Islam!
It ruined my country!
Even Iranians in Iran are thinking like this; watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYZoXXfKxTs
Ask Iranians
- Thread starter PersianBoy
- Start date
- Status
Islam!
It ruined my country!
Even Iranians in Iran are thinking like this; watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYZoXXfKxTs
Bast
Protector of Cats
YES! YES! YES!
Very promising indeed. I just hope that you are right. You know I fear the escalation of the war of words between the current Islamic regime in Iran and the West. I don't want there to be a war because innocent Iranians will die. But I, like you, know that there must be change.
I have friends who are Zoroastrians and I've been to a Zoroastrian wedding too. I haven't spoken to them about Iran because they migrated to the UK and now live in Australia but it is such an interesting religion and culture. Iran is the heart of Zoroastrianism.
plarq
Crazy forever
Iran is the cradle of Zoroaster.
Although I don't question bloh's integrity against Iranian regime, I do question about bloh's vision of Iran dissidents. Bias resulted in wrong perception.
Does Iranian regime still holds great power in security issues? Still the police and agents are arresting dissidents, as long as no organized group could force the government to concede, Iranian dissidents will face the similar fate of their Chinese counterpart.
Edit: Bast, I'm not being harsh, but Epoch Times and other exiled Chinese media, are not reliable sources of judging China, however pro-democracy and anti-communist it gets.
Lady, I sympathize with Chinese dissidents, religious activists and civil rights advocates. However, the reality has an anti-China bias, and my pessimism hasn't changed in three years. That while new democratic advocates are harassed, intimidated and jailed before any organized opposition, the old guards of democratic movements have lost their contact back in homeland. It's like Polish government-in-exile in 1939 to restore Poland in 1989. Impossible.
Although I don't question bloh's integrity against Iranian regime, I do question about bloh's vision of Iran dissidents. Bias resulted in wrong perception.
Does Iranian regime still holds great power in security issues? Still the police and agents are arresting dissidents, as long as no organized group could force the government to concede, Iranian dissidents will face the similar fate of their Chinese counterpart.
Edit: Bast, I'm not being harsh, but Epoch Times and other exiled Chinese media, are not reliable sources of judging China, however pro-democracy and anti-communist it gets.
Lady, I sympathize with Chinese dissidents, religious activists and civil rights advocates. However, the reality has an anti-China bias, and my pessimism hasn't changed in three years. That while new democratic advocates are harassed, intimidated and jailed before any organized opposition, the old guards of democratic movements have lost their contact back in homeland. It's like Polish government-in-exile in 1939 to restore Poland in 1989. Impossible.
Do you know the title or the author? I'd be interested in this book. I've heard and saw documentaries on Iran 1953, but I'd like to see this take on the role of some Westerners in 1979. I remain skeptical that the US, UK, et al, would want Khomeini in charge, but I'm always willing to look at more arguments.
Thanks!
Neither do I want a war. War will destroy Iran, and I don't want Iran to be destroyed but Islamic Republic to be destroyed.
Young people will die which is very awful. I hate war! But I know that to get this government away, the people must prepare for a bloodbath.
Sadly, west thought they could easily control the Islamists. But they were wrong.. and now they are tired of them and want to get rid of them. Wonder who they are thinking of putting in power after attacking Iran.
What do you mean? Are you saying I am wrong about Islamic Republic killing people against them? Please make it a bit easier english. As you know, english is not my first language and I haven't understood your question very well.
About the security issues, do you mean the world? What security issues exactly?
Do you know the title or the author? I'd be interested in this book. I've heard and saw documentaries on Iran 1953, but I'd like to see this take on the role of some Westerners in 1979. I remain skeptical that the US, UK, et al, would want Khomeini in charge, but I'm always willing to look at more arguments.
Thanks!
The title I have no idea but I believe the author is Arvin Khoshnood I think it's coming out as soon as summer starts.
His father is owner of www.rastakhiz.org - organization for a Imperial Iran and to bring monarchy back to Iran.
Although not the only organization that fights for free Iran but there are many more.
Another very great book explaining more about Shah of Iran; West behind the revolution; Iran during that time is by Mr Nahavandi
You can find his book here:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Last-Shah-Iran-Countdown-Betrayed/dp/1904997031
I can go into it a bit on what I think and what I have read about during all the years about why USA, UK and other countries like French would have Khomeini:
It's very simple. Right now all I can think of is that Khomeini was a radical Islamic man. He had supporters (Islamic people) and people saw him as like God's "closest friend".
Islam is the biggest enemy of communism and was at that time, the biggest enemy of Soviet. Iran was in middle of Asia, if Iran became a communist country - then you could see Middle east even some countries of Africa being communists. It would spread, Afghanistan would of been too.
Khomeini stood against them.
That's ONE reason. I will get back to you if you wish; I can go deeper into this on every point you wish.
plarq
Crazy forever
@Bloh: exiles are great sources to fight for liberty, but first hand materials of the said nation had to be gathered by insider dissidents.
I love exiles, exiled Chinese, Tibetans, Persians, North Koreans or Cubans. However, I do realize the lack of "touch" in those exiles, especially for the second generation of those exiles. Although the exiled media correctly accuse the government, their judgments may not always hold water. In short words, they lose their touch with their former homeland, and couldn't actually find what's really going on inside the country.
Internet helped a lot, but F2F, first hand information is a must to pass a judgment.
I love exiles, exiled Chinese, Tibetans, Persians, North Koreans or Cubans. However, I do realize the lack of "touch" in those exiles, especially for the second generation of those exiles. Although the exiled media correctly accuse the government, their judgments may not always hold water. In short words, they lose their touch with their former homeland, and couldn't actually find what's really going on inside the country.
Internet helped a lot, but F2F, first hand information is a must to pass a judgment.
So, now you know everything about me as well? I have friends and relatives in Iran that I talk to. Don't you think I got the first hand information? I am not making up BS here or saying stuff just to make the government suck. If so, please put up what I said wrongly and I will discuss it with you.
Yeah, actually, please do. Tell me what I said wrong, what was so biased in your opinion. I am curious to know.
boarder
King
The problem I have Bloh is that most of this information seems to come from one man Houchang Nahavandi whom you talked about in your post number 386. The other person you mention is a 23 year old student whom seems to have recycled everything Nahavandi says in his book.
Now nahavandi was a former minister/advisor to the Shah if im not mistaken, and from his interviews he seems to paint the Shah as a peace loving person who wanted "not one drop of Iran blood spilled" he also says that the Shah would always let people who tryed to assasinate him go free.
Yet from what I have read from lots of various sources is that the numbers of Iranians whom went missing during the Shahs reign was as high as half a million, so something doesn't add up to me.
Nahavandi also has a 200 000 bounty on his head. Obviously not liked by the current regime.
He does make some interesting points of leftist French being behind the revolution so as to halt communism, but I just can't find any of the documents that he claims he has, why are these not readily availiable?
He also says Iran would be a lot easier to overthrow then Iraq, seriously I think that anyone would find this hard to believe.
Im still not convinved and find his writings to be very biased and some of it from what I have learned is just plain infactual.
Now nahavandi was a former minister/advisor to the Shah if im not mistaken, and from his interviews he seems to paint the Shah as a peace loving person who wanted "not one drop of Iran blood spilled" he also says that the Shah would always let people who tryed to assasinate him go free.
Yet from what I have read from lots of various sources is that the numbers of Iranians whom went missing during the Shahs reign was as high as half a million, so something doesn't add up to me.
Nahavandi also has a 200 000 bounty on his head. Obviously not liked by the current regime.
He does make some interesting points of leftist French being behind the revolution so as to halt communism, but I just can't find any of the documents that he claims he has, why are these not readily availiable?
He also says Iran would be a lot easier to overthrow then Iraq, seriously I think that anyone would find this hard to believe.
Im still not convinved and find his writings to be very biased and some of it from what I have learned is just plain infactual.
plarq
Crazy forever
What boarder said.
We Chinese face a similar situation like Iranians. Draw parallels.
Kuomingtang was not democratic in the 40s, and Chiang Kai-Shek is definitely not a saint. Even his wife despise his untruthfulness towards Christ.
Mao, OTOH, was much worse.
We Chinese face a similar situation like Iranians. Draw parallels.
Kuomingtang was not democratic in the 40s, and Chiang Kai-Shek is definitely not a saint. Even his wife despise his untruthfulness towards Christ.
Mao, OTOH, was much worse.
You are wrong. Those two are not the only one saying this; this is what I believe and many other monachists. People are talking about revolution and asking me, when they ask me - they answer from me. No one asked "What does the people think about the revolution" so I have no idea where you are getting that from. Nahavandi was not the founder of this "west-backed revolution".. this started ages ago; even the Shah himself said that in his book "Answer to the History" .. Seems like we have IR supporter here trashing.
Yes. Shah was a peace loving person. He was the one doing his best to stop the Yom Kipur (spell?) and had a big role in making peace in it. Secondly, Shah constantly (even though recognized Israel) attacked Israel that they should stop the "war" and make peace.
There are many people who went against the Shah, critized him, tried to kill him but got away. Here is a quick list of people; hopefully next time you will write in a better tone instead of attacking like you directly attack me.
Before I post this list, I want to say - 99.99% of the sources are from the west countries. Think; if West was behind this - would they also write good things about the Shah? I think you should investigate more about this. See the different Shah-supporter websites, monarchy supporters, books written by communists, americans, english people saying how the west was behind the revolution.
The guy who wanted to kill the Shah was Parviz Nikkha; who later became the the leader of the national radio & tv (If that's how you say in English). That for a pact proves that the Shah forgave those who tried to kill him. Now here is your list:
1. Mahmod Jafarian - He was a member of Tudeh party and became vice director of Iranian National Radio and TV. He was also a military officer.
2. Dr Mansor Azmon - A communist which later became worker minister.
3. Arham - Major in the Imperial Iranian Army and member of the Tudeh party. In prison he studied engineering and later he worked for the Electricity and Water department. He was also one of the few engineers who built the famous Moghan-dam
4. Dr Gasemloo - Member of the Tudeh Party's military section and officer in the Iranian army. In prison he studied and managed to get his PhD in aliment. Later he became chef of the aliment faculty at Tehran University.
5. Dr Korosh Lashaii - Communist who later became chef for a governmental organization, which worked for human rights and freedom.
6. Dr Mohammed Jafari - Communist and in opposition against the Shah in East Germany. He came back to Iran from East Germany and become lecturer in political science at Political Science College in Tehran. He also became active in the Rastakhiz Party
There are a lot of more. But we will start with this.
Open your eyes. The days of people thinking bad about the Shah will soon end. I recommend you to READ the book fully, I doubt you have since you write like that.
Interesting thing
According to Alexandre de Marenches, Direcot-General of French SDECE, he had told the Shah that Jimmy Carter had determinded to overthrow the Shah and replace him with someone else. He also said that the mentioned to the Shah the names of those in US that had big part in this and that he had been in meetings against the Shah .. (de Marenches 1988, p. 125-126)
^There are many examples like that. I like to take things slowly.
There is a even a list of people that had participated in the operation to overthrow the Shah. I can put it up if anyone wants.
Now I want to see your source of people who went missing. I want the names of everyone who went missing. I want you to bring up anything you have against the Shah and I will gladly prove you wrong. He was a murderer? Yeah right, he killed everyone except for the big ones like Khomeini who really posed a threat. LOL.
You still haven't answered me what I posted was so biased.
I have no idea what to say on this. I am not in the government, unless you mean myself?
AL_DA_GREAT
amour absinthe révolution
Islam!
It ruined my country!
Even Iranians in Iran are thinking like this; watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYZoXXfKxTs
That is why the European nationalists hold Iran as an example of what can happen if we don't act.
boarder
King
Hey I never attacked you dont be silly I am simply questioning why you are trying to paint the Shah as something that history seems to say differently.
Thats what debating is about is it not.
What about well knowen people like Vida Hadjebi Tabirizi, Atefeh Gorgin, and Dr. Sa'edi?Before I post this list, I want to say - 99.99% of the sources are from the west countries. Think; if West was behind this - would they also write good things about the Shah? I think you should investigate more about this. See the different Shah-supporter websites, monarchy supporters, books written by communists, americans, english people saying how the west was behind the revolution.
The guy who wanted to kill the Shah was Parviz Nikkha; who later became the the leader of the national radio & tv (If that's how you say in English). That for a pact proves that the Shah forgave those who tried to kill him. Now here is your list:
1. Mahmod Jafarian - He was a member of Tudeh party and became vice director of Iranian National Radio and TV. He was also a military officer.
2. Dr Mansor Azmon - A communist which later became worker minister.
3. Arham - Major in the Imperial Iranian Army and member of the Tudeh party. In prison he studied engineering and later he worked for the Electricity and Water department. He was also one of the few engineers who built the famous Moghan-dam
4. Dr Gasemloo - Member of the Tudeh Party's military section and officer in the Iranian army. In prison he studied and managed to get his PhD in aliment. Later he became chef of the aliment faculty at Tehran University.
5. Dr Korosh Lashaii - Communist who later became chef for a governmental organization, which worked for human rights and freedom.
6. Dr Mohammed Jafari - Communist and in opposition against the Shah in East Germany. He came back to Iran from East Germany and become lecturer in political science at Political Science College in Tehran. He also became active in the Rastakhiz Party
There are a lot of more. But we will start with this.
Open your eyes. The days of people thinking bad about the Shah will soon end. I recommend you to READ the book fully, I doubt you have since you write like that.
Interesting thing
According to Alexandre de Marenches, Direcot-General of French SDECE, he had told the Shah that Jimmy Carter had determinded to overthrow the Shah and replace him with someone else. He also said that the mentioned to the Shah the names of those in US that had big part in this and that he had been in meetings against the Shah .. (de Marenches 1988, p. 125-126)
^There are many examples like that. I like to take things slowly.
There is a even a list of people that had participated in the operation to overthrow the Shah. I can put it up if anyone wants.
Now I want to see your source of people who went missing. I want the names of everyone who went missing. I want you to bring up anything you have against the Shah and I will gladly prove you wrong. He was a murderer? Yeah right, he killed everyone except for the big ones like Khomeini who really posed a threat. LOL.
I am not going to give a list of 100 000 odd names thats just being silly.
Instead I will put up some sites and sources that I feel are a lot more credible then from people in exile whom obviously want a change of the current regime therefore will often say whatever the west wants to hear just to get funding and/or help/support when they often have there own interestests at heart.
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/iran/savak/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/iran/savak.htm
Over the years, SAVAK became a law unto itself, having legal authority to arrest and detain suspected persons indefinitely. SAVAK operated its own prisons in Tehran (the Komiteh and Evin facilities) and, many suspected, throughout the country as well. SAVAK's torture methods included electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting brokon glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails. Many of these activities were carried out without any institutional checks.
At the peak its influence under the Shah SAVAK had at least 13 full-time case officers running a network of informers and infiltration covering 30,000 Iranian students on United States college campuses. The head of the SAVAK agents in the United States operated under the cover of an attache at the Iranian Mission to the United Nations, with the FBI, CIA, and State Department fully aware of these activities.
In 1978 the deepening opposition to the Shah errupted in widespread demonstrations and rioting. SAVAK and the military responded with widespread repression that killed thousands of people. Recognizing that even this level of violence had failed to crush the rebellion, the Shah abdicated the Peacock Throne and departed Iran on 16 January 1979.
hmmm doesn't sound very peace loving to me.
Here is something interesting that I think pertain to you...
http://www.iraniantruth.com/?p=961
Interestingly enough, even the Shahs son, the current Reza Pahlavi, doesnt go so far as to justify Savaks atrocities. On the contrary, Pahlavi admits in his book Winds of Change, that the massive and widespread nature of the atrocities committed by Savak is one of the main reasons Iranians overthrew the monarchy. Yet here we are, it is not uncommon that so many Iranian youth try to make-over Iranian history. Most of the youth who support the shah arise in families which had some association with the shah, or who lived in upper class families prior to the revolution. It is similar to the support and respect so many Sunnis in Iraq continue to have for Saddam Hussein, despite the massive atrocities he committed.
So now we have the Shah's own son admitting the atrocities.
There are thousand more links out there, all that say similar things. Just google and you shall find them. Don't rewrite history. And don't think that im attacking you, simply pointing out the fallacies in your theory
Let's get going then:
Vida Hadjebi Tabrizi died in a gunfight with the police. She was a member of "Sazeman-e Chikrikan-e Fadaii-e Khalgh) which
in English is "The Guerrilla Organisation of Self-sacrifices of the People" .. their goal was to destroy monarchy and
introduce communism to Iran. They used violence and terrorist actions to kill the Shah and overthrow the monarchy. At one
time they killed a traffic police, who did nothing wrong. They even planed to place bombs in a centre.
Atefeh Gorgin and "their crew" was planning to kidnap the Shah's family.. his son and his wife. Do you think the president
of USA would let them live freely? Of course not. Someone who tries to kidnap the family of the KING of a COUNTRY; can't be
let free. Terrorists deserve to be put in jail and executed.
Dr. Sa'edi died in Paris. LOL. Come on, you can do better than that.
I mean come on, Shah left the huge threats to him alive and went after people who couldn't do ****? Why didn't he kill all
the mullahs? Why didn't he torture all the mullahs? Islam was one of the biggest threat, the Shah could easily destroy it.
Now I was looking for a video when they interview some Iranian commander/chief and they tell him something along those
lines.. "We have heard that you torture and kill a lot.. " etc etc and he gives a great answer..but I can't find it but I
will put it up for you as soon as I find it.. now, next.
Execution was allowed in Iran; it was a law that the Parliament (Majles) agreed with. It was the law of a country so do not
attack that. Just like it's different laws in different countries.
Secondly; how come USA can fight against terrorist.. CIA torture terrorists, putting up Guantenamo (or whatever the name is)
when the prisoners are living in hell. How come everyone can do that, all countries - but when it comes to the Shah.." oh
oh, bad name".. Look up Mujaheddin, MKO - also known as a terrorist organization around the world; they used violence and
the Shah responded with violence (execution for instance) BUT SOMETIMES! Look at the names and list I gave you, yes I will
give you more names on how the Shah forgave and gave his enemies good positions in Iran.
"Is it necessary to add that Iran has no more reason to tolerate terrorism than the italians have to tolerate the activities
of the Red Brigades or the Germans the demands of the Baader Meinhof gang?"
Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Aryamehr
Now, I am saying that the west was behind the revolution - and most of these facts are either from Iranians who are anti
Shah (communists, mujaheddin, islamisc people) or american/english/western countries websites and books. Do you think they
would write good about someone they wanted to overthrow? One step when it comes to overthrowing someone is spreading
propaganda and lies aobut one, like they did to the Shah ... these lies became slowly the "truth" since it was being said so
many times.
Shah told his army and his generals to not open fire at any demostrators. He didn't want any blood to be shed, yet, notice how the revolution succed. Opposite to this regime, they will kill, destroy and show no mercy. The Shah said that no one should be killed, and notice why SAVAK agents, Military people etc instead left the country instead of fighting? Don't tell me "They didn't want to.." Right. The army was a pretty loyal to the Shah, but let's say the army hated the Shah (Yeah right..) the SAVAK was PRETTY LOYAL; handpicked people who were very loyal to the Shah and Iran of course, they could easily just OPEN FIRE with like AK47 and kill everyone; then people would shut up and go take a seat. But did he? No.
Now about the Shah's son.. please think a little, when I say the west was behind the revolution. Surely they would of thought about his son as well. How do you know that.. His son wasn't forced to write that? NOTE: He lives in USA. Probably under watch from FBI/CIA/whatever.
Please put up more names and everything else you have against the Shah and I will gladly answer you.
I am not rewriting history but telling the truth. I am telling you the west was behind it; and when I am talking and explaining the "real thing" (of course, what I believe..and many others) I am rewriting history.. right. So only your USA-based information must be 100 % correct right?
So if I go write a book now that you killed someone, and someone puts it as source.. must it be true?
PS. Answer me this; Assume you were the leader of USA/Iran and you catch a terrorist planing to bomb a huge shopping centre with many visitors. He refuses to tell you anything; would you torture to get information?
Also replace "you" with the current leader of ANY COUNTRY.
PS: Again; I recommend you to write the book by Nahavandi. It seems like you have something personal against the Shah as well. Read the book please before writing here (well, not that I can force you but recommend you) Stop taking a look at west-based sources; take a look at Iranians who lived during that time. You can also wait for the new book proving how West was behind the revolution (I can as I said, give some information now) I think the book is coming out again as I said before summer.
Vida Hadjebi Tabrizi died in a gunfight with the police. She was a member of "Sazeman-e Chikrikan-e Fadaii-e Khalgh) which
in English is "The Guerrilla Organisation of Self-sacrifices of the People" .. their goal was to destroy monarchy and
introduce communism to Iran. They used violence and terrorist actions to kill the Shah and overthrow the monarchy. At one
time they killed a traffic police, who did nothing wrong. They even planed to place bombs in a centre.
Atefeh Gorgin and "their crew" was planning to kidnap the Shah's family.. his son and his wife. Do you think the president
of USA would let them live freely? Of course not. Someone who tries to kidnap the family of the KING of a COUNTRY; can't be
let free. Terrorists deserve to be put in jail and executed.
Dr. Sa'edi died in Paris. LOL. Come on, you can do better than that.
I mean come on, Shah left the huge threats to him alive and went after people who couldn't do ****? Why didn't he kill all
the mullahs? Why didn't he torture all the mullahs? Islam was one of the biggest threat, the Shah could easily destroy it.
Now I was looking for a video when they interview some Iranian commander/chief and they tell him something along those
lines.. "We have heard that you torture and kill a lot.. " etc etc and he gives a great answer..but I can't find it but I
will put it up for you as soon as I find it.. now, next.
Execution was allowed in Iran; it was a law that the Parliament (Majles) agreed with. It was the law of a country so do not
attack that. Just like it's different laws in different countries.
Secondly; how come USA can fight against terrorist.. CIA torture terrorists, putting up Guantenamo (or whatever the name is)
when the prisoners are living in hell. How come everyone can do that, all countries - but when it comes to the Shah.." oh
oh, bad name".. Look up Mujaheddin, MKO - also known as a terrorist organization around the world; they used violence and
the Shah responded with violence (execution for instance) BUT SOMETIMES! Look at the names and list I gave you, yes I will
give you more names on how the Shah forgave and gave his enemies good positions in Iran.
"Is it necessary to add that Iran has no more reason to tolerate terrorism than the italians have to tolerate the activities
of the Red Brigades or the Germans the demands of the Baader Meinhof gang?"
Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Aryamehr
Now, I am saying that the west was behind the revolution - and most of these facts are either from Iranians who are anti
Shah (communists, mujaheddin, islamisc people) or american/english/western countries websites and books. Do you think they
would write good about someone they wanted to overthrow? One step when it comes to overthrowing someone is spreading
propaganda and lies aobut one, like they did to the Shah ... these lies became slowly the "truth" since it was being said so
many times.
Shah told his army and his generals to not open fire at any demostrators. He didn't want any blood to be shed, yet, notice how the revolution succed. Opposite to this regime, they will kill, destroy and show no mercy. The Shah said that no one should be killed, and notice why SAVAK agents, Military people etc instead left the country instead of fighting? Don't tell me "They didn't want to.." Right. The army was a pretty loyal to the Shah, but let's say the army hated the Shah (Yeah right..) the SAVAK was PRETTY LOYAL; handpicked people who were very loyal to the Shah and Iran of course, they could easily just OPEN FIRE with like AK47 and kill everyone; then people would shut up and go take a seat. But did he? No.
Now about the Shah's son.. please think a little, when I say the west was behind the revolution. Surely they would of thought about his son as well. How do you know that.. His son wasn't forced to write that? NOTE: He lives in USA. Probably under watch from FBI/CIA/whatever.
Please put up more names and everything else you have against the Shah and I will gladly answer you.
I am not rewriting history but telling the truth. I am telling you the west was behind it; and when I am talking and explaining the "real thing" (of course, what I believe..and many others) I am rewriting history.. right. So only your USA-based information must be 100 % correct right?
So if I go write a book now that you killed someone, and someone puts it as source.. must it be true?
PS. Answer me this; Assume you were the leader of USA/Iran and you catch a terrorist planing to bomb a huge shopping centre with many visitors. He refuses to tell you anything; would you torture to get information?
Also replace "you" with the current leader of ANY COUNTRY.
PS: Again; I recommend you to write the book by Nahavandi. It seems like you have something personal against the Shah as well. Read the book please before writing here (well, not that I can force you but recommend you) Stop taking a look at west-based sources; take a look at Iranians who lived during that time. You can also wait for the new book proving how West was behind the revolution (I can as I said, give some information now) I think the book is coming out again as I said before summer.
boarder
King
Of course I don't have anything personal against the Shah its not like I knew him or anything.
My information isnt USA based only, its what thousands of people have written down as history, incuding many Iranian's.
Im all for a change where human rights are respected in Iran just as in every country.
Im sorry but for all I have read (and I did read a bit regarding what you are saying), and I will accept some of your points like how the economy in the early days of the Shah's rule was humming along nicely, but you did fail to mention that towards the end that wasn't the case.
Yet I have seen no proof that it was as good or even close to what you make it out to be under the Shah.
Good luck.
My information isnt USA based only, its what thousands of people have written down as history, incuding many Iranian's.
Im all for a change where human rights are respected in Iran just as in every country.
Im sorry but for all I have read (and I did read a bit regarding what you are saying), and I will accept some of your points like how the economy in the early days of the Shah's rule was humming along nicely, but you did fail to mention that towards the end that wasn't the case.
Yet I have seen no proof that it was as good or even close to what you make it out to be under the Shah.
Good luck.
Perfection
The Great Head.
If Iran was a tree, what kind of tree would it be?
The proof that Iran was getting better and better is enough. All you are focusing now is that Shah was a "killer" and "torturer" and leaving everything else behind.
If you want to start a new thread about Shah being a torturer or a killer, I will gladly talk to you there instead. And one of the biggest proof, again: Why didn't he kill all the mullahs? I just gave you a huge load of information; sadly - I don't have any "documents" that say that so I can put it up for you, if you want I can write it to you on a paper and scan it maybe? Some people think everything need proof, somethings you can't just prove, especially for me because I am young. But you know what I will do my best to find you some stuff but you have to give me some time. I am very stressed because of school, I gave lots of huge exams every week..
the sexiest one
boarder
King
Yes proof is something rather important to me especially when claims that go against everything I already know.
Don't worry about scanning anything it will be knowen in the future if your correct.
Good luck with your exams, a lot more important then a message board.
PersianBoy
Prince
In the city that I live Hamedan I know four church one belong to Catholics, one belong to Protestan and two others for Armanies, one of armanies church is now a cultural heritage of Hamedan.
I know that groove of Ester and Mordkhay the respectfull people between jews are in Hamedan and everybody respect it but I don`t know where is a Jews temple or Church
one year ago I travel with my family to Yazd and there I meet some Zoroastrian poeple
about secound question first you answer are there real political party in USA. if yes then for the case of Iran yes and no if your answer is no.
If they don`t support him didn`t wote him. but now because of some economic problems less poeple support him.
I`m happy that this topic is active and this is due to Bloh. Thank you very much
Mamnon
- Status
