Current Events

Is having a criminal record still a winner in the Down Under?

Freethought111

Putting aside the big words I will get right to the point:

The French know a lot more about Iran than many Iranians who have been living in North America and Britian for the past 32 years

What French know about Iran is from reading books. It is like trying to describe a shape to a blind person. Or the taste of bitterness to someone who has never tasted it. They will never know what real Iran is until they live there for years. Many of us who live outside lived in Iran for decades. You bet we know more about Iran than the French. Most of these so called Iranologists are a bunch of arrogant ***holes. With giant egos and high opinions of themselves.

How many of them speak Farsi: I mean modern Farsi not Middle Persian or Avestan? How much time did they spend in Iran; in the cities; villages and so on? 

How dare they tell me they know more about Iran than Iranians. Sure they may know about some poetry most likely in translation! Or some historical facts but that does not make them an expert. You don't know what food tastes like until you try it. Nor do you know what a nation is like until you live there. Or what a religion is until you live under it and watch it practiced. So please do not try to impress me with French or whatever. It is not going to work; not with me.

VPK

Incapability of perceiving forest for trees, specious argumentation and making flawed general observations from faulty premises is one of the conspicuous traits of the majority of posters on this site, and a huge cross-section of the Iranian diaspora in the West as well. A Fanonian "black faces, white masks" syndrome is also another character trait.

The French know a lot more about Iran than many Iranians who have been living in North America and Britian for the past 32 years. French scholarship on Iran has also proven itself for centuries to be far more versatile, nuanced and multifaceted in its approach than that in the Anglophone world. That aside, let me ask you: when was the last time you picked up a text by Mulla Sadra? Have you ever read him? What about Nasir Khosrow or his peers?

Most of you here talk out of complete ignorance pontificating on aspects of intellectual culture that you have absolutely no idea about. Many of you have never engaged or interacted with a single figure of the intellectual heritage of pre-modern Iran yet you believe you are qualified to pass judgement.

I have said many times that the regime in Iran is a fascist totalitarian dictatorship. It is also a fascist totalitarian dictatorship that long ago betrayed its own intellectual heritage. Yet the cacophony chorus here keeps harping on the same uncritical Islamophobic points as a litmus test of sorts.

That said, I invite the assorted anglophiles to respond to the points of the following article that lay bare the illusions of so-called British democracy.

The Illusion of British Democracy

Dear Freethought111

In all societies the poor get the short end of the stick. It is always that and will always be so. I am no fan of Britain because of all the evil it did to Iran. However they do have more freedom for their own people. You could go and call the Queen a bi*** and no one does anything to you. Or voice pretty much any opinion without fear of being beaten up. Nor do you have to wear a hijab or be focred a religion on you.

Regarding the French Iranologist and Islamologist I could care less. What do French know about living in Iran? How many of these ***holes lived under Shia rule? Reality is that Iran under the IRI is a dictatorship without freedom. I could also care less about Shia which is a creation of Iranians in response to Arabs. It is a hodgepodge of Islam and Zoroastrianism with no basis in reality. Throwing big names does not prove things. I see what is happening in Iran by myself.

Daer Maryam

Thank you again and I agree with you 100 %.

Siavash300 - false dichotomies

In logic are called fallacies of reasoning; meaning, such arguments that juxtapose elements that are unrelated are false arguments. If you believe there is democracy in Britian, why don't you try the experiment of living in places such as Tottenham, Islington and many other poor suburbs of London for a year and come back and report about how great British democracy is. Real democracy only functions to the degree that there is a vibrant grass roots citizen action and participation in the overall function of a system: from top to bottom. In Britian this hasn't existed for a long time. A system can call itself anything it likes - even hold elections - but Britian is not a democracy any more because an entrenched oligarchy and ruling class controls every lever of the system. There are countless citizens of the UK that know this too, but Westoxicated Iranians such as you seeking the approval of your "white" ruling class patrons refuse to see it because ultimately people such as yourself are attempting to become beneficiaries of this system of special privilege and abuse. In that regard, you are merely the flip-side of the IRI supporter.

And, yes, Shi'ism - in its philosophical and mystical dimensions - is the best in the world. A culture that gave the world a Nasir Khosrow, Mulla Sadra, Mir Damad, Qazi Said Qummi, Muhsen Fayz Kashani, Siyyid Haydar Amuli, Shaykh Ahmad Ahsai and the Bab is pretty out there! French Iranologists and Islamologists of the Sorbonne, such as the late Henry Corbin or his students Christian Jambet and Piere Lory, wholeheartedly agree as well.

Freethought 111, you're absolutely correct !!

There is no democracy in Britian and shia islam is the best religion appeared on face of earth since day 1. No doubt about it.

VPOK, well documented resposes to Anglophile

The fact he is Anglophile means he is a TRAITOR to IRAN.

I agree with Divaneh

 Well said paragraph: 

It will be very sad if the closed and backward societies who do not tolerate any change in their own countries, take advantage of the tolerance of the free societies and export their backward customs to these elevated cultures.

anglophile - ZERESHK

Here is your best democracy in the world in action following a police shooting in Tottenham, London this weekend.

Britian is one of the most classist and overly bureaucratized societies on the planet, and has been since even before the Magna Carta. There is no real democracy in the UK other than for an entrenched oligarchy: the British ruling class. The British Common Law jurisprudence is one of the most confused and dangerous and blatantly unfair legal philosophies in the world (which in Britian today, in any case, has been abandoned for a jurisprudence that is about government legislative fiat, unchecked police powers and unilateralism by every branch of government). It is because of this that such communal violence like the one in Tottenham occur.

This below is the real mentality behind British "democracy"

Daijan Napoleon of Khorasan

anglophile

• 
  Who abolished slavery first (60 years before Americans did it)? Britain
  

They came up with it in the first place. So great they abolished it. But it was simply fixing an error they made.

• 
  Who initiated in the world the priciples of parliamnetary democracy (copied by Americans and all other democracies)? Britain
  

Actually that was Ancient Greece.

• 
  Who discovered, excavted and sold oil in Iran and gave tens of thousands of Iranians jobs and welfare? Britain
  

Yes they brought the curse of oil on Iran to milk it for money. I have said before Iran would have been much better off without oil and Britain.

• 
  Who helped Reza Shah to power? Britain
  

Who prevented Iran from getting a steel factory: Britain. Who forced Reza Shah out of power after WWII: Britain. Why did Iranians hate Britain and preferred the Germans? Because of what Britain did to Iran. Who broke Afghanistan and Bahrain from Iran: Britain.

• 
  Who helped Mohammad Reza Shah return to power? Britain  
  

Yes, through the illegal coup that resulted in so much hatred. It was that coup that too away any legitimacy of Mohammad Reza Shah. That resulted in people hating him. Hence the resistance and his paranoia and Savak. Resulting in IRI.

• 
  Who gave you the language you can read and write on this site? Britain
  

I managed to learn English because I needed to. There is nothing special about it. Why should I take this as a good thing? I would just as easily have learned French or German if that was the language I needed to live where I do.

By the way: If you love England so much you should get a spell checker! Your writings are filled with mistakes. At least learn how to write the language you so much love.

Dear Daijan Napoleon of Khorasan!!

Who abolished slavery first (60 years before Americans did it)? Britain

Who initiated in the world the priciples of parliamnetary democracy (copied by Americans and all other democracies)? Britain

Who discovered, excavted and sold oil in Iran and gave tens of thousands of Iranians jobs and welfare? Britain

Who helped Reza Shah to power? Britain

Who helped Mohammad Reza Shah return to power? Britain  

Who gave you the language you can read and write on this site? Britain

See this site for further education DNK (Daijan Napoleon of Khorasan) LOL

Britain?

The same one who propped up Khomeini. I hear they are having "burkini" hours at their pools where Islamic bathing suites are required. Are they the same people who exterminated the native Americans? Institutionalized slavery and racism. Sorry I have not love for Britain. Had it not been for them Iran and the world would be many times better off. Dai Jan was absolutely right; we make fun of it but there ware a lot of truth in it.

This will never happen in Britain

Just one word, or two maybe ;o)

There is an excellent documentary, not new, 2005. Was screened again in France 2 days ago in a context of the recent Norwegian mayhem.

"White terror", neonazis and far right. 

//videos.arte.tv/fr/videos/white_terror-4063426.html

Dangerous ideology. And that is what burka (not hejab) is. It's not faith, it's ideology ! 

For those who don't understand. Europe and the US share neither the same past nor the same experience. That is why the swastika and nazi salute are tolerated in the US (see the documentary, shocking!), but not in most European countries.

I personally get nervous when I hear Saudi Arabia. I'd seen it at work in Bosnia.

So, to all those identifying with the burka ideology under a disguise of humain rights, bon voyage! May we all go where we feel at home ! 

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Wait a minute, sorry they got that idea from a monarchy too, again, iran during reza shahs time.

Indeed Reza Shah the Great did ban hijab and good for him. Democracies do have to learn from Great Kings.

Ali P.

You said...

In democracies, citizens have certain fundamental, unalieanable rights:
Rights that, even when the majority gangs up against a minority, cannot
be taken away from the minority.

This is also true of monarchies, actually since the concept of inalienble human rights were first created and recorded in Iran, I would say that this is one of the finer lessons democracies gained from Irans monarchy.

Monarchies also have good things to learn from democracies and banning the burka for me is definetly one of them.  Wait a minute, sorry they got that idea from a monarchy too, again, iran during reza shahs time.

...

It's funny to see many people not living in France who does not know the French, who do not know the language and does not know the French culture and give opinions deeply superficial.Certaines personnes sont si heureux dans sa folie!

Dear Divaneh: Sepaas gozaram

And in my last word, I say that I agree with your pionts only differ in the implementation method and how to achive those objectives.

Education, in my opinion, will yield far better result then force and submission.

Cheers

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Dear Mehrdad

I agree that we have to agree to disagree ;)  i just leave this discussion with two points.

1. Responsible societies have to stop the spread of dangerous ideologies such as fascism and any other ideology that encourages segregation.

2. In the UK there have been some cases where Muslim girls refused the school uniforms that all other girls (of all other religious backgrounds) were wearing. The very same girls accuse the society of racism. If you allow a girl to dress differently out of religious conviction, why not allowing someone else to dress differently for another reason?

Dear Mehrdad

It was not 1953 it was 1979

Dear RB: I know, people who I find most things in common here

Are disagreeing with me on this one but such is life.

Regarding your points: I would have not had any issues with, if the law was established with the purpose of what you have stated, i.e. hiding identity or security or recognition, etc.

Such law otherwise would have targeted any one who reasonably covers or alter his/her identity including wearing masks, dinner-plate size sun glasses, etc.

There are publicly well known individuals who disguise themselves beyond recognition and they will not be affected by this law.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

VPK jaan: Yes and prior to that was in 1953

but that is a whole different discussion :)

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Divaneh jaan: I am afraid it is that simple to me

We either believe in freedom to choose and accept the unpleasant part that comes as a result or impose our will in order to "kill the spread of this line of thinking in the bud"

The Freedom of speech in US has brought some of unpleasantness and courts have fought cases, yet it has been argued that without it, the unpleasantness would have been far far worse. Lastly, the symbol of slavery will be fought far more effectively with education rather then force. You may think that by forceful removal of this, thing may change inside the house? Chances are the slavery will only increase but flaming the fire of the extremist.

So, lets just agree to disagree on this one.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Sorry to disagree, Mehrdad jaan

But deliberately hiding one's identity from fellow members of a society, which can have negative consequences for them, is not a "right" and certainly not one enshrined in the human rights charter. Just as it is not a right for me to hide a weapon (not without a permit at least) from members of a society I'm a part of, to use a hypothetical example.

And while we are on the subject of "rights", what about people having the right to be able see and recognise other people who they need or have to interact and deal with in whatever kind of situation? A simple example, if I have an automobile accident with another car whose driver is a Burka wearing person, how an earth would I know if she/he is the true owner of the car and with correct the documentation etc? What is the accident leads to a court case and proof is required about identities?

There are countless other situations I can name where the wearing of Burka can infringe on the right of others who have/need to deal with a burka wearer.

Even if set aside the question of forcible wearing of burkas (and assume all Muslim women wear the thing voluntarily) in a modern society the wearing of this anachronistic embarrassment is simply not workable and for the women who wear it, next to impossible to be productive members of that society.

It is not that simple Mehrdad

This is not a simple case of a dress choice. You portray this as if it is the case of her going to a clothes shop and choosing between Burqa and short skirt. It was forced on her when she was a child and she is conditioned that way to wear the symbol of women slavery.

Also notice that this is not just a choice of clothes. With the dress goes a violent ideology that sees women as inferior. French are right to kill the spread of this line of thinking in the bud. She has no right to promote her beliefs in the very same way that fascists are not allowed to promote their line of thinking. You let her to have her ways and, as I said, in a few years instead of a few hundred Muslim girls who are out of the mainstream, it will be a few thousands.

The assimilation is not as simple as you make it. Any sociologist will tell you that people can best relate to others who are like them. It is she who should change in order to integrate, and not the host society. Again it is not a simple case of clothes and people know this. They now know how deeply religious Muslims such as her disapprove of the Western culture.

It will be very sad if the closed and backward societies who do not tolerate any change in their own countries, take advantage of the tolerance of the free societies and export their backward customs to these elevated cultures.

Mehrdad

You are voicing your opinion and others are voicing theirs. I just wish that in Iran we were able to do the same thing. We used to be when Shapur Bakhtiyar was PM. But that was not good enough.

Some people wanted more. They wanted Islamic law. Now we do not get to debate this in Iran. Would it not be nice if he had remained PM and we had the right to have this debate in our real home?

Divaneh Aziz: I think we need to establish one thing first

If we are to debate this issue and that is, do we believe in freedom and the right to dissent?  If we do and these are the foundations for our belief, then I do see this law as an infringement on women's right and therefore disagree with it, condemn it.

Here are some quick points to your comments, [respectfully]

"These are the countries where women have fought for their rights and now almost won it"

Agreed, only just to find themselves that some of their rights is being taken away even in France. Remember I am arguing for self electing use of Burke, not when is forced upon them by family members.

"Also, don't you think that this woman has a duty to assimilate in the French society"

Yes, but assimilate in French society ought not to be based on dress codes. Should other minorities such has Hindu be outcast for their attire?

"What if she wants to influence other Muslim girls? Should she be allowed to promote her ways"

Isn't this part of a FREE society, to have the freedom to express yourself? If she is not allowed to promote her ways, wouldn’t' she turn to other alternative ways which often times happen in a closed society (i.e. violance)? I am not even sure if you really believe in this statement since I know and have read your past comments and strongly believe you are not for promotion of closed society.

"She can try to change the law but not by making a scene in the street"

Isn't that what she is doing exactly the same thing, an attempt to bring this discriminatory (in her view) law into public discussion? Are we to condemn all civil disobedience and if so, what other alternative do we have?

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Dear Mehrdad

I think you misunderstood my point. I was trying to say that Burqa ban and women rights go together. In the very same way that the opposite is true. My question to you and the lady in the video is this: Why there are no women rights in the countries that women wear burqa?

It is very simple. She is not a human. You don't give human rights to a walking cone. An object. A property of man. Such exhibition of trampled human rights is not acceptable in France and most European countries. These are the countries where women have fought for their rights and now almost won it. Where women have suffered the male chauvinism in different ways in the past. We know in many of these countries women had no voting rights a 100 years ago. That is why they are right to see this as an insult and deplore her for accepting to be inferior.

Also, don't you think that this woman has a duty to assimilate in the French society? How can she integrate with this type of dress? Do you blame those who do not want her to teach their children? Or employers who don't want to employ her? is it not the government duty to work towards the inegration of all its citizens?

What if she wants to influence other mulsim girls? Should she be allowed to promote her ways? We know that there is plenty of oil money available from likes of Saudi Arabia for the promotion of Islam. Should these countries allow that? Just look at Pakistan as an example of a country that allowed promotion of hard core Islam by Saudi satellites. Today it may be a few hundred but in a few years it will be a few thousands.

Unlike what you think, my comments that she has equal rights to men does not mean that she can wear a neqab. Men are not allowed to do that either. Now that is equality. Her rights are limited to those that society gives her, no more. She can try to change the law but not by making a scene in the street. Imagine the mayhem if everyone who parked illegally wanted to fight police.

I don't think this was to please the right wing either. The parliament has voted on this. The ban was enforced in Belgium before France. Was that to please the right wing? Italy seems to be the next and Holland is to follow. I will bet you that the Scandinavians will follow. This is the free world standing up to a backward culture whose values are in conflict with the host societies.

Europeans are not religious and this is not only against Islam. In the UK (one of the mildest) you still cannot exhibit religious symbols in the place of work or education. There have been high profile cases where people have been prosecuted for wearing crosses that could be viewed at the place of their work. They have suffered the religious extremism and managed to bit the devil and are very right to keep it in chain. I wish UK would follow France but know that in its normal way it will be the last European country to do so.