Remembering Mosaddeq

Iraj Afshar, Jalil Bozorgmehr and Mohammad Mosaddeq


Remembering Mosaddeq
by Fariba Amini

“This building was constructed in 1334 thanks to the generosity of Mohammad Hasan Shamshiri.* All the money received from regular patients who come here for treatment will be used to treat those who are poor and cannot pay for such services. From these revenues, nothing will be taken to compensate the owners and the administrators.” -- Mohammad Mosaddeq, inscribed on a plaque at Najmieh Hospital in Tehran

On the anniversary of the August 19, 1953, coup, which is forever etched in our memory, what better way than to remember Iran’s democratic leader by reading an account filled with anecdotes of his personal and political life as told to his lawyer, Jalil Bozorgmerh in a book called Taqrirat-e Mosaddeq dar Zendan* (Mosaddeq’s Prison Notes) compiled by J. Bozorgmehr and edited by the late great Iranologist, Dr. Iraj Afshar.

I have taken the liberty of selecting and translating passages from the book. In as much as possible I have tried to stay true to the original text. Published two years after the Revolution, it is the personal account of the key moments in the life of a unique man and a distinguished politician, including the events that led to his downfall.

Introduction by Iraj Afshar

“There is no doubt that the late Dr. Mohammad Mosaddeq left a lasting mark on Iran’s history and his government opened an important chapter in the political development of Iran. Thus, to judge him correctly and without bias, the many aspects of his life must be understood, and for this we need ample genuine documents.

Among these documents, which I have the honor and privilege to present to the readers, is a series of assorted notes gathered by Colonel Jalil Bozorgmehr, his honest lawyer during the military court proceedings. He undertook this task with immense courage while visiting the late Mosaddeq in prison. Dr. Mosaddeq reread the notes but in order not to make changes in the text made only a few marginal corrections so as not to cause a problem for Bozorgmehr.

Mr. Bozogmehr kept these notes from the hands of the political police in different places for 26 years and presented them to me for publication. I am indebted to him for his friendship and kindness honoring me with this task, allowing me to do the right thing towards one of the most exceptional political figures of Iran.

Colonel Bozorgmehr’s notes did not follow the sequence of events. Every day, he would write what he heard from the Dr. and would jot it down later from memory. I only tried to put them in correct chronological order. I hope it will be acceptable to those who read the book. May Mosaddeq’s soul be content.” – Los Angeles, 11 Farvardin 1359, Iraj Afshar.

Mosaddeq’s appreciative letter to Bozorgmehr

“I want to convey from far away my greetings to my friend Mr. Jalil Bozorgmehr and to thank him for his courageous effort in representing me during the military trial; I looked forward to seeing him during the time I was in prison. After the trial, I was saddened not to be able to see him. It was indeed an unpleasant period which I endured, and now that 12 years have passed since my imprisonment, I cannot leave Ahmad Abad and am not allowed to see anyone except for my children.

Since I will not live to see him [Bozorgmehr] again, I want to convey my sincere appreciation and bestow all my blessings to him in helping a compatriot. I ask the almighty God to protect him and his family.” -- Mohammad Mosaddeq

Bozorgmehr’s note

“Dr. Mosaddeq did not want to talk much about himself but I wanted to engage him so I would ask him questions. He would always say whatever the people need to know about me, they already know and they will know.” -- Jalil Bozogmehr

Passages from the book:

Studies abroad

In 1909 I started on a journey via Rasht and Enzeli to study in Paris. I took my brother Mr. Abolhassan Diba (Seqqet el-Dowleh) to study in a boarding school.

I had studied so much during 1909-1910 that I got very sick. I remember I went to see Professor Haim, a renowned French physiologist; when he saw the test results of my stomach acidity, he was astonished to see how high they were. He told me that I was the first patient whose stomach was so messed up. He told me that I had to take a 3-month rest. I told him that, unfortunately, I could not as it was my last year of studies. But he insisted that if I did not listen, nature would force me into doing so. I continued going to school but sometimes it was unbearable for me to sit for a long time and listen to the professor’s lectures.

Village life

I remember staying in convalescences in the village of Afjeh. During my time there, an old friend Mirza Abdollah Khan Mirpanj was with me. He was a very honest man. One day, he asked me so what other thing did you learn during your time in Paris besides your studies? I said, like what? He said, like cooking. I told him I learned how to cook a little bit. I know how to make crème renversée, or what they call pudding. I decided to make it for my friend. After two days of boiling milk and eggs and trying to cook it under the fire I had made, I failed. It was during lunch the next day and after nothing changed in the texture of the milk that Mirpanj told me, if your studies are anything like your cooking, God have mercy on this country and the people [!]


I had been invited to attend a meeting of a society in Tehran. By chance, Mr. Ali Akbar Dehkhoda was there as well. We worked together for a while and we liked each other and trusted one another. The meetings were held in the Seraj Mosque. One day, during am outing, he said I have told the people that you would be coming to the meeting, which will be held in a house across form the mosque. I said, ok we can go together. I found out that the owner of the house was the late Mirza Alimohammad Dowlat Abadi who was one of the leaders of the E`tedal Party. After a few discussions, I found out that they had invited me to become a member. Since I did not want to upset Mr. Dehkhoda, I did not say anything and did not decline. While I was in Europe I did not know much about what was happening in Iran when it came to politics. I was just tending to my studies. I did not know the different parties, and it was only because I trusted Mr. Dehkhoda that I had accepted the invitation. They brought the Koran so that I would swear on it. But I declined. My friendship with Mr. Dehkhoda resulted in my becoming a member of the E`tedal Party; I worked with Mr. Dehkhoda for a while; since he would occasionally be late for meetings, (extended laughter) we would go to his house so that he could be on time.


I spent a few days in Bombay [Mumbai]. Some Iranian residents of India came to visit me. Among them, Prince Soleyman Mirza and `Isa Mirza, who had both been imprisoned by the British government, came to see me. Vossuq el-Dowleh was also in the hotel Taj Mahal where I was staying. We did not meet or cross paths, for obvious reasons.


In Qavam el-Saltaneh’s cabinet, I was the minister of finance. I wanted to make reforms in the Ministry of Finance and fired a few people. When Journalists wanted to write negatively about me, they would first write in favor of Sardar-e Sepah who would then say they didn’t say anything negative.

Another time, Qavam called me in and told me that because the country was in financial distress, they wanted to sell bonds. Since people trusted me, I, along with [Sydney]Armitage Smith who was a British financial advisor, should sign my name for this reason. I got up and said I would never do such thing. As long as Armitage Smith was in charge of our finances, I would not agree. Then, they tried to bring an advisor from the United States. I said this will not work either. First you must prove that Iranians cannot take care of the financial affairs of their own country. This is like they used to say that an Iranian cannot run the oil production and he can only make water pitchers.

The Soviets

The abolition of the law of capitulation in Azerbaijan that I had ordered while I was minister of foreign affairs resulted in a continued discussion with the Soviet Ambassador in Tehran in 1302. He wrote a letter to me in which he reminded me that there was no such law between Iran and the Soviet Union. You must tell us under which jurisdiction should Soviet citizens be tried in Iran, he asked. It was obvious that all this pressure was because of what I had done in Azerbaijan.

Treaty of 1919 and Vossuq

God only knows that I was the first person who was against the treaty [of 1919, which gave partial rights to the English to govern Iran, making Great Britain the sole foreign power that mattered in Iran]. When Vossuq el-Dowleh became head of the ministers he was given a lot of money to spend. He then would buy off people and give them salaries. We worked with Samsam el-Dowleh against Vossuq. One day, Vossuq came to me and said tell me what you are up to? I said that I had no plans; that I was going to Europe. I started writing against the treaty when I was in Switzerland. I was in Neuchâtel, which was a remote place. I had a room on the 3rd story of a building. I could not make a stamp there thus I had to go to Bern and make a rubber stamp in the name of the committee I had formed : Comité Resistance des Nations. At that time, the League of Nations was meeting in Versailles. I wrote my objections and protest letters and would send them to Nayereh Soltan, and he would then send it the League of Nations and to the press. The English were watching.

Ahmad Shah

They took Ahmad Shah to England where they had a big party for him. Nosrat el-Dowleh wrote a declaration, praising the treaty Vossuq el-Dowleh had signed and they wanted Ahmad Shah to read it. One of the worst things Ahmad Shah ever did was to appoint Vossuq el- Dowleh as the head of ministers without a vote in the Majlis. And he [Vossuq] in turn, signed the treaty. Ahmad Shah became quite upset after this event. While in London, the British wanted him to admit that he was okay with this action but he did not agree. This guy, Naser el-Molk, insisted that Ahmad Shah accept the terms, but he did not accept to read the statement during dinner. It was because of this that the late Ahmad Shah was dismissed.


Qavam came to me and said you have done good work while you were in Shiraz, but we also noticed that you have spent your own money; you should be compensated. So he gave me a check for 10,000 tumans as a token. I told him that it was not necessary, no thank you. If I have done anything, it was for my country. I am not needy. I have a livelihood in Tehran. If I have had financial loss it is my own doing. It is not necessary to pay me. If I had taken that money I am sure I would have been put in jail.


They [the British] had spent quite a bit of money on the police in the South. The British consul in Shiraz told me that they gave one hundred Lacks to Farmanfarma. Each Lack was one hundred thousand Rupees, so a total sum of five to six hundred thousand rupees. When I returned to Tehran I asked Farmanfarma. He said it wasn’t just him, but Qavam Shirazi also received money. When Forughi was in office, the British sent a letter to him and he accepted their terms but they immediately charged Iran by deducting it from the oil revenues. Forughi was not the type to take money but he wanted to stay in power and get his monthly salary. Whatever they wanted, he would do. Vossuq el-Dowleh would not give any concessions until he received money; sometimes if he didn’t get his share, he would not give concessions [to the British].

The Persian Gulf islands

We wanted to send troops to the islands of Sheykh Sho`eyb and Abu Musa in the Persian Gulf but the English were against it. They said these two islands belong to the Emirate of Sharjah. They had control over Sharjah and wanted to add the two islands to the Sheikhdom. Because of this [at that time Dr. Mosaddeq was minister of foreign affairs] I had some heated exchanges with Sir Percy Loraine (who was by the way a polite man). He told me, do you know who you are dealing with? I said, yes, what can you do to me? The only thing you can do is kill me. That’s all. By the way, what happened to the fate of the islands? [Asking Bozorgmehr]

An interesting story

One of the most interesting stories I remember is about Eyrum who was the head of police. One day, the Shah told him, I have heard that lots of people go to Naser el-Din Shah’s tomb to say their prayers. Do something about it. That evening, Eyrum was a guest at Haj Hasan Aqa Malek’s (in Emamzadeh Qasem). This property has its own story; it belonged to his [Haj Hasan’s] father who was a real crook. He had gotten the property in a bet with my uncle Farmanfarma. When Haj Hasan saw that Irum was in deep thought, he asked, what is the matter? Colonel Eyrum told him what the Shah had said. Haj Hasan then said, give me some money and I will find the solution. Haj Hasan’s solution was if they buried Reza Shah next to Naser el-Din Shah, nobody will pay anymore visits to the tomb.

Foreign diplomats

In my first encounters with foreign diplomats first I would meet them with ultimate cordiality and in proper attire and would accompany them all the way to the doorstep. But then after the initial meetings, I greeted them in bed in my private room. For a couple of years, I only had one suit to wear. At The Hague and at the Security Council, I would wear the same clothing, also at private functions. Ahmad [Dr. Mosaddeq’s son] had a formal suit, which he had brought from Europe, and I wore that when I went to see his Majesty (before I became Prime Minister) and during the opening of the Majlis. I had paid 600 tumans for the suit. I was very conscientious to wear formal attire when visiting his Majesty. You know it is easier to stay in bed and take care of business that way. One aspect of it is you are not burdened to go to formal functions.

Majlis and the people

Sir, for a politician there are three things that are important: to have enough courage to finish the job; to have enough selflessness to make sure everything will be done; and to make the right decision at the right moment. If I had not decided to go to the army headquarters on 9th of Esfand and to the Majlis as well, my time would have been up. It is all God’s will. I heard later that after leaving Kakh Street [where Dr. Mosaddeq’s house was located], they had called abroad that the bird left the cage. I came in front of the Majlis and said I will speak where the people are. I was not afraid. Some five to six thousand people gathered and I spoke there. They attempted to shoot at me but the bullet hit poor Khajeh Nuri; I passed out and ended up in a coffee shop.

Bozorgmehr writes: “I was a student in law school. I remember the incident very well. It was when Mosaddeq had insisted on taking Seyyed Mohammad Tadayon [a one time minister of education] to trial and members of the Majlis were supporting Tadayon. He called the proceedings a dozdgah [den of thieves] rather a dadgah [place of justice]. He then came out of the Majlis where he had not been allowed to speak, and spoke among the people without fearing for his life.”

An economy without oil

Sir, if they had allowed us to continue our work for a year and finish the reforms we intended to undertake with an economy not dependent solely on oil, and an acceptable budget, peoples’ lives would have improved. Any reasonable person has a personal and a social aim in life. His personal aim is to have bread, to have prosperity and health for himself and his family. His social aim in life is freedom and prosperity for his country.

Sir, it is difficult to stay clean and pure. What one must do is to forgo a lot of things and to live frugally, which I have tried to do.

On the rights of the people

When you let the people speak out and criticize, the government cannot do what it wants. The government must listen to the desires and wishes of the people. The very existence of my government was based upon the needs of the nation. Therefore you could not stop people from expressing their views and strangle them.

Kakh Street and the army headquarters

They went to bring the car to take me. I got into the car and went towards my house. There were a few people running after the car. The police around Heshmat el-Dowleh stopped them. I went directly home. I later heard that they wanted to get rid of me there. But I had already left the scene. Sometimes God does miracles. At home, I heard some commotion. Someone had gone up on the tree next to Ahmad’s house and shown them a knife saying that with this we will decapitate Mosaddeq. Ahmad’s household was in turmoil. Ahmad came and told me, you should go to Shemiran, it is dangerous for you to stay here.

Dr. Fatemi was there too. I told Ahmad, why Shemiran? For what, so that they will then say, the Prime Minister and his minister of national defense minister have fled the scene out of fear. It is then that I said let us go to the army headquarters.

The trial

Bozorgmehr says: “Whoever saw me during the proceedings would tell me why don’t you use this article or that article of the law or mention this and that. When I told Dr. Mosaddeq, he said,” “they think everything at this trial is done according to law. They don’t know that even the few things we say, we do it like magicians.”

In military prison

Bozorgmehr writes: “I went to see him at around 4:30. He looked tired and upset. His eyes were hollow. After I said hello, I asked: How are you Sir? He said I am still here. I then told him that he looked very tired. He said, I have been very upset for three nights and did not sleep last night at all. I had a “crise” (breakdown). I had to take some sedatives, I feel better now. Those few days had coincided with the time twenty foreign experts among them seven Englishmen who had been at Abadan oil refinery had arrived in Iran. The Senate elections had been concluded and the 45 million dollar loan to Iran had already been used up [this was close to the first of the Iranian calendar year]. All these were worries had kept Dr. Mosaddeq awake and made him think of everything he had tried to do [for Iran].”


Colonel Farroknia came to see me. I was not feeling well. He said do you want to write something? I said, what shall I write? I already said it during the trial. I will not ask the Shah for amnesty. Amnesty is only given to criminals…….

And what followed is part of our anguished history: After the Shah returned to power, Mosaddeq was tried for “treason” and sentenced to two years in prison. He spent the rest of his life in exile, never allowed to leave his humble residence in Ahmad Abad. He died in Tehran, in Najmieh hospital, endowed and named after his mother, the daughter of Mozaffaredin Shah, an exceptional woman and a philanthropist. Dr. Mosaddeq had cancer of the mouth. He had refused to leave Iran for treatment, saying that Iranian doctors were as good as foreign doctors and it would be an insult to them.

The Shah left his homeland in the midst of a Revolution he had only recently come to recognize as one. Even those who had brought him to power did not let him remain in their respective countries- but a few weeks- while he was ill with cancer and dying. He died in exile in a foreign land just like his father before him. The fate of Iran changed forever…. A new regime that ostracized both Mosaddeq and the Shah eventually came to power.

Az Mast Ke bar Mast….

*Haj Hasan Shamshiri was an illiterate but successful bazaari and a sympathizer of the National Front. He owned and operated the famous Chelo-kababi Shamshiri in Tehran’s bazaar. Pious and generous, he gave a large sum of money to help build and finish a wing of the hospital. My father was the intermediary between Dr. Mosaddeq and Shamshiri in all the transactions involving Najmieh hospital while representing Dr. Mosaddeq as his personal lawyer.

* Jalil Bozorgmehr, Taqrirat Mosaddeq dar Zendan, edited by Iraj Afshar, Tehran, Iran Zamin publishing house, 1359/1981.


Recently by Fariba AminiCommentsDate
Forgotten Captive
Nov 27, 2012
The Bride and the Dowry
Nov 27, 2012
Enemy Number One?
Sep 07, 2012
more from Fariba Amini

Good point

by Arj on

Excellent point dear Parham. In light of Stalin's death, it did not make much of difference in terms of "Soviet take over threat." But it indeed emboldened the Americans and Brits to seize the moment without having to worry about any Soviet retaliation -- not only in Iran, but to their interests elsewhere in the world!

Fariba Amini

two points

by Fariba Amini on

Indeed. Ms. Sarshar is a professional journalist and I liked her interview on VOA. She was articulate, unbiased and very professional.


Souso was not murdered by IRI: No one has provent that.  It was a criminal matter. She had sold her antiques to some unsavory dealers and ....  However, one can definitely say that since the downfall of the Shah, crime has been on the rise in alarming numbers.




Ms. Homa Sarshar's book and Shaban Jafari.....

by Aria on

Ms. Homa Sarshar is a very smart and seasoned journalist.  When she interviews Shaban it is obvious who the real intellectual wrestler is.   On one hand you have Ms. Sarshar, a highly experienced and seasoned journalist and on the other hand you have Shaban, a simple and an uneducated man.   So, in this intellectual match it is obvious who is already subdued, Shaban.

The book is very interesting on many different levels and is a great read.

Ms. Sarshar uses all her skills and smarts with all her journalistic know-how to get to the bottom of why Shaban had sided with the anti-Mossadegh forces.   She specifically and deliberately tries to establish any connection, overt and covert, between Shaban and the U.K. agents.  She does her best to establish if he had indeed received any money from the British for his activities and involvement.   But, she fails to do so.

When Homa Sarshar pushes him further as to why he had sided with the Shah, Shaban responds by saying that he was an athlete, Varzeshkar, and Shah himself was athlete and liked athletes and that is why he sided with the Shah, other than the fact that he liked the Shah as the King and didn’t like people to insult him.  As simple as his answer was that may make one laugh - in the context and exchange of the clever questioning of a seasoned journalist trying like a good lawyer to get to the bottom of an important historical fact, and his simplistic and nonsensical response – his honesty cannot be easily dismissed.  Ms. Sarshar goes around the topic many times from many different angles, hoping to get something different.  But, Shaban’s answer is the same and does not change.

He never received any money either directly, indirectly or through third party from anyone.  So, unlike the Rashidian brothers, which is a well known fact, who were British agents , Shaban was not.

We don’t need to invite the likes of him to our garden parties or hang out with him in our Rumi gatherings, because we find his personality appalling.  You can still call him  names………But, we cannot say that he got paid by the British, directly or indirectly.



Re Stalin's death

by Parham on

If one looks, one will see that there was a void created in the USSR's internal and external politics by Stalin's death on 5 March 1953, which lasted until 1956-57 when the expansionist policies of the Soviet Union picked up and took a new direction. The coup in Iran happened in August 1953. The Americans actually took advantage of the void to make their own mark. The East-West rivalry and the cold war that ensued may not have started by the invasion of Hungary in 1958 as generally believed in the West, but by the "overtaking" of Iran through its oil in 1953.
This is a fact that has been overlooked by many, including Abbas Milani in his latest book, "The Shah".

"Zob-shodeh" indeed!


Re ex-commies

by Arj on

Dear Aria, you are proving my point. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Extremist idealists, even when switch sides, will remain extremist idealists, only their idols and masters would replace! A Pol Pot or Stalin apologist once having an epiphany, chances are, he/she becomes an apologist for the criminal entities of the oppsite side!

And regarding the death of Stalin, it's stating the obvious that it did not make a significant difference in the strategic posture of the Soviets. The point here ia the excuse of the "threat of Soviet take over" used by defenders of the 28 Mordad coup, is unfounded and used as a smoke screen for the CIA/MI6 operation! Otherwise the issue of Stalin's death -- which due to the mutual strategic understanding of the Soviet-U.S. is rather irrelevant -- was brought up in the context of the 1953 Iran, not Hungary of 1956 or 1978 Afghanistan!.

The fact that Iran possesed a vast wealth of oil and gas is all the more reason for the Soviets to think twice before any take over attempt (for Iran's oil was under the contract of the West and such an act would've been tantamount to initiating the WWIII)! Nonetheless, regardless of its lack of wealth, Afghanistan at the time (under Mohammad Zaher Shah and Davoud Khan) was under the influence of the Soviets!


Stalin's death......

by Aria on

Good friends:

With Stalin’s death in early 50s the Soviet expansionism did not die.

Soviet tanks invaded Hungary in 1958 and crushed its uprising.

Soviet tanks invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968.

Soviet tanks rolled down into our neighboring country, Afghanistan, in 1978.  Please keep in mind that Afghanistan has neither our oil, nor our access to the Persian Gulf.  So, the strategic value of Iran was much greater than any of the above countries to the Soviets.

So, good friends, who state that with the death of Stalin the Soviet expansionist aspirations died are simply wrong.

The threat of Soviet takeover in 1953 in Iran was as real.


Dr Milani, to this date is still a total disgrace

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

He is too deceitful in his works to be worthy of praise, even if he gave up communism, it didn't make him a more honest person.

This took 30 mins to read, but the critique of his work while 10 years old today, gets to the heart of this Milan's work.




Ms. or Mr. Arj - about Dr. Mirfetros and Dr. Milani - Ex. comm.

by Aria on

No doubt that UK, US and other countries always have their own interests, which they pursue.

But, I would not call Mr. Milani, Mr. Mirfetros or Ms. Azar Nafici apologists too quickly.  That dismisses the other possibility.   Maybe they just had a sincere change of heart.  They should have that right.


Maybe when they heard about the Killing Fields of Cambodia at first they did not believe it.  But, when they saw the Fields on the news they asked themselves as to how a Sorbonne educated intellectual, Pol Pot, Brother No. 1, could do this, under the name of Chairman Mao’s doctrine?      Maybe they had a change of heart then.


Maybe when they were following their Vietcong heroes (as independent communists), after the fall of Saigon, they saw that within months if not weeks all the Vietcong officials were first marginalized, then stepped aside by North Vietnamese generals, and finally disappeared from the new Vietnam’s political scene.    Maybe that is when they realized that this is the faith of the independent left.     Maybe that is when they started asking themselves a lot of questions and began having a change of heart.


Maybe when they heard and realized that in the closed country that they once considered one of the greatest communist societies, Albany, Anvar-Khajeh had a book from which people were allowed to pick  the name of their children, they realized that there is no freedom in Communism.  Maybe that is when they had a change of heart.


Maybe when the Berlin Wall fell and they came face to face with the realities of the Eastern block countries and saw the misery of the daily life, they felt shameful about how on Telegraph Road in Downtown Berkeley for years they had, blindly, talked about the great lives in Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Checkoslavakia.  Maybe that is when they reassessed the old school of thought and chose to have a change of heart.


Maybe when they read the NKVD and KGB files when they became public they realized the magnitude of the atrocities in the re-education camps of Soviet Union.   Maybe that is when their belief systems  shrank and became smaller and they began having crisis of conscience.   Maybe that is when they found the courage to admit that they were wrong and had change of hearts.


Maybe when they read the Stasi files and realized that their once-upon-a-time freedom fighters from Carlos,  Japanese Red Army, Abu Nedal, Abu-this or Abu-that were agents of the Communism in the name of the Palestinian cause, they had a change of heart.  Maybe it was then.


Maybe when they saw their friends, comrades, leaders, mentors, students chose to go under Khomeini’s umbrella under the banner of anti-imperialist crusade but only to be slaughtered in Evin and be buried in mass graves of Khavaran, they had a change of heart.

Crisis of conscience is not a bad thing. Lucky those who are courageous enough to have it.    It is never too late to change, but it takes courage to do so.  


So, I would not call Mr. Milani, Mr. Mirfetros or Ms. Nafisi apologists or opportunists, too quickly.   

I credit them for their courage that they admit that they were on the wrong side of the history. 

Former comrades of these individuals are harsh with them because what former comrades preach, tolerance, they do not practice, that their former friends simply chose to abandon a bankrupt ideology, Communism.


It is not the first time that the likes of Mr. Milani and Mr. Mirfetros are attacked or accused of……..getting paid by the Queen or compensating for the grant, or etc.

Just a quick look at our own recent history shows that those communists who changed sides because they realized that they were wrong, they, too,  were badly accused  of and attacked by their former comrades here are a few:


Dr. Kourosh Lashaie – a young and very bright medical doctor who could have had a lucrative medical career in any European Country went into an underground existence in Kurdistan as part of “Sazeman Engelabi Tudeh.”   Those who know him knew what caliber of a fine human being he was – highly intelligent, decent, spoke several languages, but above all dedicated and honest.   His revolutionary friends in Europe considered him a mentor.   But, when he changed sides they all trashed him.    They all criticized him.  They fabricated lies about him that he had mental disorder and else……….When a few years later, after the revolution, a former fellow comrade, a Mr. Hamid Shokat, while interviewing him for a book he was writing about him, he asked him as to why he changed sides.  Dr. Lashaie responded,” I realized that I was wrong and had a change of heart and opinion about my political activities………..” 

Parviz Nik-khah – a man of highest integrity, a top-notch student, and icon and an ideal in the Iranian left’s circles, until he too realized that he was wrong.   Former friends trashed him unlike any other…….


Dr. Jahanshahlu – Pishevari’s right hand man.  He was a scientist and came from a wealthy feudal family background.  He gave up the family background, wealth and future opportunities and became a hardcore Marxist and joined Pishevari.   When Pishevari’s puppet government collapsed, he escaped to Soviet Union with many others from Pishevari’s government/army.   In Soviet Union, unlike other immigrants/escapees from Iran who ended up in miserable lives, he had a different life. The Soviet intelligence, due to his smarts and capabilities, allowed him to pursue higher studies in his own field together with advanced studies in Marxism.   He, unlike other Iranians from Pishevari’s government, was among the very handful who had a good life there.  But, it did not take him long to see the real face of  communism that it was very different than how he had read it in book.    He wrote a letter to the late Shah and apologized for his involvement in Pishevari’s puppet government.  The Shah pardoned him and he came back to Iran.   He has written two volumes, titled, “ Ma va Biganegan,” where he shows how Stalin had ordered a Mir-Jafar-e-Bagherof, head of Soviet Azarbaiijan’s commnunist party and his interior minister, a General Ateshio-kov to draw up plans for seizing Iran’s Azarbaiijan as part of a bigger plan to takeover Iran.   Dr. Jahanshahlou’s “Ma va Biganegan,” although an old print, is a must for those who care to learn more about Soviets’ specific plans for a takeover of Iran.  Mr. Jahanshahlou, also, was not immune from attacks from his former comrades who called him names and fabricated lies about him.

So, this tradition of not tolerating those who change their opinions and belief systems has a long history in the Iranian left. 


So, respectfully, I disagree with the notion that Dr. Milani and Dr. Mirfetro are apologists. 



by Arj on

Dear AP..., Thank you, I kind of got my answer!

Dear Parham, excellent decription of "Shahollai!" Indeed, while not all monarchists are one, the ones that are, are equivalent of "zob shodegan dar Velayat" who believe that nothing HIM Seyyed Ali does can be wrong!


Arj, that's fine.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

I'm not attached to anyone getting the point of view or not,

Like neitzche and goethe, some people will get it.  If you have any other questios just ask. 

maziar 58


by maziar 58 on

there is a book published by FARHANG  in montreal

Dr. Mossadegh assib shenasi yek shekast          

By A.Mirfetroos

was sent to me by a friend just to read

** an Iran lover with no political affiliation         Maziar



by Arj on

Dear AP..., with all due respect, I couldn't make sense of it!



by Parham on

You could very well be right in your guess. I'd still rather think he was just taken by surprise. When I think that he did all he did and that he might have given up all that due to a belief in non-violence, something doesn't feel right. I'd say even someone who has the strongest belief in non-violence would know that if he gives up at that point, he has put the future of an entire nation in jeopardy, so he wouldn't/shouldn't budge.
But then that's my opinion.



by Parham on

Aria, I'm sorry you should feel undignified by my comments, but these discussions are nothing new to We've been having them since the dawn of ages, just that you seem to be coming back with the same thoughts and arguments that have been repeated here (and replied to) over and over, so you may get a little different approach in the replies.
As far as Shahollahis go, I don't know if you're one or not, but those are people who try to prove the Shah was right at any cost, usually at the price of making themselves (and the Shah!) pass for the stupidest creatures that ever walked the earth.
So it's a common saying nowadays.


Arj, complexity of analysis and thought is essential to

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Solving Irans problems.

The Shah involved the USA into Iran on the best terms for Iranians.  Iran in the 70's had contracts where 75% were for Iran and 25% were for ENI and other western companies, by 1979 Iran would be 100% and only allow them to buy the oil.

Furthermore when Shah brought in a prime minister to industrialize Iran and provide good paying jobs and education to people the p.m. was terrored by Mullahs with US/UK support, the next p.m. was hand picked by the US admin with the specfic job of making sure iran no longer pursued this goal.  A few years later Shah picked another p.m. and got the project moving with the USSR in Esfahan, while none of the other countries would complete the contracts they had signed over a history of 40 years even before ww2.

Shah just told them, we'll be happy to buy from you, but will go with USSR in the meanwhile.  This was torpedoed in every way possible from no salaries to workers to writing laws to disable the steel industry, but shah eventually won the battle and lost the war in 1 move.

I heard from Dennis Wright the Former ambassdor to Iran at a dinner that the shah accomplished Iranian Steel with the total opposition of the USA/UK/France/Germany and Japan.  And I personally told him on more than one occasion in the early 70's that if he completes this, he will lose his crown. 

So yes I fully support the Shah, he pursued freedom for iranians and was putting them on a path towards democracy within a generation on Irans terms.

This is not a leader that is betraying the Iranian people, but acting based on law and defending Irans rights, without compromising to the USA or UK.

Does that clarify the first part of your question?

The 2nd part.

In all honesty, I don't see the monarchy coming back anytime soon, the USA and UK learned their lesson and fear the word Shah worse than cancer, they have the levers/resources to manufacture consent not us.

However, its important the choice is protected and defended for Iranians in the future, because change always happens and the future of the USA/UK itself is not guaranteed, who knows where they'll be in 20 years time.

Under the right circumstances, not the way the world is now no doubt, A liberation of Iran is possible.  I don't support monarchy because I see it as a winner.  I support it because based on my analysis i see it as the only path for freedom for Iranians and that matters alot me.





by MM on

The 1906 constitution gave the king and a religious body (similar to negahbaan) the right to intervene, some of which were discussed in David ET's blog (IRAN CONSTITUTIONS: From Islamic Monarchy to Republic! (I & II)).  So, Mosaddegh, in my opinion was asking for more than just following of the 1906 constituion; rightly so, BTW.

I have also read that Mosaddegh refused to counter the coupe by ordering his supporters to come out.  I do not know whether this is due to the depth of JM support amongst the population (as Bakhtiar eluted to in his interview).  But, my gut feeling is that Mosaddegh thought that this conflict could be ressolved by non-violent means, similar to the events in India in 1948.  I could be wrong.

PS, with Irene approaching, we expect lots of blackouts, so I may not be able to see responses soon!



by Arj on

Let's see what you are saying here; you blieve that foreign powers such as U.S. and British are threats to our territorial integrity and independance. Yet you support their interference in our national affairs in order to re-instate Shah?! Doesn't that contradict your whole point?!

Moreover, if democracy in not the way to go, then what is your solution for our current problems? If Shahanshah supposed to be revived, how are you going to sell that to the society? In the absence of elections or a refeerandum, how are you going to determine what form of government people should pick? You're not suggesting a coup, are you?!


Aynak... Not everyone agree with your analysis

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Some people like myself feel 1953 was not a coup, but a removal supported by the constitution.  That mossadegh refusing to step down was the coup after the shah using his lawful powers.

That Shah realizing he did not have the power on his own to enforce the law and remove Mossadegh, made an alliance with the usa, some like myself feel this was the most patriotic thing to do for Iran and laid the foundation for the progress that Iranians enjoyed before the people of iran and the usa betrayed him in 1979.




by Arj on

Dear Aynak, it's ironic that Mosadegh had to be tried for "treason" on the mere, unsubstantiated allegations that he might have not resisted a hypothetical Soviet take over. Yet Shah, who let the foreign powers interfere in the state affairs and basically owed his throne to foreign powers, is hailed as national hero, hence the term "Shahollai!"


Arj, to compare Iran with Canada or Beligium is not helpful

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

neither for Iranian Freedom, nor for justice in Iran.

You say...

However, what plays the key role in preapring the grounds for
realization of such designs is the regional people's contentment or
lackthereof! As seen under democratic systems, such as Belgium and
Canada with diverse yet at times feuding ethinc poulations, such theats
to territorial integrity are minimized! 

What lays the ground for realization of such designs is motive in my opinion, not peoples contentment or lackthere of, its the Oil and Weapons Interests in irans case that manufacture approval or dissent (using soft p r tools to magnfiy issues, this is the root of the matter, orchestration.

Democratic government does't help resolve this issue, it just opens the door to the country being dominated from within using different methods.

For Clarfication...Why not look at the cases of 3rd world countries, like India, Haiti and the Congo all run by elected representative governments in a similar situation to Iran in 1953 and see if your point still holds true. 

How are the people there being served?  Or are they now in a situation where they are powerless to progress against even medium size corporations?

Reflect on how Russia/China/Japan/ etc developed, modernized and tell me with a straight face they went down and are going down the wrong path.

Even the UK/France and Germany went down the same path 150 years earlier.  Queen victoria may have had a prime minister, but she was the mother of all dictators upon historical analysis. 

Lets go back furthur, just to drive the point home, even Rome, with the rei-establishment of monarchy under Augustus went down the same path, and after 5 generations moved away to be more democratic.

It is only after development and education were prevalent on a national basis and after several generations that the people gradually came to take over and share power.

This is the path Iranians were on with the Shah, before 1979.  It was the revolution, which occured despite progress and improvement of peoples lives, which caused Iranians to kill the institution and leader that was their golden goose and lead to a devolution from the path.

As you see with India, Haiti, Congo and dozens of other examples, democracy and freedom are 2 entirely different things, in most of these democratic countries they have no freedom, most people do not have the possibilty to enhance their lives like was possible during iran in the 70's or china today. (also not saying these countries had perfect freedom, but it existed and exists on a level higher than most places in the world, to be considered among the top 10 to 20% at least).






"Dr" Mirfetroos and his funny imagination

by aynak on


Aria: "I never stated that Ajax operation did not exist.  It did.  Ajax was only 20 percent of the picture.  But the above also existed for reasons that I mentioned in my earlier comments."

20%?   If the Shah had to be persuaded to return to his home country (this
is reality and fact), how exactly (which scientific method), helped you
come up with 20% figure?   I am glad at least you agree there was a AJAX operation though.  (may be it existed 5%?)

Aria: "The Soviet scheming for a take over was never fictional or theoretical.   It
was only in 1948 that they wanted to separate Azarbaiijan from Iran
with the Pishevari’s puppet government. A couple of years later the
secret network of Tudeh party officers was discovered in the army.   So, the Soviets had all the intentions in the world to take over Iran.    It was the Peter-the-Great’s wishes to get to the warm waters of the Persian Gulf… "

This was already pointed out, but let's go over this.   Soviets had
already had Azarbaiajan under their control, with Stalin in charge back
in 1324/1945.   By 1325/1946 Qavam had convinced the Soviets  (with the
aid of pressure and threat from West to leave Iran, and they did).   So
in August of 1332/1953, ANY  reasonable person, can say that after death
of Stalin, there would be a lot less threat of Soviet Union that say 8
years earlier, when they had already occupied a good portion of North
West of Iran.


Mossadegh refused the offer from Tudeh
party to fight back because he knew that accepting such help would have
cemented the belief that he had secret dealing with them."

They key point here, is not Mossadegh.  the key point here, it is Shah
betraying his own country and siding with external powers.   A big part
of  the narrative examining this era which is completely wrong, goes
something like this:

--Mossadegh did XYZ wrong   Mossadegh could have done XYZ differently......  

Problem with reading and quoting 3tier "scholars" like Mirfetroos, who
has an --Honorary--  Doctorate form a 3Tier university? American Global
University?!?!? is that he tries to put facts as a backdrop to his
imagination.   He tries to put the victim instead of the criminal on trial, yet again!   He calls the coup a popular uprising!

Aria,  I strongly suggest, you read everything you can get your hands on
(including the falsies of "Dr" Mirfetroos) and compare.   Read CIA
records, read Homa Sarshar's interview, read various sources *all on the side of the coup* and compare.  (forget about the other side, just the side that Coup was on, and even then you should see the light).    

The responsibility of 1953 coup, directly and squarely falls on Mohamad
Reza Pahlavi, who --Betrayed-- his country.   There was nothing
Mossadegh could do to change that.   There are ample evidence/fact that
case of Iran was used as a model to suppress 3rd world national uprsing
across the globe in South and Central America (Chile/Guetemala ....) and
in Aisa (Indonasia ....).   Even CIA files directly refer to this as
model for next set of interventions etc.

These are facts that like earth being round or its age being many
billions of years old can not be disputed, no matter how much "Christian Scientists" try.   Still, it is welcoming sign
that supporters of Monarchy have found interest in reading.   But
please bare in mind, Pari Bolandeh was no Rosa Park and Shabbon Beemokh
was no Danton, something Mirfetroos would probably disagree
with :)


I would leave everyone with a simple question:

 Would 1953 coup be possible, had Shah remaind a constitutional monarch and not cooperated with external interests and stayed behind Iranian agenda, and not undermined Mossadegh government whose only crime was nationalization of oil?








It was!

by Arj on

Dear AP..., you have a quite valid point there, but the issue at hand was utilizing the foreign threat as an excuse to justify violence and ruling with iron fist! Addressing foreign threats is one thing and blowing them out of proportion to further a domestic agenda is another! It's no secret that the neo-cons of the U.S. foreign policy (Pearle, Feith, Wolfowitz...) had been pushing the Greater Middle East agenda in the run up to the Iraqi invasion/occupation since the 1970s. So has IRI been talking about an Islamic state to rule the Islamic, and ultimately the entire, world!

However, what plays the key role in preapring the grounds for realization of such designs is the regional people's contentment or lackthereof! As seen under democratic systems, such as Belgium and Canada with diverse yet at times feuding ethinc poulations, such theats to territorial integrity are minimized!


Mr. Parham:

by Aria on

In the old days, prior to 1979, anybody who used to oppose the previous government was labeled or called Tudehi, which was wrong.   There were many who were not Tudehi, or even communist.  Some people were Mossadegh sympathizers or simply disagreed with the government’s policies.  It was an ugly practice to call them Tudehi.

It seems like that anybody who questions or has a different take on the 1953 events you label him or her as “shaholahi,” this is not right, as it was not right to call the opponents of the previous regime all Tudehi.

As you have an opinion that should be respected, there are others with differing views.  If you disagree with the stated opinions you can provide counter-arguments and there can be a healthy discussion, even if the two sides continue to disagree.  

But, calling people Shah-ollahi or other names is not right.

I have the utmost respect for the man, Dr. Mossadegh, as he was the hero of Oil Nationalization and stood up to the British.   But, I have a different opinion about the scope of Ajax (based on historical events) and also factor in other issues, both internal and external, that contributed to Dr. Mossadegh’s downfall ( based on historical facts).  

The above line of analysis/thinking challenges the long-held belief that this was an only MI6/CIA work, it is understandable.    So, the people who hear this can either provide counter-arguments, or research more and see the validity of the stated opinions, or be open minded and consider them as knew facts/understandings and as such draw new/modified conclusion or simply reject them.    I welcome you or others to challenge or state opinion/facts on the specifics of my comments. 

I am sure if Dr. Mossadegh was alive today he wouldn't want you to label the differing ideas/opinions to his legacy as "Shah-ollahi."   



Arj, it's not a question of ruling by fear

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Its a question of asking whether or not expansionist or imperialist/neo colonialist policies are being pursued by the usa or not. 

If they are pursuing neocolonalsim then to call them a great satan from iranian perspective is accurate, whether the people fear them or not.  So great satan is not a myth or untrue, from an iranian perspective, regardless of fear.

Parham: Milani's work is skewed to serve the CIA.  Reading some good book reviews that dissects his work shows this, like //

It's a well put together analysis that analyses every argument the author provides and does a great job categorizing his works.


Arj jan

by Parham on

I actually had a conversation about that with a scholar friend who's close to such circles, and he was saying Milani is just probably paying back for all the grants he has received. Of course he was saying that jokingly, but there was something serious about what he said, too.


در جهان چه میگذرد ؟


از آنجا که گفتگو ها به وضعیت کنونی و آینده لیبی و و خاور میانه کشیده دیدم بد نیست نوشته ای را که حدود شش ماه پیش در باره وضع کنونی جان و چشم انداز آینده شورش یا جنبش های شمال آفریقا و خاور میانه در وبلاگم نوشته ام در اینجا معرفی تا آنهائی که میخواهند با دیدگاهی غیر رایج  در این موارد آشنا شوند به آن مراجعه کنند . عنوان  آن ( در جهان چه میگذرد ؟ ) میباشد و این هم گزیده هائی از آن نوشته نسبتآ طولانی :

ضرورت وقوع شورشهای کنونی و گسترش مرحله به مرحله آن  در مناطق گوناگون جهان و در ابعادی بسیار بزرگتر و ویرانگرتر از مدتها پیش در این وبلاگ مورد توجه واقع شده . در نوشته های متعدد و به استناد وضعیت سیستم اقتصادی و پولی حاکم بر دنیا  ، رکود اقتصادی دامنه دار کنونی  ، گسترش تباهی و تن آسائی ، رشد غیر قابل تحمل انواع تضادهای ناهم ساز در تمدن کنوی بشری  ،  ناگزیر بودن شورشهای اجتماعی و سپس جنگها را مطرح نموده ام . این شورشها و جنگها به شمال افریقا وخاورمیانه محدود نخواهد ماند بلکه دامنه آن به سراسر اروپا هم خواد کشید ضمن اینکه آمریکا ، چین ، روسیه و سایر کشورها هم بی نصیب نخواهند شد . منتها فعلأ بزرگتر ها  یعنی اروپا به رهبری انگلستان و با جلو راندن آمریکا که هنوز خاسته و ناخواسته تحت هدایت و رهبری کشور انگلستان میباشد ،ترجیح میدهند برای نجات خود   رفقا یا رقبای کوچکتر را قربانی کنند . مشکلات اصلی از خود اروپا و آمریکا منشآ میگیرد .

به هر صورت در نتیجه انقلاب  یا در واقع جابجائی اصلاح طلبانه جناح های قدرت درمصر و سایر کشورهای منطقه  ،  بازنده اصلی آمریکا و برنده واقعی در کوتاه مدت انگلستان است و آینده این را  مشخص خواهد نمود  .  به لحاظ قدرتهای محلی  ، روند کنونی  در خوشایند ترین سیرمورد نظر غرب به سود و سبک حکومتی  ترکیه تحول خواهد یافت .  و لی با وجود خطرات وآسیبها ی ناگزیر پیش رو در یکی دو سال آینده  ، ذات تغییرات  کنونی در دراز مدت  در جهت احیای تاریخی و سرزمینی ایران خواهد بود .  بازنده اصلی قدرتهای محلی هم کشورهای عربی ، بویژه مصر ، خواهند بود .
در نگاهی دراز مدت و با مشاهده  رویدادهای مهم در کشورهای اسلامی خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا میتوان دید که تلاش  انگلستان دست کم از حدود چهل سال پیش این بوده که حکومتهای اسلامی آنهم  با سبک و سیاقی که  دلخواه  آنکشور نه مردم محلی  باشد ، مستقر شوند  . در این راستا  ابتدا پاکستان ، بعد ایران ، سپس عراق و افغانستان و ترکیه و حالا هم که تونس و مصر و دیگران  در راهند .

  زبان رسمی و تبلیغی چنین سیاستی " حقوق بشر"   -   " کثرت گرائی یا دموکراسی "  -   " پیشرفت اقتصادی و عدالت اجتماعی "  و از این قبیل هست ، یعنی درست آنچیزی که اکثریت مردم آرزویش را دارند  .  ولی در عمل آنچه میتوان صدای گامهایش را دید و شنید پیشرفت زمینه مناسب برای حاکم شدن  سیستمهائی سیاسی و اجتماعی القاعده ای یا شبه القاعدهای طالبانی یا شبه طالبانی و یا اخوان المسلمینی و یا مشابه آن میباشد و به نظر من چنین امری با وجود مقاومتهای فراوان  در کوتاه مدت  کم یابیش شدنی است ولی ناپایدار  . مرکز چنین سیاستی هم نه آنگونه که رسانه های ریز و درشت جهان در حال القایش هستند  " امپریالیسم  آمریکا  " ،  بلکه در خود همان لندن " با سوابق درخشان چند صد ساله  " قرار دارد

نقطه آغاز مبارزه با دولتها و سیستم کنونی ادره کشورها   ، که در حال حاضر امواجش به خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا رسیده  ،  بعد ازسقوط  قیمت مسکن و شاخص های  عمده سهام در آمریکا و سایر کشورهای پیشرفته و رکود اقتصادی متعاقب آن  میباشد .  شعار  change   آقای اوباما در هنگام مبارزات انتخاباتی آمریکا در واقع بازتاب نارضایتی عمومی مردم از وضعیت موجود و رویگردانی از آقای بوش پسر و حزب حاکم  ، که از طرف مردم خواه ناخواه  مسبب یا مسئول آن تلقی میشدند  .  منتها تدارکات و پیشدستی برای حفظ نظام در آمریکا و سایر کشورهای غربی بسیار پیشرفته تر از خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا میباشد  .  نه افکار عمومی آنها تحمل آنرا دارند که یک نفر سی چهل سال یا مادام العمر رهبر اسمی یا واقعی باشند که مجبور  هم  باشند  تصاویر ریز و درشت و گاه چند ده متری او را بر سر هر کوی و برزنی  یا هر پول و اداره ای   نظاره گر باشند  .  نظام  حکومتی آنها هم اینقدر هوشمند یا به روز هستند  که بیخود برای خود  نه درد سر بخرند  و نه مردم را آزار دهند ،  در عوض نسخه بدلی را طراحی کردند که هم نظام خود را از خطرات مهلک برهانند و هم مردم را تاجائی که میشود راضی نگه دارند یا فریب دهند .  هر گاه  در دوره حزب جمهوری خواه آمریکا یا حزب محافظه کار انگلستان مردم به اوج مرحله ای نارضایتی رسیدند فورآ نسخه آماده  حزب  " دموکرات "  یا  " حزب کارگر" که دهن پرکن تر هم هستند میگذارند جلو آنها .  بوش آدم  بدی بود که جان و مال مردم آمریکا را گرفتار  عراق و افغانستان کرد حالا بفرمائید این آقای اوباما که از گل نازکتر نمیگه و نمیکنه  ، با همه آمریکائی ها  و اهالی دنیا هم جفت و جوره  .  با سیاها سیاهه ،  با مسلمان ها مسلمانه ، از سفیدها اگر لازم باشه  سفید تره  با ایرانی ها ایرانیه ، اروپائیها و انگلیسی هم  که در موقع انتخابات  بیشتر از خود آمریکائی ها برایش هورا کشیدند   .  دیگر چه میخواهید ؟ هم به دنیا میخوره هم به آمریکا .   در انگلستان طفلکی تونی بلر را به صلابه کشیدند  .  گفتند در باره  انگیزه حمله به عراق به مردم دروغ گفته  ، مرتکب گناه کبیره شده  ، عوضش حالا آقای دیوید کمرون را به شما معرفی میکنیم که اصلأ بلد نیست دروغ بگه و همه سخنرانی هایش در مجلس هم نشان میدهد که او نه فقط مخالف حمله به عراق بوده بلکه اصلأ مخالف تجاوز نظامی به سایر کشورها میباشد .

در مجموع و از نگاه منطقه ای  دو مبارزه عمده  در خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا  در جریان است  .  یکی  تلاش ملل منطقه و سایر کشورهای موسوم به جهان سوم  برای کسب استقلال واقعی  در مقابل  سماجت قدرتهای جهانی برای تحکیم مجدد  و نونما کردن  سلطه خود   و رقابت فیمابین  برای کسب سهم بیشتر در  مستعمرات  .  و دوم کشمکش درونی این ملتها برای مستقر کردن نظام اقتصادی و اجتماعی کاراتر در جامعه  خود  آدرس نوشته  : //



by Arj on

Dear Amirparviz..., a democratic regime is not afraid of bogeymen, for it has the support of its people behind it. A system that enjoys popular support does not rule by fear, even when threatened by the mightiest of foreign foes! On the other hand, oppressed peoples desparately cling to any ray of hope that may in their perceptions help rid themselves of their oppressors as in the case of the people of Libya!

Dear Parham, Ex-communists (such as Milani) are even bigger apologists of American expansionist policies than the right wing extremists. It could be a case of over-compensation for their past beliefs, who knows! Indeed all converts are eager to prove themselves as loyal members of the club to their new masters. As are the converted Jews the worst of anti-Semites among the IRI strongmen (e.g. Ahmadinejad, Asgaroladi, Badamchian...)! 

Daer Souri, so you are the one stalking me... (just kidding)!!! :) Thank you for your kind words. I'm embarrassed indeed!



It made me laugh too as I was writing it : )

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Commmunication is a funny art.


This title made me laugh more than any other on this site...

by BoosBoos on

"Arj the American satan excuse has a basis today"

 The #1  Most original title to a post.  We have a winner !

+10  points just for the humor value - I'm not making a political statement.  But this is too funny. 



Okay I've added this after initially laughing.  AmirParvizForSecMonach is right.  Look at his first link.   Good one Amir !   That's what I'm talking about.  People are asleep on this issue.   


Arj the American satan excuse has a basis today

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

(not what the IRI says, but from Iranians perspective) and it will have for a while until the USA changes its Afrcanization Using Islam in Govt policy for the middle east.

look at what they are teaching their armed forces about the good of carving iran up into 4 pieces.  //

become aware of the architects who have the govts ear on the subject and how they have been using islam for the past 40 years and fundamentalists... 


This is the goal followed by policy makers on both sides of the isle regardless of who comes to power by 2060 //

this is just my hallucination, but reading the journal of the us army and seeing what they are doing in libya and pakistan, I think we wlll be struggling against oil companies interests for a long time and experience america as a great satan.