Wednesday, June 28, 2006

In Memory of H.E. Prime Minister Shapour Bakthiar of Iran

UPDATE: Please see Dr Shapour Bakhtiar interview with an Iranian journalist by clicking HERE.

His Excellency the late Prime Minister of Iran, Dr Shapour Bakhtiar was brutally assasinated by agents of the Islamic Republic occupying Iran, at his home in Paris in August 1991. The chilling story of his betrayal by some members in his closest circle of supporters and the ultimate killing of this fine Iranian patriot can be further read upon amongst several different newspaper clips that this website, dedicated to the memory of the late Prime Minister, has put up for all to view. Dr Bakhtiar was 76 years old at the time of his cowardly, yet so Islamic, assasination.

An excerpt from one of the articles recounts the brutal assasination of Dr Shapour Bakhtiar:

one of the two men struck Bakhtiar with a paralyzing blow to the throat, possibly with a forearm chop, crushing the older man's larynx. He could neither cry for help nor breathe.

Then, with a butcher knife and bread knife retrieved from Bakhtiar's kitchen, they stabbed him 13 times in the neck and shoulders -- then cut his throat. They also cut his wrists and removed Bakhtiar's Rolex watch as "a trophy," police said, to prove they had accomplished their mission.

Bakhtiar was dead when his secretary returned from the terrace and was similarly slain. Calmly and efficiently, exhibiting uncommon discipline and professional skill, the assailants cleaned up the most visible signs of blood on their clothing. The knives were returned to the sink. The phone was taken off the hook.

A scanned interview by Newsweek with Dr Shapour Bakhtiar (July 30, 1984) can be viewed HERE.

Dr Shapour Bakthiars undying and patriotic soul lives on. It has been entrusted to the new generation of Iranians to pursue the path of our fallen soldiers and patriots who have given their lives to serve Iran and Iranians! Let their memories strengthen our resolve in uprooting the hell-sent Islamist occupation of our motherland! Let their efforts for a free Iran set a historical precedent for future generations never to allow such a tragic event as the 1979 Islamist takeover of Iran to ever occur again.

We salute our fallen heroes and take an oath to follow in their footsteps serving our motherland Iran.

The Islamic Republic occupying Iran is a terrorist regime and has to go in its entirety!


Sunday, June 25, 2006

Pallywood productions and its relevance to Iran in '79

Please take 15min and watch this VERY INFORMATIVE "CBS 60 Minutes" reportage on "Pallywood Productions":


What are your feelings after watching this? Do you feel betrayed by your media? You should be! And guess what! These same disgusting tactics used by these Arabs in Palestine where used in Iran in the 1979 islamist takeover of Iran! The PLO under Yasser Arafat had sent thousands of Arabs to Iran to foment unrest and train Iranian islamists in guerilla tactics!

Behold Pallywood tactics at work in Iran 1979:

For more information about involvement of the PLO and Yasser Arafat in the islamist takeover of Iran in 1979 please read: Yasser Arafat and the Islamic Republic of Iran or What Led to the Overthrow and the Betrayal of the Pahlavi's?

The PLO was but one foreign factor in the islamist takeover of Iran.


Allah, the Arab moon god

Good read on Allah, the Arab moon god that muslims worship.


Allah, the Moon God
The Archeology of The Middle East

The religion of Islam has as its focus of worship a deity by the name of "Allah." The Muslims claim that Allah in pre-Islamic times was the biblical God of the Patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre-Islamic times? The Muslim's claim of continuity is essential to their attempt to convert Jews and Christians for if "Allah" is part of the flow of divine revelation in Scripture, then it is the next step in biblical religion. Thus we should all become Muslims. But, on the other hand, if Allah was a pre-Islamic pagan deity, then its core claim is refuted. Religious claims often fall before the results of hard sciences such as archeology. We can endlessly speculate about the past or go and dig it up and see what the evidence reveals. This is the only way to find out the truth concerning the origins of Allah. As we shall see, the hard evidence demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.

Archaeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-god. As Prof. Potts pointed out, "Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites."

In ancient Syria and Canna, the Moon-god Sin was usually represented by the moon in its crescent phase. At times the full moon was placed inside the crescent moon to emphasize all the phases of the moon. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters. For example, Istar was a daughter of Sin. Sacrifices to the Moon-god are described in the Pas Shamra texts. In the Ugaritic texts, the Moon-god was sometimes called Kusuh. In Persia, as well as in Egypt, the Moon-god is depicted on wall murals and on the heads of statues. He was the Judge of men and gods. The Old Testament constantly rebuked the worship of the Moon-god (see: Deut. 4:19;17:3; II Kngs. 21:3,5; 23:5; Jer. 8:2; 19:13; Zeph. 1:5, etc.) When Israel fell into idolatry, it was usually the cult of the Moon-god. As a matter of fact, everywhere in the ancient world, the symbol of the crescent moon can be found on seal impressions, steles, pottery, amulets, clay tablets, cylinders, weights, earrings, necklaces, wall murals, etc. In Tell-el-Obeid, a copper calf was found with a crescent moon on its forehead. An idol with the body of a bull and the head of man has a crescent moon inlaid on its forehead with shells. In Ur, the Stela of Ur-Nammu has the crescent symbol placed at the top of the register of gods because the Moon-god was the head of the gods. Even bread was baked in the form of a crescent as an act of devotion to the Moon-god. The Ur of the Chaldees was so devoted to the Moon-god that it was sometimes called Nannar in tablets from that time period.

A temple of the Moon-god has been excavated in Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley. He dug up many examples of moon worship in Ur and these are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Harran was likewise noted for its devotion to the Moon-god. In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazer in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest . The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god. Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god. What about Arabia? As pointed out by Prof. Coon, "Muslims are notoriously loath to preserve traditions of earlier paganism and like to garble what pre-Islamic history they permit to survive in anachronistic terms."

During the nineteenth century, Amaud, Halevy and Glaser went to Southern Arabia and dug up thousands of Sabean, Minaean, and Qatabanian inscriptions which were subsequently translated. In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Coon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia. During the 1950's, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower and others excavated sites at Qataban, Timna, and Marib (the ancient capital of Sheba). Thousands of inscriptions from walls and rocks in Northern Arabia have also been collected. Reliefs and votive bowls used in worship of the "daughters of Allah" have also been discovered. The three daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat are sometimes depicted together with Allah the Moon-god represented by a crescent moon above them. The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god.

In Old Testament times, Nabonidus (555-539 BC), the last king of Babylon, built Tayma, Arabia as a center of Moon-god worship. Segall stated, "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations." Many scholars have also noticed that the Moon-god's name "Sin" is a part of such Arabic words as "Sinai," the "wilderness of Sin," etc. When the popularity of the Moon-god waned elsewhere, the Arabs remained true to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god.

This is what made it the most sacred site of Arabian paganism. In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.

The evidence reveals that the temple of the Moon-god was active even in the Christian era. Evidence gathered from both North and South Arabia demonstrate that Moon-god worship was clearly active even in Muhammad's day and was still the dominant cult. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al-ilah, i.e. "the deity," meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. As Coon pointed out, "The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God." The Moon-god was called al-ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad's father and uncle had Allah as part of their names.

The fact that they were given such names by their pagan parents proves that Allah was the title for the Moon-god even in Muhammad's day. Prof. Coon goes on to say, "Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah, became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being."

This fact answers the questions, "Why is Allah never defined in the Qur'an? Why did Muhammad assume that the pagan Arabs already knew who Allah was?" Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god.

In effect he said, "Look, you already believe that the Moon-god Allah is the greatest of all gods. All I want you to do is to accept that the idea that he is the only god. I am not taking away the Allah you already worship. I am only taking away his wife and his daughters and all the other gods." This is seen from the fact that the first point of the Muslim creed is not, "Allah is great" but "Allah is the greatest," i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the "greatest" except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This "Allah" was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence. Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.

Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat. Dr. Newman concludes his study of the early Christian-Muslim debates by stating, "Islam proved itself to be...a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry." Islamic scholar Caesar Farah concluded "There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews." The Arabs worshipped the Moon-god as a supreme deity. But this was not biblical monotheism. While the Moon-god was greater than all other gods and goddesses, this was still a polytheistic pantheon of deities. Now that we have the actual idols of the Moon-god, it is no longer possible to avoid the fact that Allah was a pagan god in pre-Islamic times. Is it any wonder then that the symbol of Islam is the crescent moon? That a crescent moon sits on top of their mosques and minarets? That a crescent moon is found on the flags of Islamic nations? That the Muslims fast during the month which begins and ends with the appearance of the crescent moon in the sky?


The pagan Arabs worshipped the Moon-god Allah by praying toward Mecca several times a day; making a pilgrimage to Mecca; running around the temple of the Moon-god called the Kabah; kissing the black stone; killing an animal in sacrifice to the Moon-god; throwing stones at the devil; fasting for the month which begins and ends with the crescent moon; giving alms to the poor, etc.
The Muslim's claim that Allah is the God of the Bible and that Islam arose from the religion of the prophets and apostles is refuted by solid, overwhelming archeological evidence. Islam is nothing more than a revival of the ancient Moon-god cult. It has taken the symbols, the rites, the ceremonies, and even the name of its god from the ancient pagan religion of the Moon-god. As such, it is sheer idolatry and must be rejected by all those who follow the Torah and Gospel.


Mr Richard Perle supports the Iranian people in their struggle for freedom!

Excellent article in support of the freedom fighting Iranian Nation by the former chairman of the Defense Policy Board and assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration, Mr Richard Pearle.

In his article published in the Washington Post Mr Perle states:

No U.S. administration since 1979 has had a serious political strategy regarding Iran. That has been especially evident in the past decade, when the bloom was off the rose of the Islamic revolution, the Revolutionary Guard joined the baby boomers in middle age and the Islamic republic sank into political, economic and social decline. Opponents of the regime have been calling for a referendum on whether to continue as an Islamic theocracy or join the world of modern, secular democracies. They are sure of the outcome.

The failure of successive U.S. administrations, including this one, to give moral and political support to the regime's opponents is a tragedy.Iran is a country of young people, most of whom wish to live in freedom and admire the liberal democracies that Ahmadinejad loathes and fears. The brave men and women among them need, want and deserve our support. They reject the jaundiced view of tired bureaucrats who believe that their cause is hopeless or that U.S. support will worsen their situation.

In his second inaugural address, Bush said, "All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: The United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for liberty, we will stand with you."

Iranians were heartened by those words, much as the dissidents of the Soviet Union were heartened by Reagan's "evil empire" speech in 1983. A few days ago, I spoke with Amir Abbas Fakhravar, an Iranian dissident student leader who escaped first from Tehran's notorious Evin prison, then, after months in hiding, from Iran.

Fakhravar heard this president's words, and he took them to heart. But now, as he pleads for help for his fellow citizens, he is apprehensive. He wonders whether the administration's new approach to the mullahs will silence the president's voice, whether the proponents of accommodation with Tehran will regard the struggle for freedom in Iran as an obstacle to their new diplomacy.

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) tried two weeks ago to pass the Iran Freedom Support Act, which would have increased the administration's too-little-too-late support for democracy and human rights in Iran. But the State Department opposed it, arguing that it "runs counter to our efforts . . . it would limit our diplomatic flexibility."

I hope it is not too late for Fakhravar and his friends. I know it is not too late for us, not too late to give substance to Bush's words, not too late to redeem our honor.

I'd like to thank Mr Perle for his heartwarming words and his support of the Iranian people. I hope that these words affect U.S. policy makers and that a concrete support is given to the Iranian people after 27 years of the U.S. abandoning them!

To read the full article please visit:


Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Sunday, June 18, 2006

"Our best bet" - Tea with former British Ambassador to Iran

I've got quite a few interesting articles that i'd like to share with those who read this blog. They mostly relate to the Pahlavi Era and should provide everyone with a better picture of what Iran was and what is has become, or should really say been reduced to, in the span of 27 years!


Our best bet
Tea with former British ambassador to Iran

By Cyrus Kadivar
July 13, 2000
The Iranian

It was almost three o'clock in the afternoon on a cloudy June day when Sir Denis Wright greeted me outside Haddenham Station in Buckinghamshire. "I'm afraid I've grown older since we last met," he quipped, shaking my hand. The former British ambassador to Imperial Iran was a wiry man with a slightly hawkish face and attentive blue eyes. At eighty-nine he appeared a fit and active man immersed in academic research. Wearing a light jumper, khaki trousers and brown shoes, he seemed more like an Oxford professor than a former diplomat. There was nothing pretentious about him and he clearly enjoyed meeting with Iranians or anybody interested in Iran.

As we drove through the scenic village in his rusty car, Sir Denis chatted freely about the bad weather and his recent trip to Paris where he had met a few of his Persian friends. We circled a duck pond and halted in front of a large thatched cottage with a swinging fence.

Entering the ambassador's country home through a low door we walked past a splendid portrait of a Qajar princess in a red dress. "Bought this recently at an auction," Sir Denis boasted as we headed upstairs. In the hallways lay a number of exquisite tribal rugs from Iran and Turkey. Left of the bedrooms was a cosy study where Sir Denis did most of his writing.

Under a small window overlooking the garden was a solid, oak desk. To its left, hanging on the beige wall was a picture of Sir Denis Wright, arrayed in full diplomatic uniform and ceremonial sword, being presented to Mohammed Reza Shah, at the great formal Salaam ceremony. Directly opposite was a row of ancient blue bottles purchased many years ago at Tehran's grand bazaar. They stood like sentinels on top of a white bookshelf stuffed with a few hundred rare and modern titles on Persia and Iran.

"When I'm gone," Sir Denis sighed, "all these books, photographs and my private journals will be donated to the Bodleian Library in Oxford." I watched him as he shuffled through a pile of folders. "One of the great disadvantages of being retired," he continued, "is that you no longer have a secretary to look after your correspondence." He stopped to pick up a blue paper and handed it to me. It was a meticulous study on British cemeteries in Iran. He watched me carefully as I recognised the English tombstones at he English and Armenian Church in Shiraz. "I'm afraid it is my last copy," he said regretfully. "But you may have a look at it later."

In the corner of the half-lit study was a lamp. It had been switched on deliberately to shed light on a great, vintage map of the Middle East. Sir Denis invited me to sit down in one of the two small chairs as he settled down in a rocking chair. "I'm afraid you will have to speak up," he said pointing at his hearing aide. "Now, Cyrus, tell me, do Iranians still believe that we British caused the Shah's downfall?" he asked.

"Well, there are still many who think that," I said. Sir Denis raised his eyebrows in disbelief. As the author of two excellent books "The Persians Amongst the English" and "The English Amongst the Persians", he was well aware of the complex history of our two countries and the Iranian ability to see a sinister British hand behind the scene.

"The Shah never quite trusted me," said Sir Denis. He sounded genuinely hurt. "His Majesty and I had developed a working relationship over the years. Each time something displeased him he would summon me to the palace and lecture me. Of course, I always counterattacked with my own arguments. Sometimes he would straighten up in his chair and in a condescending voice remind me that it was the English who deposed his father, Reza Shah."

Prior to being posted to Iran as a charge d'affaires in Tehran following the 1953 coup that overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh's government, Sir Denis had studied the secret files on the Shah. "Many reports described him as weak and vacillating," he revealed. "But when I met him it was not my impression. With the Tudeh and the National Front driven underground, the young Shah appeared confident and in charge, mostly thanks to General Zahedi. His marriage to Empress Farah and the birth of an heir further strengthened his shaky throne."

In 1963, shortly after Ayatollah Khomeini's failed uprising against the Shah's reform plan known as the "White Revolution", Sir Denis Wright was appointed ambassador, a post he would keep for eight years. "During this rather peaceful interlude," Sir Denis continued, "the Shah grew more sure of himself. With Alam's shrewd courage and support, the mollas and communists were silenced. This stability allowed Iran to emerge as a strong and important country in a volatile region. Shortly before the end of my term and just before the Persepolis event, I fired a memo to London saying that I felt the Shah was becoming too big for his boots."

In my talks with Sir Denis I sensed that his relationship with the Shah had always been a difficult and strained one. "I was never one to be impressed by royalty, British or Persian, for that matter. In my audiences with the Shah I always spoke bluntly and he listened most of the time. In the early days as ambassador the Shah did not strike me as a very warm person. I found him rather cold, shrewd and a totally unsympathetic character. But later after he became a family man he was more approachable. I believe Empress Farah was a positive influence on him. When I needed to see the Shah urgently it was Alam who arranged the royal audiences. We were very careful not to appear to be working against the Shah who was often upset by the press coverage he received in Britain and critical of the BBC."

Sir Denis and Alam were good friends. "We used to take a few horses from the Royal stables and ride into the hills around Farahabad," he recalled nostalgically. "During these moments we used to discuss the Shah or other important matters. The Shah, of course, was aware of these meetings. Alam always reported his talks to his king. Despite his absolute loyalty to the Shah, Alam soon grew disenchanted with his master. Toward the end of his life, Alam, as his published diaries reveals, had become fearful of the future. I distinctly recall a conversation we had in this very house that the Shah was in trouble and unwilling to listen to anyone."

In 1977, after Alam's death, Sir Denis went to Iran to see matters for himself. "I was appalled by the rampant tales of corruption, the growing opposition to the isolated Shah," he said. "But I never once believed the Shah would be deposed by the mollas."

Ironically, when the gravely ill Shah went into exile in 1979, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher dispatched Sir Denis to the Bahamas on a secret mission. The former ambassador was shocked by the physical deterioration suffered by the once-powerful "King of Kings". Nevertheless he went ahead with the unpleasant task of passing a message that the deposed Shah would not be allowed to settle in Britain. As an Iranian I could not help feeling bitter at the treatment of a loyal ally by a country such as Britain. On one occasion I showed Sir Denis a collection of pictures of the Shah in his days of glory and exile. When he came to the one of the dying monarch on his deathbed in Cairo, Sir Denis looked at me with cold, impassive eyes.

In turn he retrieved a box from under a table. It was filled with his "souvenirs" of his days in Iran. There were many photos with his personal friends: Alam, Eqbal, Entezam, Ardeshir Zahedi and Hoveyda. I stared at the grand pictures of the Shah and Shahbanou at various court and embassy functions. There were pictures of Queen Elizabeth, Ethiopia's Haile Sellassie, Russia's Padgorny, France's De Gaulle and others. Every picture revealed an attention to protocol, uniforms, medals and bore testimony to Iran's prestige in the community of nations.

"I must say that my interest in Iran lay in her history and traditions than the pomp and ceremony," Sir Denis explained to me. He spoke memorably about the Tehran bazaar and his regular visits to Rey where he often met the curator of Reza Shah's Mausoleum. "He was a Sufi," Sir Denis said pointing to the picture of an old, balding man with a bush-moustache. "We used to discuss Persian philosophy, Hafez and Omar Khayyam."

When I told Sir Denis that the tomb had been demolished by the revolutionaries he was appalled. "Barbaric," he muttered. Then as if broken-hearted by Iran's tarnished image he said, "I used to tell the Foreign Office that the Shah was our best bet. I see no reason why we should have conspired against our own interests. When I was ambassador all my efforts were centred in keeping the Shah happy. His fall was due to hubris."

We had spoken for almost an hour. After autographing one of his books for me we headed downstairs for afternoon tea. In the living room, Lady Wright offered me a biscuit as she recalled the embassy tea parties in Tehran and the many beautiful cities she had visited. "Ah, Isfahan and Shiraz," she sighed. "Have you been back?" she asked. "Not since leaving twenty-one years ago," I replied, my voice soft with emotion. "I am told everything has changed," she said. "So sad all of this. We really enjoyed our time in Iran. I would never want to go back in case it disappointed me."

I watched the English lady carefully as she poured me a lovely cup of tea from a silver pot. Despite her white hair and frail body and hands there was a gentle soul swimming in her kind eyes. The British, I concluded, are romantics at heart but this remains a deep, hidden secret buried in their reserved appearances and polite conversation over tea.

From the comfort of his flowery sofa, surrounded by more books and wonderful furniture, Sir Denis recalled an evening in Shiraz. "My wife and I had been invited to stay at the splendid Bagh-e Eram palace where Alam was entertaining Princess Alexandra. It was an unforgettable night. There was a big moon shining above the tall, giant cypress tree. Qashqaie dancers swayed to the instruments of local musicians. It was all, so enchanting!"

Leaving the cottage, Lady Wright waved at me. "We don't quite have the weather of Shiraz here," she said, smiling. "But do pay us a visit again."

I left Haddenham on the six o'clock train to London with the promise to visit the Wrights later in the autumn for an in-depth interview on their lives in Iran. But as the train pulled away the parting words of Sir Denis rang in my head. "We English don't know the real meaning of exile," he had said. He said he felt sorry for his Persian friends who were unable to return to their country. "As for us British who were there, who loved your country, well, our numbers are shrinking rather rapidly."

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Anjomane Padeshahi Iran - Protest Action Paris

Coverage in french:

Yesterday supporters of Anjomane Padeshahi Iran (Kingdom Assemby of Iran) staged a protest in Paris. SarbazeKuchak has an entry on this that I would like to share:

Symbolic Iranian Flag atop Arc de Triomphe in the French Capital

On Tuesday June 13, 2006, in the latest phase of the continuing operation Tondar (“Thunder”) One, supporters of the anti-Islamist monarchist group Kingdom Assembly of Iran (Anjomane Padeshahi) ascended to the top of Paris’ 165 feet tall Arc de Triomphe monument with the intention of informing the world of their cause and the plight of the people of Iran.

In this, the latest act by the Iranian group, the message was intended for the governments of Russia and China. On a banner unfurled from the top of the monument these states were warned to stop supporting the Islamic Republic; that Iran, rich in natural resources, has no need for the worthless imports from Russia and China; that Iranians do not want a second Chernobyl on their soil.

Next to the banner, the two Iranian activists, named “Mehr’Azin” and “Babak”, had also placed the historical and symbolic flag called Derafshe Kaviani, the last Iranian flag before the 6th century Moslem invasion. This was perhaps the first time that this flag has been seen at such heights in the French capital.

The protest ended about 45 minutes ago without any arrests. The French police did not meet the participants in an aggressive or violent manner.

In the next few days a 10-hour program about this protest will be broadcasted by Anjomane Padeshahi’s Your TV satellite channel.

SarbazeKuchak has also made a recording of Dr Fooladvand, the spokesperson of Anjomane Padeshahi Iran, interview with Mr Azeri of KRSI (Radio Sedaye Iran) in which telephone is established with the two demonstrators. You can LISTEN TO THE CLIP HERE.

My heartfelt thanks goes out to these patriots. God bless them and more power to them in achieving the goal we are all fighting for - FREEING IRAN!


Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Iranian Women's demonstrations brutally attacked by Islamic Republic's thugs!

UPDATE II: Reporters Without Borders has an accurate report on Tuesday's demonstration in Iran which was brutally suppressed by the Islamic Republic occupying Iran.

UPDATE: Tens of reports from the Iranian capital state of the brutality of the Islamic Republic's thugs against the Iranian women who had gathered to protest for their rights as human beings to be recognized! The men who had showed up to support the women were attacked by the male security forces whilst Iranian women were attacked with pepper spray, tear gas, clubs, batons, and knives in the hands of the female Islamists thugs of the Islamic Republic.

Many women above the age of 60 had gathered as well to show their solidarity with this movement and there was no mercy shown upon them. A widely recognized Iranian poet Simin Behbahani, who is in her 70's and is nearly blind, was seen to be beaten and arrested by the Islamic thugs. It's note worthy to say that this Iranian lady had participated in another women's demonstration not long ago and was beaten with an electric baton and kicked at by the security forces of the ruthless Islamic Republic!

Audio report from the demonstration (in persian):

Audio Report (the lady who participated in the demonstration says that at the very LEAST 1000 people attended the rally, but that it was probably between 1000-2000 people)

For further information please visit these links:

Tehran Women's Demo Violently Broken Up By Police - ZNET

Islamic Regime's thugs attack and assault attendants of the peaceful Women's March

Demonstration by women in Iran capital – photo report

Demonstration by women in Iran capital – photo report 2

Women's Rights Activists Beaten in Tehran - The Associated Press ; It is noteworthy to note here that the AP report has shamelessly downplayed the number of protestors that were actually on spot which organizers have said were somewhere over the 1000 mark and which other sources have claimed was as high as 5000! AP is once again seen as appeasing the Islamic Republic. AP also claims the group that organized this protest was "Labor and Communist Party"!!! This is a straight out LIE as all Iranians know it was the "Tehran Organization of the Defense of Women's Rights in Iran"! AP clearly is either being dictated what to write by the Islamic Republic in return for having an office in Tehran or they are simply such a shameless organization that they are willing to do everything from the truth in Iran from reaching the outside world. The AP article reports 1 injury! When callers from Iran say that many women were not able to get off the ground because they had been beaten so savagely! Also the AP report states that the Islamic Republic's security forces "dispersed" the demonstration 1 hour after it began! This is far from the truth as organizers have clearly stated that the security forces where waiting for them in full force at the designated site for the demonstration and that it was never allowed to take place! And please take note of the last parapgraph in the AP report!!! How SHAMELESS is that!? Trying to whitewas these savage crimes by saying "at least Iranian women have more right than their Saudi counterparts"! BASTARDS report the truth!

Iran police beat women activists - BBC ; The BBC has assumed the role of the Islamic Republic Broadcasting Corporation! They report that only 20 people showed up!!! This make my blood boil!!!! This is the very same BBC who gave a podium for the terrorist of the century Ayatollah Khomeini to launch his Islamic takeover of Iran!!! Believe me when I say that under every mullah's beard it says "Made in the U.K."!!! BASTARDS report the truth!

Pictures from the Women's Demonstration in Iran (Monday 12 June):


Iran Press News



"Protest of women against mysoginist rule" brutally attacked in Iran
June 12th Haft'eh Teer Square
Organization of the Defense of Women's Rights in Iran

Hundreds of women and men had gathered today at Haft'eh Teer Square in Tehran to protest against the Islamic Republic's anti-human policies.

The protest was violently supressed by the Islamic Republic's thugs wielding clubs and knives, and also included FEMALE thugs wielding batons who where seen savagely beating Iranian women.

This report was given live on KRSI by a brave Iranian woman who attended the rally and was not afraid of giving out her name.

Where is the MSM??? Are they mourning the death of Al-Zarqawi? Giving podiums to those who want to criticize the U.S. for its treatment of terrorists in Guantanamo!? Where is the MSM?! Hundreds of Iranian women came out to demand their rights in Iran today and they where brutally suppressed by the Islamic Republic's security forces! Where is the outrage!? Where are the condemnations!? Where is HUMANITY!?

Many more pics:

Source of all these pictures is:

Monday, June 12, 2006

Pan-Turanism (Intro)

I had earlier indicated that I would dedicate more entries on Pan-Turanism and its evil aims towards Iranian Azerbaijan.

Pan-Turanists tried to hijack the recent unrest in Tabriz and elsewhere in Azerbaijan (I saw on a few photos that a couple of infiltrators where making the infamous grey wolf sign) but they were pitifully unsuccessful to hijack this truly Azeri movement for freedom and democracy. Kurds, Azeri's, Persians, Balooch.....ALL IRANIANS suffer under this foul and rotten Islamic Republic that has occupied our motherland for 27 years now. We all seek the overthrow of this Anti-Iranian Regime.

Moving on, i've challenged a Pan-Turanist who has brought his Pan-Turanian/Pan-Turkist agenda onto my blog, as well as Azarmehr's, that Iranian Azeri's will stand ready at Azerbaijan's borders to "welcome" their "Turkish" brothers =) What a sight it will be to see the "pack of grey wolves" come to "unite with their brethren"; Pan-Turanists will see how receptive our Azeri Lions will be to such a hideous group as theirs stepping foot on Iranian soil with the aim to seperate it from its motherland.

I will post parts of an extensive research by Dr Kaveh Farrokh on Pan-Turanism and its movement and hope that my readers take note of it and read it since it will answer many questions that might exist.

What is pan-Turanianism? Simply put, pan-Turanianism is an ideology that aims at creating a Turkic super state stretching from the Balkans in Europe, eastwards across Turkey, Iran (Persia), the Caucasus, Central Asia up to and including northwest China.

The logic behind this is that all people who speak Turkish must be incorporated into this Turkic super state (see also Atabaki, 2001, Landau, 1995, Zenkovsky 1960 and Lewis, 1962 in References).

Hungarian pan-Turanianist activists go even further. They have proposed that the entire Eurasian landmass between Hungary and Norway in Europe to Japan and Korea was once an empire known as “Turania”. Apart from non-scholastic websites, no linguistic, anthropological and archeological evidence for such an empire exists. Pan-Turanian racialists and historians would beg to differ. They are impervious to logical explanations even in the face of hard evidence. Such is the case of all who are infected with the virulent virus of racialism (see C. Richards, 1997 and J. Searle-White, 2001 in References).

Pan-Turanianism, like Nazi “racial sciences”, or Stalinist “History”, has failed to convince the majority of western scholarship to its cause, and has been as equally unsuccessful in Eastern Europe, with the exception of Hungary and the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Much of pan-Turanian ideology is similar to pan-Germanic racism and Nazism; philosophies from which the Grey Wolves and pan-Turanian ideologues have drawn much of their inspiration (see Parts III & IV). Like the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s, the pan Turanian Turks envision their Turan super-state (like the Nazi “Germania”), in terms of “lebensraum” (German for “living space”) for all Turkic speaking peoples. The late president of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Abulfazl Elchibey (1938-2000), a Grey Wolf sympathizer himself (see Part II, item 4), is reputed to have stated that “…the road to Turkistan runs through Tabriz”. Tabriz has been an integral part of Persia for thousands of years.

Again you can confirm my statement that Pan-Turanists believe whoever speaks Turkish must be RACIALLY Turkish! So in the minds of Pan-Turanists a black person from Nigeria, born and raised in Turkey, would be classified as RACIALLY Turkish since he would speak Turkish =) Good logic!

I don't know what kind of a twisted RACIALIST view this is but it sure doesn't make any sense at all. If you want to create a "Turkish Supernation" at least try to create it with you own blood for God's sake and don't involve Iranian peoples' in it - because as soon as you do that you know you are in for trouble. Do you have an inferiority complex to come and claim our blood as your own? The same way you have tried to claim Iranian National Heroes as your own in the past (Rumi and Papak Khorramdin come to my mind).

Continuing with this absurd and completely manufactured lie of "Pan-Turanism":

As with every racialist movement, pan-Turanianism has invented its own version of historical narcissism[i]. However, in this particular case, one may say that pan-Turanianism has produced a “history” that is not only incredible, but dare I say, entertaining. Pan-Turanian scholars have not only re-narrated a whole new version of world history, but have set new frontiers in the disciplines of linguistics, archaeology, anthropology and logic, one on par with the “Aryan Physics” of the Nazi regime of Germany (1920s-1940s).

Below are descriptions of a mere handful of these beliefs. As you read the list below, you will undoubtedly ask: how are these conclusions arrived at, and what kinds of minds manufacture such thoughts?

(a) The Inventors of culture, language and civilization were Turks.

Pan-Turanian ideologues have placed a very high priority on re-inventing past history. Much of this is based on the founder of the Turkish Republic, Mustafa Kemal Attaturk (1881-1938) (see photo below), who stated that: “Writing history is as important as making history[ii] (see also H. Poulton and P. Robins in references).

Attaturk was right in that "writing history is as important as making history" but do you have to resort to fabricating history? I'm referring to the Pan-Turanians? Are you in such low self-esteem that you have to manufacture and fabricate false history and claim other peoples as your own and as if that is not enough other peoples' achievements as your own as well! How ridiculous. The funny part is the part about how you, Pan-Turanists, are on a mission to depict Turks as heirs of "nearly all civilization"!!! I mean how far are you willing to go with your ludricous and absurd allegations? You will NEVER have any success in your mission if your basis and foundation is built upon lies and fabricated facts! If you want to unite your Turkish countrymen by all means do so based on established facts, however not on fabricated history.

Now I found this part written by Dr Farrokh regarding the statements of a Pan-Turanist Professor's statement to be interesting:

“Indeed, I have proven that the culture of 6300 B.C. Anatolia as discovered at Çatal Hüyük by archaeologist James Mellaart is Turkish, and since this almost 8300 years old culture was not created in a day, we can easily talk of a ‘Ten Thousand Years of the Turks’ ...”

With a single stroke of his pen (or keyboard), the Professor has traced the entire civilization of humanity to the Turks and eliminated the Greek, Hittite, Armenian, Phrygian, and Iranian (Mede, Persian, etc.) legacies in Anatolia. As you read through the Professor’s book and his “dictionaries”, his cognition and especially his logical processes become somewhat clearer. But what Dr. Diker and other pan-Turanian activists are doing is nothing new; Soviet “historians” had engaged in this type of “academia” since the 1920s.

Pan-Turanian activists have learned a great deal from Soviet scholarship (see Part II, items 1c and 1e). If history fails to support your ideology, then all you need to do is to re-write that history to fit your beliefs. Logic and objectivity are never the hallmarks of any racist movement seeking to differentiate and divide nations and peoples along ethnic, linguistic, or religious lines.

Pan-Turanian activists however have failed (and continue to fail) in the face of northwest European, Greek, Italian, Indian, Iranian, Chinese, and Arabian historical archives, linguistics, archaeology, anthropology, not to mention genetic studies. Not a shred of “proof” actually exists for the truly fantastic narratives stated by pan-Turanian writers such as Silahi Diker.

Again confirming my statements about Pan-Turanists fabricated history in their favour. It wouldn't surprise me if Pan-Turanists would come out and claim that the world is flat and genuinely believe that people will believe it =)

Dr Farrokh goes on regarding this tremendous effort to sell fabricated history and states:

There is a tremendous effort in place to push these ideas into mainstream western academia and media outlets (see Part VI, items 4 & 7). Grey Wolf activists (see item below and Part III) have been introducing these false ideas into the Republic of Azerbaijan and are trying to affect Iran’s Turcophone (e.g. Azerbaijani) populations as well (see Parts II-IV).

My next entry regarding the Pan-Turanist movement will focus on these "Grey Wolves" and in later entries will address the issue of Pan-Turanists Aims for Iranian Azerbaijan. For now I suggest that you have a look at Dr Farrokh's comprehensive study - CLICK HERE to read the entire study.

Friday, June 09, 2006


UPDATE: You can view a recent interview with Amir-Abbas Fakhravar on VOA (Voice of America) by following this link (realplayer) or this link (media player)


Are you looking for a leader(s)?
Are you looking for new inspiration?
Are you looking for new blood to lead Iran into the future?

Amir-Abbas Fakhravar, a young Iranian freedom fighter has dedicated his life for the freedom of Iran! He has been able to escape the Islamic Republic and is in Washington seeking SUPPORT! Will you support him? Are you going to sit idle and let these LIONS face the enemy on their own? While you BLOW yet another OPPORTUNITY?!

There are people WILLING to lead. They HAVE the CAPABILITY to lead. They are the bright future that COULD await us. What will you do with this future? Will you embrace it? Sit idle and do nothing?! What will you do!? What are you willing to do for your country? What are you willing to do so that future generations don't have to grow up in an Islamic hell-hole like the Islamic Republic!? Are you READY to perform your patriotic duty to your motherland? Amir-Abbas Fakhravar and many other Iranian students are READY, but they need SUPPORT. Are YOU ready!?

The decisions you make today will shape the future of tomorrow!


Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Update and a Challenge

It's been bothering me (looking at my "clustermap" of country-specific visits) that nobody in Russia has visited my blog, so now i'm on a mission to get at least one visit from Russia! Russia the large Imperial Power, the vast Communist Empire, that has caused Iran so much harm and pain - everything from taking our land (Qajar's are to blame for that too!) and planting the seeds of their hideous communist ideology during the Pahlavi Era; the very same Russia that is today assisting the mad mullah's in acquiring nuclear weapons and assisting the mullah's in their continued oppression and torture of the Iranian people.
Any help in achieving this mission is greatly appreciated! I want to see dots all over Moscow on the clustermap so that I know people there KNOW that WE KNOW.

I also plan to get at least one visit from the below countries:

North Korea (partner in crime of the IRI)
Venezuela (partner in crime of the IRI)
Afghanistan (to see if they have internet connection over there lol)

Let it begin!!!

P.S. There might not be too much activity on the blog these next few days but i'm hoping to be able to pay more attention to the blog from Sunday onwards.

Saturday, June 03, 2006

Reza Pahlavi Royal Democrat

Crown-Prince Reza Pahlavi's interview with the Wall Street Journal. The main focus of it being the recent unrest and how the international community needs to STOP supporting the barbaic Islamic Republic and START supporting and empowering the Iranian people. War will not solve the problem it will rather make it worse, the solution is empowering the people according to the Crown-Prince of Iran.

UPDATE: Here is I would say an even more informative interview by the Izvestia newspaper (believe it's Russian):

Reza Pahalavi: "No War Is Needed - We Will Topple This Regime Ourselves"

Below is the Wall Street Journal interview:

Reza Pahlavi Royal Democrat

June 03, 2006
The Wall Street Journal
NAncy Dewolf Smith

It's been an agonizing week for Iranian patriots. On Monday, Washington's ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton, suggested that if Iran's ruling clerics abandon efforts to make nuclear weapons, they can remain in power. Thursday brought another jolt, when U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the U.S. would join direct negotiations with Tehran if Iran verifiably halt its weapons program.

In one fell swoop, it seems, the U.S. not only committed itself to a course that is certain to fail. It blundered into the one strategy guaranteed to strengthen the revolutionary regime while simultaneously undercutting the only force capable of stopping it: the Iranian people themselves.

At least, that's what I thought Reza Pahlavi would say when I telephoned Thursday for a comment on Secretary Rice's statement, following up on a long conversation we had in person last week. But Mr. Pahlavi, perhaps drawing on diplomatic skills he's honed in the quarter-century since his father, the shah of Iran, was deposed in 1979, gracefully called it "overall . . . a good move by Washington." The reason? "It will once and for all force Tehran's hand," and show that "the clerical regime is irreversibly committed to its dual-use enrichment program; that it will seek to stall for time, by following a pattern of deceit and duplicity; that at the end, it will prove its untrustworthiness and incapacity to become a reliable partner in diplomacy."

But then Mr. Pahlavi brought up the alternative strategy which Iranians, at home and abroad, have been urging deaf Western policy makers to adopt for years now: "That can only be internal pressure on the regime . . . support for proponents of democracy and human rights in Iran. There is no other answer."

* * *
Mr. Pahlavi should know, and not only because he is the son of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who for a time made Iran the linchpin of Middle Eastern stability and set his country on a course toward modernity and prosperity. The famous name helps, but so, for instance, does the Internet. From his home in a Washington suburb where I visited him last week, Mr. Pahlavi is in constant contact with people all over his homeland, including curious students who turn to him as a link with a more liberal past and also to exchange thoughts about a democratic future.

In short, Mr. Pahlavi easily grasps what the rest of the international community refuses to understand or to acknowledge.

"There is no incentive that we can give the Islamic Republic to stand down," he told me over Memorial Day weekend. "They need to do what they're doing, first and foremost because this is a totalitarian system. It has to keep the mood on the streets in its favor by continuing this process. If they are using the slogan of enrichment as a tool to keep these people mobilized, the minute they concede, they will lose their entire praetorian guard. Therefore there's no way that they are going to concede on that point."

The threat of sanctions or the promise of aid won't budge the regime either, he says. "There is no economic incentive that you can throw at them, because you are not dealing with a conventional state, in the sense that it is ultimately accountable and responsible and cares about the citizens living in that boundary. It's not the welfare of the people that matters to them. They can send $100 million to Hamas in Palestine when people are starving on the streets of Iran. They could care less about their economic status, so long as they can fuel their own war machine.

"You cannot even offer them a security guarantee, they don't care. For them, war is a gift from God. [President] Ahmadinejad is talking about Armageddon. He's talking about paving the way for the reemergence of the 12th imam, which is coming back to the planet to bring back stability and peace after major cataclysm. They really believe that."

Until that happens, the prospect of negotiations with the U.S. is a little godsend for the regime, Mr. Pahlavi explains. Iran's rulers can say, "Look at us! We're standing against the Great Satan . . . and guess what? We have brought them to their knees, we have brought them to the table."

As for Tehran's end game, that's simple: "Ultimately, what is the grand prize for them? They would like to achieve something the Soviets never could -- the control of the Middle East. The economic lifeline of the Western world. By encircling the Persian Gulf, by institutionalizing themselves, with their proxies operating everywhere, and in a fait accompli-type scenario, force the world to reckon with them. Naturally, if they ultimately get the bomb, their deterrent will be even more dangerous."

Mr. Pahlavi, who is 45, has seen danger in his own life. He was at school in the United States when his parents left Iran, but joined them in exile and, after his father died in Egypt in 1980, became a target himself of the new regime's vilification campaign. Today, although he does not advertise his address, he doesn't surround himself with bodyguards. Inside his airy and attractive house in Maryland, pictures on a side table of his regally attired father and mother are the only obvious signs of his unique heritage.

Mr. Pahlavi is so focused on the future of Iran that he prefers not to spend time on the past. Even so, when I ask what might be different today if the Iranian revolution had never taken place, he points to a chain of events that seem even worse with hindsight than they did at the time: "The Russians probably would not have invaded Afghanistan the way they did, and Saddam Hussein would not have attacked Iran. . . . From Sudan to everywhere else you can think of, there have been acts of terrorism, attacks on apartments in Khobar, the blowing up of Marine barracks in Beirut. It's been all over the place. If you look at the world the way it was before this regime took over, we didn't have any of these problems."

And yet a solution to all of this is percolating up today, Mr. Pahlavi says, and it's coming from the Iranian people. In fact, he insists, in dealing with a belligerent Tehran, "there is only one thing that the outside world can do, and that is to tell the regime: 'We are serious about supporting the people who are inside Iran who are against you.' That is the only thing that will make Mr. Khamenei [Iran's supreme leader] and everybody stand down. Because nothing else ruffles them. The only thing they are really scared of are the people themselves."

Peaceful revolutions from within have worked before, so why, he asks, isn't the West investing in the Iranian people -- "the same way they supported so many movements in Eastern Europe that ultimately brought down communist governments that were under Moscow's umbrella?" Dissidents are everywhere, in the universities, workplaces, the conventional armed forces, he adds: "There are thousands of cells . . . each trying to bring as much pressure as they can -- but with very limited resources. Imagine the cumulative weight of all these resistance groups in a civil disobedience act -- nonviolent, we don't believe in violent change -- that could begin sustained pressure to the point of paralyzing the system until it would collapse."

* * *
It might be easy to dismiss Mr. Pahlavi as a typical pipe-dreaming exile if there weren't so much evidence from Iran of mounting popular unrest, including student demonstrations and other massive protests and labor strikes. Arguably, unrest does not automatically translate into a force for change. Like other Iranians in opposition, though, he has reason to believe that they could. People in Iran are among the world's busiest bloggers, for one thing, and many are talking their heads off to anyone who will listen:

"They want to have justice, they want to have equality, they want to have freedom of speech, they want to have a better life, they want to be connected to this progressive world, they like modernity. . . . And they know that the only obstacle between them and the free world is this regime. When you talk to young students today, they say: 'We don't have any more fears. We are out there, we are fighting -- all we need is the support and recognition because that is going to prompt even more action inside Iran.'"

Helping opponents of the regime inside Iran does seem like a smart option, especially when you look at Iraq today -- and then imagine how much better it would be if Saddam had been replaced by Iraqis who had already decided to pull together for a common cause and similar goals. It's also a far less precarious and destructive option than a military attack on the current regime or its nuclear sites.

Mr. Pahlavi is horrified by the thought, and not only because he loves his country. He can come up with plenty of other objections, beginning with the fact that Iran's top ayatollah and the rest of the regime would be the only beneficiaries: "I think Mr. Khamenei is sitting there praying and hoping that such an attack would occur. Because it would play right into their hands: They can call another jihad or it would give them every excuse in the book to deflect attention yet again [from their failings]. It would be the greatest gift you could give them."

Besides, he continues, "nobody in this world really believes that a full-scale military attack on Iran is foreseeable. Tanks marching all the way to Tehran -- impossible. Limited air strikes at best. [And] it wouldn't achieve anything except infuriate the people; . . . you would lose many nationalists, who would say: 'This is an attack on Iran, not defiance of the regime -- you want to hurt the regime, why don't you put sanctions on the regime? Keep their diplomats from traveling. Why don't you go and block and freeze all their assets and bank accounts and dummy companies that they operate through and [use to] transfer money to their cronies?'"

Why not indeed? Mr. Pahlavi says he is no enemy of diplomacy. What he can't figure out is why so much time and effort has been focused on Iran's rulers, while so little attention and support has been directed to the Iranian people. As he emphasizes every chance he gets, "It's not by sending the Sixth Fleet and annihilating the entire Iranian navy that anything is going to be achieved, not to mention the loss of lives. It's going to be by helping the people on the streets. . . . They are the best army that can fight against this evil and remove it from the planet."

By the way, Mr. Pahlavi says that in a democratic Iran, he would be honored to assume the title of shah in a parliamentary system, but only if the Iranian people ask him to. He already has at least one vote. On the way to meet him at his house, the nice lady who drove me there quite naturally referred to her boss as "His Majesty."

Ms. Smith is a member of the Journal's editorial board.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Video of massive Tabriz anti-regime demonstrations

I saw this video clip of the recent massive anti-regime demonstrations in Tabriz on google this morning, and Winston has been quick to cover it.

Just a few comments that i'd like to make on the unrest in Iranian Azerbaijan. First of all it really goes to show what a massive participation there was in Tabriz, however the person who uploaded that video clearly is a Pan-Turanian belonging to the "Grey Wolf" faction of this movement who is trying to depict this massive anti-IRI demonstration as a "anti-Iran" demonstration! These lowlives are doing their best to tear Iran into pieaces and i've seen some of their supporters amongst those in the crowds showing their infamous "Grey Wolf" sign (done in the shape of a bullshorn); a graphical picture can be seen HERE and HERE to help demonstrate (if you go and look at the pictures from the demo's you will notice some people making these signs). You can research their movement further, and an excellent study to begin with and which is very comprehensive is the one written by Kaveh Farrokh on how Pan-Turanism is taking aim at Iranian Azerbaijan.

None the less such an anti-Iranian movement like theirs will not be able to hijack this truly IRANIANfreedom movement. I do believe that if Iranian Azeri's were aware of this threat (Pan-Turanism) to their nation these Pan-Turanian infiltrators showing the "Grey Wolf" signs would have been dealt with severely. The Pan-Turanists are doing their best making this look like a movement in support of the seperation of Azerbaijan from the motherland Iran! The title they have put on for this clip on google is "Azeri's protest Chauvinism" and with "chauvinism" they are referring to something they call "Persian Chauvinism"; little do they know that some of the leading figures of this barbaric regime hail from Iranian Azerbaijan! And by that I am not condemning any region or people since the SAVAGES that make up this regime come from all across Iran and yes even from the province of PARS where the "Persians" hail from. Azeri's, Kurds, Balooch, Mazandarani etc all of them are Iranian peoples (note again in wikipedia that the Pan-Turanians are hard at work trying to seperate Iranian Azeri's from their motherland; i'd refer you back to Dr Kaveh Farrokh article on the origin of Iranian Azeri's). Iranian Azeri's have strong loyalty to their motherland; peoples from all of Iran's different provinces including Azerbaijan, Kordestan, Baloochestan, and Pars are all proud of their provinces and extraordinary men and women that have hailed from them - it is all of Iran's provinces put together that make Iran the great and beautiful nation it is but which unfortunately has been hijacked by a bunch of Islamists who seek to destroy Iran and Iranian culture.

Please be aware of the propaganda and it sure as hell wouldn't surprise me if the western press supports any effort towards the disintegration or "Balkanization" of Iran. In the end it will only remain that though a "futile effort" that will never bare fruit because Iranians will fight to their last blood defending their motherland. Iranian Azeri's will be the first ones to confront any attempt to secede Iranian territory.

This is a topic that is dear to me as I have Azeri heritage myself in my family and a cause that all Iranians feel strongly about and which needs to be dead-clear for everyone.

More power to Iranian Azeri's demanding freedom and for their rights to be recognized.

Yashasin Iran!
Yashasin Azarabadegan!