people do really take with them to the grave! The finality of such an act is painful enough without the contemplation of the possibility that it would not have taken place if your loved one just met the right person, heard the right words, smelled the right smell, saw the right things and perceived the world differently on that day and was encouraged to go on for another day! I wish Mrs. Adjudanit all the patience and the courage in the face of such a painful loss! Camus once said that the essential nature of suicide is the only existential question of value! Vaik Yousefi * Level heads should band together Sir/Madam, I am an average American wishing for nothing more than peace in this world. I have but one question to ask of you. Is it the mullah's desire to destroy Israel? If this is the case, shouldn't the level heads in Iran band together to stop this nonsense. Why can't there be a take over there? The radical clerics need to go so that the beautiful minds of the Iranians can be free to run their country. Good luck to you in your struggle! Dumptchk * I am proud of whatever I did Dear Mr. Javid, . . . ensuing our [email] conversation ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"], I saw some of your readers have written very impolite and even insulting words about my person and false accusations about my professional life. This was too far outrageous. Please inform those readers that I am proud of whatever I did during my time in office. I left Iran three month after the revolution without a penny and started to work as a consultant in France for 20 years. Now I am retired and work voluntarily for The Mihan Foundation If anyone wants more information about my past, he/she can click onwww. mihanfoundation. org With thanks and best wishes, Abdol Madjid Madjidi To top * "If some people do not agre..." It seems that some of us just cannot bear alternative thinking. The attacks against your remarks on the Kadivar article show up this weakness, on the part of those who are in high dudgeon over your tweaking the Pahlavi regime ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"]. There are letters which are actually accusing you of being a traitor, simply because you have put forward arguments which are anathema to them. When he dreamed up his infamous but doomed single-party system of single-minded sycophants, initially called Rastakhiz, the Shah actually said (and you can read it in quotes of the newspapers of the time, newspapers who would not have dared quote one letter of it wrong), "... and if some people do not agree with this, they are traitors and can leave the country". Farhad Diba ["28th of Mordad"] To top * Let the people speak! In response to Abdol-Majid Majidi, ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"] With due respect to your letter to Mr. Javid,  I sincerely ask you îLet the peoplespeak!"  If as the former head of the planning organization (sazman Barnameh) and one of the key functionaries of theold regime, you  alongside others inpower had had an ounce of guts to stand up and had spoken against censorshipand lack of freedom of the press among other things,  we would not be here today. Mr. Javid has spoken his line whether agreeable to you ornot.  All the power to him that as theeditor of a very popular online magazine he has created a site where allIranians can speak their mind, from the far left to the far right. If Towfigh were allowed to be published during the reign ofhis majesty,  if it had beenpermitted to use satire against the late Hoveyda and even the Royal family andhad not been banned,  if othernewspapers, journals and books were not censored, maybe we would not be heretoday. You did not speak out nor did any one of your friends.  Your imperial highness only allowed certainnewspapers to go under print.  Iremember,  a good friend of yours oncetold me that as a translator of a certain book,  he had to change words which had certain connotations andmeanings not liked by their highnesses. At the end, his book was banned frompublication. Let us be fair.  Withall its suppressive nature,  today inthis Islamic Republic  and to the creditof Mr. Khatami and the many brave journalists, we have had one of the brightest eras in Iranís history regardingfreedom of the press.  More books andjournals have been printed, published and translated than anytime during thereign of Mohammed Reza Shah and Reza Khan. Let us be fair. Today, Iranian films are praised and acknowledged worldwide.  For the content and message theydeliver.   During the reign of hismajesty, Iranian films were a handful of disgustingly cheap creations both inform and in content. Let us also be fair. You and others touched Iran cosmetically.  Yes, I say to Mr. Kadivar and others as well; that the 2500-yearcelebration of monarchy was a farce, a fiasco.   For a celebration, which was supposed to glorify the PersianEmpire, every single item was brought in from overseas including the tents, thefood, the gifts, etc. etc.  And who werethe guests?  A long list of deposed andcorrupt ex-kings and so-called royalties. And let us not forget the coronation of his majesty.  People who attended these events and themany lavish parties imagined that they are in the 1900 Russia, during the timeof Nicholas III who much like his imperial majesty, ignored the people and thecommoners and finally was toppled.  Outof touch with reality.  Out of touchwith the ordinary people.  And let usnot forget the half naked theatres in the middle of the holy places in Shiraz during theShiraz Cultural festivals promoted by her highness, the Empress.    Iranian people were not ready forthat   ëArt nouveauî that maybe you andI have been exposed to.  I was a schoolgirl in her highnessesí school JeanneDíArc.  For over 6 months we were takenout of our classes, leaving our studies to go practice dance for her highnessesbirthday party!!  These were wrongand foolish,  actions out of touch withthe majority of the people.   So why notcriticize the Pahlavis for all theabove and more? Mr. Javid and I and you must have the right to speak, tocriticize and be criticized and express our opinions. If J. Javidís stance haschanged and for the better let us not bash him but give him a round ofapplause.   Akbar Ganji worked in theinfamous Ministy of information, but today he is a hero because he rose aboveeverything and exposed the beastly nature of the regime  and because of it, he is in prison now. We should express our words, but we mustbe civil towards one another.  We mustuse language that is acceptable in the framework of respectable press.  But to say that we are not allowed or he isnot entitled to criticize, in my opinion is another real proof that many of ourdear monarchists, including yourself have not truly learned what democraticpractice is all about. Drop the royalties. Drop the titles. The Monarchysystem was overthrown in 1979.  Acceptit. !!    I do not even think that RezaPahlavi himself likes these ridiculous and out of style titles.  Only his followers do not want to ever giveup. But sooner or later you all have to come to terms with it, if you want tolive in this real world and not in a world of illusions.  There is no more going back inhistory.    We must give more credit to our people.  Especially those who have lived under acruel and despotic theocracy.   But letthem decide their future form of government. Surely they have enough sense evenif they are exhausted not to accept anything less than a democraticsystem.  In this very crucial times, we must only look towards thefuture, hopefully a bright and better one, but above all we must advocate freedom of the  Press which isthe essence of a civil society.   I sayto you and others,  ìLet the people Speak"!!!  F. Amini * What good? Dear Mr. Majidi, ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"] In regards to your blind, and possibly vested, loyalty for the Pahlavi family I ask you only one simple question. In lieu of the billions of dollars that have been stolen from the poor people of Iran to preserve the remnants of this family, what good has been generated towards the people of our motherland? Mansour Fahimi * Familiar with Freedom of Press? Having lived in the West for so long, I am certain Dr. Madjidi is familiar with the concept of Freedom of Press. ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"] I am also certain that he has seen or read "editorials" in Wall Street Journal, Le Monde, New York Time... where the editor takes a position on a certain issue. There, in the "Editorial" section, the journals editors are not expected to remain "unbiased" and without the discriminating powers of intellect. Somehow, Dr. Madjidi, to my surprise, has confused the required "unbiased" position in reporting news with the needed "opinionated" stance of an "opinion column" or "editorial" written by the journals publishers, editors and writers. Regards, Mehdi Mirmiran * We really miss them Jenabe Aghaye Abdol Majid Madjidi, ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"] It was great to hear from you after a long time.i was not even 7 at the time of horrible revolotion.i made some researches and got some guides for this from my father for whom i have lots of respects since he introduced me the politicians and political area of that time.after reading lots of books,magazines.... it becomes clear and more clear that most of the politicians of that time were loyal to iran and their king.it is really heartbreaking once we hear of what we had at that time, about the progress our country was making day by day under the supervision of shahanshah and knowledgableministers like you.god bless mr hovaida and other martyrs of imperial government.god may bless martyrs of imperial army. we really miss them.we need more patriots to participate in the popular sites,write their ways of thinking about the past of iran.we need them to write more.we need them to introduce the pahlavi era.again i appreciate your comments on iranian.com site and don't become upset with the traitors comments about HIM reza shah pahlavi and i expect to read more about your memories of the glorious days of iran. best regards for the iranian nationalist Kambiz Rezvani * Echoes of a disturbing past Jahanshah Javid has many outstanding qualities. Making convincing arguments, however, is NOT one of them ["Shah bee Shah"]. If I were to choose a leader behind whom I could rally, no matter what cause he wished to champion, Jahanshah would not be my first choice. Jahanshah, however, has a great heart and that is why I think he is going to excuse the present transgression of mine. But going back to my contention that Mr Javid's arguments lacks consistency let me start off a with a sore point: the motto of Mr Javid's publication - "Nothing is sacred". What Mr Javid really means is this (putting it in Orwellian terms): Nothing is sacred but, certain things are LESS "not-sacred" than others!! In other words, if you have got any thing really vile and foul to say about the monarchy and in particular, the Pahlavis, it is perfectly fine. After all nothing is sacred. But if you were to extend the same compliments to the spiritual leader(s) of the Islamic Republic, well, they are a little "less" not-so-sacred than others. So beware! You may risk being "democratically" censored. Sadly, Mr Javid's habit of contradicting himself is not limited to his motto. The very title of his latest editorial, ["Shah bee Shah"], directly negates the cry for "freedom" that immediately follows it on the next line. This is the typical slogan that you would see on the banners of the marching mob on the streets of Tehran some 23 years ago. The same slogan that would have been spat on to your face by the froth-mouthed "pasdars" of Evin prison. Is this what our freedom loving editor wants us to believe as the way the future should be? Mr Javid's emotional outburst in response to the cover article ["We are awake"] has many familiar echoes of a disturbing past. It is full of the type of sentiments of the late seventies Iran that plunged the country in to a whirlpool of confusion and despair. In his own words Mr Javid admits that "we" know what "we" don't want but "we" don't know what "we" want! Is it not exactly the same state of mind that "we" had 23 years ago and "we" all know what happened next? Twenty-three years on and NOTHING seems to have changed as far as Mr Javid's "we" is concerned. One of Mr Javid's outstanding qualities is his honesty. I suppose he would agree that there is a little bit of his Islamic past still left in him that is unleashed from time to time. And that is precisely what makes his publication so exciting! You may not have approved of the celebrations marking 25 centuries of the monarchical rule in Iran back in 1971, but regardless of one's like or dislike for monarchy, Cyrus Kadivar's article ["We are awake"] was an excellent piece of investigative journalism. Regards, Parkhash * I don't even own an Armani Dear Jahanshah, I wanted to thank you for the storm we created together ["We are awake", "Shah bee Shah"]. It's amazing how an article about an event that took place 30 years ago can lead to such a lively debate. For the record I think this is a healthy debate which will allow people to get off their chests anything they like. My readers should continue to criticise my writing and if they want to attack me or my views they are welcome. What worries me is how deep the wound is even today and how we can still feel divided. From my part I will read all the praise, insults and criticisms with an open mind. I will write and hope others will write regardless of their backgrounds and persuasions. I am not rewriting history as much as revisiting it. Maybe when I've exhausted my travel through a world that fascinates me I will take up painting. I'd love to paint my childhood in Shiraz but maybe when I'm older. But for now I will write and write so that at the end we will have a huge landscape of something resembling Iran: past, present and future. I also wanted to acknowledge Ms Settareh Sabety's sharp pen ["Stay away from courtiers"] and hope nobody will ever ask her to put down the pen. Nobody should do that. As for being a courtier, I don't even own an Armani suit! Best wishes, Cyrus Kadivar * A special personal treat Mr. Javid, After reading your article "Shah bee Shah", I had one question: Do you treat all your writers and their subjects with the same amount of ridicule or was that just a special personal treat? Unfortunately this kind of journalism leaves a bad after taste with any future contributor to your site. Thanks for showing once again why "az ham bizar va farari hassteem" N. Nikou * We have the right to change our mind Dear Jahanshah, Though I don't agree with you, I would like to congratulate you on publishing the best Iranian web site I have come across so far. I check out your site every day and look forward to reading the various point of views. Democracy is all about being able to tolerate different opinions and if we can not practice it here in US, we will never be able to do it in Iran. So please continue the great work you are doing. Now, with regards to Monarchy and Reza Pahlavi, unlike you I am very happy to see Reza Pahlavi working so hard to bring about a referendum in Iran. I support his efforts 100%. Like you, I must admit that I am doubting the value of Monarchy in Iran. I used to be a monarchist after the revolution, but more an more I am questioning the value it will bring for Iran. We all have the right to change our mind, don't we! So I would like to find others like myself who are supporters of Reza Pahlavi, but would rather have a republic in Iran. Reza Pahlavi could be the leader/president to bring about democracy. He could run for a few terms and leave it to the rest to take on the responsibility. Thanks again for all your efforts. Please keep stirring us up. Kiana * People in Iran should decide Dear Mr. Javid, I did not read Mr. Kadivar's article "We are awake". Unfortunately, I have too many believers in monarchy around me and I am sick of them all. Though I read your article ["Shah bee Shah"] and loved it, the Iranian people who live in Iran should decide what they want to do with the country. Also, I don't believe you do not care what happens in Iran, after all the name of your magazine is Iranian and you go out of your way to find Persia, Iowa!! ["Found it"] Keep up the good work. N * Wasted youth in "Dooaa ye komail" This is SO sad: ["Shah bee Shah"] "So be it. I don't care that much about Iran, and especially its politics, as I care about publishing. I care about the thrill of watching Cyrus Kadivar, his opponents, and everyone in between, voicing opinions and expressing feelings about whatever they please, no matter how bad, dumb or distasteful some of them might seem, to me, or anyone." If you don't care about iran then why not setting up a porn site you'll make more money than now and in the same time you can satisfy your regrets for all those wasted youth that you spent in "Dooaa ye komail" instead of having fun with your girlfriend!!!! It seems that you regret that more than regretting what has happened to our people!!! At the same time you are having fun with your web-page in what ever way one can describe!There are student's and lately teachers who are being tortured because they care. Maybe that's why the islamic republic hasn't finished you yet (you know what i mean you worked with them!)you are no danger to them becouse you realy don't care! Reza * I just would like Iran to be aazaad I had a gut feeling that I should check your site today. I don't know why, but something told me I should. Lo and behold, when I read your "Shah bee Shah", I knew then that that was the reason why. Man AZ KHANDEH MORDAM. I couldn't stop laughing, hell, I'm still laughing. You know something, I'm not really on anyone's side. I just would like Iran to be aazaad. You know? No bull shit government. You piece was funny for a lot of reasons. One of them is that something like this was LONG OVERDUE. I wish I could pinch some of these people and tell them to wake up. It's like talking to Rip Van Winkle, enah tooh kheeyaleh khodeshoon hastan. hehe. Cyruseh bandeh khoda kheyilee beekaareh ["We are awake"]. Kee enghad vaght daareh keh aksaayeh beh oon gondegee befresteh beh shomaa. Nakoneh fekr mekoneh keh maa hameh mesleh oon beekaareem? Nazdeek bood kelaasamoh miss konam, my computer couldn't handle all the glorifications of the magnificent Peacock. Anyways... Mitra * Traitors_and_comrades. com It was the first time that I read thoroughly a series of correspondences on your site. I was so disappointed on the way you are handling a site which carries my country's name, IRAN. (I'm sorry that I can't call it our country, because as you clearly indictaed, there is no fact showing your interest in my great land, Iran) ["Monarchy"] You are a group of psychologically challenged individuals who can only be 'someone' when you are just a few. Your fear of fading in a bigger Iranian community and your complexes would push you to care more about your nonesense than my dear country ["Shah bee Shah"]. Of course you should not be privileged to be called Iranian. Your rhetoric and your biased views are so off that they don't deserve even an answer. It is more ridiculous when you call yourself a publisher! Be chenin 'publishing' baayad shaashid! My dear fellow citizens have been victim of so called 'roshanfekr namaa' (light head!!!) for the last 25 years. Don't you think that you have already made anough damage by kissing and licking Khomeini's ass as your leader 'Imam' !? We won't forget that what all of you so-called oppositions (against Shah) have done all these years. I know that your sick brains immediately start to put an stamp on me to call me against or pro someone. That is how twisted minded you are. Here I don't talk about Shah being good or bad. I am talking about my mother land, Iran. I'm talking about how a group of sick people like you ruined this country and keep doing it. There is NO difference between you and a pscycho who rapes his own mother. Today is time to put ALL differences behind, stop weakening each other, and have only one common goal, i.e., Iran and only Iran. You keep fighting with each other wasting all these valuable rersources (money, internet, media, meetings, political contacts, and so and so) to serve your complexes. You are scared that someone else might get the power not you. It's not about you, it's about Iran. It's sad! You 'roshanfekr namaa-haa' don't get it, do you? How truly Molaana said: aanan ke nadaanand va nadaanand ke nadaanand, dar jahl-e morrakab abaddoldahr bemaanand. Please consider changing your site name to www.Traitors_and_their_comrades.com (yes, with a capital T). Shame on you. Kamran Irani * Imam bee Imam Mr J. Javid, I am so disappointed about your article ["Shah bee Shah"] . How about Imam bee Imam? Why you are not writing about your Imam? Iran had an honor, power and good economic at the Shah times , shame on foreigners who wants to reject it . Payandeh Iran, Javid shahanshahi Iran F. Pirnia P. S : To talk Farsi, dos not mean that that person is Iranian. * Certain things I just cannot accept Setareh Sabety in her article["Stay away from courtiers"] has again well articulated her views which are ardently anti-shahanshahi, anti-Pahlavi, pro-certain aspects of the revolution (though anti-theocracy), and presenting one aspect of the "Iranian mind" and what the revolution was all about. Though she or readers who agree with her do not "trust" the Pahlavi's, can they "trust" the Iranian people enough not to obstruct a referendum under international observation? Should their world view gain majority vote, I for one, would respect the will of the majority, and will not undermine the "Republic" in it's secular, democratic aims. In fact if an Iranian Republic allows the opposition to speak (no other Republic in Islamic world has managed to offer this), I would even help out by offering positive criticism were appropriate. Of course there are two sides to every story, I implore upon the readers here to at least acquaint themselves with Reza Pahlavi's legacy and enigma from our point of view. It is only an enigma if one is stuck in the tired old revolutionary imagery that was required to destroy the ancien regime by the revolutionaries and their allies. One wonders, if Reza Pahlavi gains a majority vote, in other words the Iranian people reject our Pahlavi haters and actually feel proud of the over-the-top and kitsch, megalomaniatic celebration of our pre-Islamic past, and applaud the organizers ability to generate so much public relations and world awareness for Iran with so little money, would the majority be respected by Setareh Sabety and those who share her view? Or will we have to put up with CIA/MOSSAD conspiracies, MI6 intrigues, and cries of I didn't have enough money to put forward my view? I believe Reza Pahlavi's worry is far less with chaploos courtiers (that he rejected when he praised Spanish style monarchy) and much more with those that do not accept the will of the majority and even take to arms to force their views on the rest of us. To be honest; there are certain things I just cannot accept. For instance the degrading primitiveness, misplaced self-righteousness, nauseating bigotry, sanctimonious hypocrisy and shameless corruption of the Mullahs. If they truly had the majority behind them I would have voluntarily chosen to be in exile and make no efforts to return home. But with bickering on issues that have nothing to do with the referendum under international supervision, the isolated Hezbollah minority in Tehran and Baalbek will just sit there doing whatever they have been doing all this time, and play the bad cop to the KhatamiÇs lot and their desperate efforts to keep some sort of political future in a country whose time they have and are wasting. Referendum for Iran under international supervision. This should be the rallying cry behind all those who have had enough with the mullahs. Amir-Khosrow Sheibany * Hanooz khaabi! I really admired Setareh Sabeti's response ["Stay away from courtiers"] to Cyrus Khadivar ["We are awake"]. She is right on the mark when she says the Iranian People should not be reminded of 2500 Years Ceremonies of 1971. Some of the readers have claimed that the Revolution had nothing to do with these ceremonies. I would like to point out many scholars have pointed out that the Shah's arrogance and spending in 1971 helped to alienate him further and further from the people of Iran and the anger the people felt toward him grew considerably after 1971. Mr. Khadivar, hamvataneh Khosh Nevis, do you know that the Iranian people were not even invited to those ceremonies? Do you know the food came from you beloved Paris, Maxim Restaurant, to be exact? Most of the guests were the European leaders and Politicians. The Shah cared more about show his wealth and power to these people than for his own people. The Iranian people have suffered a lot during the past 23 years, myself included. We don't need to be reminded in detail about the ceremonies that led to unrest and revolution in our beloved land. Mr. Khadivar seems to love history and so do I. But the ceremonies of 1971 is not something I would like to think about. When I think of that I think of its consequences and the revolution that devastated my country and its people. Mr. Khadivar seems to know a lot of detail about the 2500 Years Ceremonies, but he doesn't seem to analyze the effects of the festivities on his country. In 1971, Mohammad Reza Shah said " Cyrus Assoudeh Bekhab Keh Ma Bidarim" while standing around the ruins of Old Persia. Now sitting in the city of Los Angeles I would like to tell Mr. Khadivar." Cyrus, Motasefaaneh to Keh Hanooz Khaabi!" Ali-Reza Kasra * Simply Reza Pahlavi Dear Mrs. Sabety, ["Stay away from courtiers"] First, there is absolutely nothing wrong with your prose and writing style. As far as I am concerned it is high time that Iranian women express themselves as and how they wish. I for one do enjoy the zest and flora and fauna of your prose. Your writing is sincere and comes from the heart and that is where it derives its power. I do not always agree with what you say but I like how you say it and the fact that you do stand up for your beliefs which is rare amongst us Iranians. Second, it is true that there is a great element of the past and history surrounding Reza Pahlav'i's campaign. Part of it is simply his last name which has a historical connotation. But he has never tried to draw legitimacy from history. He calls himself simply Reza Pahlavi and speaks as any Iranian citizen. He does not disavow his father or grandfather for there were achievements as well as mistakes but the future is his main preoccupation. The past is always brought up by his denouncers. The whole response that Reza Pahlavi has so far got from his opposition is centered around: The 28th of Mordad, the promiscuity of Ashraf Pahlavi, Savak, the financial corruption of the court etc. These are all issues that whether right or wrong, Reza Pahlavi had no control over. There is hardly any discussion or debate on what he actually is saying or proposing. The dialogue is always about the past and as a result we miss the future. I would love to see someone like yourself actually setting Reza to task on the substance of his program. Best Regards, Mihandoust * Trying so hard to misrepresent Once again, Ms. Sabety has found another excuse to show her true colours, like a "maare zakhm-khordeh", and spew venom at Pahlavis and monarchists ["Stay away from courtiers"]. I am not going to dignify her repetitive, tiresome and cliche nonsense by responding to them - because, no doubt, the readers of this medium can judge for themselves. Ms. Sabety is so shamelessly blinded and defiled by her irrational antagonism towards Pahlavis that she even dismisses the liberation of Iranian women as a sign of Western influence!! The irony is that this is from someone whose ultimate pride has always been her having shopped, having been educated and lived in the West. Why is Ms. Sabety trying so hard to misrepresent Mr. Kadivar's essay ["We are awake"]? All Mr. Kadivar has done is to make available a document about a historical event to, mainly, young Iranians who otherwise may not have had the opportunity to read/see and judge for themselves as to what it was all about, good or bad. Now, where is "chaaploosi" about this? Finally, the inference from the uncompromising "Opinion" of democratic and secular-minded Ms. Sabety appears to be that in her Iran of tomorrow, we should expect another Madraseh-ye-Alavi and anothe Sadegh Khalkhali - this time, the constitutional monarchists being the targets and Ms. Sabety(s) being the "cheer leader(s)" . Perhaps it is time that the educated and liberated Ms. Sabety (with a secular history of her own!) added TOLERANCE and MUTUAL RESPECT to her vocabulary. With best regards, Maral Beheshti * Oh really! Again another apologist polemicist -- but one who is much more arrogant and patronizing than our own, eloquent, Cyrus Kadivar ["We are awake"] -- who feels he should step up to bat for the ancien-Aryamehr-regime. This distinguished gentleman has chosen to use a "behaviorist psychological" approach to politics. Mr. Sheibany ["All are not equal"] in his patronizing attempt to critique. Mr. Sheibany, is under the impression that if he claims that creating Aghazadehs is human social behavior that makes it both necessary and good. Oh really! Let me see what else is human social behavior, hooligans being rowdy at English football games? Or Fraternity boys gang banging a drunk sorority girl? Or state organizations torturing their own youth? And you know if making Aghazadehs is really a human social behavior that cannot be helped, then so is breaking them. As long as there have been icon builders there have also, thankfully, been iconoclasts. Not all human social behavior should be tolerated. Some old notions become intolerable with time. For example the hejab. I was told by a friend of my mother that her grandmother never left the house for twenty years until her death because of Kashf-e-hejab. At the time that woman could not tolerate giving up that social and indeed religiously sanctioned behavior. With the incredible quirk that embodies the fate of women in our nation, her daughter, in turn, refuses to leave the house with the Hejab under the present regime. So, what was tolerable social behavior yesterday may become intolerable tomorrow. Only, not everybody is at the same page. So some social behaviors last longer in some groups than others depending on a myriad of variables, including age, economic background, education, even taste etc... Reading Mr. Sheibany's use of pseudoscientific, behaviorist reasoning to back an essentially fallacious and elitist view of the world, conjures up visions of old Nazis in exile in South America talking in whispers amongst themselves-in black and white a la Hitchcock. Setareh Sabety * As Bob Dylan once said I just want ot say that I loved "We are awake". That was one fascinating piece. Keep up the goos work. Or as Bob Dylan once said: "Keep your head up and carry a light bulb". Mr. Kadivar´s idea of this interview was a great idea. Nice work. Peace and harmony, H.B. * What else for $22 million? Dear Mr Kadivar, Thank you so much for writing this article ["We are awake"]. It was eloquently written and completely necessary in order to right some of the wrongs brought about by the same old tiresome false accusations and exaggerations about the Shah's reign. The fact that critics and the media wildly exaggerated the total cost of the 2500 years festivities by some $25 - $450 million is intriguing. The fact that as far as possible Iranian resources such as dress designers, artists, builders and airlines were used was commendable. So to was the fact that this single festivity encouraged the building of schools, roads, telecommunication networks, airports, television stations and hotels and boosted tourist and other industries, not to mention the encouragement given to individuals to do up their homes, shops etc so that they could share in the sense of pride. What else did the Iranian population and media want for $22 million? It is interesting to note that for as much as the Iranian people have criticised one of their greatest leaders, they do not seem to acknowledge the hypocrisies of others who have done them more harm than the Shah would ever have been capable of. If the Shah could have done all this in this period of celebration, imagine what the future could have held and if he had a chance to rule when the cold war had ended. I agree wholeheartedly with the honourable Mr Ansari when he claims that His Imperial Majesty was a true patriot. Many who actually came into contact and worked with the Shah reinforce this view. That is why articles like this must be written and repeated and repeated and repeated until everybody knows and finally acknowledges these facts. This great man cannot and must not remain the most misunderstood leader of the 20th century. A man who was described by a foreign dignitary as someone who combines the virtues of our great Kings Cyrus, Xerxes and Darius (this is no simple compliment) deserves more than that. I truly hope that one day in the near future we Iranians as a nation having gone through the worst degradation and fall any nation can suffer can all together offer His Majesty the gift of our words and deeds so that he knows that his noble deeds and aspirations for Iran were not in vain and what he and his father before that started (bringing Iran out of the darkness) we as a nation can revive, "extend" and "preserve" so that he can rest in peace, knowing that the Iranian people have woken up after 23 years, are wide awake, "and will always stay awake". Once again thank you. Kind regards, Laleh Sheybani * Cut the umbilical cord I have respect for Mr. Kadivar ["We are awake"]. He is of the younger generation and probably very sincere. The courtiers I talk about are of the generation before him. I do believe he, maybe unwittingly, wrote a piece of revisionist propaganda. If he had interviewed some opposing views then it would have been more balanced. I, for one, would be more interested to know where those 1500 detainees of Mr. Nassiri are right now than how Alam found the fabric shop in Paris to sew the tents. There is too much of the past surrounding Reza Pahlavi. He needs to cut the umbilical cord if he wants to stay true to his own message. It is not Mr. Kadivar that I have a problem with but the blurry eyed vision of those too in love with the former Shah and the ancien regime to see clearly their mistakes. This losing sight of reality is what I am warning against. Mr. Kadivar, because he grew up here in the West and no doubt away from any court is not himself a courtier -- but back in Sadabad you never know. It is his flowery view of the most blatant public relations gaffe in our history that is harmful to a country trying so hard to redefine itself. It is not so much that Mr. Pahlavi should shut any one up but that he should clarify his stance vis-a-vis the history of the nation he wants to lead to a referendum. Also those who were in positions of power before should have the foresight to step down and let the young man do his thing, no matter how great the urge to vindicate themselves. What I do see out of all this talk of things past that our monarchist friends have become more civil in opposing us. It used to be a year or so ago that they would send threatening emails. That proved to be a mistake. They have now come to the coffee table and are willing to talk in a civilized fashion. Mr. Kadivar has always been civil and polite. I have nothing against him personally. If I appear a bit harsh it is the nature of how I write. I cannot help it. The monarchist loved it when I used this very same pen to denounce Khatami( see IranMania) or the intellectuals in our community ["Don't ask, don't tell"] but they never like it when I use it to criticize the Pahlavis ["Diana not", "Stay away from courtiers"]. I have made many enemies and hurt some friends but I will keep writing about my reactions to everything because it is about time we Iranian women said it like we feel it. I am tired of posing and politesse. I am tired of Khanumi. Three thousand years and millions of soft spoken Khanums is enough--it is about time we had one who is loud. I am a lat. I trace my heritage back to Mahvash and Qamar Khanum (of the t.v series khane Qamar Khanum). I just want to say it the way I feel it. That is my religion. That is my country. And that is my passion. I want my children who are so aware of my sense of personal loss about Iran to someday look at my writings and know that they're Mom was not a victim who lay silent. I like Cyrus, some of my best friends are monarchists like him. I wish I was in Paris so I could say this to him at a cafe in Trocadero. I would ask him however, to do a story, even for once, just for sport, from the other side. He will find plenty of senior gentlemen and women who live very difficult lives in the cities of Europe, who would give him a different view of the ancien regime. He can call me for their numbers. Maybe trace some of those 1,500 detained by Savak and see if any of them are around what a great project that would be. Anyway I just wanted every one to know that I have nothing personal against Mr. Cyrus Kadivar and that I am happy that the monarchist reaction, with the exception of one or two, has been most civilized this time around. Maybe this is a sign that we Iranians can reconcile and hold a dialogue between ourselves. Warmest Regards, Setareh Sabety * Old bats of the Pahlavi cave The article by Mr. A.H. Sheybani ["All are not equal"] is yet another piece of valuable evidence of the failed and archaic "Shahanshahi" thinking that permeates the Pahlavist camp in their so-called attempt to justify the Grand Agha-Zadeh's grab of Taj-o-takht. The type of thinking that knows it all, better than everyone else and just like "gorbeyeh morteza-ali", can justify anything based on "that is just the way things are" and therefore let's continue being/doing the same garbage. The author asserts that it is a "human social behavior" to create an agha-zadeh and therefore we must continue supporting and allowing it. Is it also a "human social behavior" to have phenomena such as Sha'ban Bi-mokh, Savak, torture, grand theft, embezzlement, incompetence, and sheer stupidity? Maybe we should all give up on the slightest hope for improvement, for justice, for freedom and political maturity, for preserving the rights of all people, and just support Pahlavist notions.. errr I meant "human social behavior" since "the majority of our young are inexperienced" and presumably extremely naive. The old bats of the Pahlavi cave generously donate their time now to shed some light for the rest of us idiots. Even 28-Mordad was a pure movement of the people and any other characterization is "is based on hearsay and CIA publicity". Enough said! With all due respect to whoever is deserving of respect and apologies to others: Lotfan Tashreefeh Shahanshahi-toon-ro Bebarin va Dareh mobaarektoon-o Bezarin! Aref Erfani * If it walks like a duck I will be commenting on the current debate generated by Mr Javid in full. However I would like to query one point regarding "All are not equal" . I am not defending Ms Sorabi arguments ["Royal blue vs. the rainbow"] and have already criticized her writings and other similar pieces for their inaccuracies and innuendoes. It is a dangerous time for our country and the following may be a small point but I am at a loss to understand how can one say there was no coup in 1299. The Qajar king was not overthrown but coups don't necessarily have to result in removal of the monarch. Looking at actions rather than words, on the 3rd of Esfand 1299 Reza Khan e Mir Panj took control of Tehran as the commander of the Cossack Ddivision and issued a decree which started with the famous words 'Hokm Meekonam', then proceeded to declare martial law and arrest all the ministers in the legal government of Sepahdar with the exception of the prime minister (some of the 'rejal' whom were arrested such as those who signed the 1919 treaty may have deserved to have been put under arrest, you could even argue that they deserved worse - namely that they should have been tried for treason but that is not the point here). If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then I am afraid it is a duck. If someone brings about the violent or illegal change of any government albeit a wretched one, then it's a coup. Regards, Rostam * Have we not learned anything? I am writing in response to Nagmeh Sohrabi's piece regarding Reza Pahlavi ["Royal blue vs. the rainbow"]. In her article she espouses that Pahlavi has somehow insinuated that the people of Iran are not dignified or are infantile and need a leader to guide them. I am curious to know exactly where Ms. Sohrabi gets her information... because if Mr. Pahlavi has truly said these things... he is sorely mistaken. The people of Iran are the one's who will determine the future of their country. They must have a right to self-determination and as far as I know, the only thing that Mr. Pahlavi has espoused is that there should be a national referendum in the country so that the citizens of Iran can decide for themselves, once and for all, the type of government that THEY want. In this article Ms. Sohrabi also happens to mention viable alternatives to Mr. Pahlavi, one of them being the Islamist Nationalists or Melli - Mazhabi. Have we not learned anything from the past 23 years? Have we totally forgotten the history and track record of people like Mehdi Bazargan and Ibrahim Yazdi? Iran is a multicultural, multilingual, multiracial country... how can Islamists govern such a diverse nation? The European Enlightenment did not occur in a vacuum and it was the result of 200 years of struggle...it did not just happen and was not something that was inherent to the region or to the people. Iranians need to do their own struggling but when WE use forums to spew forth our complex's i.e "I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth" it discredits what we are actually saying. Monarchists are not in anyway helping Mr. Pahlavi and the path that he is trying to make towards having a secularized state in Iran, his biggest supporters also seem to be his biggest downfall because they have not learnt that pluralism and civil society need to be learned and should be an integral part of any "civilized" country. I am not interested in a merry go-round history for Iran either, but I will be damned to sit back and watch the likes of such insipid misogynistic men, such as Ibrahim Yazdi, come to power in Iran. A social democracy is what we need and if that entails a constitutional monarchy than so be it. If that is backward thinking than I think that someone should tell that to Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, and Greece. Merci, Samira * In good hands It was once again a pleasure to read Naghmeh Sohrabi offering her succinct political opinion and analysis on the future of Iran ["Royal blue vs. the rainbow"]. The idea of a 30-year old unmarried female production manager being the next leader of Iran... or better still, a group of female writers who write for an internet magazine (oh wait, but they DO write about 'everything you could imagine')...wow. Imagine the sheer brilliance of such a political solution! I guess all our problems are solved. I mean, forget about Reza Pahlavi and his rich cronies-we have 30-year old unmarried female production managers and magazine writers waiting to take the helm. What a relief to know that the future of our country is in good hands. Ahhh... I can finally get a good night's sleep. NN * I am not so sure any more Reading the most recent anti-monarchist articles, I have to admit, has made me reevaluate my thinking on the matter. I used to think that there was little chance of a monarchist (absolute or constitutional) revival in Iran's future. Now I am not so sure any more. Mr. Faz Rasti's piece, ironically subtitled ["Man... some people"] was the worst, but not the only offender. It had many faults from poor grammar and discontinuity to incoherence. But it got much worse by using an extremely crass and lewd language. Does the use of such language buttress one's arguments? Do we learn anything new by reading such base words? It is just rude and self-indulgent. It is not a matter of being overly prudish, but we would do well to follow the lessons we learned from our parents about public decorum. Indecency in public language is often an indicator of a boorish mindset. This article is so bad that if I were of a conspiratorial mind, I might suspect that it was actually written by a monarchist under a fake name as a very slick and clever trick to discredit the anti-monarchists. Ms. Sohrabi's piece "Royal blue vs. the rainbow" was much better, but that is hardly a compliment. Her article is a polemic. Polemics are not necessarily bad, but I counted no less than five different fallacies in her piece and I am not a logician. We all make occasional mistakes in our arguments but this is too much especially considering that she had written some good articles in the past. Her main argument seems to be the elitism of monarchists and Iranians abroad. Let's assume that she is right. In that case, badly argued opinions such as hers actually promote the need for elitism instead of refuting it. An easy way to add credibility to an idea is to criticize it poorly. In the end, no one seems to be arguing for an absolute monarchy. That is the good news. We all seem to acknowledge that the future of Iran ought to be a democratic one. I am not a monarchist. It may very well be the case that kings everywhere have become a superfluous appendage of the state. I don't, however, really care whether we have a republic or a monarchy. The important thing is that government must be democratic, constitutional and pluralistic. The bad news is that achieving all that, contrary to what many think, is not easy and far from a foregone conclusion. It starts with cultivating the proper qualities in ourselves. A government can not be much more virtuous than the people it represents. After reading these recent articles, it seems that we still have some ways to go. Regards, Ali Kazemi To top * I agree, but Dear Reza, I fully agree with the content of your letter ["Man... some people"] but I must say that your language is really disgusting. If you use words like "Stupid", "Shit", "I suck your cock".. that does not mean you are more correct or serious. To me it just show that you are outrageous, emotional... consequently unreliable and out of balance. This is the language of "Mollas" and loompans not serious political or social discussion. A reader * Code of speech There are many issues and topics in relation to Iran that cause many of us to get very emotional and passionate and angry. However to encourage debate, dialogue, discourse and change a certain platform and code of speech is required. ["Man... some people"] Do not get me wrong, I too feel that those folks who are still talking about the Pahlavis and their possible role in future Iran in the same manor as before must be very unobservant people. The revolution was a reaction to the Pahlavis after all. But my dear friend, don't you think by personal attacks, rude comments and character assassination of the various contributors you are not encouraging democracy and civil society either. . . Doost Azziz in a true democracy, which I have strong hopes that Iran will become soon, every one even religious Iranians must have a say... I am a very liberal person and the intolerance among many Iranians bothers me greatly, especially from Iranian-Americans who have seen the great gifts of tolerance in this society despite of it's many short comings. Intolerance to different political views, to rights of various ethnic groups, to the rights of women, the narrow interpretation of people's role based on predefined, archaic and conservative definitions of social, political and sexual roles in society. But I do not give up and curse at the world and Iranians, please lets have a dialogue and foster change. Name calling is not the solution. Hirad Dinavari * Too harsh About the article "Man... some people": I think you guys are too harsh on Mr. Kadivar ["We are awake"]. I thought his account was entertaining and at times informative albeit slightly biased. It wasn't world-class journalism but nobody's perfect... Afshin Afshari * What a great waste Dear Sir, What saddened me most reading Dariush Kadivars article ["We are awake"] was the fact that a very substantial amout of Iranian people's money was wasted on a party entertaining not only a bunch of freeloaders (royalty) but also some common thieves and murdurers... the likes of president Ceaucescu of Romania and his wife, president Marcos and his wife Imelda and last but not least the guest of honour Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia. Oriana Fallaci wrote in one of her books that during her visit to Ethiopia she saw the despot emperor throw pieces of bread out of his car and the hungry people had to fight with wild hungry dogs for the bread. What a great waste. Kamran * Shame on him Faz Rasti is the one who should be ashamed. ["Man... some people"] Mr. Kadivar reported on an interview, and there was nothing to laugh about ["We are awake"]. The celebrations were an historical event. All countries, even the friends of Faz Rasti, the Democrats in America, have excessively expensive celebrations and life styles, while there are thousands of hungry and homeless around them. What was done then in Iran is still available for the benefit of the mullahs. Corruption of the mollas is of course not on Rastiís mind! Dr. Madjidi is an honourable and good man ["I asked you not to publish rubbish about Pahlavis"]. He was never rich, and after spending time in prison in Iran, barely escaping being executed by the bloodthirsty Islamic regime, losing his wife in a car accident, he has led a very modest life, working for a living to survive. As to the late Shah -- he spoke perfect English and French, and he certainly was well educated and well mannered, something Faz Rasti lacks. Shame on him. Shahla Samii * My preferred villain is Saddam All sorts of adjectives are used to describe the last Shah; ìbrutalî, ìoppressiveî, ìcorruptî are just a few of them. The misguided people who call him ìkhoda biamorzî are quickly reminded of the ghastly crimes committed by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The people who so like to insult someone who died 22 years ago seem to ignore the simple fact that the last Shah long ago ceded first place on the podium of villains , if ever he was in first place. First prize is awarded to the so called Islamic Republic, which has excelled in savagery, economic sabotage, corruption and social oppression, amongst others, and has shown outstanding achievement in reaching new depths into which to plunge the long suffering Iranian people. In awarding this prize Iím please to say that the Islamic Republic is continuing its excellent track record which shows no sign of abating. Anyway, youíve always given too much credit to the last Shah ["We are awake"]. My preferred villain is Saddam Hussein who has survived by gassing whole villages, and indiscriminately shooting anyone who whispers anything against him or his family. Its only the RAF and US Air Force patrolling the skies of northern Iraq that prevents him from exterminating the Kurds. Whatever the Shahís sins, I donít remember him doing anything like that. Ah, but then maybe nostalgia is making me forgetful. Lets face it, the last Shah was a real SOB! His brutal regime built hospitals, schools, universities, factories, roads, send thousands abroad to study, provided jobs, emancipated women, and encouraged social progress! What a catalogue of terror!! And then to make things even worse he didnít allow political freedom to democratic forces like The Tudeh, or Mujaheddin, or Khomeini to govern the country. Terrible! Thank god the Islamic Republic allows (some) political freedom. Okay, so everything else has been taken away. A few newspapers get shut down, editors and journalists and MPs thrown into jail, students beaten up and every now and then a few intellectuals get murdered, but hey, thatís the rough and tumble of politics. Okay now, end of time out, lets all go back to insulting the last Shah. Like George Orwell's sheep in "1984" lets all bleat together: "marg bar Shah, marg bar es-ra-il, marg bar am-ri-ka . . . "!!! La Leche * Trying too hard to impress I recently read the article "We are awake", regarding the celebrations that happened at Pasargad/ Persepolis. There have been various estimates at how much was spent on the celebrations. Overall, the celebrations drew criticism from many of the Western countries that it was supposed to impress. In my opinion, the main problem with the celebrations was that the Pahlavis were trying too hard to impress the rest of the world, in particular the West, and afterwards, Iran was viewed primarily as a "Wanabee". The millions of dollars that were spent on the celebrations were primarily a waste of money that could have been put to use more effectively elsewhere, and it also paved the way for criticism from many of the Shah's critics. If Iran is to have respect from the world community, it should be on merit and it has to be earned; it can not be obtained by spending millions of dollars on empty celebrations. In essence, the celebrations at Persepolis were a representation of the Pahlavi regime... nothing more than an empty fascade that happened to have the fortune of being in power when tremendous petrolium reserves were discovered in our homeland. Ironically, it was lavish expenditures such as these celebrations that lead to the overthrow of the Pahlavi regime, and paved the way for the mullahs to take power in Iran. In hopes of a better future for our homeland. Hooman * Definition of traitor Dear Xerxes Darius, ["Dummies for democracy"] I admire your interest in books and paging through one-Democracy for Dummies. However, I totally disagree with your conclusions. You sound like you believe that democratic systems have no tolerance for traitors and you only refer to the fate of one person -- John Walker ["Let him go home"]. If you keep looking through more books you will find that; first, no system has tolerance for traitors, but it all depends on what the definition of traitor IS-recall Bill Clinton's philosophy? Second, by definition dictartorships get rid of their adversaries quicker than democracies. The bottom line is that traitors have far more chance of going scott-free in democracies- the irony of democracy. Although I prefer democracy, I adamantly oppose democracy being at the mercy of hypocrisy where politicians get away with anything by shrouding themselves in flag, religion or any dogma in the name of democracy. I appreciate if someone could tell me which French philosopher said "Oh democracy, what atrocities are committed in your name." In case of John walker, I dispise Taliban, but why anyone doesn't consider the fact that when that young man joined Taliban the latter were in bed with the U.S. and they still would be if Osama had not bought them. Of course the latter was also a hand-picked ally of the U.S. at one time, as we know. So, please ask yourself what Talibans had in common with democracy and pray that democracy does not associate itself with such a group anymore. Finally, I agree with you that in democracy everyone should have equal chance to express themselves, and in real government of the people, for and by the people there is no room for people who do not give a damn about anything and do not believe in participatory democracy. Democratic systems will keep paying increasingly high price for harboring those who do not understand, appreciate and preserve democracy. If such threats to democracy continues unchecked democracy could self-destruct. History has shown that no empire has survived after their foundations have cracked beyond repair. A.Parsa * We don't have it Unfortunately, we are a stubborn, arrogant, selfish, inconsiderate, superficial and intolerant bunch of people. We don't have the kind of unity, sense of community and tolerance needed to better our lot whether at home or abroad. Since we can not think of ourselves as a collective, and all we hear is me me me, then better go on and take care of yourself. Try extricating the notion of going back "home" to Iran out of your head, because it will NEVER happen. The underlying reason for it is that we hold our personal opinions and beliefs above and beyond the one thing that should matter most and never be compromised and that is Iran. How can you people complain of lack of democracy, when you can't tolerate a simple discussion you disagree with in a forum such as cyberspace? This is how you are with no power sitting in front of a computer, imagine what you will do at the helm of a government. You don't know what pluralism and freedom of expression means. Until that day arrives we are like any other ex-patriot from the third world, a group of silly and highly opinionated people that seem to know everything about anything but can't come to terms with ourselves. Payandeh Bad Iran. Afshin D. * Put aside our petty differences I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Mr. Kadivar for writing such a poignant and awe-inspiring article about the "Jashnhaye 2500 sale" ["We are awake"] Thirty years ago a great king, HIM Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, stood in front of the tomb of the greatest king of all, Cyrus the Great, and assured him that the glory of our past shall be revived once again. This was meant to instill in the Iranian nation pride in our history and heritage and to regenerate our nationalistic fervour. Unfortunately, as with most of his other endeavors, the Shah's intentions were misunderstood and the great fete which he accomplished was shrouded in a cloud of controversy. However, those of us who have studied and reveled in the glory of our past, realize its importance to the survival of our national identity. It is vital to our survival to truly know our history, revere it and pass on its importance to future generations. Once we accomplish that, no power, foreign or domestic, can meddle in our affairs and manipulate our emotions, the way they were able to do 23 years ago! Let's put aside our petty differences for one moment and instead of focusing on the insignificant objections which were hurled at the celebrations, consider what the Shah really accomplished by staging this event. He reiterated to the whole world that Iran is a land with a rich culture and the true cradle of civilization. Really, which other nation can boast of having a leader 2500 years ago who spoke of human rights and even wrote a declaration to make it the law of the land? The Shah wanted the world to realize this and to consider Iran as a force to be reckoned with, and not just another middle eastern country with oil! In His Majesty's own words which are immortalized in his book "Answer to History": "Our identity and heritage are our greatest advantages, the essential foundations from which everything else can be recovered and without which all will be lost. " Let's heed the call for unity! Be Omide piroozi R * Reality won't remain under the clouds I really had a hard time, reading the comments of my compatriots against our past. let me tell you in this way, our people in iran are suffering from this regime. our brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers have been under torture. many of them have been executed since 23 years ago , and now we are using our pens just to criticize a man, a nationalist and a loyal to iran soil for nothing. it has been clear during the past 23 years that he was following a way to reach our country to a respectful paid the ultimate price. he fought the west and oil companies just to keep the inflation 0 or to a very low economists know this better. he fought for his people and at the time their support was needed, it was gone for the reactionary people who destroyed our country, our culture, our strong we have to focus on future and the the exact time, the poisonous articles are publishing in a site, iranian. com just to blame our past, our glorious past. let want to criticize it? you don't want to come back? ok let me write 20 reasons for that: 1) we shouldn't come back, because under the shah's regime we were selling each oil barrel for $35, at this time, after 23 yeras we are selling it for $11(if officials are honest which doesn't seen to be). we should be nice and fair, but shah was not!!! 2) we had a dollar for 7 tomans in our pockets, now it gets 800 tomans and this makes more sense!!! 3) cause shah was a close friend to the west (although they didn't remain loyal to him)and since west is the symbol of evil(don't forget the old slogans) he was not right!!! 4) cause we don't care for the western-educated army as we are very nationalists!!! 5) since we are opposite to a weak leader and shah was weak in killing his poeple, that addes one more negative point in his career!!! 6) since shah was trying to make our culture closer to the western style and our young generation completely hate USA to make it as the ultimate desire, (don't forget the saying of that majlis representative'child!) , that makes him traitor to his homeland!!! 7) because shah was against the BAZZARIES society and tried to limit their functionality, and since these peosle are very worried about our compatriots, he was not a good leader!!! 8) because it was usual for the students to come back their homeland after finishing their education since they didn't see that much difference, but now, they hate to be back and this has become an ordinary thing, also a solution to the rapid-growing population rate in our country!!! 9) cause iranian passports were appreciable around the worlb, but. . . and this is even better for us!!! 10) because shah and his followers were not loyal to their homeland and kept on pushing the nation towards civilization, but today we have been thrown back to 1400 years ago. also we shall consider that a compulsory word is always blamable!!! 11 )cause the women were free to put on their desired clothes, but today they have to put on almost a unique form of dressing and this made them easier to be distinguished!!! 12) because under shah's regime the security arrested the communists and other left-wing followers, but today our nation with any idea opposite to the regime, are arrested and put in the jails and this make our nation stronger, not to become spoiled!!! 12) because these many families that have been destroyed in the past 23 years, were living aimlessly in their homeland!!! 13) because our people didn't even know what coupon means, but today they should memorize all its numbers and this make their brain and IQ more thinkable!!! 14) because our people were extrimists and said, "why our country is not like farnce or usa", but today they desire for their homeland to be like Dubai or Kuwait!!! 15) cause lots of contructions were made at that era like many stadiums, dams, schools, universities and so on and now every 20 years a stadium are built and every 23 years a dam is constructed and this prevents the BIRAVIYEH constructions!!! 16) because Reza Pahlavi has announced that he will take any responsibility that the nation gives him, but he should be tougher!!! 17) cause if shah was alive, Iraq didn't dare to even look at the iran's soil, but after his gone we experienced a war in which a million died!!! 18) there are more to say, the hearts are broken, the honesty have gone, there is no strong country any more, but there are alot traitors alongside the terrorists, saying a unique sentence: "Iran should not experience its great past anymore". they keep on their sayings, keep their eyes open to reallity, do not go and search in the libraries of theri past. but we shall be positive. the reallity won't remain under behind the clouds. we are looking for a time to show our capabilities, but this time under a same roof, Iran's sky. Kambiz Rezvani To top * GOOD for them!!! To those who criticize the late Shah of Iran, I bet it would have made you happy, had the late Shah of Iran instead of the 2500th anniversary of the Persian Empire, celebrated the the invasion of Iran by the Arabs, the birthday of Mr. Lenin, Marx, Mao, the leader of Albania et al of which many of you became followers of!?!