Wedding: Soraya, Shah



Recently by Ghormeh SabziCommentsDate
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day
Dec 02, 2012
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day
Dec 01, 2012
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day
Nov 30, 2012
more from Ghormeh Sabzi

Rostam here is a good link for you.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on


this is a scholarly piece I found by luck, feel free to share it with others.

by the way bafava, your argument that monarchy is theft is ot exactly a strong one.  Considering you have no alternative except for communism, unless you are thinking republic, which is a far worse theft to use your terminology. 

Because if you object to theft try having 100 senators working for special interests, requiring on average $50 million to be elected and then raping the country and its people far worse than any monarchy could.

Monarchy works well for Iran, especially if you look at it from the point of view of Iranian culture and the writings of irans philosophers over the last 1000 years.  It practically saved iran time and again from arabic culture.



by Rostam on

You keep repeating the king should not spend the people's money. What about if the money spent on the wedding was out of shah's salary? Which was less than some of the US's CEOs?

I tell you again that it is farhange akhoondi that had made us harghir parvar and faghr doost. Don't get me wrong, I don't like monarchy either, but I also don't see things from behind a black and white lens.

By the way, do you remember taghzieh raayegan? What happened to that?

The difference between us is that I know when to dislike something, but when to give due credit too. For you is an all or nothing issue. All bad or all good, nothing in between. This happens when we are driven by hate and/or hero-worship instead of reason.

THAT is what our problem is in Iran, not lavish weddings.

P.S. We both don't like the Shah, but for quite different reasons.


I may not matter how many time I say it or how I say it

by Bavafa on

Those who are committed to Monarchy and believe the wealth of the nation belongs to the KING, keep missing the point. But some how they think slander, labeling and insult will strengthen their arguments. I am afraid its not happening, you are only making a fool out of yourself.


I have no issues with having a lavish wedding or divorce or an orgy for that matter, as long as you are spending your own money. And since I don't believe the wealth of a nation belongs to the KING, be it king of Iran in the form of Shah or Velayate Faghih, or the Queen of England or which ever country you want to use as an example, in my eyes it will be just theft.

I am not a citizen of England so I don't have any say in their affairs, but I am a citizen of Iran and object to such theft.



SK and Bivafa

by statira on

Shahnaz was one of the most beautiful princesses of all time. // She was much better than her Mom, Foozieh. About having a lavish wedding in the view of some of the short minded people in here( who only you can find in Iran and mostly among Iranian men), wedding is one of the most important events in everyone's lifetime, why not do our best. Have you seen Prince William's wedding? Did any Brits nag and complain about it? Of course, not, it's actually good for the image of their country and people.

Geda geda, mikhad bashe pesar khoda.

Soosan Khanoom


by Soosan Khanoom on

baba shoma shahdoosta khafemoon kardeen

ok ok ...... one Lavish wedding is good but three ?  Oh please give us a break ....

by the way, the most beautiful one of them was Fozieh .......

unfortunately Shah's genes were dominant so Shanaz did not get anything from her mom  !  



by Rostam on

The economic inidicators of Iran's economy during Pahlavis were unmatched in any other third world country. Only Iran could break its own previously set records. Iran was more ahead than even South Korea, yes the same South Korea that had a "montage" car industry that was behind Iran in the 70s.

Now that you know Iran does not consist of 70 million good democracy-loving peaceful tolerant people, now that you know there are millions of "animals" existing and living in Iran and millions of mini-dictators, now that you have seen the other dark side of your country (the side that was hidden to most of us before the revolution), wouldn't you agree that ruling Iran is not an easy thing?

You think that if the Shah was a low key, modest person, Iran's problems would have been resolved? If this wedding didn't take place, the revolution would not have happened anyway? Get serious!

Besides, his lavishness was very modest considering that he was the (forced) CEO of Iran and he did a damn good job of developing Iran's economy and modernization. His salary should have been millions of dollars a year, still a miniscule amount compared to some of the US's CEOs.

So having a problem with his "lavishness" is childish and immature. We must all realize that some of these dislikes we have for rich people comes from the akhoond's centuries old imposition of their culture of "haghir parvari and faghr parvari" on our people.

We all run after money, but if soneone else makes it to the top, he must have been "corrupt" or a "thief". That's farghange akhoondi that even those who hate the mollahs still follow to the letter.

That culture should concern you a lot more than a lavish wedding.


Dear Reality-bite: I was not wrong… but

by Bavafa on

First a word of appreciation for support and your fairness in regards to the "labels" some our friends so generously put on others. I would think some of our true "communist" friends or those of true "haters" would have a nightmare having me in their bunch :)

Also, I was not wrong when I said I see things pretty much thru the same lens as you do. I read your complete response in search of finding one issue that perhaps I would disagree with and could find NONE.

So, thank you and I appreciate your view here as well as on other topics.



Bavafa jaan

by Reality-Bites on

First, I'm sorry some of our commenter friends have resorted to labelling you. They should know that you are not a "hater" and in fact are quite the opposite in always supporting Human Rights, justice and fairness.

Anyway, I'm just going to outline some of my thoughts in comparing the previous regime with the current one. This is not at all meant as any kind of response to your last comment to me (which I actually agree with in the main), but merely to give you and other friends an idea where I'm coming from on this issue. I'm sure you'll know most of it yourself anyway. Sorry in advance for the length.

First, please don't get me wrong. My intention was not to cheer the previous regime and I fully agree that ultimately the dissatisfaction of the people, for whatever reason, led to the fall of Shah's rule. Both regimes, the current AND the previous one, deserve criticism and condemnation. Likewise (and many here might not like me saying this), both regimes, yes even the IRI, did and have done some good things for Iran.

When the Shah and his father took over Iran, nearly the entire country was still stuck in the middle Ages. They did a huge amount to modernise Iran.  Much of the infrastructure that remains in place in Iran today, such as schools, hospitals, transport system, roads, railways, airline, organized police force, sporting facilities etc., was put in place during the previous regime.

Furthermore women obtained a degree of emancipation which they had not enjoyed before. Economic growth, land reforms, reduction of the power of the feudal system, education of the people, improvements in healthcare etc were also introduced during that era. And to be fair, the IRI has built on some of those reforms, such as education, scientific progress, provision of housing and public spaces etc.

On the other hand, neither regime tolerated/s dissent and political opposition. Under both systems, there was/is a high degree of corruption, nepotism, bribery, mismanagement and misuse of public funds, public projects etc.Nevertheless, despite many of the shortcomings common to both regimes, it is fair and important to outline that there are also quite substantial differences that, in my view, are mainly in favour of the previous regime. 


For example, under the previous regime Iran and Iranian people were not treated as pariahs internationally. They were not regarded with suspicion and contempt. People could travel overseas and were welcome in nearly all countries. People were allowed by the state itself to travel, and were not forced to satisfy the prejudices of the state (as they do now with Islamic Republic) before they could exit or enter the country.

There was far more tolerance for religious minorities. Women’s rights were respected. There was true social freedom. The state did not tell people what to eat, what not to eat, what to drink, what not to drink, what to watch on TV/Cinema, what not to watch. You were not banned and prosecuted (if discovered) from having parties or playing music. We didn’t have hordes of mindless thugs (like the bassijis) going round, harassing, intimidating, swearing at and beating on and even killing people based on the way they dressed or the company they kept in public.

There were of course social problems like prostitution and drug use to some degree in those days, but nothing like the present where drug addiction, prostitution, poverty, sex slavery and general social misery have reached unprecedented levels in Iran’s history and, in some areas, are among the worst in the World.

I don’t at all mean to defend the previous regime, because I’m not a supporter of it. Yes, Shah was determined to drag Iran and Iranian people kicking and screaming towards what he called “the great civilization” (“tamadon-e bozorg”). His main idea behind the concept of “the great civilisation” was for Iran to match and eventually surpass the Western countries in sociological, technological, economical and academic fields.

But what he completely failed to understand was that the Iranian people had to be convinced that his was the right path for Iran. He should have done this by promoting democracy and allowing people to have their say. Instead, his security forces brutally silenced the opposition. He did not tolerate anyone (especially the left wing opposition) daring to challenge his ideas and authority until it was too late. His belief was that the average Iranian was not sufficiently enlightened and informed to know what was good for them and had to be led (by force if necessary) to a better life.

I believe he also greatly underestimated the power and the influence of the clergy on a huge proportion of the Iranian people. An influence which had been there for centuries and was not going to disappear after only few decades of only partially successful modernisation/westernisation.

Shah was a patriot in that he did love Iran and wanted Iran to succeed. BUT then again a real patriot would not or should not be so arrogant to treat any opposition, who were fellow hamvatans, so brutally and ignore their pleas for more political openness.

He did at several instances consider opening Iran up politically, but sadly decided against it, thinking that the economic progress that was taking place was the priority (and note that by the 1970s Iran had an annual economic growth rate was above even what China is experiencing today).

However, despite all that, the extent and brutality of the previous regime’s security forces were nothing compared to what it is now. Not even close. 

My point in saying all this is that if I had my choice I would not like to live under the previous regime and definitely not under the present one. In fact I doubt very much if Monarchy will ever come back to Iran and I’m pretty sure the Islamic Republic won’t after it is toppled. But if I had to choose between the two, I would pick the previous one every time, because although both regimes share common failings, as I explained above there are important differences too, which IMHO, mean life in Iran was far preferable under the previous regime.

Anyway, I hope this kind of makes my stand point clear. Again, sorry for the length.


یکی‌ به من بگه: آخه به تو چه ربطی‌ داره مرتیکه فضول!


I heard someone calling somebody else a "communist", just because somebody else made an observation with regards to the poverty of the folks who were made to line up and "enjoy" the royal wedding procession, and how easy it is to spend other people's money, specially if you have the SAVAK and shaaban bi mokh as the back ups!

I guess old habits die hard! 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

tehran e Azad

I like to help you BAVAFA never hate!

by tehran e Azad on



جواب ابلهان خاموشیست


But don't forget to take your Prozac


tehran e Azad


by tehran e Azad on

Misareble?? I like every one rich or poor. Hatred is what leads to misary.  just an  advise  try not to pass this hatred of the rich and wealthy to your kids...  teach them to become successful in life NOT to just hate those who are more successful than them in life.  But you will never do that because you have a communist/ toodei view of  life. Why dont you move to north korea or cuba. Because EVERY WHERE in the world the heads of the state throw lavish events. Instead of crying over some ones wealth. See what you have done wrong in life that you are where you are in life today and tell your kids not to repeat the same mistakes.....

Enjoy mate!


Tehran Azad:

by Bavafa on

I sincerely hope your anger has subsided by leaving such angry comment

If this helps alleviate some of the anger for you, feel free to do it on regular bases, won't bother me a bit. In fact I will be happy knowing to help some miserable fellow Iranian.


tehran e Azad

correction to last paragraph

by tehran e Azad on

Also the problem with khamenei and his clan is NOT spending lavish money ,it  is torture, murder , rape , barbaric/middle aged laws that are implemented by them and the other akhoons!!!

tehran e Azad

BAVAFA and other communist minded people

by tehran e Azad on

The reason why Iran is in so much shit is because of OGHDE-ee  people like BAVAFA. Take a look at Prince Williams' wedding. Weddings of all heads of states and royals are and always will be lavish.

You back ward , jealous , communist minded people are the reason why Iran is were it is today. Unforetunatley Iranians like BAVAFA can't except the fact that some people are always going to be richer and well off than his broke behind  and he can not  except that. Only because you failed in life and live pay check to paycheck . Don't hate on  multi millionairs! Instead of constant hatred teach your kids how to become successful in life . It's too late for you. Do not pass this cycle of hatred!!

Also the problem with khamenei and his clan is spending lavish money , is torture, murder , rape , barbaric/middle aged laws implemented by them and ....




by Bavafa on

I often see things thru the same lens as you, but this case might be an exception at least partly.

You are correct about the generalization and assumption of those people on the side of the road, but in a bigger picture it is undeniable that such reasoning was one of the causes of his down fall.

Furthermore, my objection to spend other peoples money so lavishly is not and would not be limited to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, known as the king but to any king in general specially if he/she is the ruler of my country of birth. This very much includes the current king in Iran known as 'Velyate Faghih' (I do note and appreciate the dissimilarities in some area and the magnitude of waste between the two regime)

Nevertheless, I can not see how one could criticize the current ruler but cheer for the pervious one when the acts are more or less the same only different magnitudes.



Bavafa & Rostam

by Reality-Bites on

I'm kind of with you both!

There's no doubt that there was corruption and siphoning off public funds  in some cases during Shah's rule. His sister, Afshraf, in particular was known for her corrupt practices, as were many hangers on and darbaaris around Shah.

On the other hand, he was supposed to be in charge of the country (rightly or wrongly) and he was supposed to be a king. You can't expect a King/Ruler to have a wedding like a pauper. Don't forget that most of the jewellery and expensive items/decorations were passed down the generations from previous Kings and not taken from people on the street.

Likewise, as King/ruler he is going to have more money than your average Jo. I don't see anything wrong in that. Let's keep in mind that, during Shah's rule, not only his own wealth, but also the wealth/standard of living of the average Iranian increased considerably.

But it IS fair to say that Shah allowed himself and his family to have far more wealth than they should have. And that he should've been less ostentatious in his private and public lives. That is a fair criticism.

One last thing, some of us are making somewhat of a generalization in assuming that the "less fortunate" were standing roadside and wondering who's paying for this lavish wedding. How do we know this? Maybe, just maybe they were just there to cheer the wedding party. After all, from what I've read, Shah's wedding to Soraya was very popular in the country at the time.


She was truly beautiful

by Rea on

One of the loveliest female names, Soraya.


Rostam …you are correct

by Bavafa on

My wedding may have seen lavished compared to the standard of living of many in Africa. But my wedding was paid by me and my wife only and we didn't expect or asked others to foot the bill. I wonder if you appreciate the difference?

Unlike you, I never got jealous of those who get to spend others money. I just learned to stand on my own and not be a leach on the society.

Lastly, I don't hate Pahlavi's family a bit but I am not going to dismiss the theft and crimes committed by them during their reign of power either, nor this means that since they were replaced by a bigger monster (the IRI) then they were any good.


P.S. Rather presumptuous of you to think that I just parrot the line from IRI, don't you think this may be the case of  kafer hamera be kishe khod pendarad




by Rostam on

I used to get jealous about shah's wedding and his other wastes too. Isn't it the first feeling we feel when we watch these kind of videos? We get angry and ask why this asshole should have all these privileges, while asghar and akbar couldn't, right?

But this does not come from our "care" for poor people though. This comes from our culture of cheshmo hamcheshmi, jealousi, hate (kineh) and nothing else. But it does makes us feel like we care, does it not?

Everything is relative. Show me some videos of your own wedding or any of your relative weddings and then I'll show you some Africans dying from hunger. To that African, YOU are having a lavish party too.

The shah was a terrible ruler and he fucked up, but not for the stupid khalak zanak reasons that akhoond has fed you and you keep repeating here after 30 years. It seems that after all the terrible things that happened to our country most of us still haven't learnt a thing.

I challenge you to list 5 things the shah did wrong that is not related to the BS fed to the people by akhhoond. Believe me there are more than 5 reasons, a LOT more. But I'll bet that you won't be able to name even one because your opposition to the pahlavi is based on hate. You can only name the things that come from your hatred (usually the wrong reasons.) 

As long as we don't evolve, nothing good will happen in our country. And one dictator keeps replacing another one, as it did 30 years ago. The day that the "people" change their way of thinking (reason vs strong feelings such as hatred and jealousy), then things will begin to change for the better.


To JJ and Co,

by پندارنیک on

Can't you fellows stop rubbing it in? Geeeeeeeez.

How would have you felt if you were left out of the royal wedding of the century, and had to  watch your dad's wedding video with a British narration, instead?

This is for you guys...


Couldn't help noticing the array of less fortunate

by Bavafa on

On the side of the road watching such glamorous extra lavish wedding, wondering how they are ever going to pay for such "Royal wedding"

Spending other people's $$$ must be fun.



I wish..

by comments on

I wish we could have known what would have happened to Iran if Shah stayed with influential Soraya.

Any psychic?


Gate Way To The Riches of The East.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Unfortunately this realty of being so Geo-politically important has lead to a Not so fairytale ending for Iranians who have lost their Royal Families and are experiencing the Dark Days of Iran... The Fundamentalist Islamic Period.

Hopefully We will soon see Royal Weddings in Iran for many years to come after we return Iran to a Secular System it has enjoyed for almost all her History.




by IranMarzban on

wow lovely video  






by yolanda on

They had 3000 wedding guests.......Kate and William only invited 2000 guests!

Thank you for posting......finally I saw the peacock throne!


Princess ham

by statira on

Princessayeh ghadeem. Soraya was truely a beautiful princess.