Persian Realm

Jamish and MM: I want to

Jamish and MM: I want to thank you for taking the odious entity to task. I certainly neither have the patience nor Aasab to deal with callous spectators of unspeakable cruelties as if they are watching sports.

Dear Jamshid, I had a long

Dear Jamshid, I had a long response to you. This issue is too important to let go. I guess I missed a click again and it's all gone. I'll get back to you when I'm less angry at myself! (with more time)

Q, time for homework

"Association with hated terrorist groups like the MEK the Mujahedeen were the ones who invented and popularized the 30,000 number from the beginning"

Q, discuss the "associations" of those who lied about the numbers during the revolution, e.g., 10,000 killed in Jaleh square vs 97, or 600,000 killed by the Pahlavis (khomeini's cassette) vs 5000, or 300,000 political prisoners vs. 3000, etc.)

Also discuss why lying is the right thing to do under certain cicumenstances, while it is a despicable thing to do under others.

You wrote: "The fossilized exiled opposition keeps making more and more extremist statements and alienating anyone and everyone who might otherwise be opposing the government."

Did you steal this right out of the Shah's government spokesman during his last years of his reign? Discuss what happened next for the Shah's regime in only a few more years.

"the Shah's corrupt system..."

Briefly describe why corruption is a bad thing under the Shah, but it is just a mere flaw under the IRI which we must only hope to reform.

Extra points: Discuss which system was more corrput, the Shah's or the IRI's.

Darius

I look forward to your response. (I hope you have one!)

Q

You keep saying "yawnn" and "lol". Make up your mind.

You wrote: "You pulled the 8000 number out of your behind."

Try for once to speak politely, Q. Where were you raised?

Based on the available evidence, 8000 is my own best approximation for a conservative number of victims in the massacre. As I said, the number is more likely more than 10,000, but conservatively speaking it could be said it is around 8000.

If you really want to know the exact number (all of us here do as well), instead of arguing with us, then write to your "democartic" IRI representative and ask them to allow me or others to go in Iran and freely do our interviews and research.

But you are not after the truth anyway, are you?

Here in this blog, tons of evidence has been provided in reference to the massacre. But instead of displaying the slightest remorse for the victims or the slightest human decency, you engage in personal attacks, belittling and "hochi gari", all to protect the IRI's name.

You wrote: "These numbers were specifically rejected by the Harvard paper in 2007."

And why are we to use your sources as gold standard? You have lost so much of your humanity and heart to the cause of the IRI's ideology, that you cannot even comprehend the simple fact that ALL available documents and evidences should be taken into account. Not just the one that fits one's interests.

If I were like you, then I could have sticked to the 30,000 number, based on some body's "paper". But we do not all operate like you Q.

You wrote: "LOL! Do you take your audience for fools? The link says it is "believed" (not verified)"

Bingo! You hit it on the nail! In your rush to use safsateh, you gave yourself in! The "verification" issue is the key word. Absolutely! There were many executions that could not even be verified because the victims simply "disappeared" from the prisons.

This is not a first. Most massacres (and wars) have both a group of "known" victims, and an even larger group of "unverified" victims. If there is no trace whatsoever of the unverified victims after so many years, then it is safe to assume that they were executed, rather than released from prison and then immediately gotten into a car accident or some otther type of freak accident.

That's why we have things such as "unmarked graves" or "mass graves".

I am glad you are beginning to see the light and agreeing that the number of "actual" victims must have been much larger than the "verified" number. I seem to have been wrong about you Q. With a proper coach, you are indeed educatable after all.

You wrote: "Amnesty has a list of only 2000 names and has rejected additional names claimed by others."

In my opinion, you are lying. There is no such document showing that the AI outright "rejected" some names and "accepted" others. Again, you are using safsateh and maghlateh to further your goals. There is a difference between outright "rejecting" something and calling something "unverified."

Again, write to your "democratic" representative in the IRI to allow someone to go to Iran and conduct interviews wihtout fear of persecution (for both the interviewer and the interviewee.) That would be the best bet to settle the scroe once and for all. But the IRI wouldn't allow it, would it Q? I wonder why?

We are talking about a government that overhauls mass graves to hide evidence, a governemnt that threatens families not to mourn the death of their child. a government that goes to the home of the victims' parents and demand them to pay for the "bullets' used to execute their child in order to hand the dead body to the parents.

Do you take us for a fool?

Q writes: "you didn't include Pourmohammadi, a notorious conservative in the hardliner faction ... why? because you are dishonest."

Oh really? What kind of a retarded logic is this? I wasn't talking about that murderer. I was talking about whether or not Mousavi knew about the executions. Your diliegent attempts to relate fart to temple is duely noted and rejected.

It is too fantastic and too incredible to believe that the news of such massive scaled executions that took weeks to carry out never reached Mousavi who was the prime minister at the time. At some point, Mousavi must have known about it. And after he learnt about it, he should have taken the same route than Montazeri took. Alas, he didn't. And the rest is history.

Q writes: "You haven't "proven" jack sh*** about me, only that you don't understand logic or evidence."

I have only proven to myself and those who are reading these comments that rather than being a decent human being and having symapthy for the victims, rather than feeling obliged to correct a massive wrong committed by the IRI, you instead engage in even attacking the victims by stating most of them were "guilty as charged", or by watering down the scales of the massacre, or by saying that the executed were murderers, etc.

You wrote: "you were caught lying in a fit of anger... this is your way of fixing it after the fact... I'd love to share more opinions about you... you are a deluded self-centered and absolutist extremist... you have a pathological need to assert your half-baked theories... you seem to be mentally stuck back in grade school... you have a serious anger management issue... "

Stick to the subject, Q and quit your habit of engaging in pesonal attacks and 'hochi gari" when utterly defeated in your arguments.

Q It doesn't even make any sense

Condescending words do not mean jack, off or on the subject.

Your condescending remarks (....exiles.....etc) do not phase me.  If you are yawning a lot, get some sleep man.  If you cannot argue on the facts, then go back to Iran, put up Khomeini's Fatwas on your mantle and smile that you have an Islamic Republic. 

The objection letter of Montazeri to Khomeini on killing of 3800 in the first 14 days of trials is indisputable, and the executions did not end in 14 days in 1988 and continue as we write here.  Executions of 13 year olds is criminal, no matter if they are MKO or whatever.  Rape of virgins followed by executions is criminal.  The way the trials were conducted may have had a 7th century flavor of religious Fatwas and Quaric backings, but, in the 21st century, animals have more mercy on their species than IRI did.  The same Khomeini Fatwas / verses of Quran were used later to execute other entities that did not believe in the Islamic system. 

Also, writing a tone of blog does not mean you are right.  There is plenty of evidence to dispute your claims.

Sorry DK.  I am out of here.

oktaby jan: That is the best

oktaby jan: That is the best way. Ignore the gutless trolls.

It is obvious you failed to understand. On so many levels

But I don't care to explain it to you. It was for normal readers. So move on. 

OKtaby

Thank You Oktaby,

perfect demonstration of the delusional opposition.

So in your opinion IRI has failed "continuously" for 31 years and the opposition has succeeded in the same time?

I think IRI is banking on geniuses like you to help lead the opposition to another 3 decades of "success"!

Thanks for the laughs.

Seems like the continuous failure theory was practiced by molas

and akhoondzadeh, perfected for several hundred years and now they think 31 years makes a dynasty. 'amr behetoon moshtabah shode va fekr mikonin aliabad ham shahre'.

It also explains the depth of their viciousness and their inability to hold power with any resemblance of grace or decency.

OKtaby

The continuous failure of the opposition

This is a generic comment to highlight the reasons why the exiled opposition is sitting on its thumbs angrily crying foul while the IRI continues into its fourth decade stronger than ever. This is also the reason the only movement to successfully challenge the system has come from inside it, and rejects pseudo-band wagon jumpers like the clown Prince and the rest of the loudmouths here.

The reasons are simple: lies, exaggerations, emotional drivel, crazy conspiracies and wild speculations, a complete lack of objectivity and reasonable discourse and complete and utter inability to fair minded about any issue. They shamelessly repeat any and all Western attacks on Iran, by war-seeking neocons and pro-Israel likudniks thinking this will win them friends with Iranians! What a joke!

Association with hated terrorist groups like the MEK (the Mujahedeen were the ones who invented and popularized the 30,000 number from the beginning), while at the same time remaining shamelessly silent on Iranian deaths caused by the same group is also a big part of the reason.

This is why these people have accomplished exactly nothing in the past 31 years and now pathetically dare to claim credit for the real activist and coalition building work done by those who they openly hate (Mousavi and Khatami)!

The fossilized exiled opposition keeps making more and more extremist statements and alienating anyone and everyone who might otherwise be opposing the government. Since the election, and the solidarity demonstrations in Europe and North America, the traditional opposition has lost even the majority of Iranians living in the west, and that's saying a lot given that these include the highest income exiles who were directly benefiting under the Shah's corrupt system, and therefore the most brainwashed by his CIA-run "nationalist" revival programs.

That's why as a nation we are gently patting them on the back, shaking our heads and reading their "rowzeh" and moving on.

It's bitter, I know, but it is reality.

Vildemose: Khomeini fatwa 'led to killing of 30,000 in Iran'

The title of the Telegraph article I referenced is: Khomeini fatwa 'led to killing of 30,000 in Iran'. 

The Telegraph author quotes Montazeri who objected to killing of 3800 people in the first 14 days of executions (fortnight=14 days).  However, Khomeini did not listen to Montazeri, put him aside and the killings continued for a total of ca. 30,000, according to the article.   My point was that these Islamists cannot deny Montazeri's published letter to Khomeini objeting to 3800 execution in the first 14 days of an era that has lasted for a long time and even today, people are put to death based on the same Khomeini fatwas that were based on Quranic verses that I quoted already.

The people killed included minors as young as 13 years old and I do not need to tell anyone what these animal Islamists did with virgins who were condemned to death.

jamshid Jaan Not at all Keep them coming ;0)

Your insights are always welcome even if I may not share everything you say. As I said I want to respond to some of the points you made which deserve proper and well thought answers.

As I said I will try and respond in a near future either here or in a separate blog.

As I said I have some professional commitments lately so I can't answer immediately as I would wish to. But stay tuned.

Thank you for your patience.

Warm Regards,

Dariush

MM jan: Why would you

MM jan: Why would you believe Montazeri? He was a part and parcel of this regime. For now, we won't know the accuarte numbers until this regime is toppled and all the vicitims survivors come forward. There should be a special  commission selected by the new government, specifically to investiage this heinous crimes against humanity by the UN and Iranians.

Montazeri: 3,800 killed by end of 1st 14 days of executions

This was a massacre, not executions.  Montazeri was correct: We ae still talking about the massacres as a vandetta and inhumane.

This was the gest of the trials: The prisoners were asked to "repent" --> If NO, then execute almost immediately.  SHAME on you for defending these actions. 

"Montazeri, who states that 3,800 people had been killed by the end of the first fortnight of executions, includes his own correspondence with Khomeini, saying that the killings would be seen as "a vendetta" and would spark opposition to the regime. He wrote: "The execution of several thousand prisoners in a few days will not have positive repercussions and will not be mistake-free.""

//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1321090/Khomeini-fatwa-led-to-killing-of-30000-in-Iran.html

Jamshid jan, Everyone knows

Jamshid jan, Everyone knows who is the liar and a fraud. Don't waste your precious time with massacre-loving gutless Islamists.

Yawn x 3 Jamshid!

Jamshid, don't pop a vein. Answer the original question. Where did the 8000 number come from? Where?

YOU pulled the 8000 number out of your behind. YOu have no evidence for it. Even the (disproven) 30,000 number based on "secret documents" from 2001 (you didn't bother reading the 2007 Harvard study did you? Of course you didn't, you're not interested in truth) doesn't say 8000. YOu never proved or even offered any evidence for this, therefore no one needs to disprove it specifically. Do you really not understand how this works? Where did you get the number? I know where...

Two of your sources simply repeat claims (from 2001 and 2004) of people with conflicts of interest (i.e. MEK). These numbers were specifically rejected by the Harvard paper in 2007.

From Amnesty International site, AI Index MDE 13/118/2008:

LOL! Do you take your audience for fools? The link says it is "believed" (not verified) based on "claims made" from:

Iran: Violations of
human rights 1987-1990 (AI Index MDE 13/21/90).

Amnesty has a list of only 2000 names and has rejected additional names claimed by others.

Face the facts, Jamshid. Like your "logic" and your fake "outrage" your numbers are BS. 30,000 is BS, 8000 is BS. 3800 is believable and much closer to my own statements. I can accept 3800.

An elementary lesson in logic and truth for you (if you can even understand). You can't take a wild guess and simply because you think the possibility exists that it might be true, consider it true. Do you get that? It's not that hard to understand.

You are playing the same game you accuse Iranian revolutionaries of playing in 1979. What shameless hypocrisy!

Here's another instance of your shameless dishonesty:

“The principal role [in determining which prisoners to execute] is played by the representative of the Ministry of Information everywhere, and others are effectively under his direct influence.”

Yes, and Montazeri went further to say the ministry official was Mostafa Purmohammadi!!! He has named several people as culprites but the name "Mousavi" has not been mentioned once by the old man. Of course you didn't include Pourmohammadi, a notorious conservative in the hardliner faction (worked for Ahmadinejad recently) why? because you are dishonest.

In those days, before the ministry of information take a life of its own, it was overseen by the prime minister, Mousavi.

LOL! total BS!. Those days were 8 years after the revolution. The ministry was certainly not under Mousavi's control. Not that a fatva from Khomeini will be questioned by anybody, but even Pourmohammadi's indectments say he received the order from the supreme leadership. You're caught once again!

Why are you doing this? Are you really this desperate try to implicate Mousavi because he has done something you and blind haters can only dream of? Shame shame...

He certainly wasn't a decision maker on these matters,

LOL!

but claiming that he did not know anything about this massive massacre that took even many weeks to carry out is too fantastic to believe,

Once again liar, I never made such a claim. But if you are making the claim that he did know about them, please prove it. Your finding something "fantastic" is of course a worthless personal opinion and not proof. Do you know what "safsateh" even means? Just because you keep projecting your own doesn't make anyone guilty of it!

You haven't "proven" jack sh*** about me, only that you don't understand logic or evidence.

In my opinion, you are lying.

No kidding! Really? In my opinion you are a deluded self-centered and absolutist extremist who is thoroughly allergic to any real nuance, or contrary evidence and has a pathological need to assert his half-baked theories without being questioned. Everything is black and white, good and evil, just like back in grade school where you seem to be mentally stuck. Also, in my opinion, you have a serious anger management issue, the same one you had back when you were "fooled" into the revolution. This, I'm sure can't be good for those around you.

Anyway, this "my opinion" line is just to cover your behind since you were again caught lying about me in a fit of anger and this is your way of fixing it after the fact.

I'd love to share more opinions about you, if you could simply give me a prompt again ;)

Stay thirsty my friends!

Darius Kadivar

Sorry, if the subject of your blog was diverted into other things. But I felt since Q polluted your blog with his incredible lies, it needed some cleansing.

Q, Part II (I recommend others to read this as well)

And now your priceless jewel:

"The number of victims was at most two to three thousand. No list of over 2000 names exist that amnesty international finds credible."

Where is your proof that AI has found some lists of over 2000 names invalid? Let's analyze and publicly expose your intentional and malicious falsification of facts. From Amnesty International site, AI Index MDE 13/118/2008:

"In all between 4,500 and 5,000 prisoners are believed to have been killed, including women."

//www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE13/118/2008/en

Other Amnesty International documents state that this can only be a lower limit number. Therefore, the actual number must be much larger, closer to 8000 to 10,000.

You wrote,

"The memoirs of Ayatollah Montazeri, a man who lost his position because of this issue and is revered by Green movement also wrote that the number was slightly over 2000"

Q, you publicly lie wiht no shame, and in my opinion, you do so with malicious intent. Let's analyze and publicly expose this lie as well.

Ayatollah Montazeri's memoirs, volume one, page 623:

"Approximately 2800 to 3800 man and woman were executed. Even those who prayed (namaaz) and fasted (roozeh), they brought them out and told them to say "ghalat kardam", and they wouldn't say it, then they would conclude that the prisoners has not repented and immediately executed them."

Elsewhere, Montazeri indicates that he was referring only to those who were "known" to be executed, and the number of those who were unofficially executed remains unkonwn. Therefore, the actual number of executions would far surpass 3800.

Exerpts from Ayatollah Montazeri's letter to Khomeini:

"As you presumably will insist on your decree, at least order that women not be executed, especially pregnant women. Ultimately, the execution of several thousand people in several days will not have positive repercussions and is not without mistakes."

In the weeks preceeding the massacre, the IRI suspended visits to prisoners by their parents. Many families whose children "disappeared" after the massacre have repetetively asked government officials for the place of burial of their children, to no avail.

Before Ahamdinejad's government, families of the victims often gathered in Tehran's Khavaran area where they believed the bodies of many executed prisoners were buried in mass graves and makeshift graves.

Human Rights Watch reports that in 2005, the new Ahamdinejad governmet ordered the Khavaran site to be overhauled, as to avoid any further gatherings by the victim's families and to destroy any evidence.

In all, it is safe to say that if we are to include those political prisoners who "disappeared" after the massacre, the number of executions could well exceed 10,000. 

Am I to believe you, Q, who is once again publicly proven to lie in order to protect the IRI's reputation, or Ahamdinejad who does the same, or Human Rights organizations, Montazeri and most of all, the victims' families? You know my answer.

Q, Part I

Q, your arguments are immoral, to say at the very least. You wrote:

"Yea, I see what's happening. Since you got caught with you pants down on the lie of 8000..."

I got caught with what lie? When was the number 8000 disproved? Here are some links, including references, that state the number could have been much higher than 8000:

//www.americanthinker.com/2004/09/the_1988_iran_massacre_crimes.html

//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/1321090/Khomeini-fatwa-led-to-killing-of-30000-in-Iran.html

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_executions_of_Iranian_political_prisoners

You wrote:

"Mousavi was a no-body on these questions. His position had nothing to do with national security or even justice system."

In a letter of protest addressed to Ayatollah Khomeini, dated August 4, 1988, Ayatollah Montazeri wrote: “The principal role [in determining which prisoners to execute] is played by the representative of the Ministry of Information everywhere, and others are effectively under his direct influence.”

In those days, before the ministry of information take a life of its own, it was overseen by the prime minister, Mousavi. He certainly wasn't a decision maker on these matters, but claiming that he did not know anything about this massive massacre that took even many weeks to carry out is too fantastic to believe, no matter how many safsateh and maghlateh you throw at it.

You wrote: 

"I do not agree with their execution in Iran and consider it an unjustified massacre"

In my opinion, you are lying. Your unrelentless defense of Khomeini at every opportunity, the fact that you are watering down the crimes committed by the IRI, including the 1988 massacre, the fact that you even defended Khomeini's pre-revolution lies, all tell me that if your "Emaam" said so, then to you, it must have been obeyed so as well. [Note to moderator: I have compiled proof of the above, this is not a personal attack. It is a fact.]

Jamshid You make some valid points

I will try and answer them today or tomorrow latest. I am off to see Ridley Scott's Robin Hood in Paris today ( got to write a review for a magazine ) but will be back so stay tuned for my response on this thread.

 //www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSqL9ygBCck

Another one with the Tagline: "Kings have a need of their subjects ..." A dangerous Idea when the King ( Zahak Prince John aka Prince Ali) is Illegitimate ...

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVx3GxiaAxc

I like our exchanges very much and your insights are always interesting.

Cheers my Friend,

DK 

benross

"I think Reza Pahlavi handled the situation brilliantly."

I don't argue against his views. What I am saying that he is inherently uncreative and uncharismatic.

"What you see Jamshid as the flaw of 'monarchists', again, as I noted to vildemose is just turning the table. You are criticizing yourself my friend not monarchists."

And how did I critisize myself? I told you about how we genetically inherent certain talents. Leadership, charisma and people skill, although could be learnt, but they are mostly "zaati", as in our genes. RP could be a very talented King at peace time, but he (sorry His Majesty) does not have the necessary talents to fight the likes of mollahs.

Just as I can't draw even a cat on a piece of paper. I just haven't got what it takes for arts. My talents are elsewhere.

So, how did this turn out to be criticizing myself?

Second, I am saying that there is no provision to remove a king from throne and replace him with another member of the family who could possibly be more fit to fight against the mollahs.

How did this become criticizing myself?

"As long as you do not call Reza Pahlavi 'your majesty', you don't even have a ground to talk about Reza Pahlavi, let alone criticize him."

What? Are you serious? This attitude will in no way lead to a unity. It would only inflame divisions. I doubt that even RP himself cares whether he is called His Majesty or not.

"But if he didn't succeed well enough to establish who he is, is mostly because of completely confused line of thought of likes of yours Jamshid."

haan? maloom hast chi daari migi? Was Shoja'edin Shafaa also a confused man? What about the late Amini? Could there be the slightest chance that RP himself might be a bit confused and undetermined?

Just remember one thing: Our great Kings of the past, Cyrus, Ardeshir, Yaghoub, Nader, Reza Pahlavi I, "succeeded well enough to esatblish who they are" by virtue of their own genuis and courage, regardless of "the confused lines of thoughts of the likes of Jamshids of those times"!

P.S. Totally agree on your thoughts on Q.

Yawn again Jamshid!

You keep lying to get your way, and when it doesn't work you get angry. How many times do we have to go through your lies?

Does that mean that regime supporters could collectively feel "proud" that instead of killing 30,000 or 8000, the IRI had killed only 3,000?

Yea, I see what's happening. Since you got caught with you pants down on the lie of 8000, you are now spinning faster than a ferfereh on crack.

Did I say anybody should be proud of this? What did I say actually about it? Let's see:

I do not agree with their execution in Iran and consider it an unjustified massacre, but to call them "innocent" is simply laughable and opportunistic.

LOL!

you're a shameless liar!

And how do YOU know that with such certainty? Where you there with Mousavi?

Hah! I told you the reasons (see my note about being "blinded by hatered"). Mousavi was a no-body on these questions. His position had nothing to do with national security or even justice system. There were two people above him, but that's not even important. Khomeini's word was final and unquestionable. No one has shown he was a player in this at all. So you have the burden of proof to show he was. (See previous note on "negative proof")

Were you an employee or messenger at nokhost vaziri or at any national security operation to know who they might have interacted?

Maybe I was. So what?

I find it impossible to believe that once Khomeini's fatvaa was issued,

That's great. Now do you have any evidence or even somebody else's opinion beside yours? You know, somebody who matters? Honestly, no one cares what you think.

But wait, I forgot that according to you, those who were executed should have been executed anyway.

According to me?

I do not agree with their execution in Iran and consider it an unjustified massacre

My God man! It's only 2 posts down why do you have to be such a shameless liar, do you really think people are so stupid as to take your worthless words for anything anymore? Have some shame, or at the very least grow up! This is getting embarrassing for the whole community.

So why Mousavi should have protested in the first place?

LOL! I don't know, you're the one who thinks he should have!

Having fun talking to yourself like an parrot with some screws loose?

Your logic is the logic of convenience, Q.

Wow, that's rich coming after the "gol" that you just planted!

Stay thirsty my friends!

PS. Hich ghalati nemikoni!

Jamshid

Q doesn't deserve a response. He is here to distract, to change the subject and to sabotage the discussion. That's his job. He has already lost a soldier and has to work harder!

But back to the subject matter of this blog, I think Reza Pahlavi handled the situation brilliantly. Minimalist, yet concise when it comes to freedom of expression, and with necessary leeway when it comes to different tactical approaches to the fight.

What you see Jamshid as the flaw of 'monarchists', again, as I noted to vildemose is just turning the table. You are criticizing yourself my friend not monarchists.

The issue is very very simple. Reza Pahlavi is not the monarch of monarchists. He is the monarch of Iran. That's why he sits and talks with any Iranian who is willing to salvage the country, regardless the political preferences. This is the job of a king to do so.

I don't care you are left or right, republic or monarchist. As long as you do not call Reza Pahlavi 'your majesty', you don't even have a ground to talk about Reza Pahlavi, let alone criticize him.

I can criticize him, because he is my king according to the constitution. I criticize him because he should have advanced his message, so that by now, everybody in that internet discussion would have called him 'your majesty' (then go about talking about republic or reformed Islamic republic or communism or anything else). But if he didn't succeed well enough to establish who he is, is mostly because of completely confused line of thought of likes of yours Jamshid. What's your business to talk about Reza Pahlavi anyway? Once you clarified this in your mind, Reza Pahlavi can do better.

But always remember that you as a citizen, can talk about Moosavi and his supporters all you want. For Reza Pahlavi, Moosavi and his supporters are his subjects like everybody else that he has to care for. Knowingly or unknowingly, this is what brought those activists to the virtual table with him to begin with. The same way that it brings you to talk about him.

The points!

* Both the Shah and the IRI have committed political assassinations, but the numbers compiled by IRI are unbelievable, in comparison to that of MRP.  Furthermore, the scale of the murders, especially in one sitting in 1988 was unprecedented.  And, do not tell us that PotPol was worse.

* The political murders by IRI have been done by religious people based on two Khomeini Fatwas that are themselves based on verses of Quran.  

* As a VP, Mousavi was part of the government that undertook these political murders, and while some people like Montazeri objected, Mousavi colluded.

* And finally, knowing that the atrocities committed by IRI are based on Fatwas by Khomeini, Khomeini is still Mousavi's hero and someone he looks up to and admires. NOT GOOD.

Dear Vildemose

You are very right! I think after the fall of this regime, there will be many more untold and shocking IRI crimes discovered. We must remember that the IRI is the master of deciet and lies. It exaggerates and understates facts based on convienence.

The crimes that the IRI has committed and that we are aware of, are sadly only the tip of the iceberg.

P.S. I loved your reductio ad absurdum analysis!

Q

"The number of victims was at most two to three thousand..."

Does that mean that regime supporters could collectively feel "proud" that instead of killing 30,000 or 8000, the IRI had killed only 3,000?

Hey guys! Lookie here! We killed only 3000! Not 10,000, not 5000, but only 3000! Aren't we great or what? We should be chosen for the "Human Rights Observer of the Year"!

Is that it Q?

You go on to write:

"They were not all innocent."

So to your own admittance, some of them were innocents. Say, only half, 1500 were innocents. And so the IRI killed only 1500 innocents in just a few weeks. See folks? See how the IRI is not as bad as you think?

Pray tell Q, indulge us with your knowledge of the ratio of those that were innocents and those that you single handedly have proclaimed guilty as charged. Do you also think that those who were recently executed (the monarchists and more recently the kurds) were also "guilty as charged"? Enlighten us please as to what your verdict is on them.

I am not even mentioning the fact that those 8000 who were executed were mostly young men and women who even if they were guilty based on your inhuman guidelines, they should have been at most imprisoned, but not executed.

He continues on with: 

"Mousavi had nothing to do with it. Not even formally was the prime minister in charge of any national security operation"

And how do YOU know that with such certainty? Where you there with Mousavi? Were you an employee or messenger at nokhost vaziri or at any national security operation to know who they might have interacted?

I find it impossible to believe that once Khomeini's fatvaa was issued, Mousavi could not have heard about it. The least he could have done was to resign in protest, even afterwards. Even Montazeri had more dignity than Mousavi. 

But wait, I forgot that according to you, those who were executed should have been executed anyway. So why Mousavi should have protested in the first place?

Your logic is the logic of convenience, Q. Action X is halaal when it serves the IRI and its ideology, but the same action X is haraam and punishable by death when it is against IRI's interests.

Very convenient.

Jamshid jan: maybe if the

Jamshid jan: maybe if the IRI was not the biggest jailer of the journalists we would have the real investigations to the crimes and numbers of victims of IRI,

 //cpj.org/2010/05/groups-demand-iran-end-threats-against-bahari-othe.php

Yawn Jamshid, how many times do you need to be schooled on this?

Your comment was deleted because you can't control yourself (a telling characteristic) and become selectively a "gheirati" when it suits you, particularly after you're told the fact that "hich ghalati nemikoni!"

Unfortunately, my own response was also deleted. Too bad, it was educational and had no profanity.

Of course, it is you who does not have any evidence for your "8000" number. You are basically pulling this out of your behind. Ironic if you think about your theories of how people like yourself were "fooled" by false propaganda during the revolution. It looks like your "experience" may come in handy afterall... unfortunately against yourself.

We have had this discussion before. 3 facts are relevant for you to remember which you won't if history is any judge.

1. The number of victims was at most about two to three thousand. No list of over 2000 names exist that amnesty international finds credible. A work called "with revolutionary rage and rancor" by a Harvard lawyer 2007 named the same number. The memoirs of Ayatollah Montazeri, a man who lost his position because of this issue and is revered by Green movement also wrote that the number was slightly over 2000, but less than 3.

We have talked about this before and you are not interested in anything credible if it doesn't suit you. Your casual relationship to truth is something that you haven't been able to change, likely because it's just too late for you.

2. They were not all innocent. Many of them (if not most) would be eligable to be executed in the United States for the crime of treason. At best they could hope for Guantanimo. For example if they were part of Al-Qaeda. They were active members of a known violent terrorist organization that attacked Iran in the late 80s and killed many people. I do not agree with their execution in Iran and consider it an unjustified massacre, but to call them "innocent" is simply laughable and opportunistic. One must also have no respect, as clearly YOU do not, for the poor innocent Iranians killed in this attack, and in previous assassinations by this organization not to ever mention justice for them. If you did care, you would have enough "ensaf" to mention it, but we know you don't.

3. Mousavi had nothing to do with it. Not even formally was the prime minister in charge of any national security operation, nor could he have been. Montazeri Iran's #2 man at the time, wasn't even sure the cabinet was aware of such an order. Montazeri even says that Khomeini himself was mislead and was told "these are the same people we caught attacking from Iraq". People who understand Iran know that something like this needed Khomeini's order directly and that such an order would have been carried out without question. People who have no respect for truth, and want to make a cheap and tired political argument, however inflate and obfuscate to laughable levels. (That's you).

To summerize, I correctly ridiculed your laughable absurdities which were not based on facts. And you certainly didn't produce any evidence for it, just repeated like a parrot.

vildemose: This is mildly amusing. Your description doesn't even match what happened here. How was "80 Million" a "logical consequence" of what Jamshid claimed? You still have much learning to do about fallacies and argumentation. Not that people like you and Jamshid actually care for the truth enough to follow any kind of logic.

The hate is enough for you, that's all you really want to express. Everyone knows.