Roozbeh_Gilani

RG - An excellent idea

The more fragmented we are, the less effective we become. 

We need to come together under a common denominator; "democratic Iran", rather than a regime change to ...... monarchy/jomhouri/republic, a person, or just a flag. 

When I say you have no substance

it is because of such statements as the one you just made in your "response."

George W. Bush's Secretary of State Colin Powell told him before the invasion of Iraq that, "If you break it [Iraq], you own it," meaning that if the U.S. invades and occupies Iraq, it will be responsible for everything that will happen there.

//www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/0...

All the relevant international treaties, including the Geneva Convention, also say that the occupying power - even if, as in Iraq's case, the occupation is illegal - is responsible for the safety and security of the occupied. Unlike you, who has only hot but worn out and tired rhetoric to offer, people like me read these before opening their mouth.

But, in your infinite hatred towards Muslims and Islam that you cannot even disguise thinly, you again blame Muslims for something that even people like Colin Powell recognize is the responsibilty of the U.S. Using precisely the same language that the neocons use, in your fantasy parallel universe, everything is Muslims' fault, even when they are slaughtered.

Now, I admit that this is the hallmark of "deep thinking" on your part. And, your baseless, worn out, tired attacks on people like me are also the hallmark of the type of "democracy" that you believe in.

Enough is enough of a debate with a "deep thinker." Think and read before coming back! Sadly though, I believe you are just waiting for response to show your utmost intelligence in responding immediately!

Mammad

O Islamist Professor

1. You still have not enlightened us with your solution for the present situation.

Comprehensive sanctions on IRI's oil and natural gas. Sanctioning all IRI banks and financial institutions, including the IRI's Central Bank. Making regime change the official policy of the U.S. and its allies. No negotiations of any sort with the IRI. Closing of all IRI embassies, consulates, propaganda outlets, front organizations, and linked entities in the U.S. and allied countries. Expulsion of all IRI "diplomats" and IRI Fellow Travelers, including (but not limited to) Press TV propagandists. Travel ban on anyone linked to IRI Foreign Ministry, Oil Ministry, etc. Implement the same policies that helped bring regime change to Libya (Qaddafi has been in power even longer than the IRI) and are now starting to be implemented against the murderous Assad regime in Syria.

at least another 200,000 in Iraq after the invasion, and possibly as highh as 1 million and God only knows how many in Afghanistan

So when Islamist and Arab terrorists blow each other up on a daily basis, slit each other's throats and dump the body in the Tigris River, torture each other to death with power tools, use children to carry out bombings, maul and mutilate each other like cavemen -- it's obviously the fault of the Great Satan?!? Of course, naturally! After all, Islamists and Arabs are little children, not adults, and cannot possibly be held responsible for their own murderous actions. Now, that's what I call Islamist "logic" and "reasoning". It's refreshing to see the moral and intellecual level of a West-residing Islamist. One would have thought residence in a free society would have transported the Islamist mind out of the Dark Ages, but Islamist pathologies are just too deeply ingrained. When a Professor can indulge in such nonsense, is it any surprise that such pathologies also lead to the atrocities committed on a nearly basis by Islamist thugs around the world -- thugs who have contributed precisely nothing to medicine, technology or any other worthy human pursuit. Don't worry, Professor, Mousavi-Khatami-Karroubi will be leading the Islamist "reformist" movement to even greater heights than they have achieved during the past 3 decades. Sure, they will!

About Immigration

They actually used to have thought police. I was asked 30 years ago if:

• I was or had ever been a member of the communist party. I was not so siad no.
• I was a homosexual. Again no

They did not mind Muslims but God help you if you were one of the above. Back to Ayatollah! I hear from Souri things have changed; I hope so.

Thank you

I was confused. I didn't know to whom Mammad's last comment was addressed !

Dear Mammad:

I'm glad to see you here. I enjoy reading your comments, as always.

Just, please  always clarify , with who you are engaged in the debate  :)

Thank you.

Regards;

Talking about abusive language!

AMIR 1973 writes in reponse to Mammad:

"Islamist fascist "deep thinker"

"..You are without a doubt the master of BARKING and ranting against...How dare you....?   propagandist of these same killers...Safety of you position to peddle your Islamist trash....

Read his conclustion and threatening language towards Mammad:

"Shame on the U.S. immigration authorities for allowing Islamist terrorist propagandists..."

I'm just saying.

Should I say any more?

Iraj

The more you say

the more it becomes obvious who the fascist is here (thank you for takling it back!), who is ranting, and who is devoid of substance!

1. You still have not enlightened us with your solution for the present situation. Of course, I am not holding my breadth.

2. Whatever I am in my profession, you are supremely unqualified to pass judgement on it. If you do not comment on it, you will not demostrate your arrogance and there will be some doubt about it. But, once you open your mouth, all doubts are gone!

3. The most important - the very large majority of - victims of the VF regime over the past three decades have been practicing Muslims, not people like you.

4. Over the past three decades, Christian nations have murdered far more Muslims than Muslims killing non-Muslims. Let's see, at least 100,000 in Bosnia; 500,000 Iraqi children in the 1990s as a result of the sanctions; at least another 200,000 in Iraq after the invasion, and possibly as highh as 1 million, and God only knows how many in Afghanistan. And who was receiving daily reports on Iraq's war that began with a verse from the Bible? George W. Bush!

5. I do not expect you to accept my "garbage." I only express my opinion. Attack it as much as you want, but with substance. VPK told you the same. But, clearly, you are devoid of substance by just using the same worn out, tired rants!

6. Oh yeah, you even attack the immigration office for "letting me in!" So, now, they should presumably have a thought police as well. That is the ultimate arrogance. What is the difference between you and the red necks? Enlighten us. And speaking of shame, given what you said in a moment of rage, the question is, shame on who again?

7. Some of the best people in Iran - the people whom even some of the worst people who comment on this site seemingly praise - are followers of Dr. Ali Shariati. Let us see: Nasrin Sotoudeh, Haleh Sahabi, Hoda Saber, Dr. Ahmad Zeidabadi, Morteza Kazemian, Taghi Rahmani, Keyvan Samimi, Amir Khosrow Dalirsani, Reza Alijani, ........

8. Ask your family members in Iran to ask book stores, and they tell you that selling of Dr. Shariati's books has skyrocketed over the past few years. That is influence, despite anyone's rants. Some of Dr. Shariati's ideas are outdated now, but when I see who hates him (people like Mesbah Yazdi, monarchists, and people like you), and who admires him (the above list, which is the tip of the iceberg), it needs no more explanation. You are in good company.

9. Get a life. Rapidly "responding" on a 24/7 basis will not get you anywhere. Someone else, whose language is awefully similar to yours, tried the same, but it did not go anywhere. I am still here after being attacked by people like you for over three years.You and people like you cannot deter me from commenting.

10. You "exposed" me; it is just fine with me. Now, show some substance. Again: Enlighten us with your solution for the current situation in Iran.

Mammad

Reconciliation

Reconciliation is used when there are powerful sides. It is an alternative to a civil war. In Iran there are a significant number of Basiji. If they feel they are going to be killed there will be a civil war for sure.

Why should they just roll over? Therefore we need a truce that allows them to disarm. However I would not extend that to MKO. They do not have a powerful force. Therefore I see no reason to let them off the hook. Why should we?

Some responses.

Great to see so many people participating from seemingly opposite ends of political  spectrum. Apart from BoosBoos (who can correct me if I am wrong), everybody else here seems to  agree with the illegality of the VF regime. The fact that "VF System" has betrayed the ideals of the vast majority of Iranian people who fought and lost their lives for 1979 revolution. But Mamad, please correct me if I got you wrong.....

BoosBoos: I really appreciate you participating. This blog was to a small part written about user ID's like yours. No reverse psychology was meant or applied. But Thanks for proving many of my points.

COP: On "venting off". Please try this. I dedicate at least two hours of my life per day, first thing in the morning and last thing after work in the evening to one of the  three activities. one day per week of rest is absolutely essential. Please note you can do it no matter what age or health condition. We have people from teens well into their seventies in our local club. Let me know if you need more info.

Rea: Thank you. I am a great believer in "KISS  principal"

Maziar: Thanks for nicely zooming into the final push part of my comment. Anyone who has had any dealings with the mulla crowd would know that they simply would not go unless they absolutely have to. Now I can't help but thinking that "tasbih and Estekhareh" would only work under the supervision of a nicely targetted barrel of a gun, purely as a matter of speech of course.....

Mammad: I really appreciate you participating. You represent a big chunk of our countries population, who are good muslims, yet against the VF dictatorship. I agree with you 100% that the "unity must be principled". But I also disagree with lots of stuff you say. Pardon me for not going through item by item. But for instance, although I'd love for the VF to go peacefully, I see absolutely no prospect of that. The post 2009 election uprising is a proof of that. The peacefull green movement was brutaly suppressed, with leadership under house arrest. A lot of other points you raised can only be responded within this context: the failure of peaceful opposition to regime...

Soosan Khanoom: I agree with you that the government should be completely void of religion. But in another blog, I stated my belief that Islam, at least the islam we know now, is more of an ideology than a religion. Mammad is a very honest man, and his sentiments back my belief.  

Amir: I am with you on your robust approach to Islamist regime. Now the question is how can a united front, inclusive of both my and yours and mammad's be formed to liberate Iran from this nightmare of VF dictatorship. It's a tough question and a tough task. But not an impossible one. It has been done before. It is really a question of leadership. A leadership which can unite and focus the opposition against a common enemy using a simple yet understanable message. Few of such leaders: George Washington, Winston Chrchill, Gandhi, mandella, Ho-Chi-Min....

G.Rahmanian: Nice to see you back after the absence. I was wondering if you travelled back to iran using the name G.rahmanian, and could not catch a flight back!

Reality Bite: Thank you for the kind words. I am the kind of lefty who does not allow my brain and logic to be dictated by "ideology". Indeed any "ideology" which prohibits you from critical thinking should be kicked aside. Very obvious to most of us, you'd think... I generally avoid diving into ideological debates here, but a blog on that might be a good idea. In principal I see absolutely no contradiction between socialism and democracy. Indeed i believe that a true democracy can only be achieved through socialism. K.Marx in all his writings, emphasised on the the principal of "critical thinking". I remember, during my student days watching a play put togethyer by some art students (great place to meet girls if you were an engineering student like me!) In which Marx was being tried by Stalin for being a "counter Revolutionary"! A great play. On your points, I am feeling your bite of reality. I do somehow disagree with you that Iranains are unique in the characteristics you quite rightly articulated. Let's take the vietnamese. Very peacefull nation. Their struggle against French colonists and their final victory over  curropt S. Vietnam puppet regime is just amazing. What do you think brought these vietnamese peasants together to fight so bravely for their freedom whilst their country was being napalmed to nothing? Do you really believe all thes eguys were dedicated Marxist_Leninists? Of course not. They had a very determined , honest and clear leadership under Ho-Chi Min, who was interestingly enough not at all "anti-americam", although chosen as a simbol for "anti USimerialism" by the confused, chic marxsists, cigarette smoking, Latte sipping, french intellectuals of 1960's, who seem to have still some supporting amongst "iranian left"..... 

Maryam Hojjat: thanks for reading and support.

Vildmose: Thanks for your comments. You are sharp, i like you.

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

GR

The issue is highly important. But, that will be decided by the democratic system that is supposed to emerge. My own preference is for national reconciliation akin to what happened in South Africa after the apartheid regime was gone. But, again, that must be decided by the democratic system.

Mammad

I agree with VPK's point

I keep using the word "reality" a lot, and I'm going to use it again. The reality is that, like it or not, a significant proportion of Iranians are, or at least consider themselves, devout Muslims.

Many of our fellow Iranian Muslims are good, decent people who love Iran and their fellow Iranians, even non-Muslims Iranians, just as much as the rest of us. Just as importantly, they also oppose the IR like we do.

I might not agree with Mammad and say Soosan khanoom on every issue, but I consider them as Iran loving Muslims, who care for the Human Rights of all Iranians and who in opposing the IR, support the separation of government and religion.

And these are the Muslim Iranians we need to unite with to bring the nightmare of the Islamic Republic to an end and bring about a truly free and democratic society where the rights and views of ALL Iranians are not only respected but protected by the constitution.

Ps, Amir jaan thank you for the support.

 Mousavi is a Khomeinist

 Mousavi is a Khomeinist criminal who should be put on trial not a leader of democratic Iran. He should be hunted like any other nazi/khomenist criminal for the rest of his life as  should Rajavi, Karoubi et al.

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt

Dear VPK,

Fair enough. I went too far in calling him a "fascist". However, I stand by the term "Islamist". I don't have any objection to Muslims. My parents are both practicing Muslims, and both are opposed to the IRI and all its tentacles, including the Islamist "reformists" on whose behalf he propagandizes. Islamism has done too much damage to Iran, Iranians, and the world in the past 3 decades (much of it during the period of Islamist "reformists") for me to regard it with anything but the revulsion that I feel it rightly deserves. Regards.

Dear Amir

What did Mammad say that is so  bad; he sounds reasonable? I have been begging people to be civil. These attacks are not doing us any good. Alright he may have been a follower of Shariati philosophy; one I disagree with. But Mammad is an example of a reasonable Muslim. If find him far more reasonable than MK. If I had to pick a professor I would pick Mammad over MK any day. 

So I respectfully request specific points of disagreement with Mammad. We are not going to get anywhere if we refuse to even talk to reasonable Muslims. Like it or not at least half of Iranians are believers in Islam. They are not going away; not anytime soon. 

If we do not include people like Mammad we lost before we begin. You are not going to create an inclusive democracy by attacking him. Once again I want to know what is "fascist" about Mammad and his points? Maybe I am blind but I see nothing offensive about his ideas. Maybe I disagree with some. But that label is a pretty tough one and in my opinion not justified.

Reality-Bites

I pretty much agree 100% with your comments to Roozbeh. Take care.

Islamist fascist "deep thinker"

O Professor, you are without a doubt the master of barking and ranting against anyone who dares take issue with your murderous Islamist brethren. Is this any way for a world renowned scientist (LOL) to behave? How dare anyone object to hostage takers and Khomeinist thugs? (Which is exactly what those folks whom you promote as the IRI "reformists" are). We have seen the fruits of 3 decades of rule by Islamist killers, and yet West-residing Groupies and propagandists of these same killers expect us to keep buying their garbage. Okay, sure! And now, keep using the safety of your position in the Great Satan to peddle your Islamist trash and oppose any meaningful sanctions on oil and natural gas to undermine the Islamist killers. Shame on the U.S. immigration authorities for allowing Islamist terrorist propagandists into this country. Cheers now!

Mammad

You are right for most part. Religion should be kept outside of official politics. But people will still have their religion. Many people will base their decision on their religious beliefs. I oppose Sharia law or any other religion being "officially" recognized or banned. For example Bahai; or Hindu should not be banned. But an "Islamic Party" should be allowed. In fact we may have many "Islamic Democratic" or "Islamic Secular" or "Muslim Democrats". As long as they are not violent.

A strong "Bill of Rights" will prevent abuse and tyranny of majority. You are absolutely right about "Christian Democrats" and their like. Why not? I personally think no more than half Iranians are practicing Muslims. Plus many are pretty mild at that. 

I don't want eating in public in Ramadan; sale of alcohol or even cabarets banned.  We always had a problem when things like Ramadan or Moharram happen during NowRuz. If some people want to mourn while others celebrate that should be fine. I am going to celebrate NowRuz no matter what. 

Responses mostly to Mammad but also others

Here is what I think:

1. Change will be mostly from within. But it won't be just that. Some of the best Iranian minds had to run off due to repression. Therefore a foreign based "Government in Exile" may be required. But it should be made of loyal (read no MEK) Iranians. From Pahlavi to Ebadi and anyone else who is devoted to a free Iran like Iran Secular. People are not free to discuss in Iran. Hence we have no choice but to move the discussion outside.
2. Foreign governments will interfere no matter what we say. I don't like it; don't want it; have no way to stop it!
3. Sure I oppose military attack on Iran. But explain that to Obama! I don't control the US military. Therefore while I oppose attacks I have limited influence. I do write and call my representatives all the time. There is one organization that has some influence if I do use the "N" word :-) I mean NIAC (please folks don't jump on me; I have a bad back).
4. I favor targeted sanctions. I oppose sanctions on rugs and other things which are stupid. If they do want to go all the way then they need full sanctions including oil. I say either go all the way or don't bother.
5. I absolutely without reservation demand the territorial integrity of Iran. More than supporting I DEMAND it as well as reunification. Northern Afghanistan; Shia and Kurd parts of Iraq should be given the option.
6. Religion needs to be separate from government. But you will never keep people's religion out of their decision making process. As for respect I am not sure what it means. I oppose laws banning criticism of religion.
7. I agree with the first part. But do not agree it has to be a republican system. A parliamentary system PM but no President; a direct vote like Swiss or even a figurehead Monarchy would all work.

Now to remark about MEK by BoosBoos:

Yes many in diaspora are able to come and go. In fact some even "vote" in elections! I have never voted in IRI elections but I may come and go as I wish. I got (expired passport now) all my papers. My father is in the *** hole with IRI but I am not. 

Some of the people in the diaspora shouldn't move back nor should they be invited to move back (MEK et al.).

On the contrary the Iranian government very much wants them back. To stand trial! I read some of the rank and file went back and got a slap on the wrist; somehow I think the leadership will not find any Iranian judge so merciful.

RG jaan

As I usually find it is the case with you, your blog is spot on and thoughts on the need for unity right on the money. I don't think I have ever agreed with a lefty person's views so much before, lol.

I hasten to add though, I'm not a right-winger either since I do back quite a few "left of the centre" philosophies such as provision of free health care to all and at least a safety net of social security system for the genuinely needy in a society. 

Anyway, back to the main point of this discussion, and leaving aside the personal attacks on this website and who supports whom and is the agent of whom, if I may, I'll briefly set out my cents for what they are worth. I'm afraid they will be somewhat on the pessimistic side.

Let me say from the outset that I do believe the tyranny that is the Islamic Republic WILL one day be removed from its grip over Iran. The problem for me is I have no idea when and how this will happen and what will follow afterwards.

Anyway here are some of my thoughts and the problems I foresee, not just for our unity on this site, but regarding any changes for the better in Iran's future:  

1- Although there are genuinely brave and selfless Iranians, many of whom poured into the streets in 2009 to protest against the IR's joke of a presidential election, sadly a significant of proportion of Iranian people are members of "hezbe baad" (the prevailing wind). Many of those who were shouting "marg bar Shah" in 1979, barely a year before were shouting "javid Shah"! And those people will continue to support the IR, until finally the regime looks like it's about to fall. I suspect we have quite a few "hezbe baadi" right here on IC too.

2- There are two kinds of dictatorships. Those that I call soft-dictators like Shah, Egypt's Mubarak and the ousted Tunisian leader who would resist popular uprising to some degree, but are not willing (or able) to commit mass murder to stay in power at any cost and sooner or later leave power. And those that I would consider the hard and truly blood thirsty dictators like Saddam, Ghaddafi, and Bashar Assad and his father, who kill as many as it takes, even tens of thousands in one hit, to hang on to power till the last possible moment.

The Islamic Republic is a dictatorship of the latter kind. If people oppose it the IR does not pussyfoot around like Shah did. It will brutally beat, torture and kill as many people as it takes to stay in power. The regime has ensured its survival by learning lessons from how Shah's security was unable to prevent the 1979 protests and the protests in Iran under its own rule since then. That is why the IR security is far more efficient, ruthless and better organized than almost any other in the Middle East in suppressing dissent, as evidenced by how successfully it eventually managed to suppress the 2009 protests in Iran. And you can bet your bottom dollar the IR security has been learning more lessons from the recent revolutions in the Middle East, including Syria, where it has been helping Assad.

3- Popular uprisings only seem to have been successful, without the need for foreign military intervention, against what I called soft dictatorships like Shah's, Mubarak's and the Tunisian leader's, not against the hard dictators. It took foreign military intervention to remove Saddam, the Taliban and even Gaddafi, who would have defeated the Libyan rebels if not for NATO's non-stop bombing of the dictator's forces and infrastructure. As someone who is opposed to any external military foreign intervention in Iran, that is a depressing reality for me.

4- Call the for unity is all fine, and right. I fully support it. However, the other reality is that the IR being the blood thirsty dictatorship that it is, it has decimated nearly all credible opposition inside and outside Iran. There is no one, no group out there around which the opposition can rally to form an effective challenge to the Mullahs. The brave of souls of 2009 only had the likes of Moussavi - an IR figure himself who has never called for the end of the IR - to rally around. Lack of real opposition leadership is further reflected in the sad reality that even the US only sees the MEK as the only credible opposition to the IR. That is what are reduced to and it is the IR sitting pretty and laughing at us all.

Sorry to come across as negative, but as my username states: reality bites. 

Separatism vs reunification

Separatism is absolutely a danger. There are people on IC that want it. There are also people in USA mostly Neocon who push for it. If that happens it will be a disaster just like Yugoslavia. Now this is not just limited to Iran.

Other nations like Iraq and Afghanistan are much more vulnerable to it. In fact I think there is a possibility of reverse of it for Iran. If either Iraq or Afghanistan disintegrate there is a chance to reunite parts of Iran. For example Northern Afghanistan; Kurdish Iraq and Shia southern Iraq. These all share more with Iran than anywhere. The Kurds will require some autonomy but why not? Let them have internal freedom like teach Kurdish along with Persian as long as Greater Kurdistan remains part of Iran.

In addition nations which pushed to wreck others suffered a lot themselves. Russia and Britain did more to break up Iran than any other. Now watch them! The "Great" Russian empire was not even able to hold to Kiev. They struggle to keep Chechnya and failing! Most their former territories like Georgia as spitting at them. Britain had its "mighty" empire reduced to a couple of islands off Argentina and Caribbean. Britain is hard pressed to hold on to Scotland! Before long Northern Ireland will reunite with rest of Ireland. America is very much in danger of a split. We already see a giant split between the coasts; south; and middle. In fact I know people who would gladly see the South go! Again my point is the bit about "Glass Houses". They should worry about keeping their own nations together. Not about breaking our nation apart or they may be in for some nasty surprises. Once you set a trend then it applies to any nation.

Excellent & vital Advice

Great blog Roozbeh.

Mammad:

Any plans for putting IR criminals on trial? I was just wondering!

Mohammad

 "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."  Jefferson

What Jefferson mentioned has been occasionally violated by the religious political parties that exist today in the west....  Just look at the debate over stem cell research !!  

 Religion should not play a role in any kind of decision making.  

By the way, I am not saying that people should drop their religions , whatever that religion is,  I am saying that they should keep it as the personal affair....

Also which religion?  For many especially those who insist to mix it with politics, religion has being turned to a fake cover.   Bunch of hypocrites calling themselves religious. These are actually the ones who have dropped their religions for their politics.  

Some people cannot contribute

anything except, of course, attacking others, using rants, innuendoes, insinuations, baseless accusations that, when coupled with their extreme imbecility, generate the type of rants that are posted here by a guy who is on 24/7 watch!! The people that you attack in Iran are far, far, far, far ahead of you in terms of understanding the current conditions in Iran. After all, your are here in the confort of your home, constantly saying "lengesh kon," but they are there, mostly in jail, facing the most extreme brutality.

All right, you ranted loud and clear, and got the attention that you crave. Now, the true "deep" thinker, please enlighten us with your deep thoughts about what to do, hidden behind your bogus name.

Mammad

Comparing Christian Democrats with Khomeinist Islamists

Imagine what kind of deep "thinker" would mention the Khomeinist scumbags of the Islamic Iran Participation Front (whose ranks include hostage takers, terrorists, Islamic Cultural Revolution goons, and IRI Ministry of Intelligence thugs) in the same breath as the Christian Democratic parties of Western European democracies. Do Christian Democrats see a Cardinal or Pope as the rightful Leader of their countries? Do they see "Christian law" as the basis for their countries own laws? Do they espouse all the other murderous, worthless nonsense propounded by their idol and "Emam"?

Soosan khanoom

It is not a question of whether we want to mix religion and politics, but a matter of reality.

Those who believe that if we wake up tomorrow and find an Iran - a democratic Iran - in which everybody is against religion or even religion in politics live in a fantasy world, not in a real one.Yeah, we hear all the time in these pages that, "The vast majority of Iranians hate Islam," or, "I cannot wait to see Islam leaving Iran." But, the fact is that Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is here to stay. Anyone who believes that religious political parties will simply disappear in thin air is fantasizing.

In Iran, the Islamic Coalition Party existed during the Shah, exists now, and will exist in the future, for example, because it represents an important stratum of the present Iranian society, namely, the bazaar. Before the crackdown of 2009, Islamic Iran Participation Front had 20,000 members and at least 100,000 activists. These people are not going anywhere. They are there to stay.

The problem, in my opinion, is not with religion in politics, but with religion in governance. In Western European countries Christian Democracts are powerful political parties with roots in religion, and have been in power many times since WW II - in Italy they were in power for 50 years. In Germany, the most powerful European nation, the CD are currently in power. Yet, when they come to power they stay loyal to the principle of separation of church and state. That is what we need. That is the principle that I am talking about.

Mammad

Maziar58 Separatism.

Maz, 

I assume you meant me.  #5 is that there is a plan to separate Iran into several mini-countries.  It's actually a very serious plan, and it's one of the big things I've been trying to call to people's attention.  There are several people on this site pushing that agenda - but unfortunately Iranians are asleep.  This is very real.  And I've only put limited information here.

One of the official U.S. Army Plans:

//www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899 

Look at this to see what the US and Israel (and maybe Turkey) want to do to Iran.

//therearenosunglasses.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/middleeastredrawn.jpg 

Aghayeh KissKiss

First of all, Roozbeh Gilani is a good guy, and I would not "spam" his blog. Second of all, we each have our own way of expressing ourselves. Personally, I find imitation to be the sincerest form of flattery. I will leave it to the reader to decide whether I am agreeing or disagreeing with the previous commentators list of "principles". Irrespective of whether or not you agree with the style or the content (or lack thereof) of my comments, I have not "spammed" anybody here or anywhere else. 

Bo....

Is it a he or she ?

May I ask? 

just wanting to address properly;

however 7 well written points to read throughly at 11 and so well argued while 70 million Iranian are up rihgt now to face another day in their daily struggles.

And there are more agreed points than not which is a good point.

one - can you please explain # 5 for us/me

 just my taught thanks.

Maziar

Amir1973: Spam Why?

Comments like yours are the problem.  This guy put some genuine thought behind some ideas - and you come along and spam it; why?