Survey
Comments
roozbeh_gilani 's Recent Surveys
AI 'godfather' Yoshua Bengio: Disinformation bot threat is ‘shocking’ | BBC News
Viroon | 12 minutes ago
0 26
Category: None
Hundreds Arrested: Students Across U.S. Protest for Palestine as Campus Crackdown Intensifies
Viroon | 22 minutes ago
0 26
Category: None
One thing I would love to see more in this site is articles and surveys expressing gratitude to and admiration for SAVAK and its service to protect the nation from the Iranian Talibans (i.e., Tudehies, Confederations, mullahs, and other commie suversives) during the hieght of the cold war.
Dear Jockshe:
And that would be just fine with me. In fact why dont you write a blog about SAVAK and all it's achievements? You might want to also explain why such fearsome and powerfull security organisation failed to protect the mohmamad reza shah, king of kings, light of all aryans? why Mohamad reza shah ran off in tears leaving all his SAVAK generals to revolutionary mob and a certain death? From this kind of discussion maybe we could learn a lesson from our past and apply it to the current situation. After all, we all, despite our differences of views want the islamist regime to go, dont we?...
Finally,given your love and admiration for SAVAK, a quick quiz for you: Could you identify the SAVAK agents in the picture I provided with this opinion survey? I give you a hint: they wear glasses.....
Dear Roozbeh,
The reason that there is renewed interest in the late Shah and Reza Shah's era is that more and more facts are coming out about those days. For example, Manoto's documentary about Reza Shah’s accomplishments in only 17 years opened our eyes to what that great man did for us and how he brought modernity and dignity to the Iranian nation.
Also, the lies that the Islamo-Commies, pro-Moscow Tudeh-eis and the Marxists spread about the political situation in Iran under the late Shah has been revealed. For example,
When Dr. Bakhtiar opened Iranian prisons, there were only 2-3,000 political prisoners, and not 100,000.
There were a few hundred people, mostly Commies that died under the Shah, many of them in arm battles with the security forces.
Innocent Americans were assassinated by the Islamo-Commies, not because they did anything wrong, but rather because they were supporting Iranian military in our national endeavors against the Communist Imperialists to the north.
Communist sympathizers like Samad Behrangi was not killed by Savak but rather drowned in Aras River because he could not swim!
Cinema Rex Massacre was not perpetuated by Savak but rather planned and executed by the Islamists.
In the confrontation on Jaleh Square, only 15 people died (from both sides) and not thousands.
And the list goes on.
Mr. Osanloo, the labor activists said in an interview last week that the Iranian workers did not have any “economic issues” when they went on strike against the late Shah.
To sum it up, a bunch of angry young men, equipped with a misguided and foreign ideology put our country on this disastrous path and many of them, to this date, still refuse to accept responsibility.
In my opinion, History will look favorably on Pahlavi’s era.
The Commies on the other hand, are in the dustbin of history.
I have yet to meet a victim of SAVAK!
No, my uncle's friend's cousin doesn't count!
I mean, have you met a real person with two legs, two arms, and one head who was directly abused by SAVAK!? Yes or No!? Yes or No!? I mean Yes or No! What was that? No! Okay now let's move on!
Dear RG - One of my law school professors who also worked for a 3-letter agency used to tell me that every country needs an intelligence service to collect information and be cognizent of all kinds of activities, simply to protect itself from harms. Without such organization, a government would not be able to function proactively and properly. And, once in a while you have to twist a finger or an arm to encourage a subversive to talk. We do it here in America. By the way, the person in dark glasses standing to the left of Shahbanoo srtikes me as a fine gentleman. He would make a nice SAVAK agent! The gentlemen bowing to Shahbanoo seem more like aftabeh and vajebee salesmen! Thank you for your interest in my post.
Dear inspector
If you do meet one, will you believe he was a victim???????????
Howze-Soltan and Namak lakes cannot talk.
Roozbeh jaan, there is no debate whether there was repression, torture, and censorship under the Pahlavis. There most certainly was, and as the man in charge, the Shah bears responsibility. The issue, in my opinion, is the sheer exaggeration to a huge degree of its scale. The number of political prisoners was exaggerated exponentially, as were the number of people killed in Jaleh Square, etc. About 400 people were executed during the Shah's 38-year reign (as investigated by Paul Balta of Le Monde), whereas the ruling Islamist regime executed over 600 people in 2013 alone! The bloodiest single incident of the revolution, the burning to death of over 400 people in Cinema Rex, was carried out by the revolutionaries themselves and blamed on the Shah. The Shah's opposition (Khomeinists, Tudeh, Mojahedin, etc) were far worse than he was, and they proved it when they came to power. What preceded the Pahlavis (the Qajars) and what followed them (the IRI) were far more violent and repressive than they were. As we can see from the comment of our Denmark-residing IRI supporter, many of the ones denouncing the Shah's atrocities are also the same ones who support the infinitely more bloodthirsty Mollah Regime.
I can't understand the enmity that is shown against Pahlavis despite the good handling of the difficult challenges that the country had during their time and the progress that was made. As far as Monarchy goes, Pahlavis were one of the best that we had. They were kings who managed the country in the same way that Shah Abbas did, as opposed to many lazy, big headed adulterers who ruled this country.
I however don't give Pahlavis all the credit as some people do and believe that any other technocrat government who would empower the Iranian professionals would have achieved similar results. Do not forget that they inherited the enlightenment of the Mashrouteh revolution. Unfortunately some programmers in Manoto and other channels now try to give all the credits to Pahlavis whilst pass all the blame to others. This is nothing but misleading people. My argument is that if you want to give them all the credit, you must also pass them all the blames for the revolution and the current status of the country.
With respect to Savak, it was not always the same Savak and adopted different strategies at different periods and under the control of different chiefs. Under Pakravan Savak attempted soft tactics to open communication channels with opposition and how we now wish that Shah had not changed him for Nasiri. Later in the hands of a criminal like Sabeti, Savak's miss managed and heavy handed tactics created enough resentment in the society to support and overthrow of the Shah.
I agree with divaneh. It seems Pahlavis are getting all the credits.
Also DON'T forget that Pahlavis were the only kingdom with more cash to spend than any other ones we had.
Dear Amir Bear
Pahlavis had a lot of cash to spend because they had the foresight to allow rapid oil exploration and the building of modern oil facilities and ports to process and sell that oil. If Qajars had remained in power, they would have probably considered cooperation with Westerners - and oil exploration itself-"haraam" and would have been content with spending time in their herams and mosques.
For what it's worth, the IRI made more money from oil sales in the years 2005-2013 than Iran did in the preceding century (going all the way back to the Qajars).
The distinction between Pahlavi (as well as leaders like Ataturk) and just "anyone else" [who would have presumably done the same thing] is that visionary leaders are extremely few and far in between. The assumption that anyone else in Shah's place would have done the same for Iran is simply wrong. Shah was by all accounts a visionary. The extremely rapid pace of development in Iran under his (and his father's) rule was simply astonishing. From refineries to roads to airports to dams to a world class military to nuclear power (the two Bushehr reactors at 85% and 50% compeletion--in four years--at the time of his departure), to a modern education system to modern medicine, ports...the list is endless. If you really look at it, the IR in 35 years has not developed or added anything of value to any develpment projects. Even the metro system and other road projects that they boast about were in planning or execution stage at the time of the 1979 devolution. Really, the package of a visionary leader and the right circumstances is an extremely rare occurence.
And quite frankly, while there was oppression and lack of political freedom under Shah, in comparison with Iran's bloody and violent history (yes, we are a pretty violent people. It's not all about Divan-e-hafez and gol-o-bolbol) he wasn't really that bad. In fact, I would argue that under Shah, there was great political freedom (by defauly). Just look at all the organizations that thrived INSIDE Iran during Shah's rule with their leaders openly calling for the toppling of monarchy, from the Toudeh, Jebheh Melli, Mojahedin, Cherik-Fadaii, all the akhoonds. If Shah was such a brutal murderer of the opposition, how come all these guys survived to not only talk about it, but also openly give speches and demonstrate in the streets?!! Can you imagine a situation even remotely like this is Iran today?!!
Lastly, monarchy in Iran would have not remained the same. If the masses who were eager to meet Imam-e-zaman and his representative on Earth--and the "leftists" who were eager to make Iran a part of the glorious Soviet Union--had waited a couple of more years, Shah would have died of cancer, his son would have taken over, and in a few years, under pressure from the people, democracy would have taken root over time. But hey, who in Iran can beat a guy in a turban that spews out Arabic verses and uses the word "laken" in every sentence? No one! :-)
Dear AO, I couldn't have said it better myself. Our 1970s revolutionaries cannot admit their mistakes. They cannot face the fact that they willingly and blindly let themselves get bamboozled by a 77 year-old "akhoond-e shepeshoo". They have to justify the ruinous situation they helped place Iran in by continuing to exaggerate on an absurd scale the Shah's very real crimes and shortcomings. On another note, it has occurred to me that it seems the Iranian people revolted when they should have aimed for reform, and they have tried reform when reform is impossible. Talk about ass backwards.
Amir jaan - My father has the best line about this. He says that if this guys ever admit their mistake, it will be tantamount to them writing a giant "goh khordam" across their foreheads (and I'm not referring to my good friend Roozbeh here). So, they will go to their graves defending their mistake. This sort of obstinance is also a chracteristic of the Iranian / Middle Eastern culture. And this phrase, I cannot agree with you more:
"it has occurred to me that it seems the Iranian people revolted when they should have aimed for reform, and they have tried reform when reform is impossible. Talk about ass backwards."
How true....
Agreed: Roozbeh is a principled, standup guy.
On the ghormeh sabzi front, you should try Sadaf's vegetarian Ghormeh Sabzi. I tried it a couple of weeks ago. It's pretty good. A little on the sour side, but still good:
http://www.sadaf.com/sadaf-khoresh-ghormeh-sabzi-30-5092/
When we fantasize about the past, we just help ourselves to repeat the same mistakes again. Shah was certainly a visionary but that vision didn't work. Look at Turkey and you see how Ataturk's vision worked and how they kept a steady rate of progress despite who was at the helm. It was because they put the law above everything else whilst in our country the law was broken by no other person than the Shah himself when he ignored the constitution that was designed to limit the monarch's power. He was a control freak and wanted to make every major decision about the country. The system that he had created was what we know as a spider web. Knock the big spider in the middle and the whole system becomes dysfunctional. His problems with Mosadegh for example was not because Mosadegh wanted to overthrow him but because Mosadegh wanted to exercise the authority that law awarded him as a prime minister. He loved his country but nevertheless he was an autocratic ruler. By the end of his time he had surrounded himself with yes-sayers and the Majles had become far more useless than what it has become today. The price was paid not only by him but by the whole nation.
I am not in a position to judge him. I have not had to dodge bullets and then ran up the stairs for my life whilst a guard was shooting to kill me. I assume with that type of experience anyone will be mistrustful of those around him.
So do not take me wrong, I have deep appreciation for what Shah did but we have to be fair and realistic and avoid self-deceit and fantasies that are not matching the reality of the events. Look around us and you can see that not only Turks but our Arab neighbours have also enjoyed a good rate of progress. It is called oil money. In fact they are far in front of us in terms of economy now.
The judiciary system that was created by Davar was frequently ignored by Shah and those around him and I know firsthand of a case of land grab by his brother in a prime position in Tehran where real owner were forced to silence without being paid a penny. When you despise those Basijis remember that Shah associated with Shabon bimokh who was no different to those basijis.
I don’t want to undermine what he did but do not tell us that if he was not there we still had flees. If you consider the situation of Iran in those days you can see that if he was not there nothing but another technocrat government could come to power and it would do the same. "One person knows all" has never worked and will never work.
Ahh, us Iranians are one-of-a-kind, (in the most f'd up way):
35 years after the islamist take over, we are still discussing Shah and Pahlavis.
Didn't "da people" oust them?
Didn't "da people" hate them?
Aren't you better off now?
Isn't everything going your way now? (depends who you are, of course).
The people in Iran seem happy that a mullah (the new puppet) will make it easier for them, you know, more social change and all: the ease of hejab, I suppose less religious police patrols...you know, the works!
As we say in Parsi: "be marg begir ke be tab raazi beshan" - Congrats to all Iranians who finally after 14+ centuries gave total control of their land to the chest beaters of the religion of peace, nice going!
The rise of the shiekdoms in the Persian Gulf coincides with the collpase of Iran in 1979. So, it can be argued that they are the beneficiaries of Shah's vision of a strong nation in the region that uses oil revenues to attract foreign investment and speed up development. Trust me, I lived in one of those countries as achild--a few years after the Devolution. The word there was that these guys were scared sh**less of the Shah. But when Iran collpased in 1979 and progress, development, being a player on the world stage, and "aberoo" for Iranians was replaced with one single concern for Iranians- the liberation of Palestine--these gas station countries took advantage of the situation and filled in the void by becoming the conduit for Western (and now even Eastern) investment in the region. Do you honestly believe that the Shah would have allowed Dubai to become what it is today? Dubai is there because Iran collpased.
We have a family friend who was a high ranking member of Iran's embassy staff in one of those countries during Shah's reign. He tells the story of when theses shiekdoms decided in the mid-1970's to start a news agency called the "A--bian Gulf News Agency." The word got to the Shah, and he was so furious that he recalled all his ambassadors in the region, and issued a stern ultimatum to those guys. That was the end of that project. Then fast forward a few years to the early 1980's, after Iran's collapse in the 1979 Devolution. The same guys created the Gulf Cooperation Council. Do you think they had the balls to create that organization when Shah was around?!!
And to add: yes, Shah had many flaws...but like I said before, he was the best Iran had experienced in centuries--more like 14 centuries. I mean, come on, we're not talking Sweden here. We're talking Iran, an uber-religious, mostly "aghab-oftadeh," xenophobic culture that believes its savior has been hiding a well for the past 1000 years, saw Khoemini's image on the moon and believes every conspiracy theory that the average Hossein comes up with after a belly full of chelo kabab. These are the same people who believed Savak kept bags full of pulled nails at its stations. :-) Seriously, if they were pulling nails, why keep them?!
fare representation? this site certainly does. nothing stops the so called republicans aka jumhorikhah's of all flavor to represenet their point of view and sell us their idology because lets face it at the end of the day that's what is all about. but its not happening, not because of editorial policy it is because no body is interested in the products they are selling! We have seen communism in action in Iran and so many other places in the past 70 years and the result has been utterly trajic. we have seen islamists in action in Iran and so many other places pats 35 years and the results have been devastating. We have seen monarchies replaced with republicanism of all kind in our region and the result has been awfull to say the least. I can go on and on but unless you have some interesting to sell sorry no body is buying it!