Aryamehr

Documentary on the 2500 Years of Empire celebrations in Iran

2011-11-06T01:44:00.002Z

http://www.manoto1.com/videos/kourosh

Source: Manoto TVhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif

Shahanshah Aryamehr - Videoclips (1950's)

2011-10-27T20:42:00.003+01:00

His Imperial Majesty Shahanshah Aryamehr visits the Atomic Energy Research Establishment (1959)

His Imperial Majesty Shahanshah Aryamehr visits Biggin Hill RAF Station (1955)

Shahanshah Aryamehr - State Visit - White House 1967

2011-10-10T23:11:00.003+01:00

Shahanshah Aryamehr

2011-09-18T22:59:00.000+01:00

Shahanshah Aryamehr - 1973 Speech

2011-08-29T18:22:00.002+01:00

Documentary on Dr Fereydoun Farokhzad

2011-08-25T20:21:00.003+01:00

Documentary on Dr Fereydoun Farokhzad - Iranian entertainer and political activist assasinated by the terrorist Islamic Republic.

Documentary on H.E. PM Shahpour Bakhtiar

2011-08-19T23:16:00.004+01:00

Documentary on H.E PM Shahpour Bakhtiar.

Pre-1979 News Reports - Iran

2011-08-02T23:34:00.001+01:00

Iran's Industrial Progress (Pre-1979 Islamist Revolt)

2011-08-02T22:48:00.002+01:00

Women in modern Iran (Pre-1979 Islamist Revolt)

2011-08-02T22:44:00.004+01:00

Shahanshah Aryamehr's speech celebrating "Womens Day":

Parade on Anniversary of the "White Revolution" - 1978

2011-08-02T22:27:00.005+01:00

A year before western-instigated turmoil facilitated islamist and leftist terrorists to destabilize and seize control of the country and begin what has to date been a 32 year long reign of terror over Iranians.

(6 Bahman 2536)

Empress Farah Pahlavi's statement on the anniversary of Shahanshah Aryamehr's demise - 5 Amordad

2011-07-30T23:27:00.004+01:00

HIM Shahanshah Aryamehr's first visit to the U.S.A. (1949)

2011-07-17T16:13:00.003+01:00

H.E. PM Hossein Ala

2011-07-08T23:58:00.007+01:00

A rare clip of H.E. Prime Minister Ala (1951; 1955-1957), who at the time of this newsreel from 1946 was Imperial Iran's UN Ambassador as well as Ambassador to the U.S., delivers Iran's case against the USSR over the Soviet occupation of the Iranian Azarbaijan.

During the Pahlavi Era we had exemplary and patriotic statesmen, diplomats and officials such as PM Ala who were at the service of their country and worked tirelessly to protect and further the interests of Iran. With the advent of the Islamist takeover in 1979, Iran's finest statesmen and military officials were either murdered in summary executions or forced into exile. Today, Iran is run by and represented on the world stage by a group of anti-Iranian islamists who nurture no love for Iran, its people, nor its cultural heritage. Included amongst these islamists are former convicts and rapists! Understandably, Iran today finds herself at one of its lowest and humiliating points in history.

Ostad Homer Abramian

2011-07-05T23:52:00.002+01:00

Eslam va Farhang Iran

Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi @ royal wedding in Monaco

2011-07-05T18:23:00.007+01:00

H.I.M. Empress Farah Pahlavi of Iran attending the wedding of Prince Albert of Monaco and Mrs Charlene Wittstock.

JAVID SHAHBANOU!

Ostad Homer Abramian

2011-07-03T23:34:00.003+01:00

Ostad Homer Abramian - lecture on islam in Iran.

Mihan

2011-07-03T14:20:00.006+01:00

Audio (persian):

http://www.4shared.com/audio/RVJfUqLb/SMP008Mihan01.html

http://www.4shared.com/audio/83OUaIpw/SMP008Mihan02.html

HIM the Shah of Iran's state visit to the United States - 1967

2011-06-26T20:53:00.003+01:00

U.S. National Archives (1967):

President Lyndon Johnson welcomes the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, to the White House.

President Nixon's state visit to Iran - 1972

2011-06-25T13:21:00.001+01:00

Iranian Woman's Testimony of Rape and Torture by the Islamic Republic

2011-06-12T00:01:00.001+01:00

Janbakhtegane Mihan - Cyrus Afhami

2011-05-21T13:14:00.003+01:00

Bijan Pakzad's memorial service in Los Angeles

2011-05-09T21:44:00.003+01:00

Second Link

Shahanshah Aryamehr's last interview with David Frost (1979)

2011-04-27T16:50:00.004+01:00

The Shah of Iran's last interview with David Frost (1979 - Panama); before he passed away in Cairo (27 July 1980) after having suffered with cancer for several years.

New York Persian Parade 2011

2011-04-24T23:57:00.001+01:00

Arya-ee-Nejad

2011-04-24T21:36:00.000+01:00

New photos on photobucket

2011-04-22T12:42:00.003+01:00

I've recently uploaded various new photos to my photobucket page - you can find these under the "sub-albums" (on the right-hand side when you scroll down from the main page)

Shah of Iran's speech on agreement with oil consortium (1973)

2011-04-17T14:11:00.004+01:00

"Shah of Iran announces that the 1954 operating agreement between a consortium of oil companies and Iran will not be renewed when it expires in 1979. The consortium was formed in 1954 as a means to settle a dispute between a new ministry in Iran and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). The consortium included Standard Oil of New Jersey, Standard Oil of California, SOCONY-Vacuum, the Texas Company, Gulf, Royal Dutch-Shell, the Compagnie Francaise de Petroles, and the AIOC." [ref]

"Under this agreement, two operating companies were formed, one to explore for and produce oil and natural gas, and the other to refine part of this oil at Abadan Refinery on behalf of NIOC." [ref]

What then happened in 1979? Instigated unrest and armed insurrection, with western support (under the guise of "human rights"), leads to the toppling of the Iranian government and shortly afterwards takeover and formation of a backward Islamic regime. Obviously a strong and independent government in Iran did not serve the political/financial interests of these western powers/oil companies and a backward islamic state which they could deal with behind the scenes would be much more favorable to them.

Kafarane Binam - Anonymous Sinners

2011-04-17T13:21:00.004+01:00

Anti-regime rap songs by the group "Kafarane Binam" (Anonymous Sinners):

http://www.kafaran.com/

Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi on the 1979 Islamic takeover in Iran

2011-04-05T23:27:00.001+01:00

Kanoon Institute - Empress Farah Pahlavi

2011-04-05T20:48:00.004+01:00

Acknowledgement to Darius Kadivar for having brought this to attention.

************

Shahbanou Farah speaks about the activities of the Kanoon Institute and the people who contributed to it's enhancements including Mrs. Lili Amir Arjomand one of the directors of the Institute for Intellectual development of Children.

Documentary on Kanoon (1965)

A documentary film about the early years of Iran's Institute for the Intellectual Development of Children and Young Adults (better known as Kanoon) Founded by Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi in 1965. Language: English and Persian, Voice Over: Manoutchehr Anvar.

About Kanoon: Institute for the Intellectual Development of Children and Young Adult:

Official Website Here

In consequence of about four decades of active presence in the field of production of cultural commodities such as books, audio tapes, films and toys, IIDCYA is regarded by Iranian schoolchildren, teachers and parents as a trustworthy name; the brand of "Kanoon" is a guarantee of quality of the product. IIDCYA's official status and its numerous branches all over the country, along with the production of attractive, healthy and relevant products for all age groups, have caused these products to be well-received in educational and family circles.

From the time of its founding in 1961, by Shabanou Farah Pahlavi through production of artistic works, and organizing festivals, discussion panels, competitions and various conferences, as well as a variety of practical measures and consulting services, IIDCYA has answered an extensive part of the cultural and developmental needs of the children and young adults of our country. All this has been carried out in two main directions: activities "for children" addressing children and young adults directly, and activities "about children" with the purpose of promoting the knowledge of adults about the peculiarities of world of children. With a high average annual statistics in the fields of production of books, tapes and toys and a considerable investment in the fields of recreational and literary activities, these colossal task of culture-making and consolidation of cultural infrastructure is being pursued. 519 libraries and cultural centers with more than 2000 tutors throughout the country help to realize these goals.

Cinematic Affairs of IIDCYA is one of the main departments of the organization. Its brilliant achievements in the field of production ofanimation, documentary and fiction films, is such that not only in Iran, but also on international level, the look of "Kanoon" is recognized. The high international prestige of Iranian cinema today is indebted to filmmakers who started their work and grew in Kanoon or made some of their best works there: Such as Abbas Kiarostami, Bahram Beyzai or Majid Majidi.

The success of Children of Heaven in many International festivals and its candidacy for the Best Foreign Language Film of academy awards(Oscar) in 1999, was a significant achievement for Kanoon productions.

Because of this outstanding background and unrelented production of animation films in "Kanoon", its name has been on the top of the list of independent producers of excellent and unforgettable animation works. Since 1970, when first animations of "Kanoon" were produced, 180 animation films have been produced there and almost all of them have regarded artistic and noteworthy works of art in internal and international festivals. This, and also the need to exhibit and independently analyze the animation films produced by other state and private producers throughout the country in a systematic manner, holding of an international animation festival became part of the agenda of "Kanoon". The inaugural festival was held in February 1999 and it is scheduled to be held biennially afterwards.

HIM Reza Shah II on VOA Persian and "Parazit" - 18 March

2011-03-18T23:39:00.002Z

Norooz 2570 - Iranian New Year

2011-03-18T23:10:00.004Z

Faraa'residane khojasteh norooz'e jamshidi'ra beh hameh mihanparastane Irani shaad'bash migooyam.

-------Norooz 2570 Khojasteh va Pirooz Baad!-------

HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi's Norooz 2570 message:

HIM Reza Pahlavi II's Norooz 2570 message

Happy Iranian New Year 2570

Anti-Regime Demonstrations - Iran

2011-02-20T10:21:00.003Z

This past Monday there were once again large anti-regime demonstrations across Iran which were met with the brutality of the Islamic Republic's savage security forces. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians braving the regimes thugs shouted "Death to the dictator!" [marg bar diktator], "Death to Khameini!" [marg bar khameini], "Either Freedom or Death!" [ya marg ya azadi] and "I will fight, I will die, I will regain Iran!" [mijangam, mimiram, irano pas migiram].

There are two confirmed deaths in which the regime's security forces gunned down two Iranian student demonstrators: Sane Jaleh and Mohammad Mokhtari. There have been calls for demonstrations today (Sunday 20 Feb) which marks the 7th day since these two students were killed by the Islamic Regime.

What we have learned in the past 32 years that this hell-sent regime has been in power is that when people are united they can overcome any oppressive force. This unity has been solidifying and I hope that we are at a tipping point where the aspirations of the Iranians nation - for a free, democratic, and secular government - will be achieved.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The following clip shows Iranian demonstrators attacking the Islamic Republic embassy in Denmark:

There have been anti-regime demonstrations staged outside the Islamic regime's embassies across major capitals in Europe and there have been reports that yet another regime diplomat has defected (Ahmad Maleki - Consulate General stationed in Milan, Italy)

International trade is strengthening the terrorist Islamic Republic

2011-02-05T14:20:00.006Z

Arvin Khoshnood, one of the founders of the "Association for Democracy in Iran" (the main website is in swedish) has recently had a scientific article published in the swedish publication "Geografiska Notiser". The article is called "The spirit of trade - International trade and democracy in Iran 1980-2006" (article is in swedish).

The article critically evaluates the theory that "more trade leads to improved political freedoms and democracy" in the case of Iran.

Since the formation of the clerical dictatorship in Iran (1979-) the EU's policy has been to increase trade (despite so-called sanctions) in a supposed effort to contribute towards the democratization of the tyrannical clerical establishment. With this in mind the paper analyses whether increased global trade has helped democracy in Iran? whether trade with dictatorships contribute towards more democracy in those countries? and whether more trade with dictatorships is the right way to go?

The theoretical foundation to the EU's trade policy with Iran has been based on the assumption that global trade leads to greater economic prosperity, which helps bring about a larger and more politically knowledgable middle class, who then will engage in championing the cause for democratization and pressuring the dictatorship into making concessions > nurturing the establishment of democratic foundations. However, the economic prosperity and successive formation of a middle class is not so much reliant on the amount of trade but more so on how wealth (generated by increased trade) is distributed fairly amongst the society - if there is an unequal distribution of wealth then a formation of a significant middle class will not come about but instead the wealth will become concentrated amongst the dictatorial state or an elite group of people.

The paper concludes that in Iran's case increased international trade has led to increased political and social repression. Freedoms have become more limited and human rights have deteriorated. This is explained by the inequalty in the spread of wealth amongst the populace. The worsened democratic situation and the increased poverty have both happened under the period when the so-called "reformist" and "conservative" camps of the regime have been in power. Furthermore the economic wealth accrued due to increased trade has gone to the clerical regime which controls more than 80% of Iran's economy. Additionally given that oil is state-owned and makes up a major part of Iran's international trade the money from this trade goes directly into the pockets of the Islamic regime and goes towards funding its various repressive apparatuses that crack down on pro-democracy activists.

For Sweden and the EU to uphold any democratic legitimacy in international relations - trade with the corrupt and dictatorial Islamic Republic is not the right way to go.

In a subsequent letter to the swedish Trade Minister Ewa Bjorling, Arvin Khosnood writes that Iran can only begin the path towards democracy with the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and that this can be realized without bloodshed if the clerical establishment looses its sources of funding. This would leave the regime with no money to pay off its repressive forces that crush any anti-regime pro-democracy initiatives and no money to fund international terrorism (the Islamic Republic is the no. 1 state-sponsor of terrorism in the world).

Iran and the Shah - James Perloff

2011-02-01T19:03:00.000Z

Iran and the Shah: What Really Happened
Written by James Perloff

Americans have been hearing for several years about potential war with Iran. For instance, on September 17, 2006, Time magazine reported, “The U.S. would have to consider military action long before Iran had an actual bomb.” On October 10, under the heading “A Chilling Preview of War,” Time warned: “As Iran continues to enrich uranium, the U.S. military has issued a ‘Prepare to Deploy’ order.”

In September 2007, US News & World Report stated: “Amid deepening frustration with Iran, calls for shifting Bush administration policy toward military strikes or other stronger actions are intensifying.” And in June 2008, President-to-be Barack Obama declared: “The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

However, suppose a progressive, pro-Western regime ruled Iran, representing no threat? War discussions would be unnecessary. Yet many forget that, until 30 years ago, exactly such a regime led Iran, until it was toppled with the help of the same U.S. foreign policy establishment recently beating war drums.

Meet the Shah

From 1941 until 1979, Iran was ruled by a constitutional monarchy under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s Shah (king).

Although Iran, also called Persia, was the world’s oldest empire, dating back 2,500 years, by 1900 it was floundering. Bandits dominated the land; literacy was one percent; and women, under archaic Islamic dictates, had no rights.

The Shah changed all this. Primarily by using oil-generated wealth, he modernized the nation. He built rural roads, postal services, libraries, and electrical installations. He constructed dams to irrigate Iran’s arid land, making the country 90-percent self-sufficient in food production. He established colleges and universities, and at his own expense, set up an educational foundation to train students for Iran’s future.

To encourage independent cultivation, the Shah donated 500,000 Crown acres to 25,000 farmers. In 1978, his last full year in power, the average Iranian earned $2,540, compared to $160 25 years earlier. Iran had full employment, requiring foreign workers. The national currency was stable for 15 years, inspiring French economist André Piettre to call Iran a country of “growth without inflation.” Although Iran was the world’s second largest oil exporter, the Shah planned construction of 18 nuclear power plants. He built an Olympic sports complex and applied to host the 1988 Olympics (an honor eventually assigned Seoul), an achievement unthinkable for other Middle East nations.

Long regarded as a U.S. ally, the Shah was pro-Western and anti-communist, and he was aware that he posed the main barrier to Soviet ambitions in the Middle East. As distinguished foreign-affairs analyst Hilaire du Berrier noted: “He determined to make Iran … capable of blocking a Russian advance until the West should realize to what extent her own interests were threatened and come to his aid.... It necessitated an army of 250,000 men.” The Shah’s air force ranked among the world’s five best. A voice for stability within the Middle East itself, he favored peace with Israel and supplied the beleaguered state with oil.

On the home front, the Shah protected minorities and permitted non-Muslims to practice their faiths. “All faith,” he wrote, “imposes respect upon the beholder.” The Shah also brought Iran into the 20th century by granting women equal rights. This was not to accommodate feminism, but to end archaic brutalization.

Yet, at the height of Iran’s prosperity, the Shah suddenly became the target of an ignoble campaign led by U.S. and British foreign policy makers. Bolstered by slander in the Western press, these forces, along with Soviet-inspired communist insurgents, and mullahs opposing the Shah’s progressiveness, combined to face him with overwhelming opposition. In three years he went from vibrant monarch to exile (on January 16, 1979), and ultimately death, while Iran fell to Ayatollah Khomeini’s terror.

Houchang Nahavandi, one of the Shah’s ministers and closest advisers, reveals in his book The Last Shah of Iran: “We now know that the idea of deposing the Shah was broached continually, from the mid-seventies on, in the National Security Council in Washington, by Henry Kissinger, whom the Shah thought of as a firm friend.”

Kissinger virtually epitomized the American establishment: before acting as Secretary of State under Republicans Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, he had been chief foreign-affairs adviser to Nelson Rockefeller, whom he called “the single most influential person in my life.” Jimmy Carter defeated Ford in the 1976 presidential election, but the switch to a Democratic administration did not change the new foreign policy tilt against the Shah. Every presidential administration since Franklin D. Roosevelt’s has been dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most visible manifestation of the establishment that dictates U.S. foreign policy along internationalist lines. The Carter administration was no exception.

Nahavandi writes:

The alternation of parties does not change the diplomatic orientation of the United States that much. The process of toppling the Shah had been envisaged and initiated in 1974, under a certain Republican administration.... Numerous, published documents and studies bear witness to the fact, even if it was not until the beginning of the Carter administration that the decision was made to take concerted action by evoking problems related to human rights.

The Shah’s destruction required assembling a team of diplomatic “hit men.” Du Berrier commented:

When the situation was deemed ripe, U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan — the man reputed to have toppled the pro-American government of General Phoumi Nosavan in Laos — was sent to urge the Shah to get out. In December Mr. George Ball, an instant “authority on Iran,” was sent as a follow-up with the same message.

Sullivan (CFR), a career diplomat with no Middle East experience, became our ambassador to Iran in 1977. The Shah recalled:

Whenever I met Sullivan and asked him to confirm these official statements [of American support], he promised he would. But a day or two later he would return, gravely shake his head, and say that he had received “no instructions” and therefore could not comment.... His answer was always the same: I have received no instructions.... This rote answer had been given me since early September [1978] and I would continue to hear it until the day I left the country.

The other key player du Berrier named, George Ball, was a quintessential establishment man: CFR member, Bilderberger, and banker with Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb. The Shah commented: “What was I to make, for example, of the Administration’s sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an advisor on Iran? I knew that Ball was no friend.”

Writes Nahavandi:

George Ball — that guru of American diplomacy and prominento of certain think-tanks and pressure groups — once paid a long visit to Teheran, where, interestingly, the National Broadcasting Authority placed an office at his disposal. Once installed there, he played host to all the best-known dissidents and gave them encouragement. After he returned to Washington, he made public statements, hostile and insulting to the Sovereign.

Joining the smear was U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy, whose role Nahavandi recalled in a 1981 interview:

But we must not forget the venom with which Teddy Kennedy ranted against the Shah, nor that on December 7, 1977, the Kennedy family financed a so-called committee for the defense of liberties and rights of man in Teheran, which was nothing but a headquarters for revolution.

Suddenly, the Shah noted, the U.S. media found him “a despot, an oppressor, a tyrant.” Kennedy denounced him for running “one of the most violent regimes in the history of mankind.”

At the center of the “human rights” complaints was the Shah’s security force, SAVAK. Comparable in its mission to America’s FBI, SAVAK was engaged in a deadly struggle against terrorism, most of which was fueled by the bordering USSR, which linked to Iran’s internal communist party, the Tudeh. SAVAK, which had only 4,000 employees in 1978, saved many lives by averting several bombing attempts. Its prisons were open for Red Cross inspections, and though unsuccessful attempts were made on the Shah’s life, he always pardoned the would-be assassins. Nevertheless, a massive campaign was deployed against him. Within Iran, Islamic fundamentalists, who resented the Shah’s progressive pro-Western views, combined with Soviet-sponsored communists to overthrow the Shah. This tandem was “odd” because communism is committed to destroying all religion, which Marx called “the opiate of the masses.” The Shah understood that “Islamic Marxism” was an oxymoron, commenting: “Of course the two concepts are irreconcilable — unless those who profess Islam do not understand their own religion or pervert it for their own political ends.”

For Western TV cameras, protestors in Teheran carried empty coffins, or coffins seized from genuine funerals, proclaiming these were “victims of SAVAK.” This deception — later admitted by the revolutionaries — was necessary because they had no actual martyrs to parade. Another tactic: demonstrators splashed themselves with mercurochrome, claiming SAVAK had bloodied them.

The Western media cooperated. When Carter visited Iran at the end of 1977, the press reported that his departure to Teheran International Airport had been through empty streets, because the city was “all locked up and emptied of people, by order of the SAVAK.” What the media didn’t mention: Carter chose to depart at 6 a.m., when the streets were naturally empty.

An equally vicious campaign occurred when the Shah and his wife, Empress Farah, came for a state visit to America in November 1977. While touring Williamsburg, Virginia, about 500 Iranian students showed up, enthusiastically applauding. However, about 50 protestors waved hammer-and-sickle red flags. These unlikely Iranians were masked, unable to speak Persian, and some were blonde. The U.S. media focused exclusively on the protesters. Wrote the Shah: “Imagine my amazement the next day when I saw the press had reversed the numbers and wrote that the fifty Shah supporters were lost in a hostile crowd.”

On November 16, the Shah and Empress were due to visit Carter. Several thousand Iranian patriots surrounded the White House bearing a huge banner saying “Welcome Shah.” However, as Nahavandi reports:

The police kept them as far away as possible, but allowed a small number of opponents [again, masked] to approach the railings … close to where the Sovereign’s helicopter was going to land for the official welcome. At the exact moment, when courtesies were being exchanged on the White House lawn, these people produced sticks and bicycle chains and set upon the others.... Thus, the whole world was allowed to see riotous scenes, on television, as an accompaniment to the arrival of the Imperial Couple.

Terror at Home

Two major events propelled the revolution in Iran. On the afternoon of August 19, 1978, a deliberate fire gutted the Rex Cinema in Abadan, killing 477 people, including many children with their mothers. Blocked exits prevented escape. The police learned that the fire was caused by Ruhollah Khomeini supporters, who fled to Iraq, where the ayatollah was in exile. But the international press blamed the fire on the Shah and his “dreaded SAVAK.” Furthermore, the mass murder had been timed to coincide with the Shah’s planned celebration of his mother’s birthday; it could thus be reported that the royal family danced while Iran wept. Communist-inspired rioting swept Iran.

Foreigners, including Palestinians, appeared in the crowds. Although the media depicted demonstrations as “spontaneous uprisings,” professional revolutionaries organized them. Some Iranian students were caught up in it. Here the Shah’s generosity backfired. As du Berrier pointed out:

In his desperate need of men capable of handling the sophisticated equipment he was bringing in, the Shah had sent over a hundred thousand students abroad.... Those educated in France and America return indoctrinated by leftist professors and eager to serve as links between comrades abroad and the Communist Party at home.

When the demonstrations turned violent, the government reluctantly invoked martial law. The second dark day was September 8. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in Teheran were ordered to disperse by an army unit. Gunmen — many on rooftops — fired on the soldiers. The Shah’s army fired back. The rooftop snipers then sprayed the crowd. When the tragedy was over, 121 demonstrators and 70 soldiers and police lay dead. Autopsies revealed that most in the crowd had been killed by ammo non-regulation for the army. Nevertheless, the Western press claimed the Shah had massacred his own people.

The Shah, extremely grieved by this incident, and wanting no further bloodshed, gave orders tightly restricting the military. This proved a mistake. Until now, the sight of his elite troops had quieted mobs. The new restraints emboldened revolutionaries, who brazenly insulted soldiers, knowing they could fire only as a last resort.

Khomeini and the Media Cabal

Meanwhile, internationalist forces rallied around a new figure they had chosen to lead Iran: Ruhollah Khomeini. A minor cleric of Indian extraction, Khomeini had denounced the Shah’s reforms during the 1960s — especially women’s rights and land reform for Muslim clerics, many of whom were large landholders. Because his incendiary remarks had contributed to violence and rioting then, he was exiled, living mostly in Iraq, where Iranians largely forgot him until 1978.

A shadowy past followed Khomeini. The 1960s rioting linked to him was financed, in part, by Eastern Bloc intelligence services. He was in the circle of the cleric Kachani Sayed Abolghassem, who had ties to East German intelligence. Furthermore, in 1960, Colonel Michael Goliniewski, second-in-command of Soviet counter-intelligence in Poland, defected to the West. His debriefings exposed so many communist agents that he was honored by a resolution of the U.S. House of Representatives. One report, declassified in 2000, revealed, “Ayatollah Khomeini was one of Moscow’s five sources of intelligence at the heart of the Shiite hierarchy.”

Nevertheless, as French journalist Dominique Lorenz reported, the Americans, “having picked Khomeini to overthrow the Shah, had to get him out of Iraq, clothe him with respectability and set him up in Paris, a succession of events, which could not have occurred, if the leadership in France had been against it.”

In 1978, Khomeini, in Iraq since 1965, was permitted to reside at Neauphle-le-Château in France. Two French police squads, along with Algerians and Palestinians, protected him. Nahavandi notes:

Around the small villa occupied by Khomeini, the agents of many of the world’s secret services were gathered as thickly as the autumn leaves. The CIA, the MI6, the KGB and the SDECE were all there. The CIA had even rented the house next door. According to most of the published witness-statements, the East Germans were in charge of most of the radio-transmissions; and, on at least one occasion, eight thousand cassettes of the Ayatollah’s speeches were sent, directly to Teheran, by diplomatic bag.

Foreign-affairs analyst du Berrier reported:

French services quickly verified that Libya, Iraq and Russia were providing money. Young Iranians, members of the Tudeh (communist) Party, made up Khomeini’s secretariat in France. Working in cooperation with the French Communist Party they provided couriers to pass his orders and tapes into Iran. Their sympathizers in Britain turned the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) into a propaganda organ.

Journalists descended in droves on Neauphle-le-Château; Khomeini gave 132 interviews in 112 days, receiving easy questions as their media organs became his sounding board. Nahavandi affirms that, within Iran “the Voice of America, the Voice of Israel and, especially, the BBC virtually became the voice of the revolution, moving from criticism, to overt incitement of revolt, and from biased reporting, to outright disinformation.”

Khomeini’s inflammatory speeches were broadcast; revolutionary songs aired on Iranian radio. One journalist, however, stunned Khomeini by bucking the trend: intelligence expert Pierre de Villemarest, hero of the French Resistance in World War II, anti-communist, and critic of the CFR. Interviewing Khomeini, de Villemarest asked:

How are you going to solve the economic crisis into which you have plunged the country through your agitation of these past few weeks?... And aren’t you afraid that when the present regime is destroyed you will be outpaced by a party as tightly-knit and well organized as the [communist] Tudeh?

Khomeini didn’t reply. The interpreter stood, saying, “The Ayatollah is tired.” De Villemarest registered his concern with the French Ministry of the Interior, but reported, “They told me to occupy myself with something else.”

Ending the Shah’s Rule

Iran’s situation deteriorated. As Western media spurred revolutionaries, riots and strikes paralyzed Iran. The Shah wrote:

At about this time, a new CIA chief was stationed in Teheran. He had been transferred to Iran from a post in Tokyo with no previous experience in Iranian affairs. Why did the U.S. install a man totally ignorant of my country in the midst of such a crisis? I was astonished by the insignificance of the reports he gave me. At one point we spoke of liberalization and I saw a smile spread across his face.

The Carter administration’s continuous demand upon the Shah: liberalize. On October 26, 1978, he freed 1,500 prisoners, but increased rioting followed. The Shah commented that “the more I liberalized, the worse the situation in Iran became. Every initiative I took was seen as proof of my own weakness and that of my government.” Revolutionaries equated liberalization with appeasement. “My greatest mistake,” the Shah recalled, “was in listening to the Americans on matters concerning the internal affairs of my kingdom.”

Iran’s last hope: its well-trained military could still restore order. The Carter administration realized this. Du Berrier noted: “Air Force General Robert Huyser, deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe, was sent to pressure Iran’s generals into giving in without a fight.” “Huyser directly threatened the military with a break in diplomatic relations and a cutoff of arms if they moved to support their monarch.”

“It was therefore necessary,” the Shah wrote, “to neutralize the Iranian army. It was clearly for this reason that General Huyser had come to Teheran.”

Huyser only paid the Shah a cursory visit, but had three meetings with Iran’s revolutionary leaders — one lasting 10 hours. Huyser, of course, had no authority to interfere with a foreign nation’s sovereign affairs.

Prior to execution later by Khomeini, General Amir Hossein Rabbi, commander-in-chief of the Iranian Air Force, stated: “General Huyser threw the Shah out of the country like a dead mouse.”

U.S. officials pressed the Shah to leave Iran. He reflected:

You cannot imagine the pressure the Americans were putting on me, and in the end it became an order.... How could I stay when the Americans had sent a general, Huyser, to force me out? How could I stand alone against Henry Precht [the State Department Director for Iran] and the entire State Department?

He finally accepted exile, clinging to the belief that America was still Iran’s ally, and that leaving would avert greater bloodshed. These hopes proved illusions.

A factor in the Shah’s decision to depart was that — unknown to most people — he had cancer. U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan (CFR) assured the Shah that, if he exited Iran, America would welcome him. Despite the pleadings of myriad Iranians to stay, he reluctantly left. However, shortly after reaching Cairo, the U.S. ambassador to Egypt effectively informed him that “the government of the United States regrets that it cannot welcome the Shah to American territory.”

The betrayed ruler now became “a man without a country.”

Iran’s Chaotic Descent

On February 1, 1979, with U.S. officials joining the welcoming committee, Ayatollah Khomeini arrived in Iran amid media fanfare. Although counter-demonstrations, some numbering up to 300,000 people, erupted in Iran, the Western press barely mentioned them.

Khomeini had taken power, not by a constitutional process, but violent revolution that ultimately claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. Numerous of his opponents were executed, usually without due process, and often after brutal torture. Teheran’s police officers — loyal to the Shah — were slaughtered. At least 1,200 Imperial Army officers, who had been instructed by General Huyser not to resist the revolution, were put to death. Before dying, many exclaimed, “God save the King!” “On February 17,” reported du Berrier, “General Huyser faced the first photos of the murdered leaders whose hands he had tied and read the descriptions of their mutilations.” At the year’s end, the military emasculated and no longer a threat, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. More Iranians were killed during Khomeini’s first month in power than in the Shah’s 37-year reign. Yet Carter, Ted Kennedy, and the Western media, who had brayed so long about the Shah’s alleged “human rights” violations, said nothing. Mass executions and torture elicited no protests. Seeing his country thus destroyed, the exiled Shah raged to an adviser: “Where are the defenders of human rights and democracy now?” Later, the Shah wrote that there was

not a word of protest from American human rights advocates who had been so vocal in denouncing my “tyrannical” regime! It was a sad commentary, I reflected, that the United States, and indeed most Western countries, had adopted a double standard for international morality: anything Marxist, no matter how bloody and base, is acceptable.

Exile

The Shah’s personal tragedy wasn’t over. He stayed briefly in Egypt and Morocco, but did not wish to impose risks on his hosts from Muslim extremists. Eventually he welcomed Mexican President Lopes Portillo’s hospitality.

However, in Mexico the Shah received an invitation from CFR Chairman David Rockefeller, who used influence to secure permission for the Shah to come to America for medical treatment. Rockefeller sent a trendy Park Avenue MD to examine the Shah, who agreed — against his better judgment — to abandon his personal physicians and fly to New York for treatment. In October 1979, he was received at the Rockefeller-founded Sloan-Kettering Memorial Hospital for cancer treatment. Here the Shah experienced a fateful delay in spleen surgery that some believe accelerated his death.

The Shah’s admission to the United States had another outcome. Partly in retribution, on November 4, 1979, Iranians took 52 hostages from the U.S. embassy in Teheran. (According to Nahavandi, Soviet special services assisted them.) This embarrassed Jimmy Carter, who had done so much to destroy the Shah and support Khomeini. The seizure made the Shah a pawn.

While in New York, Mexico inexplicably reversed its welcome, informing the Shah that his return would contravene Mexico’s “vital interests.” One can only guess at the hidden hands possibly influencing this decision.

Carter faced a dilemma. Iran wanted the Shah’s return — for a degrading execution — in exchange for the American hostages. However, a direct trade might humiliate the United States.

Therefore, Panama was selected as intermediary. Following treatment in New York, the Shah was informed he could no longer remain in America, but Panama would welcome him. In Panama, however, the Shah and Empress were under virtual house arrest; it was apparent that it would only be a matter of time before the Shah would be sent to Iran in exchange for the hostages. A special cage was erected in Teheran. Khomeini’s followers envisioned parading him in the streets before final torture and bloody execution.

However, Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian president and the Shah’s friend, discerned the scheme, and sent a jet to Panama, which escorted the Shah and Empress safely to Egypt.

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi died on July 27, 1980. His last words: “I wait upon Fate, never ceasing to pray for Iran, and for my people. I think only of their suffering.” In Cairo, a grand funeral honored him. Three million Egyptians followed the procession.

Anwar Sadat who, like the Shah, advocated a peaceful Middle East, and defied the American establishment by saving the Shah from infamous death, did not survive much longer himself. The following year, Muslim extremists assassinated him under circumstances remaining controversial.

The Issues

Why did the American establishment, defying logic and morality, betray our ally the Shah? Only the perpetrators can answer the question, but a few possibilities should be considered.

Iran ranks second in the world in oil and natural-gas reserves. Energy is critical to world domination, and major oil companies, such as Exxon and British Petroleum, have long exerted behind-the-scenes influence on national policies.

The major oil companies had for years dictated Iranian oil commerce, but the Shah explained:

In 1973 we succeeded in putting a stop, irrevocably, to sixty years of foreign exploitation of Iranian oil-resources.... In 1974, Iran at last took over the management of the entire oil-industry, including the refineries at Abadan and so on.... I am quite convinced that it was from this moment that some very powerful, international interests identified, within Iran, the collusive elements, which they could use to encompass my downfall.

Does this explain the sudden attitude change toward Iran expressed by Henry Kissinger, beginning in the mid-seventies? Kissinger’s links to the Rockefellers, whose fortune derived primarily from oil, bolsters the Shah’s view on the situation. However, other factors should be considered.

Although the Shah maintained a neutral stance toward Israel, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, he allowed critical supplies to reach Egypt, enabling it to achieve a balance of success, and earning Sadat’s undying gratitude, but wrath from influential Zionists. Did this impact the West’s attitude change in the mid-seventies?

We should not overlook that the Shah opposed the powerful opium trade, now flourishing in the Middle East.

Finally, the Shah was a nationalist who brought his country to the brink of greatness and encouraged Middle East peace. These qualities are anathema to those seeking global governance, for strong nations resist membership in world bodies, and war has long been a destabilizing catalyst essential to what globalists call “the new world order.”

What is the solution to modern Iran? Before listening to war drums, let us remember:

It was the CFR clique — the same establishment entrenched in the Bush and Obama administrations — that ousted the Shah, resulting in today’s Iran. That establishment also chanted for the six-year-old Iraq War over alleged weapons of mass destruction never found. Therefore, instead of contemplating war with Iran, a nation four times Iraq’s size, let us demand that America shed its CFR hierarchy and their interventionist policy that has wrought decades of misery, and adopt a policy of avoiding foreign entanglements, and of minding our own business in international affairs.

Official memorial service for HIH Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi

2011-01-24T23:08:00.005Z

HIM Reza Pahlavi II and HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi's speeches at an official memorial service, held on Jan 23rd, for HIH Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi:

A photoslide of the event can be found HERE.

Prince Ali-Reza - Cremation - Caspian Sea

2011-01-10T23:47:00.006Z

There is little published information regarding Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi of Iran.

Since his passing, there are some personalities that claim he may not have been free to express himself or partake in interviews - which seems very unfortunate.

However, from the little bits of information which we have been able to hear/read in the past few days since his passing, I'd like to share my personal views on Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi.

It seems that Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi was a very disciplined man much like his father and grandfather before him; an attribute that has been mentioned is that he had "military discipline which reflected his royal background". He was active in sports and had a strong interest and affection for his motherland and its rich cultural heritage. So much so that in forced-exile he chose to dedicate his time towards research in the field of ancient (pre-Islamic) Iranian studies and philology (ancient Iranian languages) both as a postgraduate master's and more recently on a phd level at Harvard University.

Family and friends close to him say that he always had a smile on his face and that he was an optimist. From a young age he was the more lively, playful, more daring perhaps, child of the late Shahanshah of Iran and Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi.

With this background information, Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi's wish for his body to be cremated seems to be a powerful message regarding his personal beliefs. Someone that had a passion for pre-Islamic Iran and who had dedicated a significant part of his adult life studying in this field, and now with his passing having expressed his wish to be cremated and his remains to be scattered in the Caspian Sea in northern Iran - one cannot help but feel the late Prince's immense sense of patriotism - and in that a clear rejection of the hate-filled anti-Iranian Islamic ideology which has caused such pain to his fellow compatriots and which stands in stark contrast towards true and noble Iranian ideals. In Islam cremation is seen as something that is "categorically disapproved", "prohibited, disrespectful and a violation of islamic law", "forbidden, sinful and pagan" just to quote a few references to cremation by islamic scholars. Also noteworthy is that cremation was widely practiced in ancient Iran - even preceding Zoroastrianism (an ancient Iranian faith). If this is so, was his wish to be cremated then an act of defiance? an act of rebellion? a symbolic gesture? By doing this, was he finally able to express himself after so many years of being seemingly silenced? After so many years of not being able to express himself, his views, his hopes, his aspirations for his homeland...

Prince Ali-Reza - Caspian Sea

2011-01-07T10:41:00.006Z

HIM Shahanshah Aryamehr with HIH Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi walking along Iran's northern Caspian Sea shorelines during a family holiday (1970's).

HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi with HIH Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi at Iran's northern Caspian Sea shorelines during a family holiday (1970's).

According to HIM Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi his brother Prince Ali-Reza has left a will in which he expresses the wish for his body to be cremated and scattered in the Caspian Sea.

HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi with her son Prince Ali-Reza.

Prince Alireza Pahlavi 1966-2011

2011-01-07T02:02:00.002Z

HIM Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi 1966-2011

2011-01-04T20:52:00.005Z

It is with great regret that I just read HIM Crown-Prince Reza Pahlavi's statement on HIH Prince Ali-Reza Pahlavi's passing at the age of 45.

The Pahlavi family, as millions of Iranians worldwide and inside Iran, have endured tremendous hardship since the Islamic Republic usurping power in an armed insurgence in 1979 - from having to bare witness to the destruction of the efforts by some of the finest statesmen, civil servants, artists, military officials in Iranian history who helped build a proud, prosperous, and progressive nation, to an 8-year long war which led to hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers/civilians being needlessly killed. The reign of terror that has prevailed in Iran since the creation of this destructive anti-Iranian regime, the daily repression and savage murdering of innocent Iranian lives at the hands of Islamic terrorists, alongside the death of HIM the late Shah of Iran had a tremendous affect on the Pahlavi family and led to HIH Princess Leila Pahlavi ending her life in 2001 at the young age of 31.

I would like to convey my deepest condolences to the Iranian nation and the Pahlavi family - especially HIM the Empress and the Crown Prince.

May his soul be at peace.

********************

The Suicide Of Alireza Pahlavi: A Revolt Against Forced Exile

Rudkhan castle in the Iranian province of Gilan

2010-12-26T22:50:00.000Z

A Thousand Steps to Iran's Rudkhan Castle
Caricato da NTDTV. - Scopri in video le destinazioni per le tue vacanze.

Brigadier General Saeed Mehdiyoun

2010-12-18T11:54:00.003Z

An old account (2004) by Mahmoud Ghaffari on late Brigadier General Saeed Mehdiyoun.

************************

Top gunned down
Mastermind of the Nojeh coup attempt

Mahmoud Ghaffari
July 22, 2004

His left eye was gouged out, leaving an empty socket, his body was riddled with bullets, and his entire torso was black and blue from torture. This was the scene the wife of the late Brigadier General Saied Mehdiyoun saw, when she was summoned to reclaim the body of this great patriot. In fact she had to pay a dollar for every bullet used to murder him, so that his executioners could replace their inventory!

This is the scene replayed thousands of times in the Great Islamic Republic of Iran, during the first few years of the revolution and ominously still continuing to today.

Last week is the 24th anniversary of the Nojeh coup attempt, masterminded by this outstanding highest ranking officer of the Imperial Iranian Air force and many other patriots who lost their lives in the clutches of the Islamic fundamentalists. Any one, who remembers the events of those days, can only draw one conclusion; that the events of the world for the next twenty years were shaped by such animalistic and terrorist acts. We all kept quiet, solemnly dowsed in our own sorrows for the lost lives, but could never imagine, that a group of about 2000 backward clerics, can do such damage and cause so much mayhem, because of their blind and unsubstantiated faith in religion.

Heroes like Mehdiyoun are not amongst us any more, but imagine what Iran would be like today, had the heroic acts of this man and the hundreds like him who tried to save Iran from the clutches of abysmal tyranny would have succeeded.

Mehdiyoun was the son of a wealthy Tabriz merchant. He started his professional life as a dentistry student and for some reason or another switched over and joined the Imperial Iranian Air force. He moved through the ranks and became one of the handful of "Top Gun" F-4 Phantom fighter pilots. Schooled at a US Air Force base in Alabama, during the late 50's and early 60's, his star was on the rise through out his military career.

He was one of the few that the Imperial sovereign could trust. He was considered one of the top 5 commanders of the Air Force. His tenure in the Air Force took him to command positions for the Shahrokhi 3rd tactical air base in Hamadan, and Vahdati 4th Tactical air base in Dezful. His final command position was Commander of the Air Defense Command, or "Padafande Havaie".

Mehdiyoun was a loyal officer, one who had taken an oath to protect and serve the unity of Iran and serve his sovereign to the last drop of blood. This concept unfortunately is foreign to the zealots running Iran to the ground at the moment. Such loyalty and sacrifice stems back to the time of the Great Persian Empire and the Immortal guards of Cyrus the Great.

When His wife was signing the papers to release his lifeless body, a revolutionary guard present at his execution recounted that he never renounced his beliefs. When he was asked to kneel and get ready for his execution, he responded with, "I will never kneel in front of you ..."

Right or wrong, good or bad, we have to agree that commitment, dedication to excellence and the love of Iranian soil drove many of these heroes of Iran's great past. They may never be duplicated and until such time that the Islamic Republic is ruling Iran the armed forces will never be restored to its glorious level it had attained under the leaders of the past. We can concur, that if the Freedom Fighting Forces of the US decide to liberate Iran, many if not all the officers currently serving the regime will abandon their posts in a fraction of the time it took the Arab thugs to do so in Iraq.

I had the honor of knowing this man and experienced first hand his devotion to his oath of office. He was always forthright and candid, and I think that had to do with his Azeri upbringing, and it was his assertiveness and command of those reporting to him, that made the Monarch take a liking to this man.

I have been a sideline observer of the events inside Iran. Now in the post 9/11 world, I can see why actions by the likes of Mehdiyoun are so much part of world history -- not only Iran's. Had his heroic effort been successful, it would have propelled the world and its inhabitants into a much more benign existence. All of us, be it Americans, Iranians and members of other national boundaries, should salute these heroes, as they were set to change the face of history in a more positive wake.

Lieutenant General Ali Mohammad Khademi & Iran Air

2010-11-13T14:05:00.003Z

I've received the following very interesting articles on the late founder of Iran Air, Gen. Khademi, and would like to share it with the readers of this blog.

******************************************

KHADEMI, Ali Mohammad (1913-1978), Air Force officer, first general manager of Iran Air 1962-78
Encyclopedia Iranica

KHADEMI, Ali Mohammad (ʿAli Moḥammad Ḵādemi, b. Jahrom, Fars, 30 November 1913; d. Tehran, 7 November 1978), pilot, officer, and first general manager of Iran Air (FIGURE 1). Khademi was a career officer in the Air Force, who was promoted in 1966 to lieutenant general (sepahbod). He served from 1962 until 1978 as the general manager of Iran Air, the newly founded national flag-carrier, which under his stewardship became a very successful domestic and international airline. In 1970-71 he served as president of the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

Family and eduction. His father Loṭf-Allāh Ḵādemi belonged to a prominent Muslim family. In the early 1900s he joined the Bahai faith, and the subsequent persecution forced him to leave everything behind and to move in 1927 his family to Isfahan. ʿAli Moḥammad attended high school in Isfahan and graduated in 1932 at the top of his class. He passed the demanding entrance examination of the Military Academy (Dāneškada-ye afsari) in Tehran, and graduated with honors in aviation studies in 1936. The following year he graduated with distinction from the Air Force Flying School (Āmuzešgāh-e ḵalabānān-eniru-ye havāʾi).

Air Force. Khademi joined the Air Force (Niru-ye havāʾi-e Irān) in 1938, and continued with his pilot training. He was the first Iranian to receive a commercial pilot license from the British Civil Aviation Authority in 1948, and in 1957 he completed a training course at the U.S. Air Force University in Montgomery, Alabama. In 1958 he was promoted to Chief of Staff (raʾis-e setād), and became lieutenant general in 1966. Khademi contributed to the modernization and expansion of the Air Force by fostering cooperation with the U.S. Air Force, the most technologically advanced air force in the world (Aṭrvaš, p. 263).

Iran Air. In 1962, when Iran Air was founded, Khademi was selected as its general manager. Shortly after the appointment, he completed the Air Transport Senior Management course at the American University in Washington, D.C. During his 16-year tenure at Iran Air, the company was transformed from a fledgling domestic airline to a thriving national flag-carrier. Iran Air had started in 1962 with a fleet of 13 old propeller airplanes and less than 700 employees, and in 1978 the company owned a modern fleet of 37 Boeing jets and had close to 12,800 employees. Its routes included the major destinations in the Middle East, Europe, the U.S.A., and the Far East, and this expansion was the result of bilateral negotiations that were initiated and led by Khademi (Aṭrvaš, p. 13). Under Khademi's stewardship, the net equity of the company increased eight-fold, though the company did not receive any government subsidies. Iran Air became one of the country’s most profitable government-owned enterprises and the highest foreign-currency earner after the National Oil Company. The company attained one of the best safety records of any airline in the world, and maintained one of the first Middle East technical service stations in Iran, which was certified by the U.S. Federal Aviation Agency (Adams, p. 25). In addition to his responsibilities as general manager, Khademi served as the chairman of Iran Air's Board of Directors from 1977 until 1978.

Khademi’s management style was often praised by peers and colleagues, since he emphasized a team approach to develop the company's managerial skills (ʿAlāʾi, p. 203; Milani, p. 454; Rahavard." href="http://www.iranica.com/uploads/files/khademi_fig_2.jpg">FIGURE 2). He relied on the most advanced industry-wide technologies and practices, and consequently he played an active role in promoting modern management education in Iran. From 1968 until 1974 Khademi served as the chairman of the Board of the Iran Management Association (Anjoman-e modiriyat-e Irān), and became the driving force behind its expansion. The association founded seven new chapters in the capitals of Iran's major provinces, and government and private sector executives collaborated in order to organize management trainings. The first management congress was held in Iran, and Khademi became a prominent contributor to the Iranian Center of Management Studies (Markaz-e moṭālaʿāt-e modiriyat-e Irān) in Tehran, a management school affiliated with Harvard University. Between 1976 and 1977, Khademi was an early supporter and mentor of the European Economic Forum, the predecessor of the World Economic Forum (ʿAlāʿi, p. 203). Khademi was instrumental in founding the first College of Planning and Computer Science (Madrasa-ye aʿlā-ye barnāma rizi o kārbord-e kāmpiuter) in Tehran in 1973, and served as a member of its board until 1978. He also sat on the board of Damavand College, and was an advisor to the International Rotary Club.

Khademi was a member of IATA's Executive Committee, and was the organization's first Asian president from 1970 until 1971. He belonged to the Governing Board of Civil Aviation of Iran (Havā-peymāʾi-e kešvari-e Irān). In 1977 Khademi’s outstanding achievements in the fields of civil aviation and management were recognized with an honorary doctorate from Northrop University, which cited his leading role in the advancement of the airline industry in Iran as well as his important and effective services to the field of international air transport (Shell; FIGURE 3).

In 1944 Khademi married Bahia Moʾayyad, the daughter of Dr. Ḥabib Moʾayyad, the first physician from Kermānšāh who had been educated in Western medicine. They had one son and two daughters. Due to the political instability during the months leading up to the Revolution of 1979, Khademi resigned from his position as Iran Air's general manager on 9 September 1978. On 7 November 1978, two days after the declaration of martial law, Khademi was assassinated at his home before the eyes of his wife. Later investigations suggested that the assailants could have been SAVAK employees, but no motive was discovered and no one was ever charged. (Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Dādsetāni, file no. 401/68/3060; Dādgāh-e Kayfari, Šoʿba 180, file no. 193/64). The case remains unresolved.

**********************************

A Short Biography of
Late Lieutenant General Ali Mohammad Khademi,
The founder, chairman and managing director of IRAN AIR (1962-1978)

"No great man lives in vain. The history of
the world is but the biography of great men."
Scottish essayist and historian,
Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881)

"We all looked at him [Gen. Khademi] as a model.
He was a leader with broad views and yet able to keep
the rare qualities of a real human being."
Clemence Raffy, former Iran Air member of staff

The biographies of great people normally tend to demonstrate the magnitude of their lifetime achievements rather than their humane qualities. This short biography of Gen. Khademi, while it will illustrate the exceptional services he rendered his country and people, will certainly attempt to reveal his profound benevolent characteristics and moral fibre, some of which were not probably very well known to those other than the people associated closely with him.

Ali Mohammad Khademi was born in the Iranian southern city of Jahrom in the historical province of Fars on December 16, 1913. During his childhood the family life got pretty dour and though. When he was four years old, he lost his mother. Subsequently, the father and son left for the Iranian ancient city of Esfahan. They lived in Esfahan for several years, where he completed his primary and high school years. His exceptional intelligence was noticeable from his years at high school, when he taught mathematics and other subjects to his classmates. In 1932 after obtaining his high school diploma in mathematics, he went to Tehran to participate in the entrance examination of the military academy, where he stood first among hundreds of participants. At the end of his three year studies at the military academy he was transferred to the Iranian Imperial Air Force and soon after became a flight instructor. Around 1940 he began to fly for the Iranian State Airlines, a semi commercial airline operated by Iranian ministry of post and telegram, which at the time mainly carried mail, emergency cargo, some government personnel and occasional paying passengers. While flying as a pilot for the said airline with the rank of captain, he obtained his Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) license from the British as well as the Iranian Civil Aviation Organization and become the first ever Iranian commercial pilot.

Later when Iranian Airways started operations in 1946, he was one of the first Imperial Iranian Air Force pilot officers who were assigned to fly with the company as first officer and soon later as a captain. In 1949 he returned to the Air Force. Prior to becoming the Imperial Iranian Air Force Chief of Staff in 1958, he held senior training and operational positions and became the adviser to the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces’ general staff and commandant of the Air Force Staff College. During his tenure of service, he obtained a pilot and navigation license from Britain, attended the USAF command and Staff School of the Air University at Montgomery, Alabama as well as the Air Transport Senior Course in Washington, DC. In addition to that he never missed senior management seminars and courses.

Although this short biography will mostly concentrate on one of his most important achievements between 1962 and 1978 with Iran Air, it is most appropriate, however, to mention that his management ideas and valuable contributions to the Imperial Iranian Air Force helped this force to become one of the world’s best, was of utmost significance. Before his assignment to Iran Air, he held several prominent positions in the air force. He created, for the first time, the Air Force Air Transport Unit, when he was a colonel. His last position in the force was chief of staff.

In 1962, Gen. Khademi, with the rank of major general, was appointed managing director of Iran Air. From the very beginning, his vision for building and running a high standard international airline for Iran was very clear, because since many years prior to that, Khademi always had the dream of founding the ideal airline for his country.

At the outset, he clearly specified his objectives and prepared a detailed plan to accomplish them. The most important item on his agenda was the safety of Iran Air crew and passengers. While he did not count out the company's high standard service and profitability; but since by nature, he always had a great respect for and put high value on human beings lives, therefore, he reiterated that for him, nothing was ever more important than the airline's safety. As a result of that during his many years with the company, Iran Air did not have a single tragic accident. In 1973, three well known journalists who performed extensive research to write a book called "Destination Disaster", about the safety of the world's airlines, classified Iran Air as one of the few world’s safest. It was for the same reason that he put a great importance on the type of aircraft Iran Air acquired and the excellence of the company’s engineering and maintenance and flight operations department.

Khademi was greatly concerned about all the company staff’s overall welfare and training with a high priority for the flight crew and engineering personnel training. For the first time in the history of
commercial air transport in Iran, a group of most talented young men fresh from the school were selected and dispatched to the best schools in the United States to become professional pilots.
Whenever he wanted to make a decision or take an action in relation to the company, he first and foremost thought as how the most ordinary people and the travelling public would benefit from that. He, therefore, created a situation that made air travel available to every Iranian from all classes of society and not limited only to the affluent groups. To make this possible, he introduced a special 40% discount for the travel of government employees and their families, which was in fact widely expanded to beyond that group. This initiative made international travel affordable for almost every Iranian. In a short period of time Iran Air passenger and cargo traffic increased so significantly that more and more airplanes were needed every year. His success in building Iran Air to become a world class airline in a short period of time, amazed the aviation community around the world. At this stage Iran Air was regarded as the fastest growing airline in the world.

When he took over the company from Iranian Airways, the former owned only three turboprop Vickers Viscounts, three DC-6s and three DC-3s, and 600 employees with a limited network mostly operating within Iran and to the neighbouring countries. However, 16 years later the company possessed a fleet of 35 all jet aircraft of Boeings and Air Buses, a team of 12000 trained personnel and carried 5 million passengers per year on its routes in Iran and a worldwide from New York to Tokyo, covering 53 destination in Europe, Middle East, Asia, Far East and Persian Gulf. For the first time Iranians felt very proud of their national airlines.

Khademi had an exceptional talent in selecting the best people for Iran Air. He looked out and selected the most capable and qualified people to work with him. In the process he was particularly eager to choose young candidates from among the deprived societies and gave them extensive opportunities to grow within the company.

Being extremely factual, Khademi had a flair for and special interest in numbers. He often surprised his colleagues with quick calculations without using a calculator. He was an ardent believer in modern management and at one point he said and believed professional management is superior to expertise.

A large number of Iranian believed Khademi was one of the most outstanding men Iran had in a long time and some are of the opinion that had he given the opportunity to run the state instead of the airline he would have taken the country in a different direction and Iran would have been a completely different country than it is today. He was a symbol of hard working, smart and lots of fun and excitement to be around. No matter how tired he was, he was always anxious to get to work. His legacy is not just in his individual accomplishments, but also in his ability to lift the spirit of those around him to a higher level. He was an extremely brave man and a huge source of inspiration and motivation for the people working with him. Once he recognized the talent in a person, he would arouse so much confidence in that person to make him a incredibly self-motivated for the rest of his/her life.

He was the first airline chief from the Middle East countries to acquire this position and in this role too, he contributed significantly to the betterment of the international air transport, as admitted by the IATA and other airlines executives.

Khademi was an extremely conscientious and honest person. In Iran, the head of a national airline, like in most other countries, is much of a political position and in every country and government politic is a dirty game. Going through the process of holding a high office and coming out clean and uncorrupted takes an exceptional personality, and Ali. Mohammad Khademi was an outstanding example of this. Even 23 years after his departure from office and his death, still no one has attached any dishonesty or misconduct to him and his military or civil service.

General Khademi loved and was loved by his colleagues who nicknamed him simply as "Timsar," a title normally used before a general’s rank which implies respect. And he was indeed highly respected, not only by Iran Air employees but by any Iranian and non-Iranian who knew him. He was regarded and cherished for his good intentions, works and services to the country. Respecting superiors is a part of Iranian culture, however, the type of respect he received did not necessarily stem from his position; but was earned because of his knowledge, leadership, humane qualities and as the father of the Iran Air family. This self-made, quick moving man always respected his colleagues’ ideas and opinion. At the outset of Iran Air, he carried a pen and notebook and wrote down employees’ suggestions and comments to be considered and gradually acted upon in due course.

In the airline industry, in some ways, Gen. Khademi could be compared with Juan Tripp the famous American aviation legend and veteran, the Pan American's long time CEO. Tripp gave American aviation the most of what todays Americans are proud of. Gen. Khademi to Iran and Iran Air was what Juan Trip was to America and Pan American, with one distinction that after Trip left Pan Am, the airline collapsed. But Iran Air could have grown and prospered had the situation not changed. However, under Khademi’s leadership, Iran Air was so marvellously engineered and solidly structured so that even now, 24 years later, that this airline has been subjected to so much mismanagement and mishandling and despite the fact that the company’s most important assets, the majority of its experienced managers and personnel have left, the organization is still operative and serving Iranian people.

Khademi was a leadership and management genius. A man ahead of his time, he never took any nonsense from anyone unless it was beyond his power. When his colleagues were talking to him, they had to take extra caution not to make any unfounded statements. Suggestions, presentations and even simple talks should have been supported by facts and figures. He passionately believed in facts, figures, data and statistics.

Iran Air was his life; he loved Iran Air and its entire staff so much that when he was assassinated few months after he left office in November 1978, one Iran Air manager said, "In fact, he died on the day he left Iran Air," referring to his sad and emotional departure from his beloved airline and people.
There are numerous stories about his humane feelings and compassion. One day in a directors' meeting he started by saying, "In the winter, when you are sitting in your offices and you feel so warm that you pull off your jackets, or in the summer when you feel so cold that you put on your jackets; think about your colleagues who are working at the open areas of the airport day and night in the direct heat of the summer and under the freezing cold of the winter." He never forgot other people, particularly the underdogs.

One of the former Iran Air area managers in Europe was saying, one day when Gen. Khademi was hospitalized, he and his wife went to visit him. After few minutes of staying with him, he told the couple that there was an Iranian lady in the room down the corridor who apparently didn't have any relatives or friends in this town and he suggested to his visitors to share the time they have spared to visit him, with her.

Khademi was an ardent nationalist. He was one of the most ingenious self-made leaders and managers our country had seen in many years. He was a devoted husband to his wife, Bahieh (Moayed), and loving father to his two daughters, Mona and Minou and son Monib. Above all he was a most compassionate, considerate and kindhearted person whose love and legacy will remain and be remembered for ever.

Gen. Khademi, resigned from office as the Chairman and Managing Director of Iran Air in September 1978 and was brutally assassinated at his home in north Tehran on November 7, 1978. Certainly, this short biography will not cover all his outstanding achievements and superior personality. Therefore, it is very much hoped that the future book or books about him and the Iranian airline industry will pay him the tributes this great man deserves. May his soul rest in peace.

****************************

Mr Darius Kadivar's tribute to Gen. Khademi:

Lieutenant General Ali Mohammad Khademi, for a long time and before Iran Air, had the vision of building an ultimate flag carrier for Iran. He was a gifted, self-made, tireless, hard-working man and a management and leadership genius. He was an uncompromising fighter with unusual fortitude and self-confidence, who didn't accept anything less than perfect. Utterly fair and honest, he possessed a strong humane spirit, an extremely light heart and wonderful sense of humor. He hated favoritism and selected his colleagues on their merit. He gave young men and women, particularly those who were not from, or related to the privileged class, unprecedented opportunities for growth.

Obsessed with his dream and charged with infinite passion and stamina, he took over the airline and built a national carrier that every Iranian was proud of. While the Iran Air success story is attributed to a team of highly dedicated managers and staff, no one can ignore the fact that the history of modern aviation in Iran revolves around one person and that was Gen. Khademi, who among other things, hand-picked and coached a group of capable men and women to run Iran Air. Due to the political instability during the months leading up to the Revolution of 1979, Khademi resigned from his position as Iran Air's general manager on 9 September 1978. On 7 November 1978, two days after the declaration of martial law, Khademi was assassinated at his home before the eyes of his wife. The circumstances of his assassination and eventual culprits remain mysterious to this day. Khademi was a great man whose name will go down in history for the highest level of service to his country's aviation industry. Alas, the abrupt eruption of circumstances did not allow him to complete his dreams particularly the 15-year plan to expand Iran Air into one of the World's leading airlines. And a pity that Homaiyan, as he used to call the Iran Air family, and did not get the chance to give him that magnificent recognition he always deserved, during his lifetime. May his soul rest in peace.

HIM Reza Pahlavi II founds two non-profit organizations

2010-10-31T09:52:00.004Z

HIM Reza Pahlavi II has founded two non-profit organizations, Iran Democratic Union (IDU) in the United States and Association pour le Rassemblement et la Democratie en Iran (ARDI) in Europe. The purpose of these non-profit organizations will be to support various Iranian pro-democracy and human rights initiatives. Financial support will be critical in realizing the planned goals and projects that are being pursued. For more information please visit: "Iran Democratic Union"

To view the results of the Q&A forum that was recently launched on HIM Reza Pahlavi II's official website please see "Reza Pahlavi II Q&A"

Reza Shah the Great & President Kamal Ataturk (1934)

2010-10-29T22:01:00.006+01:00

Rare footage of Reza Shah the Great, founder of modern Iran, seen here conversing in persian & turkish with His contemporary President Ataturk at a state visit to Turkey.

IRGC shows off weapons arsenal used to suppress the Iranian population

2010-10-28T20:32:00.003+01:00

Terrorist Islamic Republic shows off their arsenal to suppress popular dissent.

Prof. Fereydoun Joneydi

2010-10-27T22:28:00.002+01:00

Iranian human rights lawyer Mohammad Mostafaei's family in exile

2010-10-10T14:18:00.001+01:00

Sattar - Mehregan

2010-10-06T17:53:00.003+01:00

Renown Iranian singer "Sattar" speaking to a VOA Persian reporter at the Iranian Mehregan festival encourages Iranians to celebrate their rich and ancient tradtions/festivals and admits that Islam has had nothing but a regressive effect on Iranian society since it entered by the tip of the sword.

Well done Sattar for your honesty and patriotism!

Guide for Interviewing Islamic Republic Officials on Human Rights Issues

2010-09-18T14:36:00.001+01:00

Please review.

Reporters’ Guide for Interviewing Islamic Republic Officials on Human Rights Issues

"No one's stooge"

2010-09-18T14:32:00.002+01:00

Readworthy comments from a compatriot.

******

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi: No One's Stooge
by Anonymous Observer
08-Sep-2010

I try not to be conspiratorial. I always think that simple logic provides the best explanation for any given event. But I got to tell you, I have recently been watching a lot of Shah’s last interviews—the ones from 1975 on—and I cannot escape the nagging conclusion that this man was removed from power by the Westerns powers who saw him as an emerging threat. From his comments about the “blue eyed people being sleep” to his criticism of the Jewish Lobby in the United States to asserting his independence and refusing to be America’s ”stooge” when he was labeled in a CIA study as being too “unreliable” and “dangerous”, to his criticism of Britain and claiming that in ten years Iran would be where Britain was at that time and in twenty five years surpassing the UK, all the signs point to an ambitious man who saw his country’s economic and military power rising and who was intent on asserting his independence. And they didn’t like it.

Let’s face it. Iran was on its way to becoming a major power with great resources and a lot of disposable cash. It was debt free. It was becoming a nuclear country with the Bushehr plants on their way to a speedy completion, with one reactor at 85% completion and the other at 50% completion at the time of the 1979 devolution. It is not difficult to imagine that has the Shah remained in power Iran would probably have built a nuclear bomb at some point, probably in the mid to late 1980’s.

And watch this video where he remains uncompromising in the price of oil, and essentially threatens the United States with maintaining high oil prices in exchange for the price of spare parts and commodities being too high. Another notable point in this video, as well as in the one where he refuses to be “America’s stooge” is the sense of fear that the United States has of Iran’s growing power and possible “expansionist” goals.

This guy was no stooge of the West. He was a threat to the West. The West had probably surmised that if he remained in power for another decade, Iran would have been unstoppable. We would have become a rich and modern version of India: an independent Eastern nation that would have been a thorn in the side of, and a competitor of the U.S., in the Middle East, and specifically the Persian Gulf--and they could not have that. They had their hands full with the USSR. They didn’t need another headache.

Sure, he was a dictator. But given the nature of the democracy movement in Iran, and his inevitable death, I am sure that the monarch’s absolute rule would have ended at some point and Iran would have morphed into some form of a democracy. That was just inevitable.

We really could have been somebody. We could have been a truly independent, powerful country. Instead, they pushed upon us the most backward, reactionary, theocratic system since the Middle Ages and set us back decades in development and independence, to the point that re-packaging 60 year old aircraft and re-assembling 60 year old North Korean missiles became our measure of “progress” for us, and giving away the Caspian Sea to the Russians so that they stop sanctions and sell us cheap junk became our measure of “independence.”

Truly, kudos to that great Iranian, the Shah, for being a visionary and a lover of Iran and the Iranian people. He was not perfect by any stretch of imagination, but watching these old interviews leaves one with one inescapable conclusion: he was no one’s stooge.

Operation Shahrokhi Base

2010-09-04T14:26:00.004+01:00

Operation Shahrokhi Base, later renamed to Nojeh, was an attempted coup d'état on July 11 (1980) by patriotic officers and servicemen of the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces, from the infantry, air force, army, and secret services under the leadership of the former Imperial Prime Minister of Iran - Shapour Bakhtiar; their mission was to eliminate Ayatollah Khomeini and overthrow the establishment of the newly proclaimed Islamic Republic.

A partial list of the fallen heroes of Operation Shahrokhi Base (aka Nojeh) who were executed by the terrorist Islamic Republic include:

1- General Saeed Mehdioun (Pilot) August 15, 1980 Tehran
2 - General Ayat Mohagheghi (Pilot) July 20, 1980 Tehran
3 - Colonel Daryoush Jalali (Pilot) July 31, 1980 Tehran
4 - Major Faroukhzad Jahangiri (Pilot) July 20, 1980 Tehran
5 - Major Iraj Soltani Jay (Pilot) August 7, 1980 Tehran
6 - Major Kavous Alizadeh August 7, 1980 Tehran
7 - Major Omid Ali Boveiri (Pilot) July 24, 1980 Tehran
8 - Captain Mohammad Malek (Pilot) July 20, 1980 Tehran
9 - Captain Bijan Iran Nejad Sabet July 20, 1980 Tehran
9 - Captain Karim Afrouz (Pilot) July 24, 1980 Tehran
10- Captain Mohammad Behrooz Fard (Pilot) July 31, 1980 Tehran
11 - Captain Hormoz Zamanpour August 15, 1980 Tehran
12 - Captain Ali Asgar Soleymani (Pilot) July 24, 1980 Tehran
13 - Captain Nasser Zandi (Pilot) July 24, 1980 Tehran
14 - Captain Ali Shafigh Sept. 16, 1980 Tehran
15 - Lt. Nejat Yahya (Pilot) July 31, 1980 Tehran
16 - Lt. Mohammad Ali Saghafi (Pilot) August 7, 1980 Tehran
17 - Lt. Hossein Shokri (Pilot) August 7, 1980 Tehran
18- Lt. Jafar Rastgoo August 7, 1980 Tehran
19 - Lt. Nasser Rokni (Pilot) August 7, 1980 Tehran
20- Lt. Jalal Asgari August 7, 1980 Tehran
21 - Lt. Ayoub Habibi July 24, 1980 Tehran
22- Lt. Mohammad Mehdi Azimi Far (Pilot) July 24, 1980 Tehran
23 - Lt. Mohammad Ali Farzam July 31, 1980 Tehran
24- Ho22mafar Yousef Pour Rezaee July 20, 1980 Tehran
25 - Homafar Jafar Mazaheri Kashani July 24, 1980 Tehran
26 - Sgt. Hossein Karimpourtari July 31, 1980 Tehran
27 - Sgt. Mojtaba Moradi July 31, 1980 Tehran
28 - Sgt. Siawash Nouroozi July 31, 1980 Tehran
29 - Sgt. Ahmad Mohamadi July 31, 1980 Tehran
30 - Sgt. Bakhsh Ali Karimian (and 22 other enlisted personnel)

(and over 112 Armed Forces Personnel + more than 40 civilians)

Footage of Gen. Mohagheghi's kangaroo trial before his execution:

civilians)

Video message from an Iranian student

2010-08-21T16:19:00.001+01:00

Overthrowing the occupational Islamic Republic

2010-08-10T21:13:00.003+01:00

Amir Jahanshahi is son of Imperial Iran's former Finance Minister.

Hopefully this has been thought through properly and the necessary mechanisms are in place or are in the progress of being set-up.

Ferdowsi

2010-08-10T21:11:00.001+01:00

R.I.P. Mehdi Sami'ee

2010-08-03T19:23:00.003+01:00

Photo above is of Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi's last visit with Mehdi Sami'ee, convalescing at a nursing home in Los Angles this past April, at right is Ms. Badri Adjoudani.

His Excellency Mehdi Sami'ee was the former general director of Bank-e- Markazie-e- Iran (i.e the Central Bank of Iran) during the Pahlavi Era. Mehdi Sami'ee was also an economist and occupied various key positions including general director of Bankeh Keshavarzi (i.e. Bank of Agriculture).

HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi's statement on the passing of H.E. Mehdi Sami'ee.

Babak Khorramdin

2010-08-01T22:00:00.002+01:00

Jul 30th Interview with HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi of Iran

2010-08-01T21:52:00.004+01:00

Clip of HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi paying tribute to her late husband and President Anwar Sadat during a memorial service held in July 2010:

All The Shah's Men

2010-07-29T23:12:00.002+01:00

Political life after WW II
by Sohrab_Ferdows
29-Jul-2010

Decades after Shah of Iran has been overthrown to accommodate implementation of certain policies in the region of Persian Gulf and Middle East to serve the interests of certain group of people in the world, we are still witness to the same propaganda nonsense that brought our nation to one of the lowest points in the history which is comparable to the times when Iran was overrun by Arab and Mongolian invaders centuries ago. To add more to this, one of the saddest issues of our time is glorification of ignorance under the guise of political correctness to justify and spread misinformation towards our history by some of the people who are expected to have better understanding of the political events but easily fall in the traps of false history which is fed to them through known or covert intelligence channels and propaganda. In fact, this is what paved the way for demise of our nation that was becoming prepared to enter a new era of prosperity and civilization while helping the rest of humanity in the quest for better world. All of that went down the drain and along with that, many other things throughout the world.

At least for the last two centuries, the more advanced nations which had realized the importance and effect of intelligence and propaganda in their own affairs and the relations with other nations, have increasingly invoked these tools to further their own agendas and policies in order to protect and advance their own interests and achieve their desired objectives. The importance of control over information will become more obvious when considering that, more accurate knowledge on any issue can help making better decisions and also, getting better results while avoiding waste of resources in dealing with that. These are the fundamental principles to justify use of intelligence in any situation as much as possible and these are exact same principles to justify spread of counter intelligence and misinformation in order to avoid exposure of certain agendas by confusing a targeted people. One cannot expect that others provide useful and valid information openly about their own hidden agendas in any areas which might be harmful to or against the interest of others. Misinformation has proven to be one of the most valuable tools of propaganda and psychological warfare to mislead others about true intentions regarding any tactical or strategic operation. Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov is a former intelligence agent of Soviet Union who defected to the west during cold war and in his interviews; he has disclosed that only 15% of resources in the field of intelligence were assigned for actual spying activities while 85% were used for brainwashing and demoralization of target societies. This matter is not specific to former Soviets Union or Russians. All advanced nations with strong propaganda tools have been taking advantage of these methods against each other and also against other nations, to achieve their goals and objectives and they continue to do so today. Spread of misinformation to create uncertainty and confusion towards certain matters is an important part of any psychological warfare in order to manipulate and disable the forces of a targeted people which might otherwise pose a threat or create undesired problems.

During the cold war era, Iran, as country which was at the forefront of conflicts between the East and the West, was under immense pressure by both sides of the quarrel and their internal elements. This issue created a lot of problems and restrictions for the nation in the areas of political and economic relations and developments. The problem had started right after end of WW II while Iran did not have enough time to recover from many of the major issues that she was facing as a result of decades (or even centuries) of corruption of ruling aristocracy and interference of greedy foreign powers. Before that, in the year 1941, Iran was forced to enter the war after being unjustly attacked and occupied by Allies, and break its neutrality to take side with the powerful invaders. This matter made it inevitable for Iran to become a field for future political games and manipulations by the great powers of the world and their agents inside the country. Presence of plenty of corrupt politicians among the ruling aristocrats which were all in love with the tribal traditions of hand kissing and servitude of subordinates while themselves would stop at nothing to please their own foreign masters, had made Iran a favorable place for covert or even open activities of colonialist and expansionist powers of the time since over a century earlier.

Reza Shah Pahlavi became the Shah and top political figure in Iran after almost 150 years of Qajar's ruling of the country. His rise from the bottom of society to the top in fact might have been one of the reasons that, despite all his services in development of the country and saving the people from extreme misery of disease and poverty, he was strongly disliked by many among Iranian elite which mainly came from Qajar aristocrats. Neither Reza Shah nor any of his ancestors (as far as history can tell) was part of Iranian aristocracy to link him with one or another foreign powers. His father, Abas-ali, who was an officer of Iranian army during Qajar, died before his birth and his mother, Nushafarin khanum, decided to migrate from the village of Alasht to Tehran where her brother lived. Reza grew in extremely poor condition and experienced poverty and injustice directly, which was imposed on Iranian society by corrupted ruling class, corrupt clerics and their foreign masters. He had to work hard at a very young age to support his mother and himself and that provided him with opportunity to see all the problems in society and experience them directly. During those years, children education was a luxury which was available only to a small portion of society which had all the means of prosperity in their monopoly while majority of Iranians lived a very poor life. This matter in fact became an important element in Reza Shah's plans once he had the opportunity to do something about it when in the position of leadership.

Reza's career in the Persian Cossack Brigade which was organized and run by Russians at that time was result of a lucky incident along his fascination with the marching and ceremonies that this military group carried every day in their barracks. Cossack's barracks was on the path which Reza walked all the time to do his business. He enjoyed watching the performance of organized uniformed Cossacks every day. As a strong and tall teenager, Reza drew the attention of a Cossack’s commander who noticed his interest while watching the ceremony and was asked by the commander if he was interested to join. Reza accepted immediately and started his long journey to change the destiny of his nation by freeing them from the hands of corrupt ruling leaders and putting the nation on the path of modernity and progress. It is true that Reza Khan's ascending to the position of Cossack's leadership after Russians revolution (which resulted in abandoning Cossacks) was with assistance and advice of a British officer named General Ironside whose mission was to find a strong military man to lead the Cossack Brigade. This was in fact to avoid chaos that might have affected the stability of Iran while British were not able to deal with that situation directly, but this matter in no way means that he was bound to follow the agenda of British in Iran. Even some of those who considered Reza Shah as their own enemy could not deny this. Reza Khan (as he was known by that time) was a very intelligent person who had realized the terrible situation that his country was in, and took advantage of the opportunity to put his own agenda to work in order to free his nation from dependency to foreigners (British and Russians in particular) as he continued to expand his control over different elements of power and affairs of the nation.

Reforming the nation with a backward and corrupt system and culture and dragging it into a modern age in a short period of time was an extremely hard task. The material that was available to Reza Khan was none other than remnants of Qajars aristocracy and an extremely poor nation which was ridden with disease and suppressed under local greedy and ruthless rulers who cared for nothing other than holding their own power over miserable people at any price. Later on, when he had become the Shah of Iran, someone told him that he had to either use Qajars statesmen and accept all the consequences of it (which meant continuing injustice and corruption) or start making his own statesmen by training new groups of people. This was an important task and in order to accomplish that, Reza Shah initiated a program to send some of Iranian students to European countries (France in particular) at the expense of government to get trained as new statesmen and experts to run the country for betterment of the nation. Among the first group of students, we see some familiar names like Mehdi Bazargan (who became the first PM after Islamic revolution) and Dr. Taghi Arani who established the first communist movement in Iran that later became Tudeh party. Undoubtedly, most of these people believed that they were serving Iranian people while they were in fact working against the interests of their own nation after getting the education that was intended to make them better statesmen for their country. There were many others who went the same route and some of them even found the opportunity to hold important positions within the system that they helped to break later.

In those days, it was the hardest thing for any leader in Iran, to find the people who could be trusted with any kind of work. Majority of people were poor, illiterate and ignorant and a big portion of limited number of educated people in Iranian society took pride in serving the interest of foreigners rather than their own or were after their own fantasies to save the nation by resorting to unrealistic and impractical ideologies and philosophies. It was under such conditions that Reza Khan had to implement his nationalistic agendas and revive the spirit of nationalism and pride in the heart of Iranians and put the nation on the path of progress and modernization with the help of those who were willing and capable of helping. He took advantage of weakness of Russian and British governments after the war to put his agenda to work and prepare the nation to enter the age of modernity through establishment of unquestionable authority for central Iranian government by suppressing the local rulers who dreamed of disintegrating the nation with the help of British or Russians. Many decades of weak and corrupt governments during Qajars had resulted in loss of big portions of Iranian territory in the north, east and south and Iran was on the verge of further disintegration from north and the south with the help of foreign agents. At this stage of his work, Reza Khan had assistance of some of nationalist Iranian army officers to impose the authority of central government throughout the nation and from those, name of Fazlollah Zahedi as a major army commander who later played another important role in another sensitive part of Iranian history, should be mentioned.

Reza Shah, who had felt the harshness and pain of poverty and injustice in Iran with his own flesh and blood during his childhood and teenage years, realized that he could not rely on taxing poor people for all his ambitious projects to improve the condition of living in the country. Search for other resources of funding drew his attention to oil which was being exploited by British under an unfair agreement that was originally made between William Knox D'Arcy and Mozaffar-odin shah Qajar and was slightly modified later in 1919 to satisfy the financial needs of Qajar king, Ahmad Shah. The need for money to fund development projects in the areas of national health-care, education, military, economy and industrialization, forced Iranian government to ask Anglo-Iranian oil company for renegotiating of the oil contract which was denied quickly. Failure of all efforts to convince the British side to increase Iranian share from oil left no choice for Reza Shah other than canceling the agreement from his own side. Daniel Yergin in his book: "The Prize, epic quest for Oil, Money and Power" describes Reza Shah's reaction to oil issue with following words:

"At the very bottom of the depression, Shah Reza Pahlavi of Persia became infuriated at discovery that, as an observer put it, "oil is not gold in these days." The Shah's country had become an oil state; petroleum royalties from Anglo-Persian provided two-third of its export earnings and a substantial part of government revenues. But, with the Depression, the royalties from Anglo-Persian plummeted to the lowest since 1917. Appalled and outraged, the Shah blamed the company, and he decided to take matters in his own hands. At a Cabinet meeting on November 16, 1932, to surprise of his ministers, he abruptly announced that he was unilaterally canceling Anglo-Persian's concession. It was the thunderbolt that no one had really believed that Shah would dare deliver. His action threatened the very existence of Anglo-Persian."

Reza Shah threw D'Arcy's contract in the fireplace out of frustration and declared it canceled when leader of Iranian negotiating team told him the contract is not negotiable! Some time earlier, in a private meeting with an educated Iranian who had criticized his decision regarding an issue, Reza Shah had told him that he was only a soldier of the nation and needed help of educated and expert people like him to come forward and provide ideas, directions and advice for better outcome of any plan so he could push to implement them. He even participated in manual labor work during construction of a road side by side with other workers to show that he would do anything to help in reconstructing the country. But in the case of oil, nobody seemed to be able to help and no other valuable resources were available to support development projects so Reza Shah decided to nullify the D'Arcy's contract altogether to force the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company into negotiation and it worked. It's worth mentioning here that nationalization of oil industry was once discussed during this period and was rejected by parliament in a realistic move as Iran did not have the skilled manpower and the resources for operating such industries at that time. Late Dr. Mosadegh who was an MP from Tehran and later in 1950's became champion of oil nationalization voted against it (and rightfully so) at that time.

One of the events which happened in the same period that Iranian government was struggling to get a better share of revenue from its oil industry was discovery of a plot to topple Reza Shah. At the top of this plot, a high ranking Qajar aristocrat, Firouz Mirza Nosrat o-dowleh, who continued to hold important government positions while still dreaming of restoring Qajar dynasty with himself at the top. Nosrat o-Dowleh along with a few others were arrested and put in jail. This matter had a negative effect on Reza Shah's trust towards his Court Minister, Abdolhossein Teymourtash, whom he consulted on every matter including oil related discussions. Teymourtash, according to writings of some of Iranian and foreign diplomats who knew him closely, had a lot of influence on Reza Shah at some point as he was the only person who had direct contact with the Shah. This matter had become a reason for jealousy of many who despised him for his power and influence. Some people accused him of taking advantage of his position and influence in financial institution (which he worked with at some point) to gather wealth and support his gambling habits. According to some stories, his womanizing habits resulted in becoming a victim of British espionage activities and losing a briefcase full of documents regarding his secret communications and relations with Soviet officials which ended up in Times of London to intensify suspicion towards him. This event happened when Teymourtash made a stop in Moscow to talk to Soviets on his return from London to Tehran. He was on a mission to convince the British to enter negotiation for a new contract with Iranian government over oil but failed to gain anything from that visit. Another story claims that a Russian who defected to Iran provided some information about Teymourtash being a spy for Soviet Union. Mr. Hassan Taghizadeh who later signed the new oil contract with British; has claimed that Teymourtash was innocent and what happened to him was unfair. But according to some reports, family of Teymourtash consider Taghizadeh the reason for his imprisonment and death in prison. As we can see from this little story, backstabbing, suspicions, espionage, betrayals, trickery and intrigues from every side had made Iranian political environment so intense and so complicated in those days that it was impossible to reach a solid and clear conclusion on any matter with confidence. This was a common issue regarding anything in the politics of Iran which suffered from poisonous relations that existed in our country because of corrupt aristocratic system and influence and propagandas of greedy colonial powers.

The conflict with Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was not settled easily and British side decided to take the matter to Permanent Court of International Justice which Iranian government refused to accept its competence and therefore the matter was taken before the Security Council in the League of Nations. At this time, British accepted to enter talks with Iran for a new concession after the League of Nations advised both parties to go back to negotiating table. Resulting contract after over a year of bargaining by both sides, provided Iranian government with much bigger share from oil while completely canceling the exclusive right of oil transportation for British side (which was very important from Iran's point of view) and reducing the geographical area of the concession that covered about 85% of the whole country earlier, but extending the period of contract till 1979. According to some stories, this matter was brought into discussion in the last days of negotiation by Anglo-Persian Oil Company. Seyed Hassan Taghizadeh was the leader of Iranian negotiating team, who came from a religious background (his father was a mullah named Seyed Taghi) and himself was a mullah during younger age. He later turned into a secular politician and his activities and roles in politics of Iran during Constitutional Revolution and after that was well known to many Iranians. The issue of extending the oil contract was later questioned by some of the members of parliament in an inquiry session from Mr. Taghizadeh, who led the negotiating team for Iran. When he was asked why he agreed with extension of the contract, he blamed Reza Shah indirectly (after Reza Shah's abdication) and claimed that he was afraid for his life if he did not. Regarding the oil dispute with British, Mr. Ismail Raeen in his book "Freemasonry in Iran" says that British had brought their Navy and other military forces around southern Iranian ports of Abadan and Bushehr to influence the outcome of negotiation at that time. British government which had switched all of its naval ships from burning coal to more efficient oil-based fuel in 1914, and had been tied to Iranian oil, was the main shareholder of Anglo-Persian Oil Company and intended to show to Iranians that she was serious in protecting her interests at any price.

Disputes between Iranian government and British over oil, although resolved in principles for the time being but continued over many other details. In the year 1941 presence of a group of German citizens became an excuse for Allies to attack Iran by accusing Iranian government of collaboration with Germans. After the WW I had ended, Germany which was driven out of world's oil market entered into an agreement with Iran to get one million barrel of oil in exchange for construction of two sulfur plants in Masjed Soleyman. In fact, some experts assert that oil was a major reason for Hitler to go to war as Germany was in serious need of oil to follow its industrial development projects. Shortly after Allies invasion of Iran, Reza Shah was forced to abdicate when British positioned their forces near the Capital and threatened that they would attack Tehran if he did not resign. During the days of the few weeks after Invasion of Iran by Anglo-Soviet forces, Reza Shah was target of worst attacks by British propaganda machine. They accused Reza Shah of being a despot and repressive ruler. In one occasion when the price of bread soared because most of the food was taken by occupying forces and created a near famine state in the country, Reza Shah interfered and ordered to reduce the price by 50%. This matter became a subject of negative propaganda by BBC which accused Reza Shah of forcing the poor bakers to pay the difference while in fact; it was Iranian government that subsidized the price of wheat and bread. The amount of false and negative propaganda by British and their supporters in politics of Iran against Reza Shah was so overwhelming that even some of true supporters of Reza Shah like Ali Dashti had turned against him. This matter had effectively disabled any reaction from the public in support of deposed Shah while most of Iranian people were watching as events unfolded, just like impartial bystanders. Daniel Yergin in his book attributes the rise of opposition to Reza Shah after his abdication to his distrustful treatment of even faithful supporters as he was suspicious of everyone. Knowing the history and background of deep corruption which had taken over the elite and higher classes of Iranian society have been definitely a major factor in this regard that Mr. Yergin could not have in dept information about. He mentions that Reza Shah once told a visitor that Iranians were "bigoted and ignorant" and considered Anglo-Iranian Oil Company something like mullahs, an element of power within power, and he was determined to reduce the power and influence of both.

Manuchehr Farmanfarmaian, a member of Qajar family whose ancestral tree reaches to Abbas Mirza and Mozafar-odin Shah Qajar, in his book "Blood and Oil", has written following lines about the time that Reza Shah was forced to leave Iran:

"Reza Shah's ouster was greeted with relief: no more police state, no more arbitrary self-aggrandizement on the part of Crown. We celebrated his fall, quickly forgetting that the most important human right is to live under a government strong enough to maintain law and order-- and that he had delivered such a government. Even the worst tyranny is better than no government at all, since nothing causes human beings so much misery as anarchy. Yet anarchy is what we were in the midst of as we hailed the new king, enthroned by Great Powers as they squatted on our land, while turning our faces from the man who had brought a modicum of cohesion to our country and relief from outside predators."

Mr. Famanfarmaian also mentions in his book that the British ambassador, Reader Bullard, was not happy about replacing Reza Shah with the Crown Prince and was in favor of either a Qajar king or a different member of Pahlavi family. Apparently, he even offered the throne of Iran to a Qajar prince known as Sarameh-doleh which he refused. According to memoirs of Prince Hamid Mirza Qajar who later joined British Navy with the name of David Drumond, the British plan was to install him as King of Persia but this plan did not go through after they realized that Mr. Foroughi had taken the Crown Prince of Reza Shah to the parliament to take the oath of office as the king of Iran. Reading through these lines might help us understand to some degree that what kind of situation Iran had at that time and how close it was to total colonization by British empire which its ambassador allowed himself to intervene in decision making about who should be at the top of the government system in that country even though Iran had a constitution and a parliament and a Crown Prince to keep things in order.

It is obvious that the issue of oil in Iran and dispute over that with British government as the main shareholder was not going to go away easily. This matter continued to affect the politics in Iran and the relations with oil consortium and British government for a very long time. Later on, US government and oil companies which were reluctant earlier to venture into Iranian oil exploration business in the eastern region of the country, were dragged into this story as partners to make things even more complicated. This matter continued throughout the rest of previous century and as we shall see, left its deep marks not only in the politics of Iran but also in the region and possibly the whole world. Mr. Farmanfarmian who worked in ministry of finance at some point, has brought a little story in his book about a meeting with a couple of American "oil consultants" in 1944 who were invited by Prime Minister Sa'ed at that time to bring Americans into oil equation in order to change the situation and take away British monopoly on Iranian oil by giving a new concession to Americans in the north region of the country. These two Americans were Herbert Hoover Jr. and A.A. Curtice who were both involved in negotiation between American oil company (mainly Standard Oil which belonged to Rockefellers) and Mexican government in their dispute during late 1920's. The first 50-50 contract in the oil business was signed with Mexican government at that time which settled the dispute to the satisfactory of both sides and started a new trend that was later applied to the oil concessions in other areas where Americans were involved. British however, were not happy about 50-50 contracts and had no intention to follow American model until they ran into serious problems and confrontations with Iranians.

Mr. Farmanfarmaian says that he told Hoover (the American oil consultant) about dominance of British in the oil business in Persian Gulf region which, as he believed, would drive Americans out of the area but Hoover laughed at him and said that he was overestimating British power. Then Hoover told him that British would have no choice but to share the oil in future which sounded very unbelievable to him. He later shared this information with his cousin, Dr. Mohammad Mosadeq who was an MP from Tehran at that time who expressed his deep appreciation in exchange. From the comments made by Mr. Farmanfarmaian in this regard and also in other parts of his book, it seems very likely that himself has been at least very sympathetic towards British at that point which was not uncharacteristic from a Qajar aristocrat. In some other parts of the book, he mentions another story about his meeting with American representative to complain about the Iranian election fraud which had cost him his seat in the parliament. This indicates that how the typical Iranian politicians were after resolving their problems by resorting to relations with foreign elements and centers of power because otherwise what could be the point of such discussion? This matter was very common in Iran especially in those days that Iran had turned into playground of all major powers of the world. A new trend was unfolding in the political arena of Iran as a new power was expanding its involvement in the political games of this country.

Soon after discussions with American consultants, Iranian communist party of Tudeh organized a massive demonstration in which they shouted "death to Sa'ed" and demanded the oil concession to be given to Soviet Union! Interestingly enough, many units of Soviet Red Army soldiers and armored vehicles and tanks were present in this demonstration alongside with Tudeh party which they could never deny it but tried to downplay that by attributing the presence of Red Army to October Revolution celebration. Some of Tudeh members who have published their memoirs later claimed that Red Army's appearing in that event was unexpected and Tudeh party leaders were not aware of that. Iraj Eskanadri who was a prominent member and later became the party leader, has complained (decades after the fact) about Red Army and Soviets demands in that event which had a huge negative effect on the image of the party. Tudeh party has always tried to present itself as defender of Iranian people's rights but turned out to be a tool in the hands of Iran's enemies to put pressure on Iranian government. In this way, an attempt by PM Sa'ed which was supposed to be carried out secretly in order to keep the British and Soviets of meddling in that affair, was brought to an end with a fiasco without producing any result. The news had somehow leaked to Soviets and Tudeh party in which Maryam Firouz (Mr. Farmanfarmaian's sister) was among its leaders. Now that I mentioned about two members of Farmanfarmaian family, I have to add here that Abdol-Hossein Mirza Farmanfarma (father of Mr. Manouchehr Farmanfarmaian), who had a total of 36 children from his 8 wives, was a known Anglophile. He was considered a friend by Percy Sykes who headed South Persia Riffles army that was established by British to control southern regions of Iran. Farman-Farma had been awarded the Order of St Michael and St George by British for his services and held many different government positions in the south and west parts of the country. He was governor of Fars province when Reza Shah took his troops to Tehran. He was later replaced by his nephew, Dr. Mohammad Mosadeq and was called to Tehran by Reza Khan to be imprisoned upon his arrival along with his son, Nosrat ol-doleh (father of Mozzafar Firouz who played a revengeful part against Pahlavis throughout his political career). Firouz Mirza Nosrat ol-Doleh whose mother was daughter of Mozzafar ol-Din Shah, was minister of foreign affairs of Ahmad Shah and the prime candidate to become the next Qajar king after him. Nosrat ol-Doleh and his sister Maryam later chose the name of their grandfather, Firouz, as their surname.

This was a very brief summary of what founded and shaped the political relations of Iran (internally and externally) during the decades after WW II which I will discuss in next part and that will include some of original and true intelligence reports and documents that despite wide circulation of falsified and fictional stories, have somehow escaped the attention of mainstream media and propaganda systems to mislead the public about the truth and hidden agendas of interested powers.

Neda's father rejects links to "green movement"

2010-07-28T17:55:00.003+01:00

SUMMARY OF CLIP:

Above clip is of Neda Agha-Soltan's father speaking out against false allegations that Neda was part of the "green movement". Mr Agha-Soltan says that nor Neda nor anyone in their family is part of the "green movement" - and that Neda only stood for "freedom" [certain factions of the "green movement" are so-called "moderates" of this very same inhumane islamic regime who only want superficial changes but want to keep the foundations of the terrorist establishment]. Neda's father goes on to say that they begged her not to join the anti-regime demonstrations however she responded that "if she doesn't go, other youth don't go, if nobody goes then who will go"? Neda also asked her father why his generation had overthrown the country's progressive monarchy and paved way for a backward inhumane theocracy? To which her father remorsefully answers "we might have been wrong". Neda's father then says that she told him she would not accept what his generation had done and that she will take her own future into her own hands and try to change things.

Side note: the overwhelming majority of "green movement" supporters do not adhere to the fundamentalist beliefs held by the figurehead of the movement (a so-called regime "moderate") who is himself a former Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic during the 1980's when mass-murders of political prisoners took place (Mir-Hossein Mousavi), however use the "green movement" banner as a pre-text under which they can operate and make themselves heard internationally.

IN MEMORY OF SHAHAN SHAH ARYAMEHR

2010-07-27T00:29:00.000+01:00

Artavahisht

Foundation for the Children of Iran

2010-07-14T00:22:00.004+01:00

HIM Shahbanou Farah Pahlavi of Iran speaking at The Foundation for the Children of Iran's recent fundraising event:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Lt4sy6eDo&playnext_from=TL&videos=4QwHVUVj9oQ&feature=sub

The foundation's website, inlcuding more photos of the event, can be found here:

http://www.childrenofiran.org/

18 Tir - 9th July

2010-07-10T19:54:00.004+01:00

For background on the significance of this date click here.

Che kassi mikhad man o to ma nashaveem?! Khaanash viran shavad!

Iranian identity

2010-06-27T14:31:00.002+01:00

By: "AmirN" on ActivistChat.com

My religion is Iranian
My God is Iran
My prophet is Kourosh
My Imams are Dariush, Xashayar, Ardeshir, Shapur, Khosro Anushiravan, Babak Khoramdin, Yaqoub Saffarid, Amir Kabir, and Reza Shah
My hidden Imam is Kaveh
My Apostle is Ferdowsi
My Holy Book is the Shahnameh
My commandments are written on the Kourosh Cylinder
My Mecca is Persepolis
My Holy shrines are at Pasargad, Behistun, and Naqshe Rostam
My Ashura is Qadissiyah
My martyrs are Rostam Farokhzad and Yazdgerd
My Holy Banner is the Derafshe Kaviyani
My Jerusalem is Ctesiphone
My Judas is Salman Farsi
My anti-Christ is Mohammad
My Yazid is Ali
My Shemr is Omar
My demons are the Akhounds
My Satan is Allah
My angels are the Iranian nationalists
My cross is the Faravahar
My Hell is Islam
My Paradise is Nowrouz, Chaharshanbe Souri, Mehregan, Yalda
My temple is my own heart
My religious conviction is knowledge
My faith is logic
My sermon is history

Retrospective on the late Shah's reign

2010-06-27T14:17:00.001+01:00

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1919-1980),
A retrospective on his reign on the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of his death.
By: Alan Peters

Some 25-years ago this summer, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi the Shah of Iran was dying in Cairo. Egypt's President Sadat had offered him his last refuge and helped him escape from a perilous exile in Panama.

Historically, Egypt has been famous for providing shelter - even to those they do not approve - like the family of Yasser Arafart - at the time that Arafat was public enemy #1 in Egypt for inciting the overthrow of Sadat's regime, his wife and children were guarded by Sadat's government bodyguards.

In the case of the Shah, Sadat liked him and the Shah's marriage to former Egyptian King Farouk's sister made him "family", too.

In Panama, the fate of the ailing monarch had hung in the balance for several weeks as shadowy contacts between Panama's strongman, General Torrijos, and emissaries from the Islamic revolution increasingly pointed to a swap deal - the extradition of the Shah against the release the 52 American Embassy hostages in Tehran.

While the Shah's hand-over to Khomeini was seriously contemplated by President Carter, his administration had been drawn into an eerie gambit in Panama of which the hostage end-game was unknown .

The Shah's succumbing to cancer on July 27th, 1980 must have brought a sigh of relief in Washington as indeed in many other capitals burdened by the past courtship for refuge of the Iranian monarch, many of whom had previusly benefitted from his largesses.

Two decades and many sorry events later, some of the intricacies of the Shah's personality and rule still beg scholarly probe.

The majority of Iran's current population has been born after the Shah's demise. His image in their mind, as indeed in the minds of many casual observers abroad, has been shaped through unrelenting distortions of historical facts by Carter and an obliging liberal Media, intent on justifying Carter's decision to remove the Shah.

The younger Iranians deserve an unbiased account of these 37 years in its baffling turns and twists and contradictions. Including that when he left Iran for the last time, the Shah also left behind some $3 Billion of the Pahlavi Foundation funds over which he had total control and relied on some $90 million of his own money, accumulated over many decades, through investments in Europe, one of which was a jewelry business in Switzerland.

To be sure, a distilled account of these years would not completely vindicate the Shah. His handling of the constitution was self-defeating in ways that escaped his political savvy. Yet, at worst, was still aimed to benefit the country not himself. He had all the prestige he needed and required no constitutional short cuts to stroke his ego.

His authoritarian rule, much of it because he could not find "managers" to help run the country honestly and efficiently, carried the seeds of instability and a backward thrust, the prevention of which had served as an alibi to silence dissent. Yet, the surfeit of slander and libel before and after his downfall was largely undeserving.

Few leaders in history have been adulated and demonized in such a frivolous manner. A good illustration of hypes comes from two prominent Americans. On the New Year's Eve of 1978 -- a few short days before the triggering event of the Islamic revolution -- President Carter stunned the US western allies by calling the Shah his most trusted ally and dialogue partner.

Carter's effusive flattery - describing Iran as island of stability - was in opposing symmetry to another hyperbole by Senator Edward Kennedy, who some two years later, at the height of the American Embassy hostage crisis, castigated the Shah for having run "one of the most violent regimes in history of mankind".

Kennedy continues, even today, in his baseless attacks on anything and everything, including his own government and citizens.

Both remarks were clearly calculated to achieve short-term objectives. Carter came to Teheran, desperate to check the soaring price of the crude oil.

Kennedy's remark was timed to optimize the chances of his emissary to Tehran, tasked to obtain from Ayatollah Khomeini a token release of the American hostages.

Kennedy, then seeking to snatch the Democratic presidential nomination from the incumbent Carter, had chosen the former US Senator James Abourezk (of Arab extraction) for this unpublicized mission to Tehran.

Where should the line be drawn? In a mixed bag of achievements and flaws the Shah's balance sheet resembles other modernizing states. Many would grade it superior. What tarnished his image most was his alleged record on human rights and political freedoms, much of which proved in the aftermath to be highly exaggerated.

Detractors state "a silence of a cemetery" to characterize the political arena in Iran during most of the Shah's rule. The ubiquitous security agency SAVAK, created in 1957 with the help of the US through General Teymour Bakhtiar, later a sworn enemy of the Shah, was the instrument of the repression of mostly Communist attacks on the monarchy triggered by the Soviets.

By the seventies, the suppression had spawned violence as groups, sprung from the very edges of the ideological spectrum, resorted to urban guerrilla tactics and acts of terrorism. A vicious circle set in. General Bakhtiar, domiciled in Iraq, was instrumental in sending waves of terrorists into Iran. Terrorists willing to shoot to kill.

For the first time traffic police, who usually had empty holsters or unloaded guns at their waist were issued side arms and bullets. The terrorists robbed banks to fund their operations and for the first time in Iranian history, the robbers shot innocent clerks to make a point.

Then SAVAK blended ruthlessness with incompetence.

It had been effective in dismantling the clandestine structure of Iran's Communist party (Tudeh) but failed to guage the creeping popular discontent, fanned by Marxist groups like the Mojahedin and Fedayeen, still less the coming of the fundamentalist Islamic bane that surprised the Soviets and snatched away their Marxist revolution to place it in clerical hands.

When the crunch finally came in 1978, this colossus fell on its clay feet unable to save its master. A dozen Soviet urban guerilla psychologists, operating from inside the Soviet Embassy in Tehran and calling the shots for anti-Shah operations overwhelmed Iranian intelligence and police autorities, who had no training in how to handle or oppose these attaacks.

For instance, they had their Marxist minions knock on people's doors begging for Mercurochrome (a red antiseptic liquid common in Iran) and cotton wool. Ostensibly needed to treat wounded innocents shot by the Shah's forces in such huge numbers that pharmacies no longer had enough of stocks to provide them to these volunteers.

The red Mercurochrome was in fact used to stain the streets and clandestine flyers would then claim the Shah's men had shot innocents nd removed their bodies.

As proof they used another gambit. They collected old shoes - men's, women's, children's of both sexes and threw one shoe of each pair by the hundreds on top of the stains. The flyers would then invite people to witness the amount of deaths by those single shoes that had fallen off the bodies as the Shah's forces allegedly hurriedly removed the victims and left the shoes behind.

The extent of repression was never close to claims recklessly advanced in some quarters, including by such reputable institutions as Amnesty International, which finally concluded in late 1978 that there were less than 2,400 political prisoners in the Shah's jails.

Only this number despite the wide spread Soviet efforts to install their minions and find passage to warm waters providing thousands of candidates. Despite the Bakhtiar terrorists sent in their hundreds, despite the Marxist and Fedayeen in their thousands openly attacking the regime. And the Hezbollah-to-be, pro-Khomeini adherents who disregrded laws and inviting arrest on a daily basis.

No mass graves trailed the Shah when he finally quit the country in January, 1979. No "death caravans" haunted his memory. Tehran produced no equivalent of Buenos Aires's "Plaza de Mayo" where "grandmas" gather every Sunday to reclaim news of their missing children. To be sure the military courts were quick to mete out death sentences. But the practice of royal pardon was abundantly resorted to. The sentences were systematically commuted or annulled.

Some viewed this practice as a gimmick to earn political capital but be it as it may, few now dispute the fact that the Shah was averse to cruelty or execution. He even stayed Khomeini's execution in 1964 at the behest of General Pakrvan, head of SAVAK. In hindsight the gravest, catastrophic mistake possible, which not only later cost Pakravan his life but also Iran's progress into a modern nation instead of a deep well of suffering and pain it is today.

The overall number of executions by the military tribunals, including those occasioned by drug related offenses, after drug smuggling and distribution became a capital offense, were estimated at around 350 cases in a 25-year period. The USA has more than this and Iran currently has close to 200 a year, including teen-agers of both genders, which contravenes all laws and even Iran's own.

Figured among them were a few prisoners of conscience including some twenty-five ring-leaders of the military wing of the Communist party of Iran. Their crime, leading to execution, was to have been mesmerized by Stalinist Russia. The rest of the six hundred communist officers arrested in nineteen fifties - as indeed the bulk of other political prisoners - were rehabilitated, many were co-opted into the Shah's administration.

One of his favorite gambits was to invite dissident leaders into senior government positions and then ask them to do the job better than the person they replaced.

Then chortle when they eventually admitted they were unable to because the system and co-workers were too cumbersome and their staff often sabotaged work or were incompetent and they now understood why their predecessors failed to succeed.

Having experienced the challenges first hand, they usually ended up becoming strong supporters of the Monarch in his efforts to change and modernize the nation.

All in all some 3500 persons were reportedly killed in street unrests or by order of military courts during the Shah's reign, between 1953 to 1979 though little substantiaion exists for such a number.

In one famous incident of Jaleh Square, where claims of 5,000 deaths were made, secret martial law figures later showed only eight had died from bouncing bullets fired into the air to control the crowd and another 30 had been wounded the same way. The square was also not big enough to hold 5,000 people making such a claim even less possible. Over a thousand "unmatching" shoes were found in the square the morning after!

The Geneva based International Committee of Red Cross which visited all Iranian prisons in 1977 in an anti-Shah mission inspired by Carter and his allies, put the number of political prisoners at 3200 while some seventy prisoners were declared unaccounted for.

American liberal democrats, as was the intention, could pretend to be horrified by these figures, moderate though they are in relative terms and could use them to justify the removal of the Shah.

This having been said, there is another facet of human rights in the Pahlavi era which has largely been disregarded in the rush to condemn.

In an average middle class neighborhood in Tehran of the nineteen fifties, for example, a small alley had taken its name after a Jewish doctor, who had been the first to construct a house in that vicinity.

The alley housed an Assyrian Christian family, several Baha'i families, a Zoroastrian family and of course many Moslem households. No hint of bigotry disturbed the serenity of this cultural mosaic. Tolerance or lack of it was a personal matter not a government imposition and for the most part if you lived your life to the fullest but avoided anti-government activity, nobody bothered you.

It would be hypocritical to claim that religious minorities were by law on the same footing as Moslems but intolerance was being discouraged and the system moved progressively towards full equality of rights among citizens.

There were differences: minority members could not rise above the rank of Brigadier-General in the military. On the other hand, each ethnic minority had representation in the Majliss (Parliament) and Senate proportionate to their numbers in the overfall population.

A previously unknown historical anecdote cited by a US scholar in a recent book best illustrates the point. It concerns the protection of the Iranian Jews living in the occupied Europe during World War II.

Reich on the false pretence that these citizens, having lived in Iran for over two millennium, had been assimilated in the Persian (Aryan) race. According to the author, the Iranian Government of the time, managed to procure them safe conduct from the authorities of the Third

The status of women is another case in point. Under the Pahlavis Iranian women were brought to the society's mainstream. The mushrooming institutions of higher learning opened their doors to women. Teachers, doctors, lawyers and administrators were trained and fielded in different walks of life, to the very highest levels such as Minister of Education, Member of Parliament and so on.

The right to vote, to seek divorce and be protected from an abusive husband was - to the dismay of the clerics - written into the law - weakening their supersititious and religious hold on the general populace. And creating resentment among them toward the Monarchy.

Today, the Iranian women remain one of the vanguards of resistance to scourges of the fundamentalist Mullah rule.

The Bazaar merchants also resented their monopolistic control of imports and exports and general business being extracted from their little bazaar booths, which represented billions of dollars never put back into circulation for the improvement of the economy.

The Shah moved much of this into modern, multinational organizations in uptown Tehran, so the miffed merchants funded the clerics and encouraged them to foment trouble and use religion to attack the monarchy.

Much of the bravura exhibited by the Shah's administration in the seventies, was in the sphere of economy. The exuberance of the double-digit growth was indeed intoxicating. In 1974 - in the wake of a quantum jump in the oil price -- the Shah dismissed the counsel of prudence by experts and decreed an even faster growth. In his complex psyche, many imperatives drove him to go full blast.

One factor was to firm up the throne for Crown Prince Reza but he was equally concerned with his legacy and place in history - should he not disprove those detractors who claimed he did not measure up to the towering figure of his father. Reza Shah the Great, to use his full title, was a stern disciplinarian with a strong will to unify the country and willing to use force to bring Iran's tribal chieftains under Central Government control. A hard act to follow for his diplomat son.

But the economic bullishness did not pay off in the face of the sabotage by the bazaar. The country's weak infrastructure buckled under the weight of imports and the rise in the price of oil resulted in lower consumer demand in world markets.

As the economy wobbled and Carter's human rights agenda aimed like a javelin at the Shah, forced him to make liberalizing gestures, and the tide began to change.

Iranians respect power and strength. The moment he showed a "co-operative" attitude, they turned on him. Egged on by both the funds from the bazaar and the hostile clerics, whose influence had been diminished to almost nothing among a much more modern populace with open ties available to Western life styles and mind sets.

All these were unexpected perks for the disgruntled clerics. The magnetizing effect of the boom had already drawn rural masses to major cities glutting the congregations in mosques. Now the clerics reaped the harvest of fanned discontent, brandishing radical Shiite doctrine both as a challenge and a remedy.

The Shah's "politics of liberalization" had also created its own sliding spiral. To reverse these trends, the Shah should have - but failed - to rally secular political forces to his side.

With the hindsight, it is also fair to say that the rigidity of some of the secular National Front leaders, who could have showed support and not eventually been destroyed themselves by the clerics, was an error of historical scale on their part.

Marxist and libertarian influences also made them into a philosphical, snobbish elite, which could not see the pitfalls of their mindsets relative to increasingly literate but basically uneducated and inexperienced Iranian populace.

To what extent the Shah's judgment had been impaired by the secret diagnosis of lymphatic cancer in 1974 has not been established. Such a link is hard to quantify, all the more so that the Shah had apparently not been told of the exact nature of his illness, until the later years.

Be it as it may, his most serious errors occurred during the ensuing period. It was at this time that the Shah decided on one party rule to prevent the bickering that had ensued in the two party system of Iran Novin and Mardom and to allow very capable men in the minority Mardom party to accept important positions to carry the nation forward. Instead he decreed that the Rastakhiz party would have two "wings" to cover the differing views of the elected parliamenterians.

He replaced the Islamic calendar with an ostentatious imperial calendar in a historical acknowledgement - not of his reign - but that of some 5,000 years of Monarchy in Iran. Anti-Monarchy groups, using any excuse, immediately attacked this as personal grandure.

The Shah had also begun his somewhat fanciful flights on the "Great Civilization." The new royal mindset had the Iranians believe that within a generation or so Iran would rank among the world's industrial elite. Had he been given more time, his investments in key industries in the West, like Krupp steel and internal develoment of essential items like cement plants, nuclear power, etc., could well have made his vision come true. With all the various pieces inside his almost photographic memory he was looking beyond the horizon.

Had a race against the clock already began for the Shah? A wild-west climate of profiteering marked these balmy years. Abusive business practices, including by the Shah's close family and friends, became a hallmark of the laissez-faire policies practiced at overkill scale. Partly because policing or regulating everything in a rapid growth arena with too few people to help him, became too much to handle.

Remember, a country resembles a major corporation and needs competent managers, directors, vice-presidents, senior vice-presidents and staff to run profitably and efficiently. Iran's growth far outstripped the availability of persons who could accept responsiblity with any degree of competence - or sadly - with honesty and not line their own pockets.

The Shah himself could hardly be given a clean bill of health as he brooked corruption in his entourage, yet he was far from the rapacious persona, with a fabulous wealth, which the revolutionary puffery sought to depict. In fact he was a pragmatist. When complaints reached hin that his Minister of Interior had misappropriated some $40 million and should be sacked and thrown in jail, the Shah refused.

He explained that the man had been Minister of Interior for some ten years or so, knew his job well and if he were fired, would spend a few years in prison and then be free to go to Europe and enjoy his plunder.

Instead, the Shah stated, he will be at his desk every morning at six a.m., know that I know everything - and if from nothing else but guilt will do his job for the country better than before.

Which would be preferable to releasing him to go play in Europe with his stolen money, which could probably no longer be found to retrieve it.

During the Embassy hostage crisis, the revolutionary authorities kept no stone unturned to find documentary evidence of financial wrong doings by the Shah. This search was aimed, inter-alia, to substantiate claims in the extradition brief submitted to Panama.

In March 1980, foreign correspondents scrambled for scoops in the jammed conference hall of the Tehran's Central Bank, where President Bani Sadr was to make the Islamic Republic's legal case against the Shah. Scathing revelations were expected. Yet nothing worth the print could be wired back to editors.

The revolutionary authorities had not been able to pin the Shah to any financial irregularity. This was not, however, the case in respect of some of the Shah's close family members.

Interesting to note, however, is that within six months of taking power, the Mullahs had rapaciously transfered funds to private overseas accounts they created for themselves, which exceeded by about ten times the total amount of what the 1,000 elite families of Iran had placed overseas during the last 25-years of the Shah's reign.

Most of the money transfered out of Iran just prior to the revolution was done by trades people. Plumbers, carpenters, construction contractors, builders, electricians etc., who got their money out and quickly left while the Shah was still there.

When the crunch finally came in 1978, the Shah was unprepared and not up to the challenge. He was quick to shed the awe-inspiring mask of the mighty king and meekly looked for advice.

The Anglo & American Ambassadors were solicited most, yet their counsel was tentative and vague, reflecting indecision and discord with their own chancelleries. Others consulted, were an array of retired politicians, social scientists, military leaders and some prominent clerics.

Their advice was too contrasting to allow the Shah to overcome his indecision. In managing the crisis the Shah committed blunders, practicing appeasement from a position of weakness. By the last quarter of 1978, in the face of an astounding quiescence by the Shah, the largely apolitical mass of the urban population, 60% under the age of 25-years and still wet behind the ears politially, swung to insurrectionists' inflammation of them, rendering the trend irreversible.

But to his credit the Shah skirted a bloodbath. Evidence abounds that on this score he had remained steadfast throughout the crisis period. He repeatedly rejected the get-tough advice proffered not only by some of his generals but coming also from some unlikely quarters in the West.

By the year-end the Shah was ready to unclench his hold on power.

Images of his tearful farewell at Mehrabad airport on January 14, 1979 remain haunting memories of a dream turned into a nightmare.

In a grisly act of disappointment, the Shah left behind in detention his loyal and highly refined Prime Minister of 13-years, Amir Abbas Hoveyda. The ex-Premier was summarily executed by the revolution's hanging judge, Mullah Khalkhali, shortly thereafter.

With the Shah's departure, Iran sank into the darkness of the Middle Ages. A reign of terror, of which he had presciently warned the nation, set in. The first public act of Khomeini, when he took over the reins of power in February 1979, was to abolish women's right to sit in as a judge in a court of law.

He initially dissolved the Ministry of Justice, stating that anyone against him was against Allah and should be killed where they stood - with no need for a trial or other justice system.

That presaged the calamities and blood-letting that were to follow.

Perhaps no ruler in history like the Shah has benefited from a postmortem redemption, due not to any re-appraisal of his balance sheet but the misdeeds and brutal excesses of those who succeeded him in power. Far above and beyond anything of which he could have been accused even by his most biased opponents.

A case study would support a theory that the value accorded to any given regime should be measured in light of its inevitable successor and the ability of the latter to improve conditions and ills of which they accused the predecessors.

As they ask in American politics, are you better off now? Iranians would certainly say "no".

Heif - Shayan Amiri

2010-06-20T14:14:00.001+01:00

Rare clips of Iranian Emperor on state visits

2010-06-16T21:32:00.003+01:00

Reza Pahlavi II - 12 June Statement

2010-06-13T19:25:00.002+01:00

Washington D.C.

It is with profound regret that we join the world in watching the brutal reaction of the regime in Tehran to the protests of the brave people of Iran for their rights and against the suffocating tyranny they have been subjected to these past 30 years.

The regime has had 12 months to peacefully and respectfully resolve it's differences with the populace who has long since lost faith in their so-called government and lost hope in the judicial and constitutional infrastructures of the clerics and their paramilitary apparatus.

To the youth of Iran I say: your courage is the fodder from which legends are written. Your names and your actions, today and every day, until the liberation of our beloved Iran, will not only grace the pages of our history but that of the region and the world as the stories of the great struggles for human dignity and human rights are written.

To the Basijis, the Sepah, and the men of the Armed Forces of Iran I say: Join your brothers and sisters, your sons and daughters, do not turn the sacred land of your fathers and mothers into killing fields. You are better than that. You can change your own destiny and your country's destiny. We cannot change the past. But you can change today and tomorrow. Join your people in this just struggle to reclaim your blessed country.

To the regime in Iran I say: enough. Enough killing, enough torturing, enough blood of innocent spilled! In the name of all that you hold holy, stop this vicious campaign to hold power. You know it will not work, I know it will not work, history has taught us it will not work. Enough.

To the Iranian Diaspora whose heart beats in snych with their brothers and sisters inside Iran: Do not despair, the liberation of Iran is at hand. Your unity, your voice, your sacrifice is needed today more than ever by those who are buying the freedom of Iran with their blood.

To the citizens and governments of the world I say: The people of Iran need you more than ever. Let their voices be heard. Don't allow their epic and existential struggle go unnoticed under the guise of nuclear weapons priorities. These are all part and parcel of the same problem. A vile regime whose actions can no longer be justified nor tolerated by decent men and women, regardless of nationality.

In closing let us remember the words of Dr Martin Luther King: "We will foget the words of our enemies. But we will not soon forget the silence of our friends."

With a hopeful heart for a free and properous Iran,

May God bless Iran.

Reza Pahlavi

Man Iranam

2010-06-12T16:19:00.005+01:00

Anti-regime demonstrations and clashes with security forces are taking place in Iran today - marking the anniversary of the regime's crackdown on pro-freedom/democracy demonstrations last year. Large crowds are out in force in Tehran confronting the islamic regime's savage security forces.

(the clip below is a complilation of clips of what has taken place in the past year since the anti-regime demonstrations of June 2009).

Neda Agha-Soltan

2010-06-11T21:40:00.004+01:00

Never to be forgotten...next week will mark the killing of what has been referred to as Iran's "Angel for Freedom" - Neda Agha-Soltan. The savage murderer (a paramilitary militiaman) and the system (Islamic Republic) who condoned the killing are still at large... it is in the hands of the Iranian nation to muster the courage and bring this barbaric anti-Iranian islamic regime to justice for the crimes against humanity that have been perpetrated by them in the past three decades.

(!WARNING GRAPHIC FOOTAGE!)

Rest in peace Neda. In hope that your aspirations for a free, democratic, and secular Iran will soon come true.

Mir-Hossein Mousavi

2010-06-08T08:23:00.004+01:00

I found this clip an amusing way of depicting the fundamental nature of Mir-Hossein Mousavi - the former Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic, who oversaw the execution of tens of thousands of political prisoners in the 1980's, and which the regime has now tried to rebrand as a "reformist" alternative. All these stooges which the regime short-lists for people to vote for in their sham s-elections are regime-loyalists who defend the Islamic Republic and the rotten framework which it's built upon. It's incredibly sad to see that people would genuinely fall for this kind of obvious political charade by the Islamic regime, especially after 8 years of another of the regime's "reformist" projects - namely the smiling mullah Mohammad Khatami - which resulted in further prolonging the terrorist regime's life, more executions, arrests, and torture of Iranian pro-democracy activists all under the guise of the smiling "reformist" mullah who had hypnotized liberal western media-outlets.

Shahanshah bi to mondim shekastim

2010-06-05T23:29:00.000+01:00

Neda Agha-Soltan - HBO Documentary

2010-06-03T23:23:00.002+01:00

Persian version:

English version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F48SinuEHIk&feature=channel

Manouchehr Mottaki - "murderer from a torture regime"

2010-06-01T22:51:00.008+01:00

The terrorist Islamic Republic's foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki is greeted at the European Parliament (1 June, 2010) by European MP's referring to him as a "murderer" of a "torture regime" with photo-placards bearing the image of Neda Agha-Soltan - who was killed in cold blood by the islamic regime's thugs last year during anti-regime unrest.

SECOND CLIP

Shahin Najafi - Fereydoun Farokhzad

2010-05-31T22:45:00.002+01:00

May 1, 2010 Tehran - "Death to Khamenei"

2010-05-12T21:58:00.003+01:00

Anti-regime demonstration on May 1st:

Man Iranam

2010-05-12T00:15:00.000+01:00

Sarzamine Man

2010-04-04T22:57:00.000+01:00

The Fall of the Shah - Fereydoun Hoveyda

2010-04-03T17:25:00.008+01:00

Hoveyda Fereydoun, 1979. The Fall of The Shah, Wyndham Books, NY

Amazon Reviewer:

"The author of this angry little book worked as a diplomat for the Shah of Iran for almost 30 years. His older brother served as the Shah's Prime Minister for 13 years. And yet the book is a vitriolic attack against the Shah. The reason? In the last months of his reign the Shah decided to imprison the author's brother, Amir-Abbas Hoveyda,in a forlorn bid to silence the regime's violent critics. Amir Abbas Hoveyda was made a scapegoat. When the Shah left Iran with his wife and family he abandoned Amir-Abbas to the bloodthirsty mullahs who soon seized power. That was a cowardly act on the part of the Shah. The mulahs murdered Amir-Abbas Hoveyda along with tens of thousands of other Iranians who fell into their hands. Fereydoun Hoveyda cannot forget, or forgive, the betrayal of his borther. And that is understandable.

The problem is that Fereydoun Hoveyda's emotions prevented him from writing a balanced book. His vilification of the Shah can only absolve, albeit only partly, the mullahs who actually murdered Amir-Abbas. Had the title of the book been " Settling Scores with the Shah", I would have had no obejction. The Shah was certainly no angel. But nor was he the demon that Fereydoun Hoveyda pretends.

For a more balanced biography of the Shah, and a less emotional account of Amir-Abbas Hoveyda's tragic fate, you could read William Shawcross's " The Shah's Last Ride" which remains a good example of the Western art of biography.

For a more initimate, and Iranian, view you could read Amir Taheri's " The Unknown Life of the Shah". Taheri knew the Shah well and was also regarded as a personal friend of Amir-Abbas Hoveyda.He has thus been able to remain fair to both men, although his bias, not to say hatred, of the Islamists colours his broader political judgment. A READER IN RICHMOND, SURREY, UK"

I've recently finished reading this book published by the brother of Iran's late Prime Minister Amir-Abbas Hoveyda - namely Fereydoun Hoveyda. Fereydoun Hoveyda was an Iranian diplomat who served as Ambassador to the United Nations (1971-1979) and also served as Deputy Foreign Minister during the Pahlavi Era.

This book was written within months of the takeover of government institutions by anti-Iranian islamic militants, establishment of an Islamic state, and execution of his brother at the hands of the revolutionary islamist terrorists. Although he states in the prolouge of the book that he intends to stay objective in his analysis this is not always the case as any reader comes to realize - understandable to some extent.

Many accusations in the book are subjective in nature (and this is expected after the author clearly states he hates the late Shah and lays the blame for what happened to his brother on him) rather than facts that can be verifiably established - despite this going against his expressed intent of staying objective. Most reviews of this book seem to come to this same conclusion. This leads me to believe that many of the attacks are vindictive in nature rather than grounded in facts. Would it be right of us, the readers, to accept all these subjective assesments as truths? I definately do not think so, and believe that the closest we can come in establishing something in this regard is to take into consideration a multitude of different sources upon which we can draw a fairer conclusion upon.

Having said that though there certainly are valid criticisms in the book of the late Shah, dealing with neglecting political liberties, not being hard enough on corruption, and issues pertaining to economic mismangement (most of them attributed towards the end of the Shah's reign), which can definately be taken into account when trying to come to a fair assessment on the late Shah of Iran. On top of objective criticism there are also positive objective passages regarding the advances achieved under the Pahlavi Era. A bit of further examination should be sufficient in most cases to establish which statements would fall under which category (vindictive/subjective, or objective in nature).

Fereydoun Hoveyda argues that "by 1970-72 the improvement in material conditions was requiring a parallel move toward democratization. Here the sovereign committed a serious error of judgement and let slip a number of opportunities. Yet as early as 1971 the apperance of guerilla activity, even on a small scale, ought to have alerted him."

But then he seems to contradict his first statement (society being ready for democratization) when he states later on (highlighted part being directly relevant with the rest of the passage included as a matter of interest):

"From what source did the inarticulate and often illiterate masses derive their inexorable strength? Was it simply from the fervor inspired by their deep faith? But Shi'ism had been their driving force ever since the sixteenth century. Was it from the fiery speeches of Khomeini? But the Ayatollah had been calling on them to rise up in rebellion long years since?

Who helped them to rebel? Mossadeq's National Front? The intellectuals of the right and the left? But these represented only a very small minority. Or was it the oil companies, unhappy with the Shah's policies? But their powers were limited, and after all they were still getting their oil.

There has been some talk of foreign influences. The Shah held all-day consultations with the Americans and British ambassadors. The Palestinians trained guerilla groups. Radio Peyke Iran had been criticizing the Shah from an East European country. Nixon and Kissinger had encouraged the Shah to squander the country's wealth on sophisticated armaments.

Other observers go further still. Thus, Robert Dreyfuss and his colleagues on the Executive Intelligence Review see the Iranian revolution as stage one in a grand "conspiracy" engineered in certain British and Western intelligence circles and designed to destabilize the region and dismember its component countries, so as to reconstitute them inside new frontiers. According to them, the Iranian executants of this secret plan were [Ebrahim] Yazdi, Ghotzadeh, Bani-Sadr, and Amir-Entezam. Again according to them, Yazdi, an American citizen, was recruited by Richard Cottam, professor of political science at Pittsburgh University, with reputed CIA connections. So it is not Western governments who are behind the alleged consipiracy, but a secret "brotherhood" whose purpose is to prevent the industrialization of the Third World and to keep it in a permanent state of underdevelopment. Islamic fundamentalism is supposed to have provided the plotters with a powerful weapon for inducing such a backward step. Iran was chosen first because conditions were favorable there...These views have found a certain amount of confirmation inside Iran itself. For instance, when the Ayatollah Taleghani, the religious leader of Tehran, disappeared on May 17, 1979, after the arrest of his children by the Komiteh, some fantastic rumors broke out in the capital. When the Palestinians occupied the offices of the Israeli representatives in Iran, according to rumor they found documents which established the existence of contacts between Yazdi, Ghotzadeh, and other associates of Khomeini and foreign intelligence services. They at once called Taleghani's son and handed the papers over to him. The Komiteh, which was tapping the line, picked up Taleghani Junior as he left the building and took away the compromising documents.

These are just rumors, of course, but certain world happenings do give grounds for reflection. For example there is the sudden switch by Western economists, who are now talking about the bankruptcy of their previously held theories of development. All at once they are urging the Third World to confine itself to a predominantly agricultural economy, in order to increase food production and use more of the work force. And this comes at the very moment when the experts are maintaining that at the present rate of population growth the poor countries will never be able to supply their own needs. The famous "green revolution", launched amid such a fanfare of publicity, has been unable to solve the problems of the developing regions. As for Iran, with its lack of arable land and water it cannot hope to become agriculturally self-sufficient. Although the Shah may have made a lot of mistakes. the fact remains that his broad idea of industrialization was essentially correct. For how are sixty million Iranians to be fed and clothed as they enter the third millenium, once the oil deposits are used up, except by means of an export-oriented industrial sector?"

So based on these two statements - how can an "inarticulate and often illiterate mass" be ready for democratization? Should this mass or society not be given enough time to reach a fair level of being literate/informed/educated mass before they are given FULL rights to determine the future direction of the country? If an inarticulate, superstitious and illiterate mass are given FULL rights to determine their future, is not anarchy the only realistic result of such a ludicrous move? Iranian society had come a long way at the turn of the previous century however there was still some way to go before such noble aspirations could materialize - there is nothing wrong about Fereydoun Hoveyda's aspirations as I believe any patriotic Iranian would share them, however his timing in demanding them in this regard was not correct. Also on the issue of misappropriating funds into the country's defense capabilities I have to disagree with Fereydoun Hoveyda as where would our country be today if it wasn't thanks to what remained of our military and defense capabilities at the time of the Iraqi invasion!? Although the command structure was in tatters thanks to purges by the Islamists we were still able to keep the Arab invaders at bay. Given that this book was written before the Iraqi invasion I don't believe the late Ambassador was aware of how crucial those defense capabilities would mean for our country to maintain its territorial integrity in the volatile region it finds herself in.

Some of the positive aspects that are attributed to the Pahlavi Era in the book are described in the following passage:

"[In 1977] more than 65% of the population owned the houses they lived in (and the percentage was even higher in the capital). Per-capita income stood at $2,200 ($300 in 1965). Primary school attendance was over 10 million (270,000 in 1960). Illiteracy had fallen from 85% to 55%. Whereas oil revenues had accounted for 90% of the gross national product in the 1950's, in 1977 they came to no more than 35% (for a total of $70 billion). The present critics of the regime claim that industry was confined to assembly. They forget that in the car industry, for example, in 1977 more than 65% of components were manufactured in Iran. Agriculture, although it left a lot to be desired, was showing real and appreciable progress, as the events of 1978-79 have proved. (In fact, although almost all Iran's foodstuff imports were paralyzed, there was never any shortage of food supplies either in Tehran or in any of the other towns. And it is worth mentioning that from 1972 to 1977 domestic consumption had quadrupled.) In the fields of communications, social welfare, health, education, etc., the picture was equally impressive. If inflation, which had remained reasonable until 1975, began galloping in 1977, it is generally agreed that this was the outcome of the sudden injection of Iran's increased revenues from oil."

Fereydoun Hoveyda passed away in Virginia (USA) in 2006.

Patriotic Poem- Vatan (Mihan)

2010-04-03T13:36:00.004+01:00

A patriotic poem, dedicated to the motherland, sung by an Iranian lady (video is embedded in the following page):

http://www.farhangsara.com/

31 March 2010...

2010-03-31T22:11:00.005+01:00

Potkin has a powerful clip showing the strengthening societal consciousness within islamist-occupied Iran (two girls are attacked by one of the regime's islamist guards and tens of bystanders intervene and chase the regime thug away). The regime's stronghold on society through fear and repression is slowly crumbling through the show of force and courage of ordinary people.

Also a "pic of the day" (NYPD officers holds the Iranian flag during the annual New York Persian Parade):

Na mollah! Na allah! Marg bar Hezbollah!

2010-03-28T15:01:00.002+01:00

I just came across this new protest chant against the anti-Iranian Islamic Republic:

Na mollah! Na allah! Marg bar Hezbollah!
(no mullah's, no allah, death to hezbollah)

A few nice clips I wanted to share with my blog readers:

In defence of Caspian Makan

2010-03-27T10:07:00.003Z

by Observing_Iran
24-Mar-2010

The Jerusalem Post has reported that Caspian Makan, the fiance of Neda Agha Soltan has been to Israel and has spoken with the Israeli President, Shimon Peres. Since then there's been a lot of complaints, anger and outright disgust at Mr Makan's actions, sadly most of it from the so-called "reformist" Green Movement.

Mr Makan, having been tortured in Iran after the murder of his fiance, fled and went to Canada. Since then he has done a lot of good work in trying to keep the focus on the situation in Iran and the what's been going on since June 2009. He arrived in Israel last week and was quoted as saying "I come to Israel as an ambassador of the Iranian people, a messenger from the camp of peace" and "I have no doubt that Neda's spirit and soul feels the sensitivity and warmth I received in this meeting". President Peres in turn replied by saying “you can murder a person, but not a spirit. One candle can scatter a lot of darkness. And this candle will not be extinguished. In this struggle, I am sure that the progressive and moral Iran will emerge victorious.”

Every Islamic Republic passport bears the statement, "the bearer of this passport is forbidden from traveling to occupied Palestine" i.e. Israel. By visiting Israel Makan has essentially given two fingers to the regime. But what's happened since the meeting has been very telling and of great interest to me:

One "reformist" website has declared that Makan was never even Neda's fiance
A group of "Greens" have set up a Facebook group declaring that Makan is not aligned to them
Neda's mother has declared that Makan does not represent them
Makan has been accused of hurting the opposition movement, as visiting Israel could be construed as seeking support from foreign powers for regime change and unrest.
By far and away however, the award for best toeing the Islamic Republic line comes from the Mullah's mouthpiece, PressTV, which has reiterated its firm belief that Makan is none other than a suspect in Neda's murder, visiting his Israeli accomplices.

Now, here's what I think:

The charge that Makan was not Neda's fiance is patent nonsense, and Neda's mother herself has confirmed that they were in a relationship and planning to get married. Then again, it doesn't surprise me that a website aligned to Mir Hossein Mousavi and his "Green Movement" would be hostile to anyone who has the temerity to visit the Israel, let us not forget that Mousavi himself was Prime Minister of Iran whilst the IRGC was actively helping the Hezbollah Islamic Fundamentalists in their war against Israel and was involved in the bombing of the US Embassy in Lebanon. If that isn't enough proof for you, there's also the fact that he called Israel a cancerous tumour, whilst in office. It therefore doesn't come as much of a surprise that Islamic Republic "reformists", still loyal to the theocratic system, would attack Makan.

The other charge is that by visiting Israel, Makan is harming the "opposition" movement, and giving ammunition to those that claim that Iran's protesters are all Americanised lackeys. Given that for quite some time Iranians have been shouting, "Not for Palestine, not for Lebanon, only for Iran do I give my life", we can see that a lot of Iranians are not the raving anti-Zionists that Ahmadinejad would have you believe. Iranians have a lot of problems to deal with in Iran, hating on Israel is really quite low down on the list of priorities at the moment. In addition, the Islamic Republic already blames the current unrest on foreign powers, so whether or not Makan makes a visit to Israel, the Iranian opposition will still be accused of being foreign stooges. It's an entirely illogical point for the Green movement's media to make.

Anyway, if the Iranian opposition movement is so weak and Ahmadinejad-esque that it feels "harmed" by someone going on a goodwill visit to the Middle East's only democracy, then it's a rotten, bigoted opposition movement anyway and not one I have any interest in supporting as it's on the same level as Ahmadinejad and his vile rhetoric. Where is Rahe Sabz's outrage at the Turkish Prime Minister's recent visit to Iran, after he denied the Armenian genocide? Rahe Sabz don't give a fig about the Palestinian people's rights, they're just toeing the Islamic Republic's anti-Semitic line.

At least PressTV maintain a consistent line, they've always been thuggish anti-Semites, however when the self proclaimed free thinkers of the Green movement round on a man and assasinate his character simply for going against what the Islamic Republic's fanatical supporters believe in, I believe that is wrong and just the sort of hypocrisy which makes me view the Green Movement's leaders and media with distaste.

I myself have no problem with Makan visiting Israel, any message of peace and goodwill is long overdue in my opinion. The Islamic Republic for thirty years has engaged in terrorism and hatred, and much worse has declared that it has done so in the name of Iran's people, who by and large are not the intolerant fanatics that the regime paints them out to be. Caspian Makan is simply shouting "this is not in my name". I for one support him.

1389 - Taazi Year - Norooz

2010-03-26T23:47:00.006Z

What do those Iranians who use the Taazi (Arabo-Muslim) year of 1389 indirectly promote? That they are proud of:

1389 years of being slaves to a backward, savage, anti-Iranian ideology imposed by the swords of savage Arab invaders

1389 years of being raped by Arabo-Muslims

1389 years in which our children have been sold as sex-slaves to Arabo-Muslims

1389 years since our freedom fighting national heroes, in their last defence for their motherland, where slain and beheaded by the savage Arabo-Muslim hordes

1389 years since the Arabo-Muslim hordes burned, pillaged, and raped our nation

1389 years of a pedophile, thief, rapist, murderer being idolized as a prophet sent by God!

Shame on those who regurgitate this shameful Islamic year instead of using proper Iranian reference points for their cultural new year! Iranian history goes back thousands of years, yet some Iranians shamelessly adopt this shameful Islamic year as their "new year" reference! It cannot get more illogical, sick and twisted than this - it's as if on the same day your father is murdered, mother is raped, siblings sold as sex-slaves, and your house pillaged and burned to the ground by savages and you decide to commemorate and celebrate that date as the reference point for your cultural new year!!! This is how deep Islamic brainwashing is ingrained in the psyche of some Iranians - even the "secular/modern/westernized" ones living in progressive western countries who can freely educate themselves regarding these issues!

Three suggested Iranian years that should be promoted and used are: 7032 (Mitrai Aryan year); 3748 (Zoroastrian year); 2569 (Shahanshahi year). Personally I prefer to use the Shahanshahi year - 2569 - as this the reference point for the formation of the Persian Empire (Iran) as a unified state with defined borders by Cyrus the Great.

Chaharshanbe-soori - London - 2010/2569

2010-03-22T23:27:00.001Z

Chaharshanbe-soori celebration in London:

Reza Shah II - Shahbanou - Norooz 2569

2010-03-19T23:40:00.005Z

Faraa'residane khojasteh norooz'e jamshidi'ra beh hameh mihanparastane Irani shaad'bash migooyam.

Norooz 2569 Khojasteh va Pirooz Baad!

Happy Iranian New Year 2569

HIM Reza Shah II celebrating ancient Iranian fire festival ("chaharshanbe soori") with His family:

HIM Reza Shah II Norooz address (2569/2010):

HIM Empress Farah Pahlavi Norooz address (2569/2010):

AUDIO - CLICK HERE

Arash @ DeviantArt

2010-03-14T19:07:00.004Z

Separate Religion and Politics by ~arasch on deviant ART (picture depicts a person disposing of the Islamic Republic's emblem in a trash can)

A compatriot called Arash sent me an email asking to publish his works on the blog, please pay a visit and review his political artwork:

http://arasch.deviantart.com/gallery/

The conspirators behind the 1979 Islamic takeover in Iran...

2010-03-07T20:25:00.002Z

In Memory of Iran...

2010-02-20T18:53:00.004Z

31 years ago in January 1979 these words were spoken by His Imperial Majesty Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Shahanshah Aryamehr:

"I have devoted my existence to provide them a better life. I have given land to the peasants. I have imposed our industrialists to share their profit with workers. I have developed an excellent health program and established social security. I did everything to better the standard of living of my people. I cannot order soldiers and policemen to shoot people."

"I am told today that I should have applied martial law more forcefully. This would have cost my country less dear than the bloody anarchy now established there. But a sovereign cannot save his throne by spilling blood of his fellow--countrymen. A dictator can do it because he acts in the name of an ideology which he believes he must make triumphant, no matter what the price. A sovereign is not a dictator. There is between him and his people an alliance which he cannot break. A dictator has nothing to pass on and power belongs to him alone. A sovereign receives his crown from the people..."

**************************************

In Memory Of Iran By Roger Scruton
[An American perspective]

Who remembers Iran?

Who remembers, that is, the shameful stampede of Western journalists and intellectuals to the cause of the Islamic revolution?

Who remembers the hysterical propaganda campaign waged against the Shah, the lurid press reports of corruption, police oppression, palace decadence, constitutional
crisis?

Who remembers the thousands of Iranian students in Western universities [on Pahlavi burseries] enthusiastically absorbing the fashionable Marxist nonsense purveyed to them by armchair radicals, so as one day to lead the campaign of riot and mendacity which preceded the Shah's downfall?

Who remembers the behaviour of those students who held as hostage the envoys of the very same power which had provided their 'education'?

Who remembers Edward Kennedy's accusation that the Shah had presided over 'one of the most oppressive regimes in history' and had stolen 'umpteen billions of dollars
from Iran'?

And who remembers the occasional truth that our journalists enabled us to glimpse, concerning the Shah's real achievements: his successes in combating the illiteracy, backwardness and powerlessness of his country, his enlightened economic policy, the reforms which might have saved his people from the tyranny of evil mullahs, had he been given the chance to accomplish them?

Who remembers the freedom and security in which journalists could roam Iran, gathering the gossip that would fuel their fanciful stories of a reign of terror?

True, the Shah was an autocrat. But autocracy and tyranny are not the same. An autocrat may preside, as the Shah sought to preside, over a representative parliament, over an independent judiciary, even over a free press and an autonomous university.

The Shah, like Kemal Ataturk, whose vision he shared, regarded his autocracy as the means to the creation and protection of such institutions. Why did no one among the Western political scientists trouble to point this out, or to rehearse the theory which tells us to esteem not just the democratic process, but also the representative and limiting institutions which may still flourish in its absence?

Why did no one enjoin us to compare the political system of Iran with that of Iraq or Syria?

Why did our political scientists rush to embrace the Iranian revolution, despite the evidence that revolution under these circumstances must be the prelude to massive social disorder and a regime of terror?

Why did the Western intelligentsia go on repeating the myth that the Shah was to blame for this revolution, when both Khomeini and the Marxists had been planning it for 30 years and had found, despite their many attempts to put it into operation, only spasmodic popular support?

The answer to all those questions is simple. The Shah was an ally of the West, whose achievement in establishing limited monarchy in a vital strategic region had helped to guarantee our security, to bring stability to the Middle East and to deter
Soviet expansion.

The Shah made the fatal mistake of supposing that the makers of Western opinion would love him for creating conditions which guaranteed their freedom. On the contrary, they hated him. The Shah had reckoned without the great death wish which haunts our civilisation and which causes its vociferous members to propagate any falsehood, however absurd, provided only that it damages our chances of survival.

For a while, of course, those vociferous elements will remain silent on the embarrassing topic of Iran, believing that the collapse of Iranian institutions, the establishment of religious terror, the Soviet expansion into Afghanistan and the end of stability in the region are all due to some other cause than the Islamic revolution. Those who lent their support to this tragedy simply turned their back on it and went elsewhere, to prepare a similar outcome for the people of Turkey, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, South Africa -- or wherever else our vital interests may be damaged.

Of course, it is difficult now for a Western correspondent to enter Iran, and if he did so it would not be for fun. He could not, like the ghouls who send their despatches from Beirut, adopt a public posture of the front-line hero. He would have to witness, quietly and in terror of his life, things which beggar description: the spontaneous 'justice' of the revolutionary guards, the appalling scenes of violence, torture and demonic frenzy, the public humiliation of women, the daily sacrifice of lives too young to be conscious of the meaning for which they are condemned to destruction.

He would also have to confront the truth which has been staring him in the face for years, and which he could still recognise had the habit of confessing his errors been preserved: the truth that limited monarchy is the right form of government for Iran, which can be saved only by the restoration of the Shah's legitimate successor. But such a result would be in the interests not only of the Iranian people, but also of the West.

Hence few Western journalists are likely to entertain it.

Shahanshah Aryamehr - Independence

2010-02-20T18:03:00.002Z

"We appreciate friendship but are not affected in the slightest way by what is said about us by biased people. By the grace of God, with or without outsiders, we shall reap the benefit of our own effort. We will regain our past prestige."

It is quite natural that now when imperialism is leaving this region, those areas which historically belonged to us should come back to us. I can assure you that we intend to play a positive role in the stability of the region so that the liberty and independence of all countries is protected. We will certainly respect their rights. By the grace of God, we have a sufficiently large country and are not looking for more, but we intend to defend our historical rights."

"...Iran's military force will be one of the most powerful and effective powers in this region...our aim is to implement a policy that would safe-guard stability in this region and prevent any aggressive designs...anyone who has aggressive designs in this region should know what kind of force he would have to deal with."

Shah of Iran's post-Persepolis press conference, Tehran October 18, 1971.

Iran’s Royal Opposition

2010-02-15T08:05:00.003Z

By Jerry Guo | NEWSWEEK
Published Feb 11, 2010

Reza Pahlavi was just 17 when his father, the shah, fled the country in 1979. Since then, the former crown prince of Iran has become a thorn in the side of the theocratic regime, particularly after the disputed presidential election last June. With new protests looming, he spoke recently with NEWSWEEK's Jerry Guo. Excerpts:

Do you have insiders who keep you in the loop on the regime's thinking?
I have lines of contact. Access to information has been very restricted by the regime, but we can affirm the discontent goes well beyond Tehran and the major cities. They didn't have enough manpower to cope with the demonstrations surrounding Ashura [in December]. They had to shuttle security forces from one town to another.

But isn't it commonly assumed that the countryside is more pro-regime?
The regime has completely disregarded its own kind. The crackdown during Ashura, one of the holiest days in Shia Islam, was an unprecedented offense to people's deepest beliefs. So they cannot appeal to their own religious base. Even conservatives realize that by now.

This sounds like we're no longer talking about reform.
The regime is not reformable. We tried it for 20 years. The central issue is to do away with the theocracy. A secular government is a prerequisite to democracy. It's in the best interest of the clerical establishment, too: the sanctity of religion has been most damaged by religious governance. The regime has been presenting everyone secular as anti-religion. The violence has been committed in the name of religion.

Will the regime go quietly when its leaders know their heads will be on the block?
Key elements within law enforcement or the military should consider themselves part of the transition. I look at South Africa as the model, a campaign based on amnesty and national reconciliation. Many elements are stuck in the regime and want out.

Do you see a role for yourself in a new secular government?
My preoccupation is not running for office. We are trying to liberate our country first. Then I am ready to serve my compatriots in whatever capacity. If they want me to play a more important role, so be it.

In the lead-up to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, thousands of protesters were killed in the streets by your father's regime. Is history repeating itself?
The extent of victims was definitely much more limited than what you indicated. My father voluntarily left the country to avoid bloodshed. He ordered the Army not to engage in skirmishes with the population. The transition happened rather peacefully. The difference now is the regime is calling on all possible coercive forces including civilian guns-for-hire. They are trying to hang on more violently as we go along. But despite the crackdown, you must admire the degree of discipline for people not to retaliate with violence. That's amazing.

What's the next move for the opposition?
People were saying the dust will settle. It hasn't. Perhaps we'll see major strikes or other civil disobedience. But the effectiveness of [the opposition] leadership may be so curtailed that we have to look outside. If you look at the velvet revolutions, a lot depends on solidarity from the international community.

Your father's regime was very friendly with the U.S. Do you feel the U.S. should play a greater role here?
The State Department canceled funding of a research center documenting human-rights abuses in Iran. This sort of thing does make a difference. People were chanting, "Obama, either you are with them or with us." They demand more than just a statement of principle.

Khoda Nameh

2010-02-14T23:02:00.001Z

22 Bahman - 11 February - National Day of Mourning

2010-02-13T10:25:00.005Z

22 Bahman (Iranian calendar) or 11 February (1979) is the date the terrorist Islamo-Marxists alliance took over government control in Iran and in the following months an Islamic Republic was established.

As this is the date the Iranian Government fell and the savage Islamists began their rule of summary executions and terror leads this day to be viewed as a day of mourning for Iranians across the world. Numerous anti-regime demonstrations took place across the world on 11 February.

In Iran there was an unprecedented security presence around "Shahyad Square" which is were the Islamic Republic holds its annual "22 Bahman rally" - despite the mass-organisation of the regime they were not able to BUS IN, BRIBE, FORCE and INTIMIDATE more than 50,000-100,000 people from ACROSS the country to participate in their ludicruos rally (footage on state tv was a mixture of photoshopping, select photo-angles to enlarge the crowd size, and footage from previous years!). In the sidestreets of Tehran anti-regime protests took place however where met with brutal force by the Islamic Republic's security forces who had stationed forces across the capital - two people are reported to have been killed and 100's have been arrested. Anti-regime protests also took place in several other cities in Iran such as Esfehan, Shiraz, Tabriz, Mashad, and Laar. Fellow blogger Potkin Azarmehr has more on the 22 Bahman rallies in Iran.

Here are several clips from anti-regime demonstrations held at Islamist occupied Iranian embassies across the world.

Berlin (Germany):

London (U.K.):

Stockholm (Sweden):

Sadeh - Jan 30, 2010 - Yazd

2010-02-13T09:49:00.004Z

This clip was taken on 30 January 2010 (Yazd, Iran) during celebrations for the ancient Iranian mid-winter festival of "sadeh" in which bonfires are lit symbolizing the defeat of darkness and cold and is also held in anticipation of the Iranian New Year in March ("sadeh" mean "hundreth" in persian and refers to 100 days remaining until the Iranian New Year). In the clip you can hear the crowd singing nationalistic solidarity songs and the Iranian national anthem which is frowned upon by the terrorist occupational Islamic Republic as is celebrating any pre-Islamic Iranian cultural festivals.

Message of support...

2010-01-26T23:41:00.003Z

A message of support to the Iranian people from a Portuguese boy:

Why did certain Iranian revolt against the late Shah of Iran...

2010-01-24T19:21:00.004Z

I just wanted to share this excerpt from a compatriot on the topic of "why some Iranians revolted against the late Shah of Iran". Certainly this doesn't discuss all the factors but it has touched upon a few very important factors as to why a large portion of those who took to the streets in 1979 participated in a national mass-suicide - jelousy, greed, political naivety and sheepish mentality!

"...if the University professors [the enlightened class - in persian: "roshanfekran"] all 'saw' Khomeinis image in the moon, its because we Iranians are a bunch of sheep, we follow whats 'in vogue' I have interviewed hundreds of so called 'educated' iranians and they all say that they went out and shouted ' margh bar Shah' ['death to the shah'] not becuase they were unemployed, hungry or destitute (ingredients for a revolution) but ONLY beacuse everyone else did it!!! and why did everyone else do it?? beacuse we iranians are born 'Hasood' [jelous] we hated the Shah because he had prestige, he spoke 3 languages, he had a beautiful wife and he had Grace and style and he loved being Iranian and loved Iran!! The sad part was that we all had and felt the same thing (except the wife maybe!!) but we still opted to go out and support a Goat in place of a graceful peacock!! and now all of us have reached 'goh khori' [persian expression literally meaning "eating your own shit"]! Our women are being sold to Afghans and Arabs as sex slaves, our economy in tatters, our prestige destroyed and as a result we are all refugees in far away countries calling ourselves 'Persians' rather than Iranians because of how much the term IRanian has turned deragotory thanks to our Ayatollahs! We all ran away and ass kissed everyone to get foreign passports (me included) when the Iranian passport was one of [a] few in the world that was accepted visa free almost globally! Thanks to who?- THE SHAH, whom all of us , even the so called 'educated' one hated so much!

So pls lets all go back and continue looking at the moon, hoping to see Khomeinis ass smiling in our face, thanking us for giving the Akhunds something they never had- Power, money and no accountability to anyone!!!...."

Clip - HIM Shahanshah Aryamehr

2010-01-22T23:25:00.001Z

Short clip on HIM Shahanshah Aryamehr: