The False anti Imperialism of Islamist regime

by Roozbeh_Gilani

Islamist regime and their propaganda machinery always wraps  polar opposites of Imperial japan, nazi Germany on one hand  and vietnam on the other hand into one package,  throwing it at the gullible as the justification for their own policy of hate not towards the "american imperialism", but all the forces of progress from west.

The father of modern vietnam, Ho-Chi-Min, a committed communist was not at all anti-american. The declaration of independence of vietnam from the French colonists just after the WW2, composed by Ho himself, was almost a copy of US declaration of independence. He asked and received Soviet backing only after being rejected by US. What US did in Vietnam afterwards was an unjust war with numerous war crimes, leading to a humiliating defeat, indeed the only major defeat in US history. Ho's National Liberation Front had the solid support of M. Vietnamese population, with lots of support in south.

The Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan on the other hand were two murderous Fascist entities. Japanese treated chinese as subhuman and after capturing big chinese cities they'd go on campaign of rape and murder of civilians. So did Germans who treated Russian as sub human. never mind the 6 million murdered Jews, Russians lost 20millions, of which at least an estimated 14million were civilians. An all out war on both Fascist entities of Japan and Nazi Germany which were conducted not only by Americans but also Soviets and Brits were just and correct.

Back to Ho-Chi-Min and Vietnam. Ho put the interest of Vietnam and it's people ahead of his own ideology. Pure and simple. Islamist regime on the other hand put their own ideology of hate of the west ahead of Iran and it's interests


Recently by Roozbeh_GilaniCommentsDate
Islamo Fascist Paedophiles in London.
Dec 01, 2012
For Sattar Beheshti
Nov 06, 2012
For a fist full of Dollars, For Syria!
Oct 07, 2012
more from Roozbeh_Gilani

Rahmanian, ditto!

by Tabarzin on

I don't disagree with what you say. The issue is that whoever is anti-imperialist here and shows how the Anglo-American emperor has no clothes, is quickly labeled by certain parties as an agent of the regime no matter what they stand for. And given such a zero-sum approach by such parties, it is fair to conclude that such parties hurling accusations at all and sundry are in fact lobbyists.


Of course IR regimes Anti-Imperialism is False.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

They owe their creation and being held in power to the Imperialism of the USA/UK/Israel.  They are not truley in favor of anything except maintaining control over Iran, even if it means doing as their bosses in the MI6 tell them.  Like selling our oil for only a 20% cut when during the shahs time Iran received 75%.

The Shah was really the only Iranian we had that was anti-imperialist for real and consistently won and helped iranians enjoy maximum freedom with minimum repression.  The Imperialists think they had the last laugh by betraying him and using propaganda to fool Iranians against the Shah.  Slowly & with time Pahlavi haters are losing ground as a result of their own decisions in the past.  Siding with Imperialists was and always will be the work of liars, ignorants, traitors, manipulated & deceived people.

G. Rahmanian


by G. Rahmanian on

Where did I mention you in my comment below? I didn't even read(watch?) what you have posted. What I wrote was a general statement pertaining to hypocritical IR supporters who, while condemning "imperialism," are all for IR's meddling in the affairs of other countries in the region. These entities are perpetually boasting about IR as a regional power and how IR influences regional politics. One cannot condemn "imperialism" and champion interventionist policies of IR at the same time.


Well, then

by Tabarzin on

If I am a lobbyist, I wish to get paid, and oodles of it.


The latest label and accusation

by Truthseeker9 on

is calling everyone "lobbyist" and then complain about being labelled themselves!


Mr Rahmanian

by Tabarzin on

If you or your lobbyist handlers can find a single statement of mine online supporting the IRI, you may have a point. But in the absence of that, p-u-h-l-e-a-z-e.......

G. Rahmanian

While Crying Foul!

by G. Rahmanian on

Isn't it funny that while crying foul with regards to US's imperialist agenda IR's supporters proudly brag about the Islamic Republic becoming a regional power and its influence in the Middle East?


Gotta love this, right?

by Tabarzin on


Give me authenticity or give me nothin

by SamSamIIII on


AO jaan, our friemd Rouzbeh is one authentic commie dude whom i respect. the difference between a genuine  commie & a fake commie is the same as the difference between a legacy patriot vs a fake real estate patriot , Blonde vs fake blonde, Horse vs wild ass..u get the picture;). In short, a lotta fake ommatie commies came to this leftist agenda not thru conviction but simple reactionary hate for the western man & his/her accomplishments. Ironicaly, in Iran a huge chunk of the so called left was in fact leftist bacheh akhoonds who were educated in the west and felt inferiorated & unacknowledged so upon return to Iran packaged their nonsense in a legitimate banner of socialism ,commuinism with an ommatie twist  just so to degrade the west, the jew & even kiaani Iran. Now i wont go further or else risk the wrath of the shaikhmaster who deleted my comment on Your own blog. 

 Cheers pilgrim!!! 

Anonymous Observer

Perfectly put RG jaan - Thank you

by Anonymous Observer on

Back to Ho-Chi-Min and Vietnam. Ho put the interest of Vietnam and it's people ahead of his own ideology. Pure and simple. Islamist regime on the other hand put their own ideology of hate of the west ahead of Iran and it's interests

I complimented you on my blog about this very correct and astute observation.  Very well put.  This is essentially the bottom line.  Everything else is just safsateh. 


You're welcome, Abarmard

by AMIR1973 on

Now, will you stop making false claims about the IRI being "way above compared to many developing countries". In reality, the IRI has a pitifully low standard of living compared even to many developing countries (i.e. not in the Top 100), so what purpose is served by making such false claims?


Thank you AMIR1973

by Abarmard on

That's what my argument is, Iran should not be compared to Vietnam. Set your objective not based on free trade but freedom and rights.



Do not believe these false claims

by AMIR1973 on

Ranging from education, possibilities of moving a class up, health care, worker's rights, to name a few, Iran is many decades ahead. Iran is way below average when compared to developed nations but way above compared to many developing countries.

These claims are lies. The IRI is not ranked even in the Top 100 among countries in either infant mortality or life expectancy. In fact, it's figures on these basic measures of well-being are below many other developing countries in the Mideast, including countries either poorer than Iran or even more conservative in their outlook than Iran. For a country that has the second largest natural gas reserves and third largest oil reserves in the entire world to be ranked not even in the Top 100 is downright pathetic. But, I guess it is better than Vietnam -- so things are actually not that bad. Great "logic" and "reasoning" on display!


Imperialism or Islamist

by Abarmard on

Both sides and their supporters use wrong terminologies to define one another and neither is better or does the right thing.

Question is whether Iran is willing to have relation with US or US is willing to presume relations with Iran based on their interest. Referring to historical data, Iran has many times initiated the willingness to talk directly to US and has not received any answers. One of the main reasons that president Obama was given unconditional support from majority of the population in US and the world was the idea to initiate a dialogue with "US rivals" such as Iran. We now know that was nothing more than a slogan.

I don't discount the fact that Iranian social policies are horrible, backward, and unfair but that's no reason to mix issues with international politics and diplomacy. You have done the mistake to do just that: you have let go of horrible rules and policies of Vietnam, lack of any rights and anti-humane behavior of Vietnamese government in the sake of having semi open trade policies. What about freedom and rights?
I loved Vietnam and highly recommend a visit to that wonderful country but the people live under despotic, torturous, and highly corrupt government without currently having any hope for a better future. Vietnam is following the Chinese model but much worse in sense of political, economic, and social wellbeing.

I have said this many times and have argued this even when I visited Iran. To compare Iran to any Asian countries, you must first admit the cultural differences. In those countries people are submissive and their government has full control of their people. In return the people don’t complain much and work very hard. Their government has no mercy to those who don’t follow rules and their workers do not enjoy any rights. Working conditions historically has been worse than horrible, where most Iranians would never submit to those conditions! Hard to believe? Not really. Take a visit to Iran and its factories vs. Vietnam and be the judge for yourself.

In Iran, even though one can find similarities that originate from despotic system and cultural backwardness, is vastly different in the attitude in regard to having a good life. That attitude is absent in daily lives of most South Asian countries.  India for example, where there is a caste system in place where lower caste are treated similar to animals but population has accepted their cultural norm! If women are beaten to death or are raped, we do not even hear about it, while in Iran is a different story.

Simply put one would not want to be a poor or middle class in those countries vs. being in a similar class in Iran. Ranging from education, possibilities of moving a class up, health care, worker's rights, to name a few, Iran is many decades ahead. Iran is way below average when compared to developed nations but way above compared to many developing countries. Our daily discussion here in is not based on comparing Iran to developing nations but to developed nations. We want the highest form of a system that is not corrupt and it is under check, democratic, has above average social welfare, provides equality of genders, freedom of expression and speech, etc.

If your objective is better relations with the West and open trade as a way of best option for Iran while disregarding human life and social rights, then you are right in your blog. However if you want what I mentioned in above sentence that also carries these attributes, then please do not compare Iran with Vietnam because they are many decades behind.
Finally I don’t suggest that you have said this but for some it is challenging comprehension that relations with West don’t equate freedom,(in case of Iran)  lack of Islamic traditions, lack of corruption, gender equalities and rights. Better to be clear and direct about Iranian rights than simple shallow scenarios that have neither truth nor substance in them.

Bahram G

Belief, attitude, and behavior

by Bahram G on

There is intimate relationship among the three. What we believe colors our attitude and our attitude drive our behavior. Therefore, the Islamists' behavior in all spheres of life can be traced to the belief they hold. And their belief is a brand of Islam called Shia. This brand is replete with loads and loads of what maybe considered anomalies. It is largely other-worldly. That is, it denigrates this world and it's trapping and hugely builds the attractions of a coming next stop for the faithful and the dreadful destination for those who are not from the fold as well as those from the fold who do not strictly adhere and practice its dictates.And Islam, by design and from the word go has been a combative ideology of the righteous against infidles. The Shia sect has an added measure of being trapped into the tangle of guilt-paranoia. To this day, the Shia Iranians bloody themselves annually feeling guilty that they failed to go to the aid of Hussein in his battle with Yazid over who was going to be the CEO of the Islam business, We weren't there at the time, most of our ancestors weren't even Muslims and most of the ones who were Muslims weren't Shia. Besides, we really had no dog in that fight, so to speak. Two Arab cousins who indeed shared a great grandfather fought for leadership. What was it or is it to us? But we have bought into this alien islam, have adopted all it's good and bad and taken many pathological aspects of this defunct belief of Fortean centuries ago to a new low and we seem to be incapable of casting the yoke off our necks.In short, it is Islam, and in particular the virulent Shia brand that determines the attitudes of the ruling Islamists. And it is that attitude that keeps us on the present track of suffering. Suffering that resonates with the very soul of Shia Islam. We are hooked on suffering. It is our "dope" and we seek it, it seems.