Pictory

Niavarani Carpenter

Are you making these recommendations as a qualified health care professional......

Or as one of their patients?

the Shah was a nut

The Shah visited Imam Reza at least once a year.

The Shia Muslim Cleric in Tehran always read from the Koran was in the company of the Shah before the Shah left on travel.

The Shah was a nut.

Any Mazandarani family that gave all it's children Arab names like Reza and Mohammad Reza must be a psycologically disturbed family.

We don't have to look far.

The daughter of the Shah was on psychiatric medication for most of her life. She ended up committing suicide.

There is no nuttier family than the Pahlavis.

The whole Pahlavi family needs shock therapy.

Anyone who even has an ounce of respect for the Pahlavis need to get their head checked.

Why are we obsessed about the shah?

after all these years? how long will this last?

"Revolution" of 1979

Having lived in Canada for the quite a few years I have some familiarity with the system that is applied here. There were 2 Canadians who dared to speak about Jews. One was Ernst Zundel in Toronto who disputed the Holocaust claim of 6 million. He was put in prison and then was sent to Germany to serve the rest of his prison term and never allowed to return to Canada.
The other one was a Native Canadian Indian who was a decorated world war 2 veteran who had received the highest Canadian medal of honor for sacrifices he had made . This Indian Canadian was a chief in a remote tribe somewhere in Alberta Canada. He had the misfortune of speaking to a local news reporter and mentioning something about how Jews seem to have the control of so much wealth around the world and as result such an influence on the politics of the countries where they live. He was taken to court, had his medal of honor taken away from him and removed from the Indian council. When I see the interview Mike Wallace had with the Shah of Iran 5 years before the "Revolution" it makes me think twice as who was really behind the whole mess.

Dear Kadivar (re: Zion)

I agree with many points of your comment, not everything, but I applaud you for saying them. Some Monarchists do in fact think (misguidedly)that Shah and Iran were actually "democratic". I'm glad you are not one of them. And yes, I do realize you still have serious disagreements with me elsewhere.

I do want to shed some light on one point however. Naturei Karta, the Jewish group that visited Iran, and met with Ahmadinejad are not Nazis, "close to Nazis" or extremists. They have never denied or questioned the Holocaust and they said so in their visit to Tehran on National TV. They, are, however in agreement with many around the world that the issue of Nazi Holocaust has become a cheap political tool in the arsenal of Israel and its supporters.

Zion's definition of Zionism is grossly inadquate and self serving. Asking Zion about what Zionism really is, is like asking Bin Laden to define Islam. It may be a popular misconception but full of bias and self service.

Zionism has theological roots far older than the largely Zionist movement which was actually concocted by secular socialists. Unfortunately, through media misinformation and one sided propaganda, the older historical meaning has been largely usurped by this modern movement. And now when the term Zionist is used it refers to one particular group with a very narrow and concrete conception of Israel.

Zionists, for example, do not consider those who advocate for a one state democracy to be Zionists, even though they also want a homeland for Jews (The only definition according to Zion). And it is not just a religious objection as many non-observant secular Jews are also anti zionist.

Zionist activists, however, do everything they can to portray any alternative view as "fringe", "unpopular", "antisemetic" and do the best they can to make sure these views get no media exposure or funding. That is perhaps the saddest story of all.

Some references:
//www.jewsnotzionists.org/
//www.ijsn.net/home/
//jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/

I agree with the col......

you would have to be a moron to think the mullahs have done better than the shah!
and speaking of "puppets" you really think the cockroach akhoonds are acting on their own??!! give me a break, they were created by the brits during the safavids' reign....just to serve their purpose...
The colonel is exactly right, that the shah should have unleashed HELL on these SOBs and shot that butcher out of the sky!
but he WAS NOT A MURDERER, and couldn't pull the trigger that would kill a lot of people. I just wish badrei, neshat, and oveissi would have acted on their own!! Now, one must look back and see was it worth it to kill a bunch of arab terrorists, british lapdog akhoonds, and other freaks like khalkhali and rajsanjani in order to save 35 million?! I think we all know the answer to that
and as far as this bastard sob, wallace- I wonder what the hell he thinks of himself now trying to paint the shah as a butcher, after seeing what that sepheshee dog khomeini did to our country????
where is the idiot, carter, to answer for ruining iran and being responsible for millions of lives lost????!!!
however, it all boils down to the country's people- if we were true patriots we would not follow an illiterate moron that had a tough time speaking correct farsi, let alone any other language, then what do u expect????

This Says so much!

This Documented Coercion and Manipulation, really shows that Iranians are not bad people. They were tricked.

Those in Iran who still speak poorly of the Shah and thought they could have done a better job really need to look inside themselves.

Making a mistake is fine and big mistakes are also redeemable. It is immoral to live without the ability to have a sense of painful regret for ones harmful mistakes.

If Iranians can't feel remorse for mistakenly betraying this kind, noble and majestic leader or cannot see his innocence then they need help.

The Media in disturbing

When Americas foreign Policy is based on misunderstanding what can one say. Moving forward based on Untruthful lies to fulfill unclear agendas.

Another name for this is The Freedom To Choose with Coercion & Manipulation is Feeling not so Great while not having the possibility to enhance your life. God Bless The West!

I put this on a big news service earlier yesterday and it was not published even though 6,000 articles that were put after mine were published. What a Disgraceful Pro Mullah Biased News Service.

See below.

DEBATE:
Are the Israeli strikes on Gaza justified?
SENT:
28-Dec-2008 09:13
COMMENT:
I don't agree with either side of this issue, in any way. It's humiliating to realize this is where our human family is at.

Blame clearly lies in more places than just Israel and Gaza, since neither side of the equation can manufacture or deliver the weapons used alone.

The capacity to apply peaceful means to resolve this issue does not exist. Why?

When Jimmy Carter betrayed the Shah and Americas pact with him and introduced to us Khomeini as a man of peace, what were you expecting?
COMMENT STATUS:
UnPublished

Now I ask you is this comment so offensive it should have been passed up for other comments?

Wise words ?

A famous American politition in 1980's said:

"If you are an enemy of the United States, you are in great danger, however, if you are a friend of the United States ... you are dead!"

Think about it, Shah and Saddam were friends of the US and are now dead because they started to disobey the US. The present Iranian government has never been a friend of the US and is considered an enemy and so is in danger of being attacked by US and or it's allies, but far from dead!

Colonel Hemayat2

Colonel Hemayat2 says: "1-Army could have easily crushed 1979 Coupt, a few of the Shah's Generals including Rahimi, Khosrodad, and Aminafshar,.."

Colonel Hemayat2, the plan you are talking about leaked out then in 1979. Such a plan could have potentially worked if it had been attempted much earlier, before the army was in such a disarray. Also note that IRI power structure is very different from Shah's power structure, the fact that IRI managed the 1980 does not mean that the Shah's generals could have done the same.
It is for the better that Rahimi et all's plan was not set in motion OR if it was set in motion (?) it failed at the outset. I was in Iran and old enough in 1979 and 1980. Don't get me wrong this is not to say what IRI did is good..

Power...

Dear Fatollah, I disagree with most of what you said. One can not put a time frame on democracy. There are African countries that are far worse off than Iran of the 50s and yet have been holding democratic elections for desades. Only a dictator's logic can try to justify postponment of democracy. About 50 years prior to 1953, our people (led by the same "Khanzadehs, Ashrafzadehs and Akhoondzadehs") asserted themselves as a force to reckon with through the constitutional revolution. Yet all the achievements of the constitutional revolution were ignored and stepped on by Reza Shah and later on, MR Shah!

When MR Shah replaced Reza Shah, he knew that he owed the British for his rise, and was afraid of them (see Alam's memoirs) for the same reason! He also owed Amerians big time for restoring his throne in 1953 coup and was regularly scorned by them (see Kermit Roosevelt's memoires of the 1953 coup, where he mentions that the code-name for Shah in CIA communiques with Isenhower was "the Boy Scout")!

However, Mossadegh was not afraid of the British, and as a matter of fact, stood up to them for our oil interests and brought them to their knees in Hague. Because his power stemmed from the people -- and obviously not from the foreign powers! I'd say that's enough reason for his endearment by our people to this date (just look at the student protest banners in unversities across IRI). You may bring up different culprits, but if I were you, I would look to find out why Shah did not enjoy such a popular support -- except for the first couple of years of his reign! The worst kind of miscalculation is underesimating people's intelligence and power!

As for our military, it was full of patriotic personnel, yet it was equipped by the Americans, advised and maintained by the Americans, thus not able to refuse American authority -- as if it were a communist regime, could not resist Soviet influence! That is why Americans acted as if they owned the Shah!

a couple...

1-Army could have easily crushed 1979 Coupt, a few of the Shah's Generals including Rahimi, Khosrodad, and Aminafshar, designed a very ruthless and aggressive operation code name ROOZ e Nejat by the army that would have started with killing about a 10 thousand of the rebellions and would have continued with a war with Iraq in order to stabilize the Shah regime. Just like what IRI did in early 1980. This all documented and when they get declassified and by then I am dead , you will remember by it.
But Shah disagreed and telegraphed from Morocco with a firm NO order to his generals. The rest is history.

2-If the Shah ever did anything by the rights given to him by the constitutions , was removing Mossadaq.
Have you ever wondered why in 28 Mordad not a single bullet was fired? Pretty far from the definition of Coup, no?

3-What makes frustrated is that there are people out there who rather keep the mullahs in power than to consider the Pahlavis, or the good they did!! That is why lose, we are stuck in the past.

4-Am I the only who when he imagines what if the 1979 had been defeated where Iran and Irani would be?
Afsoos va hezar afsoos!!!!!

Ajam !

I agree with some of your points!

And don't get me wrong, what I meant by "shepesh", Iranian homes were literally infested with lause some 60 years a go! I was referring to that, specificially!

you and I seem to talk at cross purposes! :)

I understand your reaction to Col. Hemayat's comments. I do not necessarily agree with Colonel Hemayat's point of views, though I understand his situation and frustration. I can only imagine what he must go through each day. It is obvious that he loves his country. He seems to be a rough personality, after all he is a military man. And regarding Iranian military, isn't it ironic that there was no military coup attempt against the Shah or in Iran in gereral, except that of 1953!? While you would see the wave after waves of coups all around the world, in third world countries during that era from 1950-1980. How many coup's in Turkey, Argentine and the Philippines alone and also other Asian and Latin American countries? But, not in Iran, doesn't that tell you something about our officers moral and allegiance? I think that is admirable and something to be proud of!

The Shah didn't give any spesific instructions to his military commanders before leaving Iran. And yes, General Robert E. Huyser was in Iran to neutralize Iranian army and the British of course were instrumental in their silent intrigues within the ranks to pacify Iranian military. We should bear in mind that a military might is built to safegaurd a country's borders and can not be used to crush it's own citizens! The military equipment was paid by hard currancy from oil revenues, it was not given to us as a gift, as Nasser of Egypt would receive a new fleet av fighters for loosing them in a battle.

The Iranian military collapsed under its own weight, not because it was a sand castle as many claim, to the contrary, the Iranian army was quite able with allegiance to Shah alone. Those who bash or even ridicule imperial army of Iran, I wish they were from the ranks of former Iranian military and not from the people who lost their fortunes/properties which was assembled during his reign!

The notion of democracy in 1953 while Iran had huge social problems, poverty stricken, the rate of illiteracy and various serious diseases would not be appealing to me! I wouldn't comprehend the basics of democracy in 1953. But, I could relate to the nationalization of our natural resources, naturally! And every decent Iranian would do/feel the same!

You know perfectly well who members of our parliament before, during and after 1953 were? They were either Khanzadeh, Akhoondzadeh, former Akhoonds, Royalists, Ashraf-zadeh and Landowners!
Perhaps, there were several, but few selfmade men of knowledge and wisdom among them too! I am not saying they weren't any good or bad, but to be honest with you, most of them were actually safegaurding their own interests and privileges as they do today! Mossadeq was a good man and a nationalist, but he miscalculated the strength of his country and countrymen, let us not forget that there was history there between the Pahlavis and Mossadeq! And we can disguss the content and the extent of who broke more of the laws accroding to the Iranian Constitution! But, it is outside of the scoop of this discussion.

We have made Mossadeq for what he was not! A saint. How would we regard Mr. Khomeiny today if his plane was shot out of the skies of Tehran in 1979? How would we regard P.M. Mossadeq today if he had the chance to govern the state of Iran's affairs for 5 or 10 more years? I don't have an answer to these questions. But, Action speaks louder then words!

Let's start there. :)

Regards Fatollah

Javab be aghaye sarhang!

Quote:
***********************************************
"we just lack unity! come my brothers and sisters , take each other's hands and unite, no matter what you beleive no matter where you live, and you WILL see a strong Iran will not need no forign interference for better or worse!!! that is what shah wanted and that is what God wants! We ARE the chosen people!

Who is with me?

Javid Iran!!!

"چو ایران نباشد تن مباد
**********************************************

تا آنجایی‌ که من یادمه، ما یک بر اینکار رو کردیم و نتیجه‌آش خمینی و رژیمش شد، آیا واقعا آنقدر مردم رو ساده لوح میدانید که انتظار دارید یک بر دیگه با طناب اتحاد و برادری شما به چاهی بسا عمیقتر از قبلی‌ بروند. از اسمتون معلومه که چقدر قابل اطمینان هستید. کلنل زمان شاه احتیاج به معرفی نداره و همه از رشادتهای آنها در سر سپردگی به رژیم شاه خبر دارند. شما کارت سوخته و باطل شده هستید. لطفا زیاد برای رهایی مردم ایران زحمت نکشید و خودتان را ناراحت نکنید، این ژستها به شما نمیاد. یک بر گول حرفهای آن دجال "خمینی" خوردیم و برای هفتاد پشتمون بسه.

Meek...

Dear Fatollah, what I meant by "sheepish" is subordinate (meek-like), not like a louse! My point however, was in response to Col. Hemayat (whose ptriotic gestures for unity are admirable) who suggested that Shah should've kicked Wallace in contempt!

What I meant is that Shah who owed Americans for restoring his throne -- had his army controled by them (practicaliy a subset wih American hardware and advisors, remember Hoiser?!) and having alienated his people -- was not in a position to afford such a stand! Yet the same can not be applied to the treatment Khomeini received from the U.S. and American media for the very same reasons!

Ajam !

He is dead and long gone! Blaming Irans current miserable state of affairs on that man only is unfair. Afsoos! He inherited a "shepesh" infested Nation. For getting rid of that alone, you should be thankful! As you said you were 12 in 1979, how could you possibly remember? Just a note, you owe even your national identity to the two Kings of 53 years! :)

regards Fatollah

Kick?!

Shah was owned by Americans and their media, that's why he's so sheepish with Wallace! I guess he's saving his wrath for the people here!

KADIVAR

Don't apoplogise, we all know jews had a hand in destablizing HIM for the reasons I stated b4, just like the rest of the western world, Shah tried his best to create a balanced relationship between East and the West, better than Tito better than De gaul.

BUT, our king was NOT appreciated by his people, and when the world tuned against him, so did his people!

Israil and Arabs don't care about Iran.

I just care about my king and my country!!!!!

چو ایران نباشد تن مباد
 

To all Arrogants who sold iran cheap and all the ungrateful...

Bi cheshm va rooyan must learn about their past and where they came from so they would not repeat the mistakes that their stupid parents (who deserved no better than what they got: the sign of god, the grand ayatollah rooh-allah al-khomeini) committed in 1979:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceiVQbwBAPw&feature...

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdkXP-EK5Mk&feature...

Being stuck in 1978 has one big advantage, and that is being stuck in the best period of recent iranian history when we enjoyed peace, prosperity, progress, and basic freedoms (that we did not know then); things that we would never see again for at least the then next 30 years.

Apparently the saying is true (from Brits?) that iranians should be kept hungry and arabs should be kept full to be content and do not revolt.

Dear Mr. Kadivar

We can of course debate the problems of Israel. God knows it is far from perfect. That however is a different debate, wouldn't you say? What matters here is that we now agree that there was no Israeli or Jewish conspiracy - with or without you "favorite" author. ;-)
That is good for now. Take care.

hahaha

Persian Pishi:
You are the prime example of a dude stuck in the past and doesn have a clue about Iran today.

Mr. Kadivar

Mr. Kadivar, I thought I would never come across a monarchist that I could respect. You proved me wrong...
--regards

Khak bar sare ma

Does anyone remember when this bastard (Mike Wallace) was interviewing Khomeini in France when he was sitting on the floor and try to quote Sadat? He asked (two times) for Khomeini to forgive him for quoting Sadat that Khomeini is a lunatic. Ironically in 1976 he was as arrogant as a typical SOB to quote CIA that Shah is a megalomaniac with no repercussion and continue to pound to him. And Shah was as gentleman as he always been in his patriotic life.

This is all about damn liberal American media. They hated the Shah and they thought they got their man. After 35 years they realized that what they promoted was a blood thirsty idiotic mullah who destabilized the whole world with no end in sight. They had to hurry to redo their mistake, but so far it cost them collapse of twin towers and part of the Pentagon, and over 4000 dead servicemen and perhaps more catastrophes yet to come.

Someone needs to ask Mike Wallace but more importantly, Jimmy Carter: was this a worthwhile American policy? As late as it is: we now have to live with it!!!!

C'est moi

Javid Shah.

Down with every Islamists, specially Khalkhali the gorbeh kosh.

Down with every leftist.

Down with all those who sold my country to the fascists and traitors.

Damn all the donkeys who staged the revolution and still believe in khomeini's lies agsainst the shah.

Payandeh Iran.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnX6yyg4sG0

ZION says that you are a disgusting Anti-Semite if ...

1. You don't like Israel, its army or its policies;

2. You don't bow to every thing that ZION says;

3. You don't accept that the land between the Nile and the Pherate rivers belongs to the jews as 'promised by god';

4. You say that jews who did not live in the middle east for 2000 years shouldn't have claimed the land;

5. You say that Israel doesn't care about any other people in ME and would ruin their countries, if it feels threatened;

6. You say that Israel was threatened by Shah in 1979 and by AhmadiNejad since 2005;

7. You say that the Israel lobby was working hard to make the Americans do the same to Iran as they did to Iraq;

8. You say that Middle East was better off before Israel;

9. You say that Israel is not the only democratic, free, liberal, progressive, intelligent, humanistic country in ME;

10. You say that arabs and muslims are also human and their rights, their people, their land and their property counts.

If any of the above applies to you, then by ZION's standards you are a disgusting Anti-Semite.

Mischaracterization!

To Fatollah: I believe you mean 1342, for in 1343 nothing of significance took place. Whereas on 15 Khordad, 1342 Khomeni's first rebellion against Shah began. And FYI, NO, I would not have joined that rebellion even if I was born then!

That is a cheap shot on your part because since I oppose Shah's policies, you should equate me with resentful, reactionaries whose main objective was to oppose the land reform, women's rgihts movement and secular education...! In 1342 Shah's despotic rule had not reached its peak yet and there were many secular alternatives to Khomeini that kept every sensible and rational mind from joining him. That is why it was defeated!
However, during the ensuing 15 years, Shah did a pretty good job of alienating and pushing any decent poitical entity into Khomeini's camp!

Shame...

What a wonder to see the thoughtful and respectable Shah defend his legacy so articulately. It is truly amazing how a few minutes of recorded history can exonerate the Shah from the bogus accusations that he was an American puppet.

The Arab-crazed pseudo-nation (umma!) of Iran, now brutally ruled and ruined for three decades by the lowest form of Islamofascist cockroaches, has justly paid, and should continue to pay dearly for their infinite ingratitude and criminal ignorance.

The truth is, no one deserves their profound misery more than the shameless riffraff still supporting Iran's thuggish regime and its barbaric "revolution" ...

Haha

Get stucked again? It's very relevant to say and give points to prove that anti-zionism ain't anti-semitism. Otherwise, I'm as anti-semite than you anti-iranian...

Dear Anonymous Zion

You avoid answering the Questions I submit to you and again try to distort my comments. In addition associating me to Anti Semits or even Anti Zionists makes me even more dissappointed by you after sharing with you my own family background which is equally deeply rooted in Europe and Iran.

But well I won't dwell on this if you simply can't read into my comments and arguments that aim at simply clarifying the deep reality of Israel's position in the Middle East. The Land you claim is yours by your ancestors was occupied essentially by Jews having lived in the Diaspora and particularly in the European Diaspora with a life style and values which had hardly anything to do with their ancestors and by claiming it back after centuries they made an absurd claim on that distant land. I do not say the same thing for those Jews living in Palestine who lived in Palestine and whose claims could be seen as legitimate even if they represented a minority in demographic terms. You cannot deny that the creation of Israel however understandable both emotionally and from a humanistic point of view ( due to the Holocaust and the Pogroms) corresponded to the arrival of a population which initially had nothing in common with the inhabitants of this land. It was called and was known as Palestine up to WWII. Zionism from which you take pride in was a nationalistic movement. As a Jew you have the absolute right to believe in it and support it. But a criticism of Zionism should not be confused with Anti Semiticism as one of the commentators said here.

This narrowmindedness has cost Israel more than anything else. One being the deadly blow brought to the Peace Process by the Assassination of Itzak Rabin by one of your Zionist Fanatics and not a PLO or Arab Terrorist. What was more criminal in this act was less the man who commited the crime ( in itself condemnable) but the ideas that drew him to commit this crime and jeapordize the Peace Process. These people go hand in hand with all extremist groups including fundamentalist Islamists. Some are even close to Nazi groups which did not surprise me when some of the Jewish Orthodox's participated in the Holocaust Conference in Tehran organized by Ahmadinejad. This mentality was also one shared by those who were against Sadat and never accepted the Camp David Accords.

You should stop looking for excuses for your own shortcomings. My position in regard to the creation of the State of Israel is that it is an irreversible one and anyone who asks to see it Wiped off the Map is a moron and an idiot. So Ahamadinejad enters this category of people who will join the dustbins of History.

On the otherhand I find no excuses to your politicians in denying the right of a two State Solution today. Beyond the technical difficulties it is the principle that is important to be universally accepted if we hope to see a peaceful and tolerant middle east in the future. The War Mongering drums today are obsolete.

On the otherhand I am not naive, I hold Iran responsible in formenting trouble in the region. To what magnitude is what needs also to be reexamined. Hamas and Hezbollah should be countered and Iran's role is not innocent. But the solution is a global solution and I think that both Europeans and Americans with the Obama administration have understood this inevitable reality.

The point of the matter is that Israel cannot simply hide behind the argument of the Holocaust and WWII today after all the conflicts in this region since the creation of the State of Israel. It would be even indecent in respect to those who are dying today be it on the Israeli side or the Arab/Middle Eastern Side. Lebanon, Iran Iraq, the Six Day War are all conflcts that have cost lives and responsablities are shared.

The new generation of Israelians have to be accountable for their own actions GOOD OR BAD. The moral dillema here has nothing to do with acknowledging a unique crime ( the Holocaust) in the history of mankind which was caused by an ideology which is condemnable from ALL ASPECTS and From ALL ANGLES but the recognition by Israel that something went wrong in the process of the creation of the State of Israel and that the only way to compensate for the collateral damages is to take constructive steps into understanding your critics point of view without necessarily sharing them.

As for the Shah, To Judge him on the same grounds as a Politician in a democratic state is ABSURD. He never claimed to be a Democrat so why judge him on the same level as the President of the United States or France. He believed he had a mission and he actually fullfilled it on many levels and that was to modernize his country and make sure that his people were economically and socially in a much better situation than his fellow neighbouring countries. We judge him on the fact that this distribution of wealth may not have been as just or that his regime had shortcomings. All these arguments are partially true but they do not constitute a balanced judgment on the Shah's Regimes accomplishments or failures were in comparison to what the country had achieved in less than 50 years and in comparison to its own neighbours.

But this is another debate or should I say the initial debate of this blog which inevitably led to the debate we are having here because our destiny in this region are interrelated and we depend on one another one way or another. That is why leaders in this region need to understand eachothers respective dillemas before jumping to quick or wrong conclusions.

Got to go to bed its too late here and all I can hope for is that if the leaders don't make this effort that the people on the contrary will for the sake of our generation but also for that of the future generations in this rich and thriving part of our planet that deserves better leaders and politicians to represent them than what they have today.

Knowledge is Power

Had shah of iran look at Mike Wallace's question from the scientific point of view his reponse to his question could have been Much much much much much better and more intelligent. Probably by now he still would have been king planning for his one hundred birthday while the mullah one after another were on their way leaving Iran in search of job opportunities abroad...

Job! Job! job!