Shah vs. Khomeini: Round 1

The Shah steadily turned from a constitutional monarch to a deranged tyrant

Share/Save/Bookmark

Shah vs. Khomeini: Round 1
by Arash Monzavi-Kia
20-Feb-2009
 

After the 1953 coup, Mohammad Reza Shah’s reign as an autocratic monarch started. Similar to his father’s rule, soon the parliament became a rubberstamp of the royal decrees, and the political rights were in effect suspended. However, it still took the Shah another decade before he could gain the absolute power over his court, the army and the Persian nobility. Meanwhile, he had to contend with his family, who were forcing him into divorces and remarriages; the power-hungry generals of his army, who were planning coups behind his back; and the older and wiser nobility, who were trying to teach and mentor him! Besides, the country was dirt poor and most people were illiterate and living in abject poverty.

The Shah’s oppression of Mosaddeg’s allies was moderate, with only one of them (Dr. Fatimi) executed. However, his secret police (Savak) soon found its real target among the underground Tudeh party and its clandestine military branch. Several hundred were arrested and many tortured and executed. Astonishingly, later on the Savak itself became a threat to the Shah, as its first notorious chief (general Bakhtiar) planned a coup-d’état, apparently in discussion with the American CIA! In the 1950’s, the Shah became so disenchanted with his wrenched monarchy, that he collapsed in a state of deep despair and depression, and even seriously contemplated abdication and ‘retirement’!

Two events saved the Shah’s morale from depression and desperation, a happier marriage and a royal revolution! When the Shah’s only full-brother died in an airplane crash in 1954, he was left with no heir-apparent. His beautiful wife seemed sterile and in 1958, the royal family forced him into his second divorce. This time, instead of wedding a prominent princess or pampered nobility, the 40-year-old Shah turned towards a young middle-class university student, who was both intelligent and energetic. The young bride soon blessed him with two sons and two daughters, as well as some degree of hope and happiness.

The royal (White) revolution of 1961 was instigated by the American-inspired new reformist prime minister, Dr. Ali Amini, who had also served in Mosaddeg’s cabinet. Amini and his agriculture minister designed a revolutionary land-reform program that overnight, disposed of the feudal system in Iran. To that program, they also added clauses for women’s suffrage, compulsory secular education, and provincial councils. The new Democrat US president (Kennedy) believed that such social reforms were the best remedy for modernizing the 3rd world countries, without losing them to the communist block.

Not everyone was happy with the “White” revolution. However, the large landowners were appeased by some moderating measures, and the conservative clergies were calmed regarding the compulsory secular schools and the women vote. Unfortunately, a militant ayatollah (Khomeini), who had a history of aggressive anti-secular views as well as collaboration with the radical Fedaiyan Islam, rose in fierce disagreement against the Shah’s reforms.

Rather than attacking the core and popular items such as the land reform, Khomeini concentrated his attacks against the peripheral issue of provincial councils, where non-Muslims could be elected with no distinction from the Muslims. He condemned that clause as a clear violation of the constitution, which officialised the Shia Islam. He also tied the reformist efforts to the increasing Jewish and Baha’i influence over the Shah’s government. The ensuing religious uprisings of 1963 (15 Khordad) were viciously suppressed by the riot police and the army, resulting in hundreds of causalities. This caused a major disenchantment among the militant religious groups who had helped bring the Shah to power in 1953, but now felt completely betrayed and brutalized.

Following the 1963 crack down, ayatollah Khomeini was arrested and even psychologically abused in prison. Even so, next year, a new conciliatory prime minister (Mansur) arranged for his release and safe return to Qom. Sadly, the much westernized Mansur soon became the target of even more vicious attacks from Khomeini, who declared him an American puppet and initiated some more rioting. This time, the Shah forced Khomeini into exile (first to Turkey and then Iraq), to uproot the leadership of religious discontent. Nevertheless, the Islamic militancy continued and Mansur was murdered by the Fedaiyan Islam terrorists in the spring of 1965.

Prime Minister Mansur’s assassination heralded a new era of terrorist attacks and guerrilla warfare against the Shah’s government. Although the fundamentalist Fedaiyan Islam group was soon decimated, two new and actively armed resistance groups (Peoples Fedaiyan and Peoples Mujahidin) emerged from the tormented ashes of the Tudeh Party and the National Front. Both groups were radicalized by the Savak suppression of any political dissent, and evolved into Cuban-style militant guerrillas. Also, both of them received significant support, training and arms from the Palestinian resistance fighters, who saw the Shah as a staunch Israeli supporter. In response, the Shah packed the leadership of his secret police (Savak) with the most notoriously vicious characters (like general Nasiri), who truly enjoyed the persecution, torture and murder of hundreds of idealistic intellectuals and university students.

In the mid 1960’s, the Shah decided to take an active role in the affairs of government, which gradually turned into an omnipotent supervision and even direction of all the political, military and social affairs of Iran. In his thirty seven years of reign, the Shah steadily turned from a constitutional monarch (1941 to 1953) to a meddling king (53 to 63), a benevolent dictator (63 to 75) and finally a deranged tyrant. However, the forceful reform decade starting in the mid 1960’s was the zenith of his dictatorial reign, which elevated Iran from the lowly ranks of a backward country to a respectable and thriving state.

The Shah was unusually energized by the achievements of his ‘White’ revolution, and the forceful struggle against what he saw as the communist (red) and the religious (black) reactionaries. For more than a decade, he took the helms of the country, all the time believing that he was taking Iran from the dark ages into the modern era of a grand civilization. To that effect, the Shah even assumed the prime ministerial functions, and used a tame figure head (Hoveida) to rubber stamp all his wishes and directions.

Reference: Majestic Failure, by Marvin Zonis, 1991.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Arash Monzavi-KiaCommentsDate
وابستگی، استقلال، همبستگی‌
-
Nov 04, 2012
The pain of living
1
Oct 21, 2012
The 2nd Year of Green
-
Jun 01, 2010
more from Arash Monzavi-Kia
 
Bavafa

To: Anonymous465646

by Bavafa on

Can you exercise what you preach? I whole heartedly agree with what you are saying with the exception you drifted off and did exactly what you were preaching about.

Mehrdad


default

Let bygones be bygones

by Anonymous465646 (not verified) on

I guess people have nothing more controversial to talk or write about except about the late Shah and his reign on this Website and then we see hundreds of posts under different registered and unregistered aliases all venting off their pent-up frustrations, inferiority and superiority complexes, OGHDEH and KINEH, using the most profane and obscene languages you can find anywhere, cursing and badmouthing the late Shahs!!

you people already defecated all over Iran by bringing Khomeini, then couldn't take it yourselves and all fled Iran and now from afar still won't let go!

Dictatorship was/is not unique to Iran! all Iran's neighboring countries were run by some sort of dictatorship and none of them had any more freedom than Iran during the Shah's reign yet none committed the kind of suicide that you our so called Intellectuals did in 1979, deliberately flushing your country and yourselves down the toilet of misery and despair!!

GIVE IT UP people! Shah has been dead for 29 years now even his hones are dust!

live the rest of your damned lives as refugees and second/third class citizens in your adopted countries and let it go.


default

to: Nasser

by Anonymous11 (not verified) on

Continued on Ezekiel 38:1 the battle of Gog and Magog (Gorg va Magorg -Akhund va Akhunda and what Akhunds will do to Iranians on their way to total annihilation).

Which Akhunds are we talking about? Sunni Akhunds vs. Shia Akhunds??


default

To: Jamshid_Niavarani

by Aboli (not verified) on

Thank you Sir, for always using this name.

If one has read one of your posts, he has read them all :

Heavy in cussing, rich in oghdeh-goshaie,zero in substance.

Many of us, just see the name, and immediately skip to the next comment.

You are saving us a lot of time.

Thanks again! :-)


default

To: Jahanshah Javid

by farrad02 on

Again my comments (which were not in any way unacceptable or inappropriate) were deleted. This is censorship and it goes on on this site!  Aziz, this taints your good work. And you need to do something to control it!


Darius Kadivar

Dear Anti Shahis:Know the difference between RULING & REIGNING?

by Darius Kadivar on

Oh Good I did not Know We had Such a HUGE Constituency ... LOL

As Usual You Anti Shahi's are Confusing two fundamentally different concepts of Kingship and that is RULING Vs REIGNING ...

How Many Kings and Queens have ruled England since Cromwell Beheaded Charles Ist after establishing a Ruthless Theocracy he called a Republic ? ...

It was only to be followed by a Restoration of the Beheaded King's Son Crowned Charles II and a Truly Constitutional Monarchy where the King would Reign and Not Rule.

The Spanish went through an Abolishment of their Monarchy to be followed by a Bloody Civil War and a Faschist Dictatorship before realizing that Restoring the Monarchy was probably the best shortcut towards a Constitutional Parlimentary Democracy.

Oh But I guess  in YOUR BOOK Iranians are less intelligent than the Spanish and the British to understand the difference ! ...

Constitutional Monarchists are NOT ShahParast But Democrats who respect the Royal Institution and what it represents in a Nation's Identity and Symbol of Unity. The Crown is Above the King or Queen that is supposed to have it on his or her head and not the contrary. A Constitutional Monarchy aims at Crowning the Parliemant's Victory over Absolute Rule and not the contrary.

As Such, Constitutional Monarchists deserve As Much as any Iranian Secular Republican ( who have Proved to Be Incompetant to this day in offering any true candidate or alternative to the current theocracy in Iran after more than 30 years other than investing in the hope of seeing an Islamic Reformists like Khatami to bring Democracy to Iran)  to have their views heard and respected in a Free Debate which MOST of You ( albeit Arash Monzavi-Kia and Parthian it seems) Refuse to have on grounds of Prejudice rather than Genuine Historical Knowledge.

Most Supporters of a Republican Form of Government should either :

GROW UP or RUN FOR President !

But Stop Giving Moralistic Lessons on Democracy to Supporters of a Constitutional Monarchy in a Country with 25 centuries of identification with an institution that has greatly defined its cultural and national identity as reminded to us regularly to this day ( Except by the Islamic Republic) including by Americans : 

NPR: Ferdowsi, The Poet Who Rescued Iran

Bebin TV History for Dummies: The Constitutional Revolution:

Bakhtiar Part One of his Last Speach about the Constitutional Revolution:

Cromwell and the Rise of Parliamentary Democracy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFlG3ak4RZg&feature=related

Charles Ist's Execution:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k88K8AMVcgg&feature=related

Juan Carlos Named King in Front of Parliament (1976):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX-ZW-AgybI

And Last But Not Least EVEN THE FRENCH HAVE UNDERSTOOD THE DIFFERENCE and Reza Pahlavi's Message of Unity for National Reconciliation for Democracy and Human Rights:

Reza Pahlavi New Book (A TIME OF CHOICE) Q&A With French Media

 


Bahramerad

Iran - A Nation of 'SHAH PAR' RASTAN '...

by Bahramerad on

Reza2 - You seem to be the only one around these pages with a good perception of the Iranian condition.

People seem to forget that you CANNOT rule a country by yourself.

Reza Shah The Great might have rule with an iron fist — but his fist consisted of an army and a thousands of civil servants that he himself had created and did his biding for him.

Mohammed Reza Aryameher depended upon the army, the civil servant machine and the newly created middle class technocrats and merchant classes.

Khomaini relayed on the services of Khal'khali and his kind and the newly imported Islamo / leftist of all kind.

Khamenie relays on the services of the hezbollahies of all shade and description and the cooed 'silent' majority.

Note: how many Shahs have we had since 1906 so called constitutional revolution in Iran. And who were the ones propping them up?

Answer: The Iranian 'Shah Par'rastan'....


default

Nasser, I hope it's true what you wrote

by Siavosh (not verified) on

I enjoyed your piece. Definately have to agree with you on Rezah Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah. Deadly right on those. I googled the chapters you provided just to double check. I'm with you on the other ones too. But looks like 11:44 is the key determining event. With Taiban gaining ground in Afghanistan and by Putin forcing the closure of U.S. military supply base in Kyrgistan one could arrive at that conclusion. But here is my question. Wouldn't Russia and Saudis be drawn into this war too or are they just going to sit back and enjoy the spoils?

Thanks,
Siavosh


ganselmi

Parthian,

by ganselmi on

I think much of what you write, especially regarding the Mohammad Reza's failures in the mid to late 70s is fair enough. He did fail to act decisively at crucial points to suppress the Khomeinist insurgency, taking the road of concession rather than confrontation -- partly as a result of misguided pressure from Carter and his Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and others who urged him to liberalize and engage at the worst possible moment when he should have asserted himself as a sovereign.

That said, this "failure," exemplified by his insistence that the army should not fire live munitions on the rioters, also testifies against all those characterize him as a brutal despot. That is, if the Shah really was a dictator in the form of a Pinochet or Marcos, then he would have simply executed his opponents en masse the moment they posed an existential threat to his sovereignty. That he refused to do so shows just how gentle the man really was.


default

Amid bickering about a dead

by tsunami (not verified) on

Amid bickering about a dead shah and a dead mullah, the schizophrenic Supreme Leader of Ignorance, has enslaved future Iranian generations by burdening them with mind-boggling levels of theft of Iranians national wealth and national pride.

Let's talk about present and the dismal future ahead of every single Iranaina child and grand child.


Parthian

To monarchists

by Parthian on

Ok, I give you this, Shah was much better, I mean much much better than Khomeini, and his regime  was much better than IR. There is no doubt about it. Only the true islamofascists would claim otherwise. All statistics show that. However, you the monarchists, or constitutional monarchists have to admit that without the Shah, Khomeini may not have come to power.

Events in history do not happen in vacuum. Shah's policies were misguided from early 70s to the revolution. He was gutless, and never showed courage during any of the crisis. His prime ministers were always his escape goats for all the mistakes he made. Many people paid dearly for his terrible policies. Only if had done couple things differently, Iran would not be in this shape. So I ask, are you Iranians first, or monarchists? because if your loyalty goes to the Shah, than you are no different than the basiji thugs. If your loyatly is to Iran, than you must admit, at the end, he loved his power and reign more than Iran, and that is why he could not come into terms of allowing political freedom. 

Reza Shah is a different story, because we need to look these regimes in the context of their time. Reza Shah  was a much better ruler than his son. 


Ostaad

Jamshid, you stand corrected.

by Ostaad on

Reza Shah was born in the village of Alasht which is located in the Savaad Kouh region (mantagheh) in Ostaan Maazandaraan.

Aslo, watup with this "In 1925 no one from Mazandaran named Reza could ever aid Iranian society.?! Did you mean to say something deep or this is just one of your frequent brain farts?

BTW, have you taken you med?


ganselmi

You are profoundly misinformed

by ganselmi on

Jamshid, you are profoundly misinformed about Reza Shah. Your argument consists of one oversimplification after another and is self-contradictory. You are trying to say that Reza Shah was installed by the British (he wasn't, they just preferred a strong national government over the incompetent Qajar) and also an agent of the Russians -- well which is it? The two were rivals for influence in Iran: Reza Shah couldn't have served the interests of both, in other words.

As for the dictatorship argument, you are being simplistic and unfair again. The Iran Reza Shah was dealing with was essential a country in a permanent state of emergency: its territorial sovereignty was under attack from all manner of domestic seditionists and the imperial ambitions of the great powers. Its people were poor, illiterate, and disease-stricken. It lacked a national police force or a coherent judicial system. Out of this situation, Reza Shah created a modern nation state. And yes, that involved some amount of dictatorship. But if you look at a nation state's birth, you will find that it meant some amount of dictatorship and trauma.

But let's get back to your original comment, which has thankfully been removed: It seems you are trying to mitigate and shift your responsibility the open ethnic hatred against Mazandaranis which you expressed earlier. Why not have the courage to either stand by your words or at least to redact and apologize? 


Jamshid_Niavarani_IV

The problem with Mazandaran in 1925

by Jamshid_Niavarani_IV on

In 1925 Iran, the village of Savad kuh, Mazandaran was one of the most backwards places in Iran.

Reza Khan was trained by the Russians.  Reza Khan was a Cossack soldier.

Reza Khan was installed by the British.

Reza Khan was implanted on Iranian society.

Reza Khan was a dictator.

Put all that together and you will see why Iran is in Bad shape today.

Don't be so myopic.

There is nothing wrong with Mazandaran.  In 1925 no one from Mazandaran named Reza could ever aid Iranian society.  Reza Khan's dictatorship led to Ayat'Allah Khomayni's rise to power.

More than 2500 years of B.S. and two Spiritual leaders to add to it.

Watch the movie "300" then watch the speech on "Axis of Evil".

It is safe to say, close to 3000 years of dictatorship and counting...

To all who say the Pahlavis were good...

I say you deserve neither life nor freedom... Go back to Iran and hang with the Mullahs you filthy animals.

Farah Pahlavi and Reza Pahlavi are my dogs.

Hand in your green cards and get out of my country Pahlavis!

Pahlavis=Bastards


ganselmi

What's wrong with being

by ganselmi on

What's wrong with being Mazandarani Jamshid? Care to explain?


Darius Kadivar

FYI/Henry Fonda Narrates Shah of Iran's Life and Times (1980's)

by Darius Kadivar on

Portraits of Power - Henry Fonda Narrates Shah of Iran's Life and Times (1980's)

See Blog


default

idiot called Jamshid

by shahram G (not verified) on

Among all the non sense that you jived in your letter,you called him,The SHAH of Iran as a Mazandarani,can any body tell me what's his ethnicity got to do with the main subject???
Where the hell your family did come from??
Never seen an IDIOT like Jamshid,maybe you should change your name to Ghazanfar instead!
we lost our country to mullahs because of BASTARD like you.


default

For Iran

by Amir Ghiassi (not verified) on

It is not easy to satisfy every body, but you can satisfy the majority. Sorrowfull the Shah had no contacts with middle class and poor class people. If he could call them by telephone and ask their opinions; he could understand his people. The other force is that the super powers did not want Iran continue to be modern; so how could they sell their weapons and materials. If there is no hate and war how they can sell their drug and weapons. The Shah did not begin the war with Iraq and he played very calm situation in those days as Iraq sent a lot of people out of the country, but the Shah did not start a war. The could not sell billions of billions dollars their weapons and drug. But now they do. Sorrowfully the world the guided by the companies which want to sell; they can store their materials for ever. If there is no war who will buy billions of billions dollars their drug and weapons, the real king of kings are there. They own 40% of the world welath and they have media and huge companies in control. They can advertise what ever they want and the people will believe them. They want to destroy everything so they can again build them. Like cars, if the car is not damaged who will buy a new car? These people are against education and Love and unity; so they want hate between races, nationalities and religions and their people like Ak Ghaedeh are marketing the war. So they have their benefits. The war between Shia, Suni, Christian, Jew Bahai is what they want. Hate and war and ignorence. The did not want the Shah any more; as he did not start a war.


default

'I will give you

by Anonymous-H (not verified) on

'I will give you spirituality, no one shall remain homeless in this country, the dispossessed will have free telephone, heating, electricity, bus services and free oil at their doorstep..'
Ayatollah Khomeini's Promises 30 Years Ago at Behesht Zahra Cemetery.

Thirty years on, the reality is very different from those promises made by Ayatollah Khomeini. Not only Iranians didn't get free telephone, heating, electricity and bus services, but the standard of living for Iranians compared to the other oil producing countries in the region drastically deteriorated.

Soon after the mass executions of the former regime officials, the revolution started devouring its own children. One by one former supporters of the revolution which were no longer required were eliminated. The MeK, seen in the above picture guarding the barricades to the Prime Minister's Palace, the Communists, the remnants of Mossadegh supporters in the National Front, the more liberal Islamists and right up to even those amongst the Shiite clergy who did not want to toe the line, one by one fell victim of the revolutionary elimination process.

The result of all this elimination is in tens of thousands of Iranian lives with its climax in 1988 when thousands of political prisoners, who had survived earlier bloodbaths, were massacred.

The emasculation of the powerful Iranian army after the revolution, which up till then had stopped Saddam Hussein's every aggression on the Iranian soil, emboldened the Ba'athist regime to invade Iran. Over a million Iranians were killed and maimed in an eight year war that was unnecessarily prolonged with no tangible gains for either side.

Millions of Iranians who could not tolerate the new repressive Islamic measures left the country which resulted in the biggest exodus from Iran ever since the Arab invasion thirteen centuries ago and the brain drain continues today.

Not only no spirituality was gained but the country has suffered a rapid moral decline. Government's own figures show an alarming rise in prostitution, drug addiction and crime. At one point the school children were even asked in their classrooms to snitch on their parents and friends if they seemed to deviate from the revolutionary guidelines.

Not only the political freedoms we seeked did not come about, even our personal freedoms were taken away. We were told what to wear, what to drink, what to eat, what to listen to and what to enjoy and what not to enjoy.

Iranian instinct for survival and resourcefulness however has fought back. Bit by bit Iranian women have fought for their rights and the restoration of the rights they had before the revolution. Their resistance has meant that the Ayatollahs have been unable to push Iranian women to the status of Saudi women.

The young, the students and the intelligentsia have seen the errors of the past generations, they no longer think the same as their previous generation. Technology makes them even more aware of what they are missing and how their counterparts enjoy life and freedom in the rest of the world.

The workers, the teachers and the dispossessed are no longer swallowing the false promises and waiting for free goodies to be delivered, they are demanding their rights and their leaders remain defiant in jail.

After thirty years of elimination and brainwashing to destroy the Iranian identity and our joyous culture, the struggle continues. Our country has seen even worse and more savage invaders than these and has survived. This dark era will just be a storm in the tea cup in the Iranian history.

There are many things which are hindering the Iranian nation however, whereas thirty years ago it was the Iranian Left who helped the Ayatollahs to take over the power, now it is the international Left which is helping the clerics remain in power, the 'useful idiots' and the spineless Western leaders who see no further than their short term interests, the proxy terror groups in the region and the unscrupulous turncoats are all desperately hand in hand trying to keep this antiquated regime on its life support but it will be all in vain. Iran will survive and Iran will come through victorious as it has throughout the past.


default

Daniel's Prophesy regarding Pahlavis, Khomaini and Khamanei

by Nasser P (not verified) on

This is what Daniel prophesized in Torat/Bible to Darius, the King of Persia about the future events that will take place in Persia. He foretold these events with deadly accuracy from Alexander through Khamanei. Here is the section about Pahlavis, Khomaini and Khamanei. You be the judge:

[Reza Shah]
Daniel 11:23 “After an alliance is made with him he will practice deception, and he will go up and gain power with a small force of people. 11:24 “In a time of tranquility he will enter the richest parts of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers never did, nor his ancestors; he will distribute plunder, booty and possessions among them, and he will devise his schemes against strongholds [England and Russia], but only for a time.

[Mohamad Reza Pahlavi]
11:25 “He will stir up his strength and courage against the king of the South[Saudi Arabia] with a large army; so the king of the South [Saudi Arabia] will mobilize an extremely large and mighty army for war; but he will not stand, for schemes will be devised against him[Saudis flood the market with cheap oil in 1976 bankrupting the Shah].11:26 “Those who eat his choice food will destroy him, and his army will overflow, but many will fall down slain [Khomaini took care of this part]

[New King of the North, Ayatollah Khomeini and King of the South,Saddam Hussein]
11: 27 “As for both kings, their hearts will be intent on evil, and they will speak lies to each other at the same table; but it will not succeed, for the end is still to come at the appointed time.

[Saddam will attack Kuwait and fire missiles at Israel]
11:28 “Then he will return to his land [Kuwait]with much plunder; but his heart will be set against the holy covenant, and he will take action and then return to his own land.

[Saddam's forces will rain misery in the south]
11:31 “Forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress[Karbala], and do away with the regular sacrifice[Ashura]and they will set up the abomination of desolation[massacre followers of Shia sect in the south].

[UN will strenghten sacntions against Saddam and take action]
11:32 “By smooth words he will turn to godlessness those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will display strength and take action.

[U.S. will justify invasion of Iraq based on "intelligence". Many will die on both sides of the battle between Islam (sword) and the flame(West].
11:33 “Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days.

[Sunnis will fall from power in Iraq. Extremist groups will help Sunnis fight back]
11:34 “Now when they fall they will be granted a little help, and many will join with them in hypocrisy.

[Many in the U.S. government will fall from their positions of power due to war. But they will come to power again at the top of the military command at the appointed time].
11:35 “Some of those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time.

[Khamanie as the winner of the US/Iraq war will do as it pleases and will call for the destruction of Israel]
11:36 “Then the king will do as he pleases, and he will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will speak monstrous things against the God of gods; and he will prosper until the indignation is finished, for that which is decreed will be done.

[Khamanie will show no regard for Human Rights and will persecute women and religeous minorities]
11:37 “He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god; for he will magnify himself above them all.

[He will allocate huge sums of money to develop the god of fortress (nuclear power)]
11:38 “But instead he will honor a god of fortresses, a god whom his fathers did not know; he will honor him with gold, silver, costly stones and treasures.

[He will take action against Israel with the help of Hizbullah and grant them rights over Lebanon]
11:39 “He will take action against the strongest of fortresses[Israel] with the help of a foreign god[terrorists]; he will give great honor to those who acknowledge him and will cause them to rule over the many, and will parcel out land for a price.

[Saudi Arabia gives it up to Khamanie without a fight and gives passage to Khamanie to move forward]
11:40 “At the end time the king of the South will collide [not war] with him, and the king of the North will storm against him with chariots, with horsemen and with many ships; and he will enter countries, overflow them and pass through.

[Khamanei raises his voice closer to Israel and assults Israel from land that will be resuced from him at the end: Sinai, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon]
11:41 “He will also enter the Beautiful Land, and many countries will fall; but these will be rescued out of his hand: Edom, Moab and the foremost of the sons of Ammon.

[Khamanie will undermine Egypt and other Arab governments with his stand against Israel]
11:42“ Then he will stretch out his hand against other countries, and the land of Egypt will not escape.

[Khamanie will bask in his vast political and economic clout]
11:43 “But he will gain control over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the precious things of Egypt; and Libyans and Ethiopians will follow at his heels.

[Russia and Sunni Taliban funded by Saudis will turn up the heat against Khamanei]
11:44 “But rumors from the East and from the North will disturb him, and he will go forth with great wrath to destroy and annihilate many.

[Khamanei will rule the Syrians but...]
11;45 “He will pitch the tents of his royal pavilion between the seas and the beautiful Holy Mountain; yet he will come to his end, and no one will help him.

Thus far, all of Daniels prophesy have come true. Let's hope this last part does not:

Continued on Ezekiel 38:1 the battle of Gog and Magog (Gorg va Magorg -Akhund va Akhunda and what Akhunds will do to Iranians on their way to total annihilation).

According to Daniel's Prophesy, the blood bath unleased by these corrupt and power hungry Akhunds will end the lives of millions of Iranians. Let's hope they are stopped sooner than that.


default

A national movement

by Alborzi (not verified) on

Khomeini was not the only guy who opposed Shah, what was Shah's main shortcoming was his cowardice. In face of any opposition he would run and throw his loyal servants to be executed. Khomeini was the one who grabbed power, but there was many oppositions, including mossadegh .... .
Shah never identified with Iranian national aspiration, its not surprising that the son writes his book in French, these guys seek legitimacy in west, they do not understand Iranian national aspirations.


default

Iranians saddeled with one tyrant after another...

by Reza2 (not verified) on

Perhaps a better title for this report would have been:

Majestic Failures: Replacing one tyrant with another and another...

Khamanei too has been the "Shah" of Iran for the past 19 years. Single handedly he's committed more political murders in Iran as both his predecessors. His social, economic and political crimes can only be surpassed by that of Zahak. Although he's very close to breaking that record too.


Ali P.

Two men...

by Ali P. on

Two different visions for Iran...