Misc

FYI/VIDEO: Opening Statement of Reza Pahlavi in NY (25th Sept)

Opening Statement of Reza Pahlavi in NY (25th Sept, 2009)

VIDEO: Opening Statement of Reza Pahlavi in NY (25th Sept, 2009)

Reply to FR

The 1906 Constitution was written by people who did not know enough about our ancient history, especially its philosophy. Yes we have to change and rewrite that Constitution the sooner the better.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

Steelworkers Of The World; Unite

شما را به خدا ببینید که کار ما سلط یعنی منظورم پهلوی طلب ها به کجا کشیده که یه کارگر بو گندوی آهنگر بخودش اجازه میده شازده مارو اینجوری دس بندازه. اونم با چی؟ با یه سریال لوس انگلیسی که همه میدونن همه چی زیر سر اوناس که شاه خدابیامرز ما رو بردن گوادلوپ با هاش اونجور نا مردی کردن.از جزئیاتشم من زیاد نمیدونم اونموقع ها ما زیاد کاری به سیاست نداشتیم.فقط یه جمله ورد زبونا بود که میگفت تو این مملکت هرکاری میخای بکن فقط به شاه فحش نده. آخ که چه روزگاری بود که هم تسمه از گرده بابای امثال تو کشیدیم هم فحشش راهم باز به بابای تو میدادیم.تو فکر کردی شازده ما مث شاه توی فیلم تو هستش که پای پیاده مث بچه یتیما سراغ سرپناه بگیره.ایشون هم ادعاهاشون مشخصه هم مطالباتشون.خونخواهی پدر هم که حق مسلم هر پسریه، از گذشته شونم همه خبر دارن. اگه نداری تو ی همین سایت یه آپاراتچی سلطنتی هس که میتونه بهت ثابت کنه ایشون کی بودن و قرار بود چی بشن تا اینکه ایشون تشریف بردن آمریکا برای ادامه تحصیل توی دانشگاههای سی ان ان و فاکس نیوز و بقیه قضایا که من وقت واسه گفتنش ندارم. یه مشتری خمار پشت در منتظر جیره سناتوریشه.فقط اینو بدون قرار شده وقتی شازده ما به کوری چشم همه تون برگشت سر میراث پدریش نه ما از ایشون بپرسیم از مال ملت چی بردی نه شازده به ما بفرمان مال ملت رو چرا خوردی. خلاصه این دفعه آخرت باشه اینطرفا پیدات میشه ما اینجا کمتر از مهندس سناتورزاده قبول نمیکنیم.دموکراسی هم واسه خودش حدی داره.

Our tipping point

If after the experience of the past 30 years, there is still a theoretical argument, despite the actual experience, then it is hard to fathom how we'll ever get there. Does anyone really care for person and mechanics instead of the basic requirements of an Iranian government that is representative of us?

Iranian experience and struggle is not separate and independent of constraints of what is going on globally and the looming questions driven by limited resources and technologies of control. Because of our natural wealth, we have been excessively impacted by those global forces and unduly influenced in our thoughts and politics by the extremes of reactions. Hence, our politics have never reflected our collective interests but our different world views. Independent and critical political thought has not been our strength even if criticism is in our blood.

In the spirit of Monty here is an Irani angle: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB5eZPWB_RM

OKtaby

form or nature of the government: which?

//iranian.com/main/blog/kaaveh-aahangar/form-or-nature-government-which-more-significant

Mr Mostofi

Did you know that the monarch of Iran should be the defender and upholder of the faith (constitution 1906)? Did you know that by faith they meant Islam? We are not talking about Reza Pahlavi's role in a post-IRI state. We are talking about his role at this moment Sir.

FR

Reply to FR

Reply to FR
.............

Yes, we have to rewrite a new Constitution with a distinct secular aspect to it, reflecting the true ancient heritage of Iran.
Yes we need to keep all parties within their scope of activities. It does not matter who wants to be King of The Royal Institution, or the Keeper of the The Heritage Institution. He or she must defend the culture of Iran against too much democracy, religion or business; especially if they want to use nationalism for their cause.

RP has to decide whether he wants to carry on his Royal duties properly, or resign and become a full fledged politician. You can't be both.

Once that is established, The Royal Institution has to carry out its duties to resurrect Iran. At the moment Iran is second to Islam and that is not right.

And I am returning to this comment again to add this link:

//www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/12/iran.pro...

It shows the attitude of these aliens. They do not care about Iran. They think that your average "Asqar Aghaa" respects all that Islamic stuff more than anything Iranian.

There is no one in Iran to correct this guy. We seriously need a proper spokesperson outside Iran, to sort this situation out, so that CNN does not go broadcasting it all over the world.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

Messrs. Jamshid, Kadivar and Mostofi

I read your comments with much interest and although both in this blog and on a few other blogs,  I have made my stance fairly clear on the issues of Monarchy and Reza Pahlavi, I would like to make a further contribution.

Jamshid has done a very accurate analysis of the present day monarchists and their relations with Reza Pahlavi. There are, however, at least three different monarchist groups.

1. those who are traditional monarchists with old family ties to this institution, still live in the pre-1979 era and have very little, if at all, understanding of the meaning of constitutional monarchy. Ths group support Reza Phalvi in the hope of returning to the peak of the Pahlavi II years and reviving the glories of the past, This group generally consists of the people in their sixties to late eighties and their children and gradnchildren.
2. those who have recently converted or renewed their allegieances to monarchism. Members of this group often come from the tribalist background or used to belong to a romantic strain of leftists or  Islamists who believe that Reza Pahlavi is the natural successor to the throne but expect him to take a non-political role.
3. this group's members are adherents to constitutional monarchism but are not necessarily followers of Reza Pahlavi. They are however, in the absence of any reputable or reliable contender, support Reza Pahlavi and urge him to return (nominally) to the tradition of his fathers and the past kings of 2500 years of monarchy.

The problem is that Mr Reza Pahlavi, at the same time, represents, all and none of these groups. While he does not wish to reject the people who love and support him because of his fathers, he cannot stand for the defender of the institution of monarchy singularly because by doing so he will alieante the people from different political stocks who are looking up to him as the convener, or as Mr Kadivar put it, the moderator.

Daruis's analogy to De Gaul is relevant but I am afraid implausibe. The chances of a unified Iranian resistance is less than zero. It has never existed not even after the Arab conquest of Iran.

Mr Mostofi's suggesting the Reza Pahlavi should not interfere in politics is, with due respec, a romantic view as there is no constitution of 1906 anymore to protect and uphold the non-political status of the constitutional monarchy.

This is why I wrote ealier that Reza Pahlavi is not a monarchist per se.

Lastly, the reason that Reza Shah could not opt for a Republic and was forced to continue with the monarchy was due to the strong infuence of one dominant group: the clergy.

FR

Reply To Mostofi

Mostofi;

Let me assure you that despite my disbelief in a systematic heavenly intervention in our mundane matters I do respect your sincerity in your beliefs.

I am totally ignorant of the circumstances which led Newton to the quoted statement. In any event, I think, Hearschel should've shunned any argument with a man whose head was once hit by a falling object!

Now, equipped with the information you share with the rest of us; I realize the source of  my melancholic thoughts on The Shah's birthday, every single year, while a meaningless draconian celebration was forced upon a nation: stars were talking to me.

While I have no appropriate word for you; I am sure your monarchist friends, while enjoying you company, will utilize your skills to advance their cause. It seems a perfect match.       

FYI/ Crown Prince Reza speaks on Human Rights ITV (1993/1995)

Former Interview on French German TV ARTE and on Iranian Diaspora Media

PRINCE OF PERSIA: Crown Prince Reza on Human Rights German TV & Diaspora Media (1993/1995)

Reply to Mirza..... Mirza,

Reply to Mirza.....

Mirza, if you bothered to study as much as some of us, you would realise that certain things, cannot be explained by simple scientific logic, for simple things that you may sense.

As Newton said to Herschel, "Sir, I have studied it, you have not", when questioned about why he believed in such mumbo jumbo.

Without wanting to change the topic at hand, I would let you know that for thousands of years people have valued the moment of birth of any event.

In ancient Iran, the moment of birth was so important, that Herodotus even wrote about it. I am sure many here have consulted their horoscopes properly by a professional, and have benefited from it.

Otherwise, your quip is funny, but does little more to explain your premise, other than add value to the topic at hand.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

Pity, Houdini Is Dead

Monarchist Entertainment Enterprise Presents:

Due to an unprecedented public endorsement of our new venture: Dialogue With E.T In Search Of  Help  For Our Stranded Prince; which debuted with a successful show on Astrology, we are pleased to announce the following lineup of guests for future shows:

Tarot card reader: Sister Gini

Renowned psychic: Brother Jamal;

and a number of international ghost hunters.

A sensible and decent chap

One can no stop to think that he speaks with authority but simplisity and common sense. He projects him self as the modern man of people. I have time for him.

Azer

DK: thanks for the

DK: thanks for the reply

As an Astrologer I have used the birth of the new cycle from 31 Oct 1981 and it is a good horoscope.  Justice and balance will prevail.  Most of the change will come in the next four years.  We have barely begun.  As Saturn goes through Libra it will bring many to justice.

I do not think that RP can shy away from his duties anymore.  As I said, he needs to dissociate from politics.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

alimostofi jaan ( Brain Storming on your questions)

I see your point but as you know RP however Crown Prince is not yet "officially" a King since formally he needs to take his oath in Parliament according to the former 1906 Constitution.

His Oath made in Cairo upon his 21st Birthday was a pledge as "Roi de Jure" aka "King By Prinicple" if you will. So given the dramatic circumstances - The Revolution- that did not allow him to be officially named King and therefore claim a Legal legitimacy as King.

This gives him some leverage to take upon himself a given political role as leader of the Opposition a little like De Gaulle ( who was neither a President at the Time) since the latter considered that a defeated French government under Pétain was no longer legitimate in his eyes.

De Gaulle Very Much like RP was not seriously taken at first when Pétain formed his government. Most French considered that "collaborating" with the Germans was the only possible solution at that stage of the invasion. But When Pétain's government participated in deporting jews and political prisoners and commiting crimes against the French people, it became also illigitimate in the eyes of the the French at large. It was only then that De Gaulle was seen as the "President in exile" not to say the Leader of La France Libre"

L'Appel Du 18 Juin Very Much like RP's Oath in 1980 became a political pledge to save the country. What Truly made De Gaulle Legitimate was that he succeeded !

I wish the same for RP, and quite honestly I am begining to think that he has Great Chances of coming out victorious from all this crisis. In What shape or form I do not know ? King or President ?

I am No Lawyer so the following arguments may not be perfect but may at least allow to situate the dillema which both RP and the People will have to solve together.

Given that I am a constitutional monarchist and wish to see him only in a "Ceremonial" role and not a "political" one your questions are legitimate and interesting.

But I personally believe that his RP political role will be limited to one of a moderator than a leader. As a matter of fact that is why he uses the "generic" vocabulary of the "People" knowing perfectly that a nation like Iran is composed of many different opinions and mindsets not to say ethnical and cultural differences. This is why he appears just like De Gaulle Above Parties rather than implicitly for a given ideology or political mindset. Even if we all know that given his family background he will be automatically associated to his father and grandfather.

I think that this "political neutrality" which RP displays in his interviews and speaches as being above political differences is actually quite in tune with the concept of Constitutional Monarchs. Juan Carlos had to play this "moderator" Role when he had to convince his first Prime Minister ( a member of Franco's entourage ) to create his first post - Franco Era government under the cloak of the monarchy and accept socialists in the Parliament. It was only later that he gradually allowed more and more participation of Socialist and left wing parties to actively participate in the transition towards democracy.

RP will be faced with the same choices if lets say he succeeds and that the current Reformists like Moussavi or Khatami would be asked to form a transitional government or to at least be part of a coalition of democratic forces united by a common concern that is: Making sure that the democratic experience becomes a reality.

The Constitution will then be improved so as to define the role of the monarchical institution ( or Presidential Institution) based on the choice of the people.

My take is that RP's strategy is one that allows a "winning-winning" outcome for both the Monarchy and the People in that it neither will be hurt but will rather benefit by a change of regime.

I don't Know for the "Republicans" aka "Jomhurykhah" compatriots who support RP But this is what I can say from a Constitutionalist Monarchist advocate ... 

For indeed From a Royalist point of view:

1) At Best if People choose the Monarchy (Constitutional) as a Sytem of government, the monarch will have to remain coherent in its promises by not interfering in the Political choices and decision makings of the government. 

2) At Worst: The People choose the Republic but choose to Forgive the Royal Family and allow them to return to Iran and allow the Shah to be buried in his country like the last monarch of our ancient land and with all respects due to his place in history.

What matters is to make sure that the transition can take place towards a democratic system that will give the citizens the necessary guarantees and protection that exist in all democratic societies ( be them Republics or Constititional Monarchies). That way No One be it the future ( King or Simple Citizen) nor the People ( Citizen or Subject)  is humiliated or tricked into a role they did not choose.  

I have to go now cause its getting late here but the debate continues and others probably have similar concerns and why not solutions or interpretations as to how RP can play a constructive role in helping Free the country and succeed a democratic transition.

Anyway this is what I can come up with as an answer for the time being.

Got to Go !

take care and stay in touch,

DK 

Kadivar's horoscope? (to alimostofi)

Mr. Mostofi, I have a suggestion for an addition to your list. How about firing of his current spokesman, Mr. Kadivar? .... or finding him a new position so that he can resign? What does Kadivar's horoscope say?

DK: re 24 Nov interview. If

DK: re 24 Nov interview. If you listen carefully you will hear that RP always speaks in terms of "the people this, and the people that". Right from the beginning he complains about why there is no dialogue with "the people" instead of the regime. There is a problem with that attitude of his.

The fact is, that as far the role he has, he represents the personification of the cultural element of Iran. That is what the role of the monarch is in CM. He should be stepping forward more forthrightly, and spearheading a cultural movement, so that he would be taken seriously. He has to explain, much more fully than I have, what he stands for, and so be self-righteous enough to talk on behalf of all Iran. That is what a Prince or King does to fight for his culture.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

FYI/Reza Pahlavi Old Interview on RADIO ZAMANEH (24 Nov 2008)

A Very Good interview, its AN older interview of The Crown Prince made last year before the Post Election "GREEN" Protests (which shows a certain continuity and coherence in his approach):

He say's:

1) FIRMLY AGAINST WAR WITH IRAN

2) SUPPORT THE THIRD WAVE: A Coalition of all Iranian Democrats both inside and outside Iran.

3) THE NUCLEAR DILEMMA

4) THE NATURE OF FUTURE DEMOCRATIC STATE 

Listen Here

Constitutional Monarchy is

Constitutional Monarchy is an institution. The rules of that institution make RP responsible to certain duties. Some he has carried out properly, some he has not.

My grandad taught MRP whilst he was the Governor of Azarbaijan Province a few things, as the most learned Iranian always became the Governor of Azarbaijan. One of the most interesting stories I am told, is the moment when MRP was informed that he had to become King. So he turned to my grandad and asked him if he had any last advice now that he had to leave. My grandad told him, "Iranians like to have two types of Kings; those that rule and those that govern." And apparently the conversation ended at that point. Later we found that my grandad never wrote about his life during the reign of MRP.

So why have written all this? It is not to show off. It is to say one thing. RP has to defend the culture of Iran which has nothing to do with politics or religion. In essence my only criticism is his political role. He has actually no political role under the rules of the institution. He has a cultural role. As such, his involvement in Iranian democratic movement is not correct. He represents the non-political, the non-business, the non-religious elements.

In a CM you really only need the monarch to make sure that the political element does not use nationalism or culture to clould their political agenda - especially if they do not have one. The worst case of course of fascists or communists who abuse politics to the extreme by putting nationalism or their utopia in with politics. As such they are wrong. The same goes for theocrats. So you need the monarch to make sure that the politician or theocrat or commercial person does not step out of line. The law of the land would have been written in such a way as to clearly show where one institution crosses the line. Simple. That is why a CM is better than a Republic. In a Republic there is no end to what democracy can do. One day they will vote to rename Demavand to Mount Seyyed for all I know.

Anway to cut a long story short RP needs to beat the cultural drum, as he is a drummer anyway. He must be seen as the vanguard of what it means to be Iranian first over and above politics, religion and commerce. He must make sure that none of the other three do what the CM is supposed to do.

But as any die-hard politician would tell you, RP has not done anything and has jeopordised the very essence of CM. The answer is that he did not know what his role is. How many Iranians are there out there who say what I say? Maybe after all these years of me screaming at him to use non-violence, has he finally come around to use that method, but he has not really put forward a cultural defence for his role.

He needs to go forward as the defender of Iranian culture. He must defend the names of Iran in history and geography that belong to Iran. Our identity needs to be defended, the CM's role is in fortifying and preserving what makes Iran Iran.

Seeing the Seyyeds remove the flag, the national anthem and so many things, is what he needs to stop. Those are the paths he needs to be working on. Not politics. Obviously if he wants to conquer Iran for the sake of Iran against an alien invader, which the Seyyeds are, that is fine. But he must make that clear.

He must get up, like a true Iranian and state why he has a duty to regain Iran. He can conquer Iran peacefully by making the people of Iran respond peacefully en-masse to non-violent general strikes. I can go into those details, but most of you should know what I mean. More importantly he must use the western media to challenge their ignorance of what his role is. He must clearly and repeatedly elaborate on what I have stated above.

But are you RP going to do it? As an Astrologer who has studied your horoscope I know why you are where you are. You need help and as a Scorpio like your father you are far too proud. Your grandad was a Pisces and listened more than many think. Many Zoroastrians helped your grandad.

Ali Mostofi

//www.alimostofi.com

Watch It; You Guys

"پدر خدا بیامرز تون" دیگه چه صیغه ایه؟مگه قرار نبود سکولار باشه؟ بعدشم زاویه دوربین رو چرا اونجوری گرفتی؟توی چند صحنه سایه  بینی،یادگار پدر خدا بیامرزش،میفته پشت لبش.عین سبیل هیتلر. آخه اینکه درست نیست.خیانت نکنید به ایشون.بعد از کلی تلاش شبانه روزی قرار شده با هواپیمای "ال عال" ایشونو ببرن تهران.شما میخاین پروازشون کنسل بشه؟ کور خوندین.

جنبش سبز ما چیست

در ارتباط با این مباحث لطفا به مطالب زیر مراجعه کنید.

جنبش سبز ما چیست

یک روز یه مرد ریشو

گر رسم شود که مست گیرند 

Reza would make a good leader

this is becoming obvious to more and more Iranians.

Reza would make a good leader

this is becoming obvious to more and more Iranians.

This was a good interview

This was a good interview by RP. He seems to be a sincere and down to earth guy. I get good feelings about this man.

Although I prefer a secular parliamentary republic, I don’t have any problems supporting a true consitutional (secular) monarchy either, as it reflects Iran's 2500 years of tradition. While the elected prime minister or president runs the country, a true constitutional King could still play many important traditional roles that a president or prime minister could not.

Still, I always wish that Reza Shah the First decided to go with a republic instead of a monarchy. This makes a good "what if" analysis for historians.

There was a person in this site called Majid. I haven't seen him write comments for a while. He always asked monarchists whether they would support a "monarchy" if the monarch was from a family other than Pahlavi.

Faced with choosing a republic or a monarch throned by a family other than Pahlavi, I am certain that most of Iran’s monarchists would choose a republic.

Therefore, in reality, today's Iranian monarchists are really Pahlavists, not true monarchists. They are Pahlavists because to them the name Pahlavi is a symbol of progress, prosperity, secularism as well as restoration of Iranian national identity.

I believe they are correct as "Pahlavi" truely does stand for all of these. And while there were some negative aspets too, my experience with today's Iranian Monarchists is that they are not willing to allow the monarch have absolute power as the Shah once did. They want checks and balances as they have learnt form the past. And I find RP to be in line with these changes of attitude.

The only other entity that today stand for the same values are various groups of republicans, including jebehey melli. They have learnt from their past mistakes too (but not all of them have), and hopefully won't repeat those mistakes again. Of course, we could extend this and say that we all have learnt from the past and we are all quite different than we were 30 years ago.

Monarchists and secular republicans have more in common than they think. But after 30 years, they have failed grandly to set aside their bickerings about the past and unite in a common front against the mollahs with a focus on their common grounds. But I don't fault RP for this at all. I fault some of the ordinary supporters of monarchy and republic/jebheye melli supporters who can't think of the bigger picture.

As far as those who criticize Reza Pahlavi, I am yet to find one comment or article that is based on reasoning and facts instead of blind hatred or knee jerk feelings. The critics are mostly reverting to arbadeh keshi and hochi gari, or vainly relating him to the times when he was just a kid, or falsely accusing him of being influenced by some vague people or entities in some even more vague manners.

The frustration and desperation of RP's critics and the lack of any meaningful substance in their criticism actually speaks volumes about the critics themselves, and scores more for RP in the eyes of the neutral reader.

An Amnesiac Afghan

You say: 

"Remember I never intended to insult you on the personal level. "

So is this a personal compliment?

"You have, correctly, recognized that my kind of  argument, so to speak, is genuinly based on eliminating the possibility of existence of the Pahlavis in the Iranian political scene.Your paycheque is being jeopardized. "

And a few more accusations of the same kind directed at me and others who disagree with you.

What if I tell you that you are in the pay if the IRI? Would you take it as a compliment or as personal insult?

Take it easy boy. One sip at the time.

FR

.

. 

I don't have your "dramatic/radical" views Ayhab

My implicit objection to Fateh's rants was not because I thought they did not apply to you as a specific person! His generalization is what annoyed me (turned his rants to racist rants).

As for the monarchists, I don't have your "radical" view against every monarchist, and all who worked for Shah. I have great respect for people such as Akbar Etemad, and many others like him, and  I don't give a hoot how you view that.

Akbar Etemad was the president of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI) between 1974 and 1978.

See : //iranian.com/main/2009/feb/akbar-etemad

Capt_ardabil

I have never used the flag feature and never will.  No idea why your comment was deleted.

Your comments about me do not bother me at all.  Its the other nonsense that you write about that "mire to nervam" as young Iranians say these days.

I can handle your personal attacks....they are even funny every once in a while

Main Problem with Shaholahie's

The grand master of Mir5[pahlavi] dynasty, tried (masalan) to Modernize(segregate) Iran based on ethnicity. Obviously he was  ashamed of his own background, coming from  and paid by most ruthless Russian monsters[Cossack] ever lived,  who were nothing but bunch of vatan forosh mercenaries, who were paid by Soviet czars to terrorize the country.

shall we elaborate more, or just let these Mir5 nostolgic[malijaks]parasts carry on with their Aryan racist rants and promote their AIPAC [Nokar] called Reza 1/2mir5??

You call the shot  boys. I am all for it. Lets be candid about it ladies and gents.

-YT 

P/S sorry I do not have much of kind word for any of you has beens ha. perhapss next time. ;-)

kharmagas. kam boos booos kon dunbal ino on, get a back bone. ;-)

Fat H-ead, (aka - kiseh kash)

I assume you were not man enough not to flag my response to your Aryan Brotherhood inspired  comment about my ethnicity.

Well little man, If you had to flag it, then we know what you lack as a man. 

-YT 

P/S Faramarz..... never forget to keep washing the dastmal yazdi's. you never know when you need them ;-)