Ayatollah Mahmoud Taleghani

1979 Tehran University sermon



Mammad Agha

by Another MD (not verified) on

I was partially agreeing with you until you said "if such things are democratic characteristics, the IRI has far too many democratic characteristics, because the amount of work that has been done in Iran ever since the end of Iran/Iraq war is fantastic."
Obviously we view IRI quite differently. I do not hide my feeling that I detest that regime, and nothing that they have done even barely compensates for the harm that they brought to the country. We may never agree on this, but that is fine.
As for democratic characteristics: democracy has many components, its least important component in fact is voting as it can be easily rigged in so many ways or easily turned impotent. The major components of a democratic system are - in decreasing order of importance:
(a) Economic democracy - equality in benefiting from resources of the country and balance between rich and poor - this has been a total failure in IRI, but somewhat successful in shah's regime. Naturally some poor became very rich after revolution and vice versa. That is not economic democracy.
(b) Social democracy - this deals with providing equal opportunity for all citizens of the country - this has been a fialure in IRI as well compared to shah's regime. Status of women and minorities as well as poor are best examples.
(c) Judicial democracy - this has also been a failure in IRI compared to shah's regime, and has to do with impartial rule of law and due process.
(d) Political democracy - this relates to anything political: freedom of speech, political parties, etc. Both IRI and shah have failed in this area. IRI receives a somewhat better mark in this area than shah's regime simply because shah did not allow any opposition, and that may have led to revolution ultimately.
I do not know what IRI has done, beyond the minimum that a government must do to avoid its total collapse, beyond the projects that were already planned in 1979, and beyond what the people of iran should be credited for, that you call their achievements fantastic?
As for Alam's notes, if you look at many books and memoirs that the people around shah have written, you see inconsistencies among their description and interpretations of events - it is simply inconclusive to pick and and choose the ones that would support a particular point of view. Contrary to common belief, people around shah were generally not very loyal to shah, they were far more loyal to their own ambitions and goals, and if they could without being caught, most would easily back-stab shah when possible. So all these memoirs should be taken with grains of salt.
Obviously, we view IRI and shah's regime differently and based on different criteria - that is quite alright. If we had a true democratic system, then diversity of opinions would not cause any issues as the bulk of people would each evaluate the system from his or her specific point of view, without any one view prevailing or imposing.


I did cool down!

by Mammad (not verified) on

Dear another MD:

First of all, I apologize for using bad words.

Second, I have not read Malek MD's book. I do not even know what book this is.

Third, Alam's book is not gossip. It is a written history of the last 15 years of the Shah's regime. It may not be balanced, or it may be totally baised, but this won't be the first time one reads biased analysis of historical events. Alam (Who was just as corrupt as the Shah was) presents the events of every day as they happened, and then adds his own interpretations and analysis of things. That is the part one may argue about, not the facts and events themselves, many of which are well-known, anyway.

But, most importantly, while Sepaah-e Daanesh and things like that did do some useful things, they do not represent democratic characteristics. How can they be, when the Shah's goal was not even to establish democracy? I won't get into why the Shah started such things, because it is beyond these few lines.

Moreover, if such things are democratic characteristics, the IRI has far too many democratic characteristics, because the amount of work that has been done in Iran ever since the end of Iran/Iraq war is fantastic. The problem with the IRI is not that it has not done anything. The problem with it is its reactionary and bloody nature, and the fact that it uses God to justify its crimes. How can one argue with a bunch who think of themselves as God's representative on earth?

We have political democracy, and then we have economical democracy. If you are talking about political democracy, as I think you are, then its characteristics are freedom of thought, opinion, and worship. The freedom to choose one's private lifestyle without any intrusion by the State. Freedom of the press, publications, etc. And, of course, true elections whose three fundamental pillars are, in my opinion, democratic, fair, and competitiveness. If you agree with these, then the Shah's regime had none of these.

I am sure that you are well-read, but what I meant was reading more about what the Shah did.

Thank you for being so civil.


Hey Mam-mad...

by Setiz (not verified) on

You must be really 'mad' to put shah in the same league as IRI. Shah, no matter how he was, was a saint compared to IRI. And way too good for people like you, with language and rationale like yours. You got what you deserved: 1400-year-old khomeini gang with their mambo jumbos and their atrocities. That is what you asked for, that is what you got.
Take the mad-ness out of your name and your mind first, then get civil, then take to a discussion and claim that shah was bad for the vulgar kind of you. I let you decide what the rest of your name stands for, if you have the intelligence to figure it out. And don't show off with a biased book that you have read next time.
Beh gorbeh goftan shahedet kiyeh, goft domam.


Mammad agha: cool down

by Another MD (not verified) on

I am not sure that you are in fact agreeing with me or not. Malek MD is a ferocious pro-IRI. Read his comments. and I was simply proving him wrong. Let's look at your points one by one.
1. What you are saying is true. But the reverse is also true. If shah was bad (in this guy's book), IRI is even worse -- by almost any measure. See how wonderful IRI is in Malek MD's book.
2. I don't think you got my point here either. BY iranian law half of senators and representatives of shah's were elected by people. In practice, elections were of the same style as those in IRI. I don't know what you are disagreeing with me about. I am simply pointing to the the fact that both had bogus elections.
3. I do not dispute any of this.
4. I do not dispute any of this.
5. Now this one is interesting. Democratic characteristics that shah regime had and IRI does not have is what they did for the people, too numerous to mention. If you really do not see this then we belong to two different worlds. There are other comments which highlight this. Essentially anything modern in today's iran belongs to the shah's period. Even "sepahe danesh" and "sepahe behdasht" had huge impact on the status of villages then. Again "compared to" IRI.
6. Yes, IRI is somewhat more open, but they are far more brutal by sheer strength of numbers. This is too detailed to mention, but see book by Baghi, an ex-revolutionary to see how benign shah was "compared to" IRI. That was my only point.

Well, I have read far more than you can imagine, but not the gossip books like the ones that you have mentioned. People around the shah each have their own version of facts and it needs a lot more investigation to decide which is talking about what.

Finally, getting vulgar, does not make you right. It only indicates the weakness of your argument that needs vulgarity to support it. So whatever you said, to you too, albeit amplified ten-fold.


Hey another MD!

by Mammad (not verified) on

You know nothing about the Shah's regime, or you conveniently forget the little that you may know and, therefore, your nonsense. Read to learn, have an open mind, instead of constantly bragging about your MD!

1. One horrible regime - the IRI - does not justify another, the Shah's. In fact, the IRI is the legitimate child of the Shah's regime.

2. The Senate and Majles were not elected during the Shah, in the sense of your own criteria. So, stop contradicting yourself.
Just as the IRI has the Guardian Council, so did the Shah's regime. The IRS GC has 12 members, the Shah's one: Himself! Do not take it from me. Just read Asadollah Alam's memoirs to see what he says about "elections" during the Shah's regime. Oh, yeah, he commited treason against the Shah, or these are not his memoirs!

3. Just like the fascists in the IRI, the Shah established the fascist Rastakhiz Party in 1975. He could not even tolerate the "show" that Iran-e Novin, Mardom, and other political "parties" were putting up for him. The man, coming to power through an anti-Iran coup, was a control freak.

4. Just as the fascist Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi said recently, "anyone who does not like the IRI, can get his passport and leave," the Shah also said EXACTLY, PRECISELY the same on Esfand 12, 1353, the day he announced the Rastakhiz founding. Rastakhiz eventually became the Shah's rafttabikh!

5. What are the "democratic characteristics" that the Shah's regime had? Name one!

6. As horrible as the IRI is, it is far more open than anything that the Shah's regime was. Just read Alam's memoir: The Shah's regime was about a few whose only concerns were who slept with whom, who was cheating behind whose back, who had a higher commission, who was a better nokar to the Shah and better baleh ghorbaan goo, and who had stolen more.

Read, instead of attacking people groundlessly.
With your behavior, MD means something very different and apt, mad d...



by MRX (not verified) on

imagine if this cockroach would have survived! he was a spritual leader of MKO.
glad he is dead. wish all of the mullah's were gone once and all from our land. wish they could all be deported to saudia arabia, najaf or karbela or where ever the hell they belong! good riddence he is gone.


Hey Malek M.D.

by Another MD (not verified) on

Why is it that any pro-IRI individual has to resort to deceit and hypocrisy to support his position even if he is an M.D. and living in a western country comfortably (the comfort that IRI supporters deny the people of iran who are condemned for life for being moslims by force)? What are you doing here? You should be in IRI to feel the pain imposed on iranians by arab loving IRI leaders who have been imposing arab rule and arab law on the people of iran.

Voting does not mean a thing in that part of the world since:
(1) Senate and Majles representatives of the shah regime were voted in by the people; they in turn had to vote for any prime minister. So any prime minister of the shah was as legitimate as anyone "voted" in by IRI. In fact, dismissing of people's representatives of shah's regime by khomeini was illegal in the first place if voting is the criterion.
(2) 99.8% of people of iraq (your favorite arab country) voted for saddam many times, so he must have been truly represented people of iraq and their aspirations, and thus his actions, i.e. invasion of iran, was totally legitimate in your book -- it reflected votes of your beloved people of iraq. In fact, saddam and his actions were far more legitimate than IRI since he brought in far more votes that even the 98% who voted for islamic republic.
(3) A vast majority of pakistanis voted for musharraf twice (and before for Bhutto, twice). So all of these people must be legitimate, as legitimate as IRI leaders.
(4) And an endless list of other examples in that part of the world...

Voting does not mean a thing just like these other words like democracy and dictatorship. They are all tools of deceit by likes of IRI and their supporters.

Voting is legitimate only if:
(a) People are totally free to vote for anyone that they want - not a body like khebregan or negahbaan pre-selecting candidates as they please. People have been demonstrating in the streets each time we have had a vote in iran to object to their candidates being vetoed.
(b) System is transparent, with total freedom of the press, and people are educated as to who these people really are and what they stood for.
(c) People are not lied to only to be elected.
(d) There are means to keep elected representatives and leaders accountable to their actions if they do not deliver what they promised. Voting should not be interpreted as a blank check, otherwise an elected leader can destroy a country in the name of "well I am in charge since I was voted for".
(e) There are fundamental laws that protect basic rights and freedom for all people irrespective of their views before any voting takes place. That is equality of people irrespective of their religion, ethnicity, or gender. In the absence of these basic freedoms any vote is biased or cooked, and therefore fundamentally void and null, and is only designed to give people the impression of participation as tools of oppression and manipulation and deceit.
None of the above conditions are true about IRI system or IRI leaders and representatives. That makes them all illegitimate, or as legitimate as saddam and musharraf were and are; not to mention shah's regime since it at least had some of the characteristics of a democratic system far more than IRI with a rigged voting system.

I wish you and all other arab-lovers of IRI would love arabs even more to just move to your beloved arab countries and leave that nation alone, so that each citizen would decide for himself/herself if he/she wants to go to heaven or hell and what kind of life he/she wants to pursue and decide his/her destiny by his own god-given mind, rather than imposed on by a bunch of arab-lovers imposing arab way of life of 1400 years ago on them. Just leave the pople alone, they may NOT want to go to heaven, that is their wish, and none of anybody's business including the so-called "voted " in IRI leaders.
Enjoy honesty of your elected leaders here:
Enjoy praising your favorite arabs here:
Enjoy integrity of your favorite kind of people living with arab way of life here:
Long live iran and iranians whose only religion is love for iran.



by Farbors Maleknasri M.D. (not verified) on

I just wounder howa person could have bring Democracy for Iran as he was not voted by the Iranians? I mean the ones who have founded thier ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, are living there and are willing to protect it from getting contaminated by devilish poisons again. Despite the foolish and desperat activities of not any more so great satan all arab Nations now whish to go the same way as Iranians. allready now are the devilish times over for ever. Greeting


Hard to trust any mulla...

by Another Anonymous (not verified) on


Hard to trust this bunch!

by Another Anonymous (not verified) on


To sagezard

by Your Leader (not verified) on

Vaghean ke sage zerdi. Akhe martikeh hamal in che harfieh ke mizani?



by Saggezard (not verified) on

Another monkey we never got a chance to really know. May god do him right!


Date correction

by Librarian (not verified) on

Ayatullah Taliqani died on September 9th 1979.
The date on video needs to be corrected.



by Shahpour Bakhtiar (not verified) on

Dear Another Anonymous,
Thank you for your clarifications. Mr. JJ, I apologize for the unjust accusations.
I was overly sensetive due to my personal profound interest about Shaad Ravaan, Shapour Bakhtiar's life's legacy & his most unjust murder for his outmost wish which was, Democracy for IRAN........


Roohe Taleghani Shad! He was

by BK (not verified) on

Roohe Taleghani Shad! He was an honest and courageous man who was not afraid of telling the truth, not in the Shah's time nor after the revolution. He spent many years in Shah's prisons and was tortured by his butchers numerously.


Shahpour Bakhtiar

by Another Anonymous (not verified) on

His video is still on. JJ did not remove it. Old videos are moved on the side (or down) of the window as he puts up new videos.
BTW, his name is shapour, not shahpour, FYI. And yes, he was a great man. Wish we had more like him, a lot more.


Why JJ ? WHY ?

by Shahpoor Bakhtiar (not verified) on

Aghaye JJ,

Why did you CENSOR Shahpoor Bakhtiar on Democracy and brought in Taleghani?

Were you afriad of the I.R. ?
Or did they (I.R.) got the list of their opposition through this site & sent the names on their black list?

Anyway, It was on for a day and you chickened out dude...
Iranians need TRUTH with information to make a Radical shift in their level of conciousness....

Shahpoor Bakhtiar was one of those TRUTH tellers...
Nobody understood his simple message! I.R. criminals killed him & you are killing his legacy by taking it off your site & your CENSORSHIP...

Hala, hey cherto pertaye hamaroo post koon, vali harfe Haagh roo penhaan...

Baa ese Taasofee doost...


Hey JJ

by Anonymous of the day (not verified) on

Your site is awfully slow and errors like:
Warning: MySQL server has gone away query: INSERT INTO watchdog ...
Maybe akhounds have taken over and are either swallowing or selling your site's bandwidth "Fi Sabillelallah" for "Ommate Eslam".
What is happening man?



by Iva (not verified) on

Moslem fascists took care of this old man the moment he uttered the words of “I hear the sound of “Nalain” dictatorship” (Nalain instead of boots). It seems even some akhonds didn’t realize what the hell they are creating and they paid for their closed minds, such as Taleghani, Khomeini’s son, Shariatmadari and list goes on.



by Iva (not verified) on

Moslem fascists took care of this old man the moment he uttered the words of “I hear the sound of “Nalain” dictatorship” (Nalain instead of boots). It seems even some akhonds didn’t realize what the hell they are creating and they paid for their closed minds, such as Taleghani, Khomeini’s son, Shariatmadari and list goes on.


The only nice thing about this video is...

by پیام on

... the end title music.



by Ali (not verified) on

chert o pert meegee dadash. koja regime kostesh? iranians and their conspiracies.



by Iranboy on

Khodeshoon Koshtanesh khodeshoon ham barash barnameh tahieh mikonand. Agar in baba zendeh bood ta hala dah bar edamesh kardeh boodand.