Letters to my torturer- The Iranian Left, the Left, the silly Left.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Simorgh5555
by Simorgh5555
04-Sep-2010
 

I recently stumbled across a book which gives a harrowing account of prisons in the Islamic Republic. The book is called, 'Letters to my torturer, love, imprisonment in Iran' by journalist Houshang Asadi. The fact that Houshang spent the years before the Catastrophe of 1979 opposing the Shah warrants attention, as his personal friendship with the then small time opium smoker Ali Khamenei before he was fast-tracked through to the rank of Ayhatollah, and ultimately Supreme Leader.

Througout the book Asadi expresses his sense of betrayal that the leftists and Islamists he trusted implicitly would inflict horrendous physical and mental torture on him. However, the biggest revelation is the way he grudgingly admits that he was never treated this inhumanely under the Shah. However, Asadi's sense of betrayal amongst the leftists and liberals of Iran is not unique and indeed, Asadi's expereince confirms that non-violent opposition to his regime was largely tolerated. The cover of the book perfectly sums up Asadi's spells in prison during the regime of the Shah as a "minor inconvenience" and little did he know of the gruesome punishment that would await him and others Iranians after 1979. Asadi, Bazargan, Shamlou, Forouhar, and the singer Dariush Eghbali are just some of those amonst the Left of the Iranian political scene who gained their fame and even flourished in fmae or creativity under the Shah's rule but are now have been killed by the monster they helped pave the way for or are living in exile indefinitely. Take the singer Dariush Eghbali , who was at the peak of his music creativity with his politically motivated songs challenging the poltical status quo of the Shah, where is he now? Yet, during an interview with Voice of America last year he seemed to sugegst that there is no real fundamental difference between the regime of the Shah and that of the Islamic Republic. The difference, Mr Eghabli, is that you are living in exil, rather that inside your country. THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE. If other Iranians like Mr Eghbali cannot tell the difference then their judgment is beyond repair.

Some of the Left learned their lesson, take Shapur Bakhtiya, who opposed the Shah, and was imprissoned, but yet he was willing to put aside his differences for the love of his country and knew that what the a government run by a mob of Islamist/Marxists was infinitely worse than that of the Shah.

Indeed, when Reza Pahlavi, was asked the question directly as to why there was no liberal democracy during his father's regime, he accepted the fact, and did not try to defend it. However, if politcal freedoms were absenst, the Shah more than made up for it for social equality,emancipation of women and their right in the work place.

However, what has this to do with Mousavi? You may ask. Has he learned the lesson of other misguided leftists such as Asadi? In 2009 Mosuavi remarked that the torture and ruthless clampdown of demosntrators in the rigged election of that year by the government forces were "far worse than that of the Shah".If this is so , then why does he not demand for the overthrow of the Islamist regime in the same way he did for the Shah? Is there an inch of regret or compassion for the thousands killed before 2009 , especially during the time he was in office as prime minister in the early ninteen eighties? Mousavi has conducted himself as a gutless coward and still vows allegiance to Ruhollah Khomeini, murderer, mad man and self-confessed paedophile.

When you see a supporter of Maryam Rajavi, or an over excited 'Green' supporter trying to flog you a green breacelet, just smile and walk on knowing their life and achievements have been a total failure.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Simorgh5555CommentsDate
In memory of Kurdish political prisoners Kamangar, Alam Hooli, Vakili, Heydarian, Eslamian
4
May 20, 2012
In memory of Delara Darabi
2
May 19, 2012
The FAKE humanitarians on Iranian.com
5
May 19, 2012
more from Simorgh5555
 
MOOSIRvaPIAZ

Simorgh

by MOOSIRvaPIAZ on Sat Sep 04, 2010 03:45 PM PDT

Iran is already a major client state of the Russia and China. They are
doing to Iran what the US is doing in Iraq without occupation of troops.
No country with expansionalist policy is going to use the word -
Empire, that would be a give away, but the Islamic Republic is now
beholden to two of its gratest puppet masters economically and
politically. Just look at how control over the Caspian has been handed
on a platter to Russia.


And do you think Russia and china would stand by and let west take away their greatest asset in the region?  Absolutely not. Once you order military strikes, prepare for the hell to be unleashed. A destabalized Iran is not in anyones interests, most of all poor Iranians who will suffer brunt of endless conflict. then we should kiss democracy and good bye.

The situation in 1979 is not the same as today. Iran was a progresiive
and modern country and did not plummet into the depths of despair which
it has now. You suggest not changing the rehime, I ask what have
Iranians got to lose by not doing so? Let's face it torture, rape of men
and women, dismal economy, short life expectencies, young men and women
being shot or sent to the gallows, rampant drug, what can possibly go
worse? To mention, nothing about thepre-Islamic heritage and the other
resouces and assets which ahave been siphoned or destroyed. Iran ' as we
know it' is already vanishing 

 


You say the situation in Iran is not the same as 79. And this is exactly why I'm concerned that things will turn to shit once west initiates a military campaign. 30 years worth of OGHDEH will tear Iran apart. I can guarantee you that. Iran will be balkanized.


you  speak of military action as if the west is going to strike all and every asset the regime has, including its leadership and military assets. All the west cares right now is for the nuclear program to be stalled, just like Bill Clinton bombed Saddam and sanctioned Iraq which resulted in millions of unnecessary death. 



it is not in the inerest of Israel, Arab, Chinese, Russian, and some western countries to see an independent strong Iran that is also secular and democratically elected. They would rather have the status quo, a weak state that will be susceptible to pressure and one that is isolated from the west. "contained" as they say.



And even if the west wanted to initiate a major military campaign with
the purpose of regime change, they will not going to waste all the money
and not get to call the shots after they're in. and lets not forget that west should expect blow back from IRI and its proxies in the region. the entire middle-east will be destabilized.


We agree that things are much worse than 79. you ask what are Iranians going to lose? Well, if you want my cynical view, a country for starters. 



There are other options but are painfully slow processes, certainly not something many here in the west like to hear. I would personally rather die here in exile, away from my motherland, than to see it being torn apart as a result of adventurous policies by the neocons.



The quest for democracy in iran is a slow challenging struggle not without its ups and downs.  we might not see it in our lifetime.



  •  
Roozbeh_Gilani

"Repeat of 1979": The nightmare of the Islamist regime of Iran!

by Roozbeh_Gilani on Sat Sep 04, 2010 03:36 PM PDT

Read through every comment posted by the elements of the islamist regime on this site, and the same common fear pops up:

Repeat of 1979....

But history has tought us that this nightmare is the inevitable fate of any tin pot dictator, and completely inevitable.  


  •  
Simorgh5555

Moosir - Iran 'as we know it' is already disappearing!

by Simorgh5555 on Sat Sep 04, 2010 03:08 PM PDT

Iran is already a major client state of the Russia and China. They are doing to Iran what the US is doing in Iraq without occupation of troops. No country with expansionalist policy is going to use the word - Empire, that would be a give away, but the Islamic Republic is now beholden to two of its gratest puppet masters economically and politically. Just look at how control over the Caspian has been handed on a platter to Russia.

The situation in 1979 is not the same as today. Iran was a progresiive and modern country and did not plummet into the depths of despair which it has now. You suggest not changing the rehime, I ask what have Iranians got to lose by not doing so? Let's face it torture, rape of men and women, dismal economy, short life expectencies, young men and women being shot or sent to the gallows, rampant drug, what can possibly go worse? To mention, nothing about thepre-Islamic heritage and the other resouces and assets which ahave been siphoned or destroyed. Iran ' as we know it' is already vanishing 

Mousavi is a treacherous opportunist who cannot even admit to himself his shameless mistake which has brought as the cost of the ruin to the country. Also, he is too much of a coward. He knew he could advocate regime change against the Shah and get away with it. If he says anthing similar about the current regime, he will know he will get his ass pinned to the wall.

I advocate regime change because I see no other window of opportunity left. Dialogue, internal reforms, hunger strikes, industrial action have not yielded any results. Not taking any action and simply hoping for the best is not going to make the situation better. 

However, I do share one concern with military action with you and that is the threat of separatists like the Kurds, Baluch and Azaris. Apart from the Mullah they are the biggest existential threat  to Iran. They need to be crushed mercilessly with an iron fist just the same as the Mullahs. 


  •  
marhoum Kharmagas

Simorgh, Were you too young around 79?

by marhoum Kharmagas on Sat Sep 04, 2010 02:20 PM PDT

Simorgh, since I don't want to ask your age, if you don't mind, can you tell me if you were/were not too young at the time to support Shah, defend him?


  •  
marhoum Kharmagas

right on, Old Chap!

by marhoum Kharmagas on Sat Sep 04, 2010 01:55 PM PDT

"As for why some people dont mindlessly call for the sudden regime change, have you ever considered that there are people who based on the bloody experience of the 79 revolution, dont want to turn Iran into a
bloodbath yet again?"

Exactly Old Chap (*), ..., can't add much to complement your wise words. Some of these idiots haven't figured out that many of us could care less about Khamenehie or Rafsanjani, but don't  want a repeat of 79. 

(*) Hope you like that better than MVP


  •  
benross

The way some people portray

by benross on Sat Sep 04, 2010 01:38 PM PDT

The way some people portray things is as if they have learned nothing, absolutely nothing from history

Those who didn't learn from the history, don't say 'Goh Khordam'. Learning process starts from there. 


  •  
MOOSIRvaPIAZ

As for blaming everything

by MOOSIRvaPIAZ on Sat Sep 04, 2010 01:22 PM PDT

As for blaming everything on Mousavi, its pointless so lets not even
try.

 

Mousavi reflects the overall mood of the people in iran, which are
generally depressed, guarded and apathetic. If people wanted to revolt,
they would have bypassed Mousavi by now, and told people like me to go
back in the house you old chap, (like the revolutionaries of 79 did to poor old Bakhtiar)


  •  
MOOSIRvaPIAZ

"If this is so , then why

by MOOSIRvaPIAZ on Sat Sep 04, 2010 01:15 PM PDT

"If this is so , then why does he not demand for the overthrow of the
Islamist regime in the same way he did for the Shah?"

Maybe he has learned his lesson afterall? That mindlessly calling for regimes overthrow like they did back in 79 does nothing to solve countries problems?

As for why some people dont mindlessly call for the sudden regime change, have you ever considered that there are people who based on the bloody experience of the 79 revolution, dont want to turn Iran into a bloodbath yet again? Or out of the concern that decades of ideological indoctrination and racist policies practiced by the regime (pitting one ethnic group against the other) , calling for an overthrow could literally mean the end of Iran as we know it? Or that foreign elements with regional interests will use the opportunity to divide and rule like they did in Iraq? (Russia, China and the west all have interests in Iran.)

The way some people portray things is as if they have learned nothing, absolutely nothing from history. The world is a complex place and requires complex answers.

 

Before proposing ridiculous policies, it is wise to contemplate on the shit storm that will ensue when your proposed policy takes effect. it is something that is lost on the neoconservatives. they love to solve everything by brute force. (and end up fucking things up more)

 


  •  
« first‹ previous12