How Much of a Game Changer is the Iran Nuclear Deal? Flynt Leverett and Seyed Mohammad Marandi on RT’s CrossTalk

The University of Tehran’s Seyed Mohammad Marandi, on RT’s CrossTalk—click on the above video or see here and (YouTube) here—made an important point not widely recognized in American discussions of the Iran nuclear deal:  For the Islamic Republic, the main payoff from the nuclear deal was not, first and foremost, sanctions relief.  Rather,

“For Iran, what was important was to have a peaceful nuclear program.  So, the notion that Iran’s path towards a nuclear weapons is blocked is fine for Iranians because it’s not what they were doing in the first place.  The biggest gain for Iran here was the fact that its peaceful nuclear program, and the fuel cycle, was recognized

This vindicates Iran’s policy over the past decade.  After 2003-2005, when Iran basically gave up everything and the United States failed to come to any sort of reasonable agreement with Iran, Iran felt it had no option but to push forward heavily to advance its peaceful nuclear program.  And that’s what gave Iran the bargaining chips that was able to use, during the recent negotiations that ended a few days ago, to get what it wanted

Despite the difficulties and despite the hardship [Iranians] went through because of the sanctions, the biggest victory is that [Iran] basically forced the United States to the negotiating table.  And it has forced the United States to annul the UN Security Council resolutions—and none of those resolutions has ever been applied in Iran.  In other words, the demand was that Iran end its enrichment of uranium, and Iran never did so.”

While, as Mohammad points out, this is “a major shift in American foreign policy,” it is not clear how much of a strategic game-changer that shift will prove to be.  On this point, Flynt notes

“As someone who, along with my wife, has for years been arguing, inside the U.S. government and since we left the U.S. government, that the United States, for its own interests, needs to realign fundamentally its relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran, what happened in Vienna is obviously a very, very positive step.  But it is just a step.  And it begs the question of whether the United States can—as we outline in our book, Going to Tehran—really make the kind of commitment to a comprehensive revision of U.S. relations with Iran, somewhat analogous to the way that Richard Nixon recast America’s China policy in the early 1970s.

That’s the kind of real strategic revision that is critical to halt the accelerating deterioration in the U.S. position in the Middle East—and, on a less nationalistic basis, to put the Middle East itself on a more positive trajectory, with serious conflict resolution in various regional venues.  That’s the key challenge for the United States right now: can it really build on this opening that the nuclear agreement represents?  I think the nuclear agreement is fine, in and of itself, but the real strategic payoffs, the real benefits from this will only come if the United States can take these bigger steps as the nuclear agreement is implemented.”

The discussion is worth watching in its entirety.

Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett  


493 Responses to “How Much of a Game Changer is the Iran Nuclear Deal? Flynt Leverett and Seyed Mohammad Marandi on RT’s CrossTalk”

  1. pragmatic says:

    Here is my reply to Mr. Marandi’s sheer hallucination!

    1- On the contrary the first and foremost was the sanctions. The status quo of the economy is stagnant. There are over 800 billion in the banks. Businessmen are hesitant to invest. Good amount of money during the 8 years of Pakdast/Mehrparvar government has been evaporated!

    2- If Iran is a member IEAE then why her peaceful nuclear program, and the fuel cycle, should be recognized? Isn’t it her right?

    3- He says “After 2003-2005, when Iran basically gave up everything and the United States failed to come to any sort of reasonable agreement with Iran, Iran felt it had no option but to push forward heavily to advance its peaceful nuclear program.”

    The contradiction in his statement: If peaceful and within IEAE’s criteria, then why Iran gave up everything? If we assume in the beginning, it was peaceful and the government all along it claimed it was, then why they gave up to sign an agreement with the US? Later he says Iran, brought the US to the bargaining table! Make up your mind dude?!

    4- In the next paragraph he says “Despite the difficulties and despite the hardship [Iranians] went through because of the sanctions, the biggest victory is that [Iran] basically forced the United States to the negotiating table. And it has forced the United States to annul the UN Security Council resolutions—and none of those resolutions has ever been applied in Iran.”

    I love the way he turns around the situation! At the same time he admits to the difficulties and the hardship! OMG! Then he says basically Iran forced the United States to the negotiating table! Sure, the US was hurting so much that they begged Iran to talk to them, HOAX! I really conceive he has forgotten he is in RT studios not Seda o Sima!

    5- I agree with Flynt’s note. As I have been saying the United States strategy for ME has changed. They want a strong Iran punish the Arab States and to some extent Turkey and Israel. Let’s not forget if we know most of the terrorist acts are funded by KSA’s money, then for sure the US knows it, too. Therefore, the time is becoming very close to punish the master fund supplier behind these terrorist acts.

    I haven’t watched the video yet, I replied to the text. It would have been a great idea if Leverett’s would invite the other side’s opinion too, someone like Sadegh ZibaKalam.

  2. pragmatic says:

    صادق زیبا کلام در گفت وگو با خبرنگار نامه نیوز درباره شانتاژ خبری اخیر صداو سیما در تلاش برای منفی نشان دادن جمع بندی مذاکرات هسته ای، گفت: در تمام 2 سال گذشته دریغ از پخش یک برنامه بی طرف درباره مذاکرات هسته ای در صدا و سیما، خلاصه‌ی تمام برنامه های صدا وسیما در 2 سال اخیر این بود که باید مراقب باشیم، مواظب باشیم که کلاهی بر سر تیم مذاکره کننده نرود، ما نگرانیم، به ما زور می گویند، و اینگونه ادبیاتی بر صدا و سیما حاکم بود.

    زیبا کلام در ادامه گفت: یک بار نشد که صداو سیما به این پرسش میلیون ها ایرانی پاسخ دهد که این برنامه هسته ای که اینقدر سنگش را به سینه می‌زنید و در 12سال گذشته از بودجه بهداشت و درمان و آموزش و راه سازی و جاده سازی و عمران و آب برق زدید و در این چاه ویل هسته ای ریختید چه منفعت و سودی برای کشور داشته است؟ بگویید چه کمکی به بالا رفتن رشد اقتصادی مملکت کرده است؟ اما دریغ از کوچک ترین پاسخ به این پرسش.

    وی گفت: اکنون که توانستند با مساعی 2 ساله تیم مذاکره کننده و ممارست دولت یازدهم کشور را از چاه ویل و باتلاق 8 سال گذشته خارج کنند و اعتمادی را در طرف مقابل ایجاد کنند و بگویند که ما واقعا نمیخواهیم سلاح هسته ای تولید کنیم و به دنبال برنامه هسته ای صلح آمیز هستیم متاسفانه اصولگرایان تندور به جای گفتن دست شما درد نکند شروع کردند به ایراد گرفتن که اینجای متن اینطوری است و اونجای متن اونطوری.

    زیباکلام، در ادامه با بیان اینکه من نمیدانم صدا و سیما چه چیزی و چه کسی را قبول دارد، تاکید کرد: صدا و سیما اگر مردم را قبول دارد، باید بداند که مردم با 4 میلیون رای به جلیلی و 19 میلیون رای به روحانی حرف و نظر خود را اعلام کردند اگر آن رای را قبول ندارند، آن شادی مردم در خیابان ها و جشن را قبول کنند، اگر آن را قبول ندارند این وضعیت مردم و به ویژه جوانان در چند هفته اخیر را ببینید و بپذیرند که گوششان را به رسانه های خارجی چسبانده بودند و منتظر نتیجه مذاکرات بودند، این اشتیاق و شور و این اضطراب را ببینند و رای و نظر مردم را بشنوند.

    این استاد دانشگاه در ادامه انتقادات صریح و بی سابقه خود به صداو سیما، گفت: صدا و سیما متاسفانه یک اقلیت تندرو و اندک را می بیند که نگاهشان به موضوع هسته ای نه از منظر منافع ملی که از منظر سیاسی است، آنها به جدال هسته ای نیاز دارند تا بتوانتد غرب ستیزی و استکبار ستیزی خود را توجیه کنند، چرا که اگر قرار است در موضوع هسته ای به سازش برسیم خیلی ها خواهند گفت در موضوع هسته ای که اینقدر مشکل بود ما به توافق رسیدم پس در افغانستان و یمن و سوریه و عراق که اشتراکاتمان بیشتر است نیز می توانیم به توافق و همکاری برسیم.

    زیبا کلام همچنین گفت: البته ایران و آمریکا بر سر موضوعاتی چون حقوق بشر و اسرائیل اختلاف نظر داریم اما خب همه کشورهای بر سر موضوعاتی اخنلاف دارند و در جایی دیگر تفاهم، به همین خاطر در کمال تاسف باید گفت تنها چیزی که برای دلواپسان مهم است آمریکا ستیزی است و نه منافع ملی.

    وی در پایان گفت: صداو سیما بدبختنانه به جای اینکه منعکس کننده صدای اکثریت مردم باشد، کسانی که مالیات می دهند و حقوق آقای سرافزاز را تامین می کنند، بلندگوی کسانی شده است که تیشه آنها به ریشه منافع ملی خورده است.

  3. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 21, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    Another feeble mind – ignoring the lessons of the Iran-Iraq War.

    But I agree with his proposition for unconstrained debate.

  4. masoud says:


    I underetand you’re passisonate, but please accept that you are also functionally illeterate when it comes to the histoey, nature and legality of Iran’s nuclear program, and outside of a well known troika of clowns on this forum, we are accustomed to discussing things at a higher level.

    On the off chnce that you are genuinely serious, and not spouting hollow rhetorical drivel, please google the works of Gareth Porter and Cyrus Safdari on the history of Iran’s nuclear program. For inflation on the vsrioud legal matters associated with Iran’s nuclear program, refer Dan Joyner’s works on this matter.

    If you just want yo sling shit around, please go do it somewhere else. Facebook, maybe?

  5. pragmatic says:


    Instead of being funny, reply back to my replies. Do you see the contradiction in his speech?
    Higher Level! For years I am reading you and others higher level posts here and at the end you all lost the game! This agreement is worst than Turkamanchai!

    I forgot to add that Marandi indirectly accepts the US as the main power.

    Please come to our level and explain why the Iranian regime accepted all the shit the US threw at them? Higher level my ass!

  6. pragmatic says:

    These are Iran’s accomplishments, please read:

    یکی از مهم‌ترین اجزای توافق هسته‌ای، صدور قطع‌نامه الزام‌آور شورای امنیت سازمان‌ملل در تأیید برنامه جامع اقدام مشترک است. این قطع‌نامه، در کنار فواید حقوقی‌ای که برای ایران دارد (از جمله مقیدکردن‌ِ کنگره به رعایت توافق، ملزم‌کردن اوباما به وتوی «مصوبه عدم‌تأیید» کنگره در صورت لزوم و قراردادنِ همه ظرفیت‌های حقوق بین‌الملل در پشتیبانی از برجام)، سه دستاورد «سیاسی» بسیارمهم نیز دارد که جایگاه ایران را در صحنه جهانی به‌طرز قابل‌ملاحظه‌ای ارتقا می‌بخشد. به‌واقع، این چند دستاورد بیش از هر چیز حکایت از آن دارد که ایران از یک قدرت سنتی و سخت‌افزاری منطقه‌ای به قدرتی بالغ و مُدرن تبدیل شده که بر «نرم‌افزار» و سازوکارهای نظام بین‌المللی نیز مسلط شده است و می‌تواند از آن به بهترین شکل برای پیشبرد منافع خود استفاده کند: ۱) اولین دستاورد «سیاسی» صدور قطع‌نامه شورای امنیت این است که – برای نخستین‌بار – یک کشور موفق شده سلطه ساختاری و حقوقی شورای امنیت بر نظام بین‌المللی را به صورت بی‌سابقه‌ای مهار کند. تا به امروز، قطع‌نامه‌های شورای امنیت – مطابق ترکیبِ ماده ۲۵ و ۱۰۳ منشور سازمان ملل – بر همه توافقات بین‌المللی اولویت داشته است و در صورت تعارض میان آنها، این تعهدات کشورها براساس منشور بود که می‌بایست مقدم شمرده می‌‌شد. یعنی، براساس این اصل، هیچ توافق و معاهده‌ای نمی‌بایست در مغایرت با قطع‌نامه‌های شورای امنیت منعقد شود. اما این بار، به همت ایران، توافقی در صحنه جهانی میان چند عضو سازمان‌ملل (از جمله پنج عضو دائم شورای امنیت) به امضا رسیده…

    … که نه‌تنها با قطع‌نامه‌های پیشین شورای امنیت (که ایران آنها را غیرقانونی می‌داند) در تعارض است، بلکه با لغو آنها عملا بر این قطع‌نامه‌ها تقدم نیز می‌یابد. به عبارت دیگر، ایران موفق شده توافقی منعقد کند که عملا اثر اصل ۱۰۳ منشور را – که در ادبیات پسااستعماری از آن به‌عنوان ابزار سلطه قدرت‌ها یاد می‌شود – بی‌اثر کند. به‌واقع، ایران – در یک مقاومت چندساله علیه سلطه این نهاد و با اتکا به راهبرد مدبرانه و هوشمندانه تیم حقوقی دکتر ظریف – راه جدیدی باز و الگوی تازه‌ای به جهان ارائه کرده است. گویی پیام ایران این است که از این به بعد، توافقی که براساس عدالت و موازین حقوقی بنا شده باشد، می‌تواند بر قطع‌نامه‌های ناعادلانه، سیاسی و غیرقانونی شورای امنیت تقدم پیدا کند!
    ۲) دومین دستاورد بسیارمهم سیاسی-حقوقی این است؛ قطع‌نامه‌ای که در تأیید توافق هسته‌ای صادر خواهد شد به نحوی تنظیم شده است‌که اشارات به ماده ۴۱ (مربوط به فصل هفت منشور) تنها به بندهای مربوط به لغو تحریم‌ها (یعنی تعهدات طرف مقابل ایران) محدود می‌شود. در قطع‌نامه‌های مشابه شورای امنیت، معمولا اشاره به مفاد فصل هفتم (مفاد ۴۰، ۴۱ و ۴۲) در مقدمه (آغاز) قطع‌نامه صورت می‌گیرد تا «فصل هفت» تمامی بندهای متعاقب را دربر بگیرد. اما در این مورد خاص، تنظیم قطع‌نامه به نحوی انجام شده که تنها طرف‌ِ مقابل ایران و بندهای مربوط به تعهدات آن تحت‌فصل هفتم قرار گرفته است و نقض تعهدات از جانب ایران (چنانچه به فرض محال صورت پذیرد) به‌مثابه نقض یک قطع‌نامه فصل‌هفتمی نخواهد بود. به عبارت دیگر، گویی ایران- پس از عدم‌تمکین با شش قطع‌نامه شورای امنیت- از فصل هفت خارج شده و طرف مقابل خود را در فصل هفت قرار داده است! جدا از فواید حقوقی و امنیتی این اقدام، این امر به این معنا نیز هست که ایران موفق شده است شورای امنیت را از رویه معمول خود خارج و به ابتکارات و بدعت‌های جدیدی به نفع خود وادار کند. همین نکته گویای این است که «ایران» (و نه پنج عضو دائم شورای امنیت) در تدوین و تنظیم این قطع‌نامه مؤثرترین نقش را ایفا کرده است و این خود از نظر نمادین و سیاسی برای کشور امتیاز بسیار ارزشمندی است.
    ۳) سومین دستاورد «سیاسی» صدور قطع‌نامه این است که ایالات متحده آمریکا – که همواره سکان‌دار بلامنازعه شورای امنیت بوده – برای نخستین‌بار «مخاطبِ» یک قطع‌نامه الزام‌آور شورای امنیت قرار گرفته است. به عبارت دیگر، برای اولین‌بار پس از تأسیس سازمان ملل، شورای امنیت، ایالات متحده آمریکا را به اجرای تعهدات‌ حقوقی‌اش نسبت به یک کشور دیگر (ایران) ملزم می‌کند. سایر قدرت‌های جهانی هریک در مقطعی – به‌ویژه در آغاز فعالیت سازمان ملل پس از جنگ دوم جهانی و در دوران استعمارزدایی در دهه‌های ۱۹۵۰ و ۱۹۶۰ میلادی – مورد توصیه‌های محتاطانه شورای امنیت قرار گرفته‌اند؛ اما ایالات متحده در نیم قرن اخیر همواره موقعیت خود را فراتر از سازوکارهای حقوق نظامی بین‌المللی تعریف کرده و هرگز اجازه نداده است که شورای امنیت آن را موردِدستورات خود قرار دهد. اما این بار، به‌همت ایران، طلسم این شیوه آمریکا شکسته شده و شورای امنیت این کشور را نیز بالاخره به اجرای تعهداتی ملزم کرده است. به‌واقع، این اتفاق – از منظر سیاسی و نمادین – اتفاق قابل‌ملاحظه‌ای است و از این پس، تاریخ‌نویسان، مدرسان حقوق بین‌الملل و اساتید علوم سیاسی در سراسر جهان، این دستاورد دیپلماتیک را – که شاید نقطه عطفی در افول «استثناگرایی آمریکایی» باشد – به نام ایران ثبت خواهند کرد.
    ۴) چهارمین دستاورد سیاسی این است که ایران موفق شده جریان جنگ‌طلب و ایران‌ستیز درونِ آمریکا (و درون کنگره) را با استفاده از اهرم حقوق بین‌الملل – آن‌هم با همراه‌سازی دولت و دستگاه سیاست خارجه خودِ آمریکا – تا حدود زیادی منزوی و حتی مهار کند. امروز، برای جریان تندروی درون آمریکا، «ایران‌ستیزی» برخلاف ۳۵ سال گذشته دیگر رایگان نیست و چه‌بسا هزینه قابل‌ملاحظه‌ای نیز دارد که کمترین آن نقض قطع‌نامه‌ای است که متحدان غربی این کشور پای آن امضا زده‌اند.
    مشهور است که چند سال پیش، آقای جان بولتون – سفیر اسبق آمریکا در سازمان ملل و یکی از اعضای برجسته جریان نومحافظه‌کار و ضدایرانی – در همایش سالانه بزرگ‌ترین لابی اسرائیل در واشنگتن، به میزبانان خود در یک سخنرانی جنجالی گفته بود که شورای امنیت سازمان ملل «ابزاری در جعبه ابزار آمریکاست» و وعده داده بود که از آن با همه قوا علیه بلندپروازی‌های هسته‌ای ایران استفاده کند. اما امروز – فقط چند سال پس از این ادعا – به نظر می‌رسد تیم مذاکره‌کننده دکتر ظریف موفق شده است این ابزار را از جعبه آمریکا بیرون بکشد و آن را علیه این جریان خطرناک – و به‌تبع آن، علیه این تفکر و ایدئولوژی مخرب – به نفع ایران و منافع ملی‌ به کار گیرد. این دستاوردها از یک سو قدرت نرم ایران را در صحنه بین‌المللی به نمایش می‌گذارد؛ و از یک سو اهمیت حفظ و تقویت این توانایی را در صحنه داخلی گوشزد می‌کند.

  7. masoud says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 21, 2015 at 3:00
    I seriously doubt you’ve been reading anything for years. You seem to be confused on some fundamental matters. If that is the case I’ve given you enough information for you to start better informing yourself. If on the other hand you just want to fling shit around, there’s plenty of other forums where your contributions would be better appreciated.

  8. Kooshy says:

    Massoud if you want to understand Vanak Preag’. angle you need to put in a green lens, then all his BS analysis and links falls in place, similar to what trios zios angle we encounter here. Green’ basic angle is that we will support any government that we think will finally overthrow the system she got elected through. They chosen this path firstly because they know they don’t have the support and the balls to come out and do it themselves so their hope is to do it using the system itself ( Imam family and or Rafsanjani). If you listen and read that clown Zibakalm you will see his points all the time is I fully support the Nizam ( which realistically he doesn’t ) of IRI, but everything the Nizam does and has is bad, primitive and premature and must get westoxicated to become functional, useable and worldly, does that sound familiar with anybody else you know here?

    That’s why he needs to get out to Vanak Sq, continue on walking north on right side of street( there are more French clone designer shops)like if you are walking in Boulmich, go north to the cafe next to old Shahpoor high or what it is now the cinema museum , order a espresso and croissant that should give him enough Paris satisfaction for a couple of day. I recommend this exercise on every other day bases as long as you can’t get your color revolution.

  9. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 21, 2015 at 3:07 pm

    Yes, all valid and true.

    The agreement emphatically is not like that of Turkmenchai where Iran – a defeated country – had to cede territory to the victorious country – Russia.

    If that were the case, Americans would have their agents in Iran dismantling everything and taking them away.

    These are some other ones:مجوز-رهبری-برای-اکتشافات-هوایی-اورانیوم

  10. Ataune says:


    1- Peaceful nuclear energy cannot be construed as a restraint to the economic growth, but the unprecedented sanctions imposed for the last three years on Iran can. Nuclear energy is a strategic industry and the decision to engage on its path has a long-term impact not measurable by short term oriented tools like inflation, unemployment and GDP growth measurement. Putting the consequences of a long-term decision under the scrutiny of short term tools skews the reasoning and doesn’t explain a lot. But besides this logical inaccuracy, if you are suggesting that Iran should have decided to scrap her nuclear energy activity as soon as the US started pressing her, then you should at least explain if this is your recommended decisions any time an Iranian strategic choice is faced with serious adversity, for ex. space industry, setting up an energy market in the Persian Gulf etc…, and if not, what in your judgment differentiates these 2 examples from the nuclear one.

    2- In the legal world everyone is supposed to abide by what is agreed on. In the real world you have the bullies, the ones that abdicate under their pressure, and the ones that try to defend themselves. The bully will certainly not abide by the rules when his demands are not obeyed. If you are among the one defending themselves and you succeed in having the bully accept a “right” which is legally yours, you have made a big advance in deflecting his aggression.

    3- From 2001-2002 to the middle of Bush’s second term, it wasn’t Iran who was against any agreement on the nuclear issue, the inflexible side was the US and the reason is clear because Iran was in the beginning of the road. US believed she had the upper hand and imagined being able to easily enforce a regime change. Around 2007, US understood that for at least one generation she doesn’t have the necessary resources to do so. The backpedaling on the demands started from then. Around maybe 6 months before Rouhani’s election, when the two sides were building ammunitions for the inevitable upcoming negotiation phase, US indicated that she was ready for a deal. This timing had little to do with the brinkmanship between US and Iran and more with former realizing that she is maybe running out of time in her preparation for the next rounds against more potent adversaries, China and Russia.

    4- If US had thought for a second that her pressure tactics are working, in a world without any serious threat to her hegemony in the horizon, she would have certainly not indicated her willingness to talk. She just would waited for Iran to decompose and fall. It is then safe to assume that the US was forced into the negotiating table by the reality on the ground. The leadership in Iran received the indication that US is ready for a deal and calculated that the time was ripe to accept the offer – mitigating the hardship by the population was certainly a factor in this calculation. This context, as described, is obviously different from Iran being forced to negotiate.

    5- Contrary to what you attribute to Mr. Leverett, he is saying, correctly in my opinion, that the big strategic shift to the US strategy hasn’t come yet and “… the real strategic payoffs, the real benefits from this will only come if the United States can take these bigger steps as the nuclear agreement is implemented”. And it is Mr. Marandi, closer to what you are saying, who describes this deal as a “fundamental shift.” Although even him sounds more inclined toward the Leveretts on this issue than you.

  11. kooshy says:

    Ataune says:
    July 21, 2015 at 7:50 pm

    On your last point you are absolutely correct Flynt last comment on the RT debate above is that for a US policy shift and a rapprochement, (paraphrasing) “US needs to come to term with the Islamic republic as a legitimate political order representing majority of Iranians with legitimate national interests.”, is obvious Preg and other Vanak Greens will ignore this part, since this is exactly what they hope and expect US will not do, they do not and will not accept the Islamic revolution in Iran and hope nobody else does they are the true dead-enders. As I wrote a few month back with regard to communality of Greens, Zios, US and Monarch Arbs, with regard to denial of the legitimacy of Islamic Republic, they all share this point obviously for common end goal but different self-interest inspired reasons. As has been the obvious case for them all including their hope and the shining light up on the hill they were wrong and delusional, with a lot of wishful thinking all along.

  12. BiBiJon says:

    What is April 1st without an inane prediction?

    Soon after Walt-Mearsheimer 2007 publication of ‘The Israel Lobby’ (or better title The Cheese Platter), the lobby tried feigned indignation at and denial of underhand oversize influence, but quickly realized the dopy citizenry couldn’t give a toss about the revelations. When in Sunlight, might as well act out the “so what, we are better than average, and are entitled, and be really out there, in your face.” This of course is par for the course for the criminally minded arrogant imbeciles who fill out the ranks of the lobby. So, the cheesy billionaires started funding a propaganda campaign against Iran to get their longed for war with such gusto that they achieved … peace.

    Shibley figures, correctly, it is because of Netanyahu’s (and his cheesy supporters) overplaying their idiot war hand that we in fact have a no-war deal. See ;

    The not-so-poor gang of billionaires have no option but to double down in the hopeless task of derailing the deal because if it stands, the deal represents just such a full, complete, comprehensive and total defeat on their part that it is unbearable — the cheesy morons have succeeded in isolating themselves and their beloved Israel, publicly and loudly demonstrating they have zero influence in the world’s big boys club, and after this fiasco, they will be ignored by all and sundry.

    As derailing the deal is impossible (UN, and EU have endorsed it already) then their doubling down is as certain as it is ‘the last’ act. For the next six months I expect to see the Lobby overdosing on steroids and exposing their criminal conspiracy in broad daylight.

    By April, DoJ will go after the operatives and end the charade of so-called think tanks, journalists, experts, paid-for politicians, etc. This will finish off the Republican rank of presidential hopefuls and leave only Paul and Sanders to duke it out in November.

  13. kooshy says:

    BiBiJon says:
    July 21, 2015 at 8:45 pm

    BIB Jaan

    IMO, That’s a tall order, I hope and wish so it comes true, but I don’t see so, the problem is not just the Jews on the both coasts, but to me a big problem with this country is also the Mountain and South states rednecks, suppose they be able to shut the Jews down, how are they able to shut the radical rednecks who are elevated to believe they are exceptional and on the f***ing shining hill?

  14. BiBiJon says:

    Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we …

    kooshy jan, I agree, so much so I call it inane! But, I did want to highlight the fact that the lobby has just had their ass handed to them.

    On Ataune’s point 5, I was first clued in to the Leverett’s persuasive assertion that it is logically in US interest to come to terms with the IRI. That IRI, even when Khomeini was alive never foreclosed on the possibility of one day having a ‘normal’ relations with US.

    I think Leveretts are a tad impatient. The tributaries of Iran, and US will eventually flow into a river of mutual respect and acceptance. However, the Obama admin is correct not to lean too far over their skis, after all see what happened to Netanyahu and assorted war mongers. Beating Netanyahu, and institutionalizing Iran’s ‘peaceful’ nuclear program are too good a first step to sacrifice on the alter of quick rapprochement.

    The true meaning of the deal so far is this: If Iran can be trusted with nuclear technology, then the argument about her hegemonic ambitions, and aggressive posture, etc will start to melt away rather quickly. Netanyahu has been checkmated, but being a moron he can not see that many moves ahead.

  15. kooshy says:

    BiBiJon says:
    July 21, 2015 at 9:59 pm

    BiBi Jaan

    In case you haven’t read it, the conclusion it’s in line with the necessary glaucoma surgery for the “NEW COMING AMERICAN VISION”

    A Mideast Game of Thrones

    By Patrick J. Buchanan

  16. pragmatic says:

    @kooshy and the other high-level society folks here:

    Sir! I really do not understand your posts! You keep telling me where to go and I am vanak and bla bla bla!! Most certainly you are confusing me with somebody else! I don’t know who you are and I really am not keen to follow your drivel.

    You guys all were wrong with your assessments in regards to the negotiations, thus why don’t leave the site or don’t post for a while

  17. pragmatic says:

    هاشمی از همان اول گفته بود. به مذاکره خوشبینم. دلیل خوشبینی اش هم یک کلمه بود و بس. “انتخاب ملّت”. هاشمی سالهاست که معجزه انتخاب مردم را به چشم دیده است. از معجزه 22 بهمن 57 تا اعجاز باورنکردنی24 خرداد 92. هاشمی خوب می داند جلوی اراده مردم ایستادن ممکن نیست. حال چه مذاکرات هسته ای باشد چه انتخابات ریاست جمهوری. هاشمی خوب می داند “میزان رای ملّت است”. فقط یک شعار نیست. شاخص اصلی امام است. راز خوشبینی هاشمی به مذاکرات. راز اعجاز انقلاب بود. اعجازی به نام “اراده مردم”

    Khoda Agha Hazrateh Ayatollah Khamenie va Aghayeh Hashemi Amirkabir zaman ra salamat bedarand.

    دولت قبل برای صهیونیستها نعمت بود

  18. pragmatic says:

    Kooshy where do you live? I guessed Germany, your English sucks, write in German or Farsi.

    I teach a one thing write here: words such as apple, honor, elephant, orange you use “AN” (don’t confuse it with your hero Ahmadimejad) not “A”.

    Thus it is AN espresso not A espresso. Also, when you think you are on pulpit and you start writing use commas, periods, so on and so forth. sometimes your sentences are 5 lines!

    Once again, I am not a green, they are a big group in Iran on the contrary to what you think. I am not like them because I do not believe in their so called leaders Karoobi and Mir Hossain. Therefore, stop accusing people based on assuming. Thus far, none of your thoughts, predictions or assumptions have come through.

    Last but not least, when you start typing go back and read them again.I just arrived at work. So long

  19. pragmatic says:

    چرا دوستی با دشمنان محال نیست؟
    وَلَا تَسْتَوِي الْحَسَنَةُ وَلَا السَّيِّئَةُ ادْفَعْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ فَإِذَا الَّذِي بَيْنَكَ وَبَيْنَهُ عَدَاوَةٌ كَأَنَّهُ وَلِيٌّ حَمِيمٌ ﴿34 فصلت﴾
    هرگز نيكى با بدى يكسان نيست. همیشه بدی را با بهترین عمل (نیکی) پاسخ بده تا همان کسی که گویی با تو بر دشمنی است، دوست تو گردد

  20. kooshy says:

    Prag. My writing is not going to change, yours is not any better, so don’t need to constantly make an ass of yourself, still good that you understand me, nothing like the morning espresso on the café next to my old school, don’t need to wear a green band to be green. They are not that many nuts who fallow laughing nut job.

  21. Pragmatic says:


    I enjoyed yourassessment. I fully agree with you in regards to the lobby and Netanyahu.

    Here is the delta between me and others:

    1- I don’t believe Iran brought the United States to the table.

    2- I believe the United States facilitated the talks because of the new ME map and Iran’s role in this new strategy. Whereby, Iran will be the main power, without being accused of terrorism and bulling her neighbors.

    3- Soon we shall see the world’s community pressure on KSA and my opinion in ten years time Israel will be a smaller of a country than it is today.

    4- Off the topic… Why I support Hashemi, it is due to his wisdom in regards to Iran’s foreign policy, and how to cement our hegemony in the region. They call him and his family theives, others aren’t? We had the worst embezzlements of our history during Ahmadinejads,whereat we had the largest revenue of our nation.

    Last but not least, we all like our beloved country in prosperity and a nation with succulent society. The difference is the method of getting there.

    I’m out.

  22. Pragmatic says:

    Don’t compare my English with yours. Once again what are you referring to with your nonsense.

  23. Ferri says:

    Contracts dictate your rights; what you can and can’t do and the ensuing results if you are deemed to have breached the terms of the “Contract”. There is no room for vague terminology with multiple-interpretations, actions which you are requested to take but are not written very specifically, open-ended dates etc. Words such as “good will intention”, “mutual respect” are all nice words but won’t protect you in a court of law.

    There is a reason why the legal industry is a multi-billion dollar business in this country; why law suits are so prevalent; why companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars to have a team of in-house legal experts as well as out-side legal counsel to review every document before you place your signature on it.

    Unfortunately, for Iran this “JPCOA Agreement” leaves much to be desired.

    Some people believe when you criticize this deal you don’t want Iran and the US to have a relationship with one another; or you don’t want sanctions to be lifted in return for certain compromises etc. Not true. The point is what are you giving away for what you believe you are obtaining in return and does this Agreement protect your rights. In the case of Iran it does not. Anyone who believe otherwise has either not read the 159 pages and its annexes in detail or has not understood the Agreement as written and the resulting negative ramifications for Iran.

    One final point, if you believe this agreement is intended to build relationship between the US and Iran then you have a very short term memory of history and demonstrates your inability to see the forest from the trees.

  24. Irshad says:

    @Ferri – US has restarted relations with Cuba. I see this deal as the begining of something fruitful gor both US abd Iran – although there will be many regimes such as Zionists, Wahabi-Arabia, Turks, Petty tyrants of UAE, Canada etc. who along with rhe various DC lobby groups will try to derail US from it. Both Iran have their seperate interests and issues that rivals the other (eg. US – Isreal superiority, Iran – Hezbollahs detterance against Isreali attacks etc.) but they will learn to manage those differences like how US is doing with Cuba and has done so with Vietnam. The real test will be is when US starts to antagonise Russia in Caucasus or China in Xijiang – whose side if any Iran will take or if Isreal bombs Iran during the duration of this deal and Iran hits the Zionists hard – what US does!

  25. Irshad says:

    Avery good read regarding the internal politics of the Wahabi Kingdom of Horrirs:

    “Salman, fishing in the Yemen”

  26. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Kheyli khari.

    Obama and Kerry have said on numerous occasions that the reason they negotiated is because the military option is not viable and- pay attention nafahm- BECAUSE “OUR PARTNERS NO LONGER WANT TO MAINTAIN THE SANCTIONS AND IF WE DON’T NEGOTIATE NOW THE SANCTIONS REGIME WILL FALL APART”.

    This is what Kerry himself said on numerous occasions the last one I saw was in the CNN interview right after the negotiations.

    So yes, Iran forced the US to the negotiating table.

    Why? Why would Iran do this if the sanctions regime is falling apart anyway? Because what Dr. Marandi said.

    Oh but sorry of course shoma- angal tu kun-e Hashemi- have better strategic insight into why things have happened than the US Prez, US Sec of State and the Dean of Tehran University School of World Studies, not to mention Agha.

    Kheyli khari.

    Also for your info, quoting clown Zibakalam- whom the students that cheer for him at his “performances” call a clown- does nothing to further your argument.

    His job in Iranian universities is to be a “blitzableiter” for sophmoric students, and I don’t mean that metaphorically. That’s his job and he gets a nice salary for it. (So we’ll now see if you really speak German as you say).

    Also, with phrases like “…a nation with succulent society” you shouldn’t lecture others about English.

    Kholase kheyli khari.

  27. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Of course as an angal tu kun-e Hashemi, the reason for your personal attack on Dr. Marandi and your use of of the word “hallucination” is because of something Dr. Marandi said on PressTV a couple nights ago.

    Don Akbar Khan had said that the victory of the nuclear negotiations is a bigger victory than the liberation of Khorramshahr during the war- a clear sign of Hashemi’s increasing dementia- khoda shafash bede (not).

    Dr. Marandi on PressTV said that the agreement is neither a disaster nor the beginning of a new era and whoever says it’s bigger than the liberation of Khorramshahr has “illusions”.

    So yes, as an angal tu kun-e Hashemi you are doing your duty by protecting the host in whose rectum you reside. Khoob javabesh dadi!

  28. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    And never ever forget baradar razmandeye janbaz-e azizam that Dr. Marandi is veteran you went and fought at the age of sixteen even though he could have very easily left because of his US-born status.

    He went and defended his country unlike some on this forum who “had better things to do”.

    And not to mention the mustard gas in his lungs- because he doesn’t.

  29. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    More signs of Hashemi’s increasing dementia- or maybe he’s just lying as usual…

    یک فرد مطلع به بهانه نقل خاطره‌ای از جانب آیت‌الله هاشمی رفسنجانی درباره پرونده قضایی فرزندش روایتی را از دیدار مهدی و پدرش در حیاط دادسرای قاضی مقدس نقل کرد.

    به گزارش رجانیوز به نقل از فارس، تنها ۳ ماه از فتنه سال ۸۸ گذشته بود که مهدی هاشمی فرزند آیت الله هاشمی رفسنجانی با بهانه انجام مأموریت کاری از سوی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی و برای سرکشی به واحدهای بین المللی این دانشگاه و اتمام تحصیلات خود در شهریور آن سال از کشور به مقصد لندن خارج شد.

    تنها چند ماهی از خروج مهدی هاشمی گذشته بود که پرونده اتهامی وی در دادستانی تهران مفتوح شد و به این ترتیب برای این فرد قرار تعقیب صادر شد و وی به دستگاه قضایی فراخوانده شد اما مهدی از بازگشت امتناع کرد.

    این امتناع مهدی هاشمی ادامه داشت تا اینکه متهم سرانجام در تاریخ ۲ مهر سال ۹۱ حوالی ساعت ۹ شب به کشور بازگشت.

    بر اساس اطلاعات موجود در آن زمان بستگان ایشان از جمله پدر وی بسیار اصرار داشتند که متهم از فرودگاه به زندان نرود ولی مقامات قضایی زیر بار این خواسته نابجا نرفته و این فرد پس از چند ساعت به دادسرا هدایت شد.

    مهدی هاشمی تا ساعت ۱۲ شب در فرودگاه بود و بعد از آن به خانه پدری‌‌اش رفت و پس از حدود ۶ ساعت در حوالی ساعت ۶ صبح به دادسرا مراجعه کرد که پس از انجام تحقیق و بازپرسی‌های مقرر برای این فرد قرار بازداشت موقت صادر شد.

    مهدی هاشمی ۸۴ روز در بازداشت موقت بود و پس از آن با تکمیل شدن روند بازپرسی‌ها این فرد با قرار وثیقه‌ای حدوداً ۱۰ میلیاردی آزاد شد.

    از آن تاریخ تا کنون که حکم دادگاه این آقازاده جنجالی به جرم اختلاس، ارتشاء و جرایم ضد امنیتی برای وی صادر و قطعی شده است وی هنوز حکمش اجرا نشده اما گاه و بی‌گاه مطالبی در رسانه‌های مختلف نقل می‌شود که صحت کافی را ندارد.

    اخیراً نیز آیت الله هاشمی رفسنجانی عصر سه شنبه ۲۳ تیرماه در دیدار جمعی از اصحاب رسانه فرهنگ و هنر، مدیران مسئول خبرگزاری ها و سایت های خبری، خبرنگاران رسانه های مجازی و روزنامه ها، هنرمندان عرصه های سینما، تئاتر و موسیقی و جمعی از شعرای انقلاب اسلامی اظهارات جالبی را از دیدارش با فرزندش در زمان بازداشت وی مطرح کرده است.

    اظهارات آیت الله هاشمی به نقل از سایت شخصی وی

    «….نمی خواستم وارد پرونده قضایی مهدی شوم و الان هم نمی خواهم مطلبی بگویم که تأثیر مثبت یا منفی در روند قضایی پرونده بگذارد، اما چون سؤال کردید به ذکر خاطره ای بسنده می کنم.

    پس از اینکه مهدی با نا تمام گذاردن دکتری خود در آکسفورد، وارد کشور شد و سه ماه توسط زبده ترین نیروهای وزارت اطلاعات تحت بازجویی بود، روزی به من خبر دادند که مهدی می خواهد شما را ببیند، من هم گفتم که بیاید اما گفتند ایشان نمی تواند و اگر می خواهید شما باید به ملاقات ایشان بروید.

    در ملاقات مهدی در زندان و با اصرار وی به خاطر پرهیز از شنود، زیر باران در محوطه پارکینگ قدم می زدیم، مهدی به من گفت که اینان می گویند دو راه داری، یا در چند خط از رهبری تقاضای عفو کن و یا باید این پرونده طولانی و چند هزار صفحه ای را ادامه دهی.

    خود مهدی به من گفت علی رغم اینکه خود چنین میلی ندارم چون می دانم جرمی مرتکب نشده ام، اما اگر شما و مقام معظم رهبری بخواهید این کار را می کنم که من به ایشان گفته ام بگذارید با آقا مشورت کنم.

    در ملاقات با رهبر انقلاب به ایشان عرض کردم که راضی به این نیستم که وی تقاضای عفو کند و شما بپذیرید، چون در نگاه جامعه انعکاس خوبی نخواهد داشت هم می گویند رهبر چرا به تقاضاهای عفو زندانیان دیگر توجه نمی کنند و هم می گویند هاشمی در پرونده پسرشان اعمال نفوذ کرد.

    آیت الله خامنه ای استدلال حرف های من را پذیرفت، بعد از آن بود که به مهدی خبر دادیم هر طور که خودت می دانی، عمل کن و وی هم بر این نکته تأکید می کرد که چون می دانم گناهی نکرده ام بگذارید همه بفهمند و اگر هم گناهی کرده ام، بگذارید در همین دنیا محاکمه شوم و به مجازات برسم که سخت از مجازات آخرت می ترسم.

    بگذارید به همین مقدار بسنده کنم و بیشتر نگویم تا پرونده قضایی وی سیر خودش را بگذراند، البته خود مهدی و وکلای وی حرف های دارند که به موقع خواهند گفت. فقط بگویم یوسف از دامان پاک خود به زندان می رود.»

    مهدی هاشمی به واسطه شنیدن کدام خبر گریه کرد

    با توجه به اظهارنظر آیت‌الله هاشمی رفسنجانی از دیداری که وی با فرزندش مهدی داشته است به سراغ یکی از مطلعین این ملاقات رفتیم و از وی درباره جزئیات این دیدار پرسیدم.

    این فرد مطلع به خبرنگار فارس گفت: بیش از یک ماه از بازداشت مهدی گذشته بود که به اسناد و مدارکی تازه که از سوی سازمان بازرسی وقت ارسال شده بود دست یافتیم.

    وی افزود: متعاقب دستیابی به این اسناد بار دیگر به مهدی هاشمی تفهیم اتهام شد و مهدی هاشمی با توجه به اطلاع از کشف این اسناد از ما خواست تا با پدر خود تماس بگیرد.

    متهم در این تماس به پدر خود گفت: اینها(منظور افراد مسئول در پرونده) به اسنادی دست یافتند که جرم مرا بسیار سنگین می‌کند.

    در این تماس تلفنی مهدی از پدرش خواست برای گفتن پاره‌ای از مطالب با وی ملاقات حضوری کند. این در حالی بود که آقای هاشمی در بیشتر روزهای بازداشت مهدی حداقل یک بار روزانه به صورت تلفنی با وی صحبت می‌کرد.

    با توجه به درخواست مهدی از پدرش آقای هاشمی ابتدا از دستگاه قضایی خواستند که مهدی را در جای دیگری غیر از زندان و دادسرا برای ملاقات بیاورند که این موضوع مورد موافقت قرار نگرفت زیرا دستگاه قضایی معتقد بود باید مانند سایر متهمین با وی برخورد شود.

    پاسخ دستگاه قضایی به آیت‌الله هاشمی این بود که اگر شما ملاقاتی با فرزند خود می‌خواهید مثل سایر مردم به دادسرای مربوطه مراجعه کنید.

    این فرد مطلع گفت: آقای هاشمی به دادسرای شهید مقدس آمدند و با اصرار خود در حیاط دادسرا با مهدی حدود یک ساعت ملاقات کردند.

    مهدی خودش عنوان کرد که در این ملاقات از پدرش خواسته بوده تا با توجه به سنگین شدن جرایمش نامه‌ای بنویسد که این اتفاق افتاد و مهدی نامه را مستقیماً به تیم حفاظت پدرش تحویل داد.

    متهم بعداً عنوان کرد: از پدرم خواسته‌ام تا به واسطه نامه‌ای که می‌نویسم از مقام معظم رهبری برای من در این مرحله درخواست عفو نماید.

    وی افزود: روز چهارشنبه بعد از ملاقات یعنی با گذشت چند روز از آن دیدار مهدی در تماس تلفنی با پدرش نتیجه درخواستش را جویا شد که آقای هاشمی گفت: آقا (مقام معظم رهبری) با عفو شما موافقت نکردند.

    این فرد گفت: در این لحظه مهدی با شنیدن این خبر ناراحت شد و به گریه افتاد.

    این فرد مطلع در پایان به خبرنگار فارس گفت: البته مسایل دیگری هم درخصوص این دیدار و جزئیات آن وجود دارد که اگر ضرورت ایجاد کند قطعاً اطلاع‌رسانی خواهد شد.

  30. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 21, 2015 at 11:54 pm

    Mr. Rafsanjani understood early one – year 2003 – that P5 were meant to take sovereign rights away from Iran.

    He was openly vacillating between resistance and surrender.

    Over the subsequent years, I have understood that it was the brave Mr. Khamenei who opted for resistance while many of his associates and cohorts wanted to surrender and go home and continue to sleep the 800-year slumber.

    Mr. Ataune’s latest summary is much closer to the mark than your idolization of Mr. Rafsanjani.

    [In 2012, when Americans were on the path of war, it was Mr. Khamenei who again opted for resistance; sending a message out that Iran will fight with all its might.]

    You are, in my opinion, significantly undervaluing the robust nationalistic leadership of both Mr. Khamenei and Mr. Ahmadinejad.

  31. fyi says:

    Irshad says:

    July 22, 2015 at 8:16 am

    It is painful to watch what is happening to Yemen.

    Yet again, an Arab country starts a war which it cannot win and just kills more people and destroys their livelihoods.

    I have seen this happening over and over again:

    – All Arabs against Israel in 1948
    – Syria Arabs against Jordan in 1970
    – All Arabs against one another in Lebanon Civil War
    – Jordan Arabs against Israel in 1967
    – Egypt Arabs against other Arabs: Egypt-Yemen 1956, Libya-Egypt in 1977, Libya-Egypt 2015
    – All Arabs (except Syria) against Iran:
    – Iraq Arabs against Kuwait – 1991
    – ISIS Arabs against other Arabs – 2014
    – Saudi Arabia against Yemen – 2015

    I ask myself, is it because they are Arabs?

    Is it because they are stupid?

    What is going on here?

    All that money and effort for war instead of improving the lives of ordinary people.

    Makes no sense to me given the backwardness of Arab society in many material areas.

  32. Karl.. says:


    “All that money and effort for war instead of improving the lives of ordinary people.
    Makes no sense to me given the backwardness of Arab society in many material areas.”

    Doesnt the same goes for persians too? Backward? No money going to the people etc?

    There is no way there will be good relations in the region and thus more wars if people outside the region fanning the flames of shia/sunni or arab/persians hatred.

  33. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 22, 2015 at 11:17 am

    The last time Iran started a war was in 1826.

  34. Karl.. says:


    I was speaking of the fanning of flames of shias/sunnis persians/arabs, that is something both sides do.

  35. Irshad says:

    @fyi – thank you for your comment – as always appreciated!

    I think there is a civil war in the Arab World as to who is going to lead it (currently with Egypt, Syria and Iraq out of the picture – the Saudis and the oil wells have filled that void) – Is it Arab nationalism or Sunni Wahabism? Arab nationalism standing for the nation state with civil rights for all citizens regardless of sect/religion/tribe OR Wahabi exclusivism and chauvism at the expense of fellow citizens who happen to be of different sect/religion/tribe. In all the wars you mentioned there has been one constant – the House of Sauds. They fough Nasser using MB, they fought Iran using Saddam, they fight Assad using takfiri zombies, aswell as using all their financial/media/religious soft power currently against Iran – please see Wikileaks about this. Unless the core Arab states of Egypt/Iraq and Syria fill the void and pull the rug under under the Sauds feet – there will be more death and misery for Arabs. The Isrealis are busy killing Palestinians and the Saudis do
    Nothing. How many Saudi bombs has fell in Isreal compared with Yemen? There is a famous hadith in the Sunni hadith collections where the Prophet made dua (prayed) for Shaam (greater Syria) and Yemen. He was asked to pray for Najd – he didnt only to show there will be nothing but fitna coming from there and the horn of the devil. He – asalways – proved to be right!

    @Karl – I do not see Iranian sponsore TV channels openly calling for the death and destruction pf Sunnis. I do not see Iranian sponsored Ayatollahs openly calling for desturction of Sunnis who deserve death. I only see that coming from the Saudi side – you can find more by googling it.

  36. Karl.. says:


    Not nercessary iranians but some shias throughout the middle east have such secterian views.

  37. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 22, 2015 at 2:04 pm

    Please supply incidents of that at the state level as well as the Hawza level (from the Doctors of Religion).

    The few examples of that I have seen has been some minor functionary from Hawaza making inflammatory remarks about the late Ayesha or some other personage from early Islam that is respected by the Sunnis.

  38. kooshy says:

    Flynt and Hilleary correctly criticize the Obama administration for presenting the just made nuclear deal with Iran to the American public as an Arms control/prevention deal, for this reason let see and analyze how and why Obama selling this deal as an arms control deal made his constituencies and see if it intends to move on to an strategic understanding or at least respect for other side’ strategic position.

    As Flynt and Hillary have on many occasions mentioned, the Obama administration’ PR operatives are out and saying we have negotiated this deal preventing/delaying the time Iran can obtain/make a nuclear device/bomb.
    IMO Obama is choosing the easiest path he can obtain the American public’ approval, that in itself is a sign of weakness that is noticed by Iranians, they know choosing this selling point gives him the cover for an American regional strategic necessity, which is ceasing/stopping the hostilities with Iran. It’s easier to mobilize the Americans (specially the rednecks who will not accept that the cease fire was an strategic necessity for lack of other options to contain Iran’ rise) to pressure the congress for accepting a cease fire deal based on arms control, it gives them the sense of they won and the other side under our pressure accepted to give up her bomb making capability. If you notice what is never mentioned is American’s own intelligence NIT which repeatedly has said at least since 2003 Iran is not after making Nukes. If that would have been mentioned then public would have asked why we would have needed to make a deal if they were not making one.

    Is for this dishonesty to tell the truth or the whole truth that makes doubt they (US deep state regime) intend to even keep this deal, it could be that they desire a tactical ceasefire with less powerful adversary in ME for now till they can sort out their dilemmas in Europe and Asia. Under this assumption like SL mentioned a few days back Iran shouldn’t and hopefully will not stop expanding her conventional military power and her regional economic and political influence, specially arming her regional allies, in lieu of trade with EU.

  39. kooshy says:

    Irshad says:
    July 22, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    Irshad- in my view the only reason Saudis and gulf Arab mini states as well as Turkey they want Bashar out is because of this reason, they do not want Syria (or Algeria) a strategic ally of Iran to become the political leader of Arab states, after Egypt went under the ongoing turmoil. As far as other Arab states likes of KSA, Jordan and the Mini Gulf states goes they lack both street legitimacy or a substantial population or military power to become or be able to lead the Arabs in Arab politics.

  40. Karl.. says:


    The secterian nature and that war that is ongoing now in Syria is in part due to the shia secterianism against the sunnis. Same goes for Iraq past invasion and shia rule.
    There are examples on Google, from clerics to man on the street type of people.

  41. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 22, 2015 at 5:07 pm

    “The sectarian nature and that war that is ongoing now in Syria is in part due to the Shia sectarianism against the Sunnis” is not a true statement.

    12-Imam Shia or 7-Imam Shia have been a very small minority of Syrian population.

    Iran is helping her allies – the Alawites not being Shia ta all – against the Jihadists.

    And there are more Syrian Sunnis fighting with the Syrian Government than against it.

    I guess what you are saying is that if Iran did not help defend Syrian Government, then Sunni Jihadists would not be angry with Iran.

    That is of small concern to Iran.

    In Iraq, while you might have a point regarding discriminatory practices of the Shia-dominated government, it does not excuse mass murder of Shia by the Sunnis.

  42. Kooshy says:

    Is impossible to believe accepted rational shieh leaders (likes of Sistain, Nasseolah, Khamenie,) or at state level Iranian government make inflammatory comments or threat against Sunnis and their believes. But is correct and true that the Wahhabis do like and welcome to inflame a street level inter religion fight as they see that the eventual decide becomes and eventful advantage of unity for them and Sunnis in general. Reverse of this is not true for any minority specially a religious minority like shieh without any substantial outside support.
    If you like to insist you must let us know what would the reason and rationality for minority Shieh or Shieh governments be to wanting a religious war/fight with majority Sunnis, if you can think of a rational reason then is fair to ask you give up your insistence on something you don’t know much about.

  43. Irshad says:

    @Kooshy – thanks – didnt think about that angle – but makes sense – only thing was that Mr Assad was busy visitng Western capitals prior to 2011 to show his a moderate as opposed to the hardliners who are in the Baath party – remnants from his fathers rule. He could not be the symbol of Atab leadership – it would have to be more the Syrian Arab Army in alliance with Hezb.

    Also does anyone take the Saudis seriously? All they care about is $$$ coming from the Saudis – and even then it may not work – as the Pakistanis recently showed by mot getting involved in Yemen. I see the Saudis are using the title “Custodian of the two Holy Sanctuaries” more pften then before. Isis, has teally dented their credibility along with all the fellow Sunni countries (Turkey,Qatar) clamouring to have the mantle of Sunni leadership.

    @Karl – there is hardly any anti-Shia sermons coming from Sunni scholars based in Algeria – ask yourself why is that? Karl, the Shunni-Shia divide was always there for hundreds of years but people – lived peacefully together – but then from 2003 things got ugly. Why? Go read the writing of people like BIn Baz, Uthaymin or current grand mufti of KSA – and see what they say about Shia, Sufis, etc.

  44. Nasser says:

    Stratfor on Turkey

    http: //www.

  45. Kooshy says:

    IMO this is not generally off and is in line what we are discussing here

    Can Washington Meet Iran’s Deepest Challenge—to US Hegemony in the Middle East?

  46. Kooshy says:

    Irshad says:
    July 22, 2015 at 5:48 pm
    Yes if Syria wouldn’t have been destabilized on a made up religious dived Syria was next in line to be the political leader of Arabs with substantial street support in all Arab states since Syria stood up never signed peace treaty and fought Arabs main enemy meaning Israel, that’s why US and her EU clientele couldn’t accept/stand a unified stable Syria, it had nothing to do with Iran, Syria supported Iran in war with Sunni supported Iraq no body asked it’s president must go, so all of the sudden what was the change? That Bashar had to go once Egypt was out?

  47. Kooshy says:

    “I’m out.”

    First as Dr Sotodeh use to said “to the left side testicle of Dr Zaryab they had to take out”.

    Second maybe for the umpteenth time it is time to be out of politics again.

  48. Rehmat says:

    Israel’s 1967 war hero, late Gen. Matti Peled’s son Miko Peled posted on his blog that Iran is not a threat to Israel. He said that Netanyahu is obsessed with Iran because the latter supports both Hamas and Hizbullah, and Hizbullah has already humiliated Jewish army twice (in 2000 and 2006). Miko then explains why the US care about Netanyahu’s rants – because US law-makers are very scared of the Jewish Lobby.

  49. Rehmat says:

    Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro in a recent interview claimed that the West has targeted Syria, Iraq and other regional countries through creating and supplying of the terrorist groups in order to destroy these counties and subjugate them to its will.

    The West has a similar agenda behind its so-called “landmark” nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic. It’s no surprise that Israel’s top European ally, German Chancellor Angela Markel has sent her vice-Chancellor and minister of economy, Sigmar Gabriel, to Tehran to re-establish old sisterly-bonds which existed under the rule of US-Israeli poodle Shah of Iran before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

  50. pragmatic says:

    The end of the nuclear challenge is nearing, the strategic relationship between the Iranian president and the leader is gradually entering a new phase due to his relatively complete support of the nuclear talks. An area which was the most imperative to be solved.

    Issues between Rohani and Ay. Khamenie could be named in three areas: white, gray and red. The nuclear issue was in white area, which they were relatively harmonious. Let’s talk about the other two areas. I vehemently like to know in which issues we’ll see their differences.

    Here are some of the areas, which I conceive we’ll see the differences:

    1- The revolutionary guards and their business endeavors.
    2- Issues of freedom and the right to dissent activities.
    3- Open competition in political parties.
    4- Freedom in areas of cultural, scientific and artistic.
    5- Fight against corruptions
    6- Iran’s policies in the region and how to capitalize Quds Force.
    7- Civil society
    8- Future of Ahmadinejad and his team
    9- Future of Khatami, Karoobi and Mousavi

    And many more. Let’s talk about Iran’s new face after the nuclear agreement. Do you believe the element of “value” is going to be replaced by the element of “expediency”? Are we about to see the forth revolution within the revolution? The first was the killing of the mullahs in the first few years of the revolution, the second was the 1367 cleansing of the Monafegheen and the third was the presidency of Khatami.

    I’d like to have your opinion about these topics.

  51. pragmatic says:

    Mr. Kooshy – I really do not understand what you are referring to, apparently you think you know me, you don’t. You keep bringing names that I don’t know.

    Bussed In Basiji: Once again if you insult me, FOHSHE KHARO MADAR is on your way. You like other hardliners just know to insult. Ahmagh a razleh kecafat can’t you convey your message without insulting?

  52. kooshy says:

    Prag. Like I wrote you there are not that many nuts who think all their wishes can materialize by 80 YO laughing nut job in a country that majority is educated and informed. It’s enough for now, I don’t care who you are but I know you have too many colorful wishful thinking. Good luck with that.

  53. kooshy says:

    IMO Mr. Rohani’s administration for two years did not do match except blaming every problem on previous administration and tying all the future economic hopes to resolving the nuclear issues so it could get the public approval for an agreement/deal much like Obama admin selling the deal to Americans as an arms control agreement the Iranian government sold the deal to her constituency as the only way she can return the growth back to the economy (basically having money to spend). With that in mind, unlike the Obama administration which is on his last term the Mr. Rohani administration between now and the election needs to improve the economy in a serious way, they no longer can blame the previous administration or the western sanctions, this could become good and rewarding if economy can show recovery by election time, or it could be a political mistake to tie their own hands politically.

  54. pragmatic says:

    هاشمی توافق هسته ای را تبریک گفت. از انتخابات 92 زدوده شدن “ابرهای تهدید از آسمان ایران گفت.
    حرف دوم آقای هاشمی شبیه تسلیت است. به همه آنانکه انزوای ایران را در دنیا می خواهند. با مصداق کاملی به نام اسرائیل. البته در دوره ای موفق شدند. با بهانه هایی که از سال 84 بدست آنها دادیم. از انکار هولوکاست تا کاغذ پاره خواندن قطعنامه ها. هاشمی از ذات صلح جویی مردم ایران می گوید. تا همه بدانند سیاست خارجی تهاجمی چقدر خطاست. تا همه بدانند منظور امام از صدور انقلاب، دخالت در دیگر کشورها نبود. هاشمی در ادامه سخنان خود از مظلومیت تیم مذاکره کننده هسته ای می گوید. از اینکه چه صبورانه پای مصلحت مردم ایستادند. هم خود هم خانواده هایشان. از تهمت هایی که شنیدند و دم نزدند. تا مصلحت مردم به مسلخ تندروها نرود. البته هاشمی خیلی پیشتر از اینها وعده این پیروزی را به ظریف داده بود. در دیدار نوروزی سال 93. هاشمی آن روز پیش بینی عاقبت کار ظریف را کرده بود. عاقبتی به نام دستیابی او و همکارانش به “بزرگترین پیروزی برای مردم ایران”. روایت مظلومیت ظریف.
    حرف بعدی هاشمی انتخابات 92 است. انتخاباتی که اگر نبود امروزی هم در کار نبود. هاشمی از نقش خودش کم می گوید. ولی از کمک شورای نگهبان، زیاد!. می گوید سهم من فقط همان ثبت نام بود و بس. سهم شورای نگهبان هم این بود که جلوی مرا گرفت تا روحانی به پیروزی برسد!. این حرف آخر کنایه تلخی است. ولی واقعیتی پیداست. واقعیتی ثبت شده در کارنامه شورای نگهبان. داوری ناعادلانه کردن در جایگاه قضاوت. عاقبتش می شود امروز که نه می توانند از تقدیس احمدی نژاد دفاع کنند و نه از رد صلاحیت هاشمی.
    از ملاقاتش با فرزند در زندان می گوید. از دوراهی که پیش پای او گذاشتند. محاکمه یا درخواست عفو از رهبری. از ملاقاتش با رهبری می گوید بعد از این ماجرا. از پرسش رهبری که نظر خودتان چیست؟. از اینکه گفته بود راضی به خرج کردن رهبری برای آزادی فرزند نیست. هزار ناگفته دارد از دادگاه فرزندش. که هر چند به نفع خویش است ولی گفتنش به نفع نظام و مردم نیست.
    حرف آخر آقای هاشمی، حرف رسانه است. درست مثل افطاری پارسال. امسال می گوید من خودم یک رسانه متحرکم. این دو تا حرف را هر آدم رسانه ای که کنارهم بگذارد. متوجه رمز و رازهای آقای رسانه ایران می شود. مردی که در رسانه ملّی هیچ خبری از او نیست. ولی پررنگ تر از صداوسیما، صدایش به مردم می رسد. هاشمی در 80 سالگی بزرگترین درس رسانه ای خود را به همه می دهد. تا بگوید تحرک رسانه ای فراتر از حصار تمام سانسورهاست. چرا که عصر ارتباطات، عصر حصر خبرها نیست. مصداق عینی اش هم خود آقای هاشمی است. که هنوز خبرسازترین سیاستمدار کشور است. چه با صدا و سیما چه بی صدا و سیما.

  55. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Angal tu kun-e Hashemi,

    As always in the last 36 years, whoever stands against Imam and Agha ends up in the dustbin of Iranian history.

    Rohani is personally very upset about how everybody puts his election victory and Presidency to the credit of Rafsanjani.

    Rohani is smart enough to know that if he has to choose between Agha and anybody else, it’s better for him to choose Agha.

    Looking forward to the new face of Iran after Rafsanjani dies.

  56. Ataune says:

    I don’t see Rouhani opposing the Leader in any political affairs. Like any two well informed individuals they can have their differences of opinion but Rouhani knows well that his role and responsibilities are on a different register than the ones of the Leader. While the president runs the affairs of the government of the country – let’s not forget he’s only elected for four years term – the Leader is the holder of the legitimacy of the system. Rouhani knows well that the interests of the state, the nation, the system, and himself too, are intertwined with the house staying intact. While he’s administering the affairs of the country by trying to keep it clean and in order, the Leader has to preserve the tent straight and upright.

  57. pragmatic says:

    او محتاج گفتن و نوشتن ما نيست او با اين تخريبها ميدان را خالي نميكند ولي تبعات و جمع جبري اين همه جفا در حق سابقين اولين بشدت با آموزه هاي اسلام ناسازگار است و به اساس و ريشه انقلاب و نظام و امام و راه نوراني امام آسيب جدي وارد ميكند. خصوصاً كه اگر اعمال و رفتار و گفتار و نوشتارمان براي خدا و دين خدا و خدمت بندگان خدا باشددر شبهات و اختلافات شاخص ما پيامبر و امير المومنين و ائمه و معصومين و مراجع و امروز هم مقام معظم رهبري فصل ختام است و نظرات آن حضرت براي همه حجت شرعي است.
    در پايان از خدا ميخواهم خواسته يا ناخواسته در برابر اردوي ولايت ودر قرار گاه اردوي آتش تهيه دشمن عليه اصحاب و ياران امام قرار نگيريم چون سخت ترين نبرد جنگ با خوديهاي فريب خورده است امير المومنين در پايان سه جنگ بزرگ و خونين سه جمله را به يادگار گذاشت يك جا فرمود: خار درچشم و استخوان در گلو اين مصائب را تحمل نمودم و در جاي ديگر با كمال سر بلندي فرمود: ” فقعت عين الفتنه” من توانستم چشم فتنه را از كاسه سر خارج نموده و فتنه را پايان دهم اما در مقابل خوارج و نهروانيان و پيشانيهاي پينه بسته با پيشينه ها درخشان با آه و تاسف ميفرمايند” يا ليتني مت قبل عشرين سنه” كاش بيست سال زودتر از دنيا رفته بودم تا شاهد فرو پاشي در اردوي خوديها نبودم.

  58. Khomeini says:

    To All

    Foreign Relations Committee – Iran Nuclear Agreement Review

    it is worth watching it.

  59. pragmatic says:

    Beya kiramo bokhor bacheh kooni

  60. Khomeini says:

    Foreign Relations Committee – Iran Nuclear Agreement Review LIVE

    Marco Rubio: Next [US] president should walk away from the deal and reimpose sanctions

  61. Khomeini says:

    Foreign Relations Committee – Iran Nuclear Agreement Review LIVE

    Sanctions on Bank Saderat will not be lifted.
    secret deal between Iran and IAEA will be heard in secret committee meeting.

  62. Ferri says:

    I like to see if one word Rafsanjani can gather a crowd as the Supreme Leader can – bet you not!

  63. Nasser says:

    “Most successful economies have outlaw pasts. Go back far enough and you’ll find that all the great powers — the United States, Great Britain, Germany — defied the conventional economic wisdom of their age in order to succeed.

    More recently, in the 1960s and 1970s, South Korea challenged the laws of comparative advantage and won. The largely agrarian country was supposed to focus on what it did best in the global economy — subcontracting for the Japanese, growing vegetables, and so on. Instead it created globally competitive steel and shipbuilding industries practically from nothing. By refusing to listen to the orthodox economists, South Korea leapfrogged from the level of a sub-Saharan African country in 1960 into the ranks of the most developed nations in one generation. China has done something similar by continuing to adhere to a state-led industrialization model.”

  64. pragmatic says:

    In his famous Friday Prayers sermon coinciding with the 2009 summer protests, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani called for national reconciliation, the release of political prisoners and freedom of the press. That there were an estimated 1.5 million worshippers attending that Friday Prayer.

  65. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 23, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    Was he asleep at the wheel when the Second Majlis altered the electoral law so that only those with “outward conformance to Islam” (the bearded crowd) could stand for elections?

    Did he not publicly admit that they – the Islamic Establishment – was wrong in its treatment of such organizations as the Tudeh Party and the Iran Freedom Movement?

    He was one of those responsible for creating the National Security State in Iran and refusing to dismantle it.

    Now he has become a Liberal and a Democrat?

  66. fyi says:

    Irshad says:

    July 22, 2015 at 5:48 pm

    Yes, Mr. Irshad I take Saudis capacity for doing fitna and all sorts of evil things quite seriously based on what you yourself had pointed out about their involvement in various wars of the Arabs.

    “Turn Persian Gulf into a gulf of friendship & peace” as Mr. Ahmadinejad suggested years ago.

  67. Khomeini says:

    professor Marandi and Soraya Sepahpour Ulrich on Iran nuclear resolution

  68. pragmatic says:


    People do change. If you accept this revolution, then you have to accept all the mistakes they made all the way to this date, and still making. Ahamdinejads mistakes were by far more than any politician in the history of Iran. He was the most illiterate politician that Middle East has seen. Let’s not forget all those years which you are referring to Mr. Khamenie and the other mullahs such as MousaviArdabili, Karoobi, MahdaviKani, Yazdi and Janati were on his bandwagon. This said, today Hashemi foresee’s a different Iran and certainly the correct one. He loves this regime like his own child, his entire life is behind it. Today he truly sees that they can’t behave the same way as they did the first 20 years of the revolution.

    Hashemi is still a decision maker in this government. Don’t you ever forget that his base in Qum and Najaf by far is stronger than any other clergymen in IRI. Khoda sayeye ishan ra az sar melat Iran barnadarad, Amin.

  69. Amir says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 23, 2015 at 11:37 pm

    Well, we know Hashemi wants to preserve the Islamic Republic alright! The problem is that he wants to preserve the Islamic Republic that he knows (and accepts) rather than the one we envision; it’s a difference of narratives.

    We think Hashemi wants to preserve the state for his children and and acquaintances, while we say Hashemi’s blood isn’t more colorful than others; he has endured hardships, has been tortured by anti-terror joint committee (SAVAK), has been involved in the post-revolutionary phases etc, that’s great, we respect that (maybe too much, since he has made many mistakes and has taken advantage of his position), but does he have to establish a network for his progeny?

    Bear in mind that I didn’t start talking about “Hashemi was the one who started degrading morals by introducing decadence and even urging others to follow his example”. Those who followed him must have wanted to do so (in their hearts) and Hsahemi didn’t hold a gun to their heads, still… الناس علی دین ملوکهم

    You support Hashemi for whatever reason; that’s OK. Just be yourself and don’t invoke Islamic and Quranic tenets.

  70. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 23, 2015 at 11:37 pm

    You are saying that Mr. Ahmadninehad’s mistakes were worse than those of the late Muhammad Shah – which caused the loss of Aran and Nakhcehvan, that of the late Shah Sultan Hussein that destroyed the Safavid state?

    You cannot be serious.

    Slandering Mr. Ahmadinejad is not going to help your cause; whatever it is.

    I understand that he is a decision-maker in the Islamic Establishment.

    But he has not repented of his past mistakes – that would require a public apology to the families of the wrongfully executed and imprisoned.

    He has not done that.

  71. pragmatic says:

    Amir Aziz,

    With all due respect I do not agree with you. At the same time I don’t expect you to subscribe to my belief. Let me assure you the Islamic Republic which Hashemi wants is not for his family. You are absolutely incorrect there. You see, all these years Hashemi has not only accommodated himself with all the changes in the world, but also with our region and the new generation post revolution in Iran.

    He has learned, experienced and seen that one can’t be a hard core revolutionary all his political life like he was prior to the revolution and the first ten years. Imam (rezvanollah tala) and his men accomplished what they had fought for so many years, which was overthrowing the Shah and monarchy. Up to death of Imam they all were still hardcore, but as they went on, he and Khatami were the two who believed that now is the time to open up the gap existed for so long with the Western countries. They knew the need to commence a two way beneficial relationship with the West. I know him very well and I know why he has altered his positions regarding some fundamental issues. Now let’s look at some of the things that have happened since Khatami’s presidency.

    The following are what you guys liked him for:

    For the past decade, Rafsanjani has shown himself to be quite adept at responding to direct and indirect attacks. When the reformist journalist Akbar Ganji held him responsible for the murder of dissidents and intellectuals in 1998, Ganji was imprisoned for six years, as conservative newspapers sang the praises of Rafsanjani and touted his revolutionary credentials. In the immediate aftermath of the bloody 1999 student
    uprisings, Rafsanjani praised the government for its use of violence against the protestors.

    This is the time you guys started disliking his excellency:

    By the 2005 presidential elections, however,
    Rafsanjani and some of the reformists were united in their opposition to Ahmadinejad, allowing bygones to (somewhat) be bygones. Ahmadinejad thereupon picked up the mantle of critiquing Rafsanjani from the reformists, turning it into a successful campaign tactic and continuing the criticism during his first term as president. In October 2006, without directly naming Rafsanjani, he called him “selfish and without piety.” Ahmadinejad’s unprecedented attack on Rafsanjani was seen at the time as a reflection of the former’s attempt to “fully eliminate from the political system Mr. Rafsanjani’s spectrum of supporters.” The reasons for this attempted purge were both practical and ideological. On the one hand, Rafsanjani was perceived to be one of Ahmadinejad’s most powerful enemies from within the ruling elite; but additionally, among Ahmadinejad’s supporters, there was general agreement that “Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani’s moderation [as president] had slowly given away the fruits of the Revolution. This is absolutely a false allegation.

    The main issue between his excellency and his foes is the REPUBLIC. If we consider Hojatolislam ol Muslemin Mesbah and Hojatieh as his foe. In his only Friday sermon since the election, on July 17th, Haj Agha, to the delight of the opposition,
    warned against the elimination of the republican aspects of the Islamic Republic: “The title of Islamic Republic is not just a formality. This is
    a reality passed on to us on the basis of the Koran, as well as the religious sayings of the (Shiite) Imams and the prophet. We believe in them. We should have them [the Islamic and
    the Republic] at the same time. Rest assured, if one of those two aspects is damaged, we will lose our Revolution. If it loses its Islamic aspect, we will go astray. If it loses its republican aspect, it [the Islamic Republic] will not be realized. Based on
    the reasons that I have offered, without people and their vote there would be no Islamic system.”

    His excellency’s anxiety over the weakening of the Republic was not just about the system; it was also personal. Since the death of Imam Khomeini, Rafsanjani has played power politics in Iran
    almost exclusively through republican institutions. He pushed for constitutional changes that made the presidency stronger than ever before—and, moreover, his presidency was marked by an intense push and pull between the executive branch and the parliament, another republican institution. His presidency created the conditions that led to the rise and the electoral success of the reform movement in the 1990s; when the reformists attempted to shut him out, he responded by trying to enter politics through the 2000 parliamentary elections. And when the radical Right, in turn, sought to purge him from the system, he ran for and won the election for the Assembly of Experts.

    As you see Amir jan, Hajagha cannot be eliminated from the system, he is too powerful on the contrary of what some people think. His popularity has rise tenfold since 2009 and many who disliked him before are now his strong advocate and they look at him as the only one who can take Iran save the Islamic Republic of Iran. We all saw how he played his cards in the last election. He is too smart and too wise to be eliminated. He knows that in order for Iran to sustain her power and gain more global recognition, certain policies internally and externally has to change. As you see the regime is implementing those and Hajagha is behind all of them. As you see Delvapasan are against the treaty. BTW, Faezeh khanum aziz served her term. Mehdi if convicted he will too.

    Henceforth, don’t be naive like Kooshy and that bad mouth jerk B.K. here, his excellency wants the best not only for the Islam but also for the Republic.

    Another note: Hajagha’s fmaily are all thieves? How about the $750 Billion revenue during the cleanest government of Iranian history “Ahmadinejad”? What happened? Why you guys do not mention other Ayatollahs and their agha zadehs? Do you remember when Yazdi started to go over his limit, Hajagha said “In a written statement I will say about Yazdi’s position in electing a leader of Imam’s death, and the Shumal forests!” Another example was “Mohmmad Khamenie”!

    I’m out.

  72. pragmatic says:

    I forgot to add the Islamic Republic which Hashemi wants is exactly the same as what Imam Khomieni wanted. I suggest you get your hands on his books,especially
    ازاد اندیشی اسلامی – روشن فکری دینی

    I was at Tashkis Maslhat couple of months ago and I was given the book.

  73. pragmatic says:

    @FYI aziz.

    I am perplexed! You are an advocate of Ahmadinejad who ruined this country? You know what in ten years if not sooner you guys shall learn who he was!

    I am so upset that you compare Ahmadinejads accomplishments (none) with Hazrateh Ayatollah Hashemi’s? At the end of the day who prevailed and who is one of the decision makers of the regime? Mahmood “haleh noor”, “Abo beriz onjayee keh misoozeh”, “yek dokhtareh 14 saleh ba ghablameh tu khoonash ghanisazi kardeh”, “In mamaro looloo bordeh”, “a kid in NYC told her mama, look look it’s mahamood” or Hashemi Rafsanjani?

    Be real stop distorting the history, the facts, the figures?
    Ahmadinejad has been thrown to history garbage dustbin.


  74. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 24, 2015 at 10:08 am

    When the late Reza Shah asked the late Dr. Abbas Iqbal Ashtiyani to write a history of his reign, late Dr. Iqbal replied: “The histories of sovereigns are written after their deaths”. Which caused the late Dr. Iqabal to suffer the wrath of the King and so on and so forth.

    The historical evaluation of the administrations of Mr. Rafsanjani and Mr. Ahmadinejad will need to be performed 2 generations from now – 40 years. “They came, they exercised power, they made decisions, and they left the scene” is all that we can state with certainty at the present time.

    There may be significant and justified criticisms that could be addressed at both, I am sure, and those will depend on one’s own value-judgments as to what are more important and significant values in human life.

    Since I am a person for whom Freedom and Dignity (Keramat Ensani) of a human being are most important, I cannot gloss over Mr. Rafsanjani’s decisions that again abridged the intrinsic rights of the individuals in Iran.

    There was the certainty among the Islamic Revolutionaries in 19179 that the new Islamic Republic would be restoring the Just Rule of Imam Ali.

    That did not happen; Iranians under the Islamic Republic experienced the same abuses of Due Process of Law that has been endemic to all Muslims everywhere under native Muslim Rule – be it civilian, monarchical, dictatorial, military, religious or any other form of government.

    Mr. Rafsanjani bears direct and indirect responsibility for much of that in my opinion because he has been present and in a position to influence decisions that abridged the rights of Iranians and disrespected them.

    One has to ask him: “Did you do your utmost to uphold the Law, to Protect the Innocent, to Respect the Individual Muslim, his property, his namus, his dignity?”

    The fact remains that there is still not a single Muslim country in which a Muslim is safe in his person, in his property and in his namus.

    That was what Mr. Rafsanjani was promising in 1979 and that which he has failed to deliver to this date.

  75. Amir says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 24, 2015 at 9:44 am

    Thanks for your detailed reply.

    All I can say is our difference of opinion about the said individual rests upon our notion of what is “good” for the country and the state.

    I have been looking at Hashemi as an alternative within the state (during the past 10 years or so), who at times had professed that he’s trying to prevent dissenters from radicalizing; people criticize such individuals as “check-valves for the system”, but they could call them “hula-hoops” or “water lilies” if they deem that proper. One issue is Ayatollah professes to be doing all these things for the sake of state and Islam, but I can not help smiling when imagining someone saying “even though it pains me, I would eat this delicious cake/ award this contract to my associates/ “select” this MP for people, for the sake of [whatever]”.

    I know! The comparison isn’t accurate at all, but still…

    Also, you mentioned others’ acquaintances; many believe if it weren’t for his excellencies children, others wouldn’t dare go as far as they have gone.
    اگــر ز بــاغ رعیــت ملــك خورد سیبی. بــر آورنــد غلامـــان او درخت از بیخ
    به پنج بیضه كه سلطان ستم روا دارد. زنند لشكریانش هزار مرغ به سیخ
    َAgain, not justifying what others have done, but you know…

    Finally, about 750-800 billion dollars; some of it was used to import electronics and consumer goods, which flood this country today; many of my classmates who voted for Mousavi (and accused Ahmadinejad of squandering public budget) were the squanderers (if that’s even a word) themselves. Much of went into expanding gas projects, petrochemical plants, telecommunication infrastructure, many many [possibly useless, sometimes wasteful] higher education academic centers and research institutes, but which had better be used to jump-start recovery/ progress/ innovation/ whatever.

    Finally, since you persist about the word “republic”, Ahmadinejad represented the masses and Hashemi (willingly or not) represents the elite. Mixing Ahmadinejad with Mesbah Yazdi and Hojattiyeh and Ekhbarioun and … wouldn’t solve that.

  76. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Don Akbar was never “good”- not before, not after the revolution.

    He was always in it for his own wealth and position.

    He sacrificed and continues to sacrifice whoever and whatever he has to, to stay in power and maintain his wealth and network of angals.

    Go ask some of the angals that he flushed out when they were no longer needed.

    The only “ideology” he has is the one that will allow him to stay in a position of privilege at any given time.

    He wasn’t “revolutionary” and “hezbolllahi” back then, nor is he “liberal” and “democratic” today.

    He is the main source of most of the wrong things there is in the Islamic Republic today.

    Whoever has ogd-e, kin-e, nefagh with Islam, the revolution, Imam and Agha votes for and supports him, whoever loves Islam, the revolution, Imam and Agha prays for Hazrat Izrael to pay him a visit.

    These are the facts of this file.

  77. kooshy says:

    “Henceforth, don’t be naive like Kooshy and that bad mouth jerk B.K. here, his excellency wants the best not only for the Islam but also for the Republic”.

    The rule for a grown up blogging and on line debate is; that, in your comments you just can’t make me an example for good or bad, but in the same time, ask me not to respond to your really childish political ideas and unconceivable wishes.
    It shows that you have learned a lot from the Ay. Laughing Nut Job, and it reminds me of Ahmadinejad vs Moussavi and Sheikh debate, it was fair to put him down but not fair if he says that the very learned to be first lady of Iran (similar to putting watermelons Under Arms of our own Noble Peace Prize winner, which dint work) had a fake diploma, or about Nut job’ children.
    As far as, Ay. Nut job goes he is lucky that due to Mr. Khamenei he has a state job, otherwise he lost all his last campaigns for any electoral seats, that’s how much support he has. You like him great, and dandy, good for you. Wondering, why we don’t have many politically smart ones like you in Iran.

  78. pragmatic says:


    I really enjoy reading your analysis, however, it doesn’t mean I agree with you. This said, you wrote:

    FYI says:”….Iranians under the Islamic Republic experienced the same abuses of Due Process of Law that has been endemic to all Muslims everywhere under native Muslim Rule – be it civilian, monarchical, dictatorial, military, religious or any other form of government.”

    “Mr. Rafsanjani bears direct and indirect responsibility for much of that in my opinion because he has been present and in a position to influence decisions that abridged the rights of Iranians and disrespected them.”

    Pragmatic: To certain degree the the first paragraph is correct. The question is this: Was Ayatollah Hashemi the only politician ruling the country then? Imam, Ayatollahozma Montazeri, Dr. Beheshti, Ahmad Khominie, Bahonar, Ray Shahri, Mothari, Mousavi Ardebili, Leader (Khamenie), Janati, Yazdi, Mousavi Khooiniha, Karoobi, Mohmmadi Gilani, Khalkhali, Azari Ghomi, Momen, Meshkini, Amini, Mahdavi Khani, Sanaie brothers, so on and so forth were only observers?!

    FYI says: One has to ask him: “Did you do your utmost to uphold the Law, to Protect the Innocent, to Respect the Individual Muslim, his property, his namus, his dignity?”f

    Pragmatic: If we assume all the aforementioned were not upheld, was due to the system philosophy or an individual named Hashemi? Of course it was the system. He was like the others a piece of the system.

    FYI says: That was what Mr. Rafsanjani was promising in 1979 and that which he has failed to deliver to this date.

    Pragmatic: As I alluded in my original post, he has seasoned and changed during all these years. But still he is steadfast with Imam’s political viewpoints.

  79. pragmatic says:

    @ Amir

    You wrote: “Finally, since you persist about the word “republic”, Ahmadinejad represented the masses and Hashemi (willingly or not) represents the elite.”

    Pragmatic: The above statement is so raw! Ahmadinejad does not believe in “Republic”, how could you so affarmitively say Mahmood represents masses and Hashemi doesn’t? Ahmadinejad deceived people with cheap talks, and in certain areas by bribing them. The elite in Iran grew up like mashrooms during Ahmadinejad. Did we have so many luxury cars prior to Mahmood’s presidency? No we didn’t. Did we have all these skyscrapers and towers before Mahmood? No we didn’t.

    In what kind of a condition Hashemi took over the government and in what conditions Mahmood?
    If you are comparing compare apple to apple. Just remember this: withing next 15 months you’ll see who did good and who did bad for this country.

  80. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 24, 2015 at 2:46 pm ]

    The late Dr. Beheshti was already dead when the most egregious violations of law took place. He was the best, no doubt.

    The other that you have mentioned also have their share of responsibility.

    They also failed miserably in what they had promised “Hokumat-e Ali.”

    But we are not talking about them.

    So he was part of a system and the “System” thought for him? Did he have no individual volition and moral responsibility?

    If he has changed, he can publicly apologize for his own individual actions and extent sincere apologies to any an all.

    That is the first step if one to believe him.

    Next, he could publicly lobby for the changes to the electoral laws – for a start.

  81. pragmatic says:

    A poster here who carries unprecedented complex wrote:

    “…Whoever has ogd-e, kin-e, nefagh with Islam, the revolution, Imam and Agha votes for and supports him, whoever loves Islam, the revolution, Imam and Agha prays for Hazrat Izrael to pay him a visit.”

    All I can say is WOW! You are really a master piece. Praying for ones death is sick. You are a sick poppy. I really suggest you pay a visit to the nearest veterinarian close to your barn.

  82. pragmatic says:


    His actions since 2005 is louder than an apology! They way his political actions have altered, suffices. Do you remember his last but historic Friday prayer? He “yek taneh” stood in front of the hardliners and astray. Why people like Shariatmadari, and Mesbah attack him? Because he has apologized by his new stand for Islamic Republic of Iran.

  83. ordinary says:

    Hashemi is more a question than an answer for Iran.

    Unfair to say elites do like Hashemi, not categorically. Those I met who liked Hashemi like him for his potential to reduce Islamic republic down to a label (they say remedy to an snake’s bite is from the snake). Same group would prefer Reza Pahlavi if he was viable. A famous phrase then repeated after Hashemi was “everything is lawful, if you find the culture how to use it” – obviously purposely made to extrapolate to your heart content. Western investigative media consistently characterized him the slippery politician of Iran.

    What are his significant contributions, books and renown speeches, what are his philosophic and religious contributions? What makes him deserve the post he holds?

    On what basis should he be given the benefit of the doubt now: “that he has seasoned”!!! please!!!

    Yet, there are worst conspiracy theories related to this man, in the west regarding Hafte Tir, he was often favorite subject of the circles, “how a curious phone call, literally a minute before the bomb, called him out of the meeting” – let’s leave it as a conspiracy theory for waste of time and by the westerners.

    An “ayatollah” with POWER and MONEY, what has he done to exemplify a Moslem leader and a role model?

    Well, among the many more deserved Iranian leaders, we can afford to discount Hashemi – for Hashemi falls on the side of risk and liability. To choose or promote Hashemi is an insult to intelligence, specially from a source claiming to be pragmatic.

  84. kooshy says:

    If there is only one important difference between Mr. Ahmadinejad and all other Iranian presidents since Mr. Rafsanjani that should be his tolerance for the system that had he was elected in.
    What I mean is that we all know Iran has been challenging US’ hegemony and is been under US pressure ever since the revolution. But Is just since Mr. Rafsanjani’s presidency that US has been trying to undermine/ containing Iran’ influence and system by using very sever intrusive economic/scientific etc. sanctions. Which started with Iran and Libya Sanctions Act during Clinton’s first term. And it picked to its severest point after Mr. Ahmadinejad’s reelection of 2009.

    During their time in office for all the last four presidents of Iran including the current seating presidents, the decision to challenge the US hegemony was correctly a national security decision at the system (Nezam) level, and correctly still is. So the decision to challenge US hegemony to stablish and maintain Iran’ sovereignty and independence never was and still is not an administrative cabinet level decision, basically constitutionally presidents of Iran do not possess the power to set overall policies of the system (Nezam).

    Except for Dr. Ahmadinejad, all three other presidents were clergies, all three all the time blamed the economic difficulties of the country on the US sanctions, all three compromised or tried to compromise (to what the system allowed) with the hegemon in chief, for some economic or sanction relief, never the less all three failed, Never the less they turned back and they blamed the failure of the economic improvement on the system’s decision (basically the leadership) to challenge the US for Iran’s independence. Mr. Ahmadinejad is the only president who based on the system’ decision also challenged the US/West for Iran’s sovereignty but also accepted as the head of the administrative branch to be the system’ fall guy and take the blame for economic miss management, instead of turning back and put the responsibility on the system, especially when Iran necessarily had to stand up to the most severe sanctions ever since the revolution. He took it on the chin and he didn’t blame the system or the leadership for being blamed for the Nezam’ decision to increase Iran’s bargaining chips as Mr. Kerry vaguely mentioned yesterday.

  85. fyi says:

    ordinary says:

    July 24, 2015 at 3:30 pm

    “everything is lawful, if you find the culture how to use it”

    This reminds me of the famous saying of the late Saint Paul: “Everything is permitted provided you can justify it.”

    Of course, he meant justifying it to God when facing the Judgment Day.

  86. Rehmat says:

    @pragmatic – Your knowledge about Dr. Ahmadinejad is pathetic based on Israeli hasbara and Uri Avnery, the idiot who claimed in 2013 that Dr. Ahmadinejad was an Israeli Mossad agent.

    Ahmadinejad was the second most popular elected president of Iran after president Ali Khamenei before he became the country’s supreme Leader.

    In July 2013, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenie, in a meeting with the outgoing President Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his cabinet in Tehran, lauded their performance during the last eight years.

    The Leader criticized measures to underestimate the efforts of the government, saying the Iranian nation must be notified of the administration’s services.

    “Some even deny the administration’s concrete actions, but what matter is that efforts and attempts be expressed and recorded in country’s public scene,” said the Leader.

    No compare Ahmadinejad with Benjamin Netanyahu who couldn’t muster more than 23% votes. Morally he is so corrupt that during his ten years stay, he cheated American taxpayers by using four different names.

  87. masoud says:

    Some people are talking about the *windfall revenues* of Ahmadinejad’s terms in office. When it comes to the economic realities of their own countries, many Iranians are woefully ignorant. Here’s something to chew on:

  88. ordinary says:

    Many thought Hashemi is showing them a way out of repression. They reinterpreted “everything is lawful, if you find the culture how to use it” to mean: live however you like but don’t make it public. Hashemi was considered by these as a leader in the waiting – who understood human nature and tyranny of times. His statement was not offensive to the devout either, as private matters are between man and God.

    There was a shrewdly positive effect from his statement, like Persian poetry, the open interpretation made the social order livable for all that took Hashemi’s lead – devout and secular.

    Hashemi is a shrewd and smart man. This notion that “he has / is seasoned” means he can now treat the broader public. I suspect he unwittingly might lead the nation towards separation of church and state – that is when one’s smarts becomes the nation’s enemy – I give a disproportionate allegory: Mauviah was a very smart and shrewd politician, after Imam Ali, he was considered by the elders as the most suitable to lead the empire of Islam, in establishing his order, he unwittingly divided the nation and blamed it on the Ahlul Bayt, to what end God only knows).

    Hence Hashme’s shrewdness seems to me a risk not worth taking. To the contrary, while Imam Ali was a very smart man but he never misled people numbing them into hypocrisy; he had strong speeches, robust policies and a sound philosophy. A strong leader can lead the people with honesty, however rough the rid may be.

  89. masoud says:

    Hashemi and his ilk represent the biggest challenge Iran faces. They are a much more serious threat than the US. If they are allowed to have their way, they will implement the very same cultural political and economic policies that have turned Ukraine to such beautiful bouquet of flowers.

  90. pragmatic says:

    Well, you guys are very interesting! After the death of Imam, Ayatollah Khamenie became the leader and his first president was Hashemi. As we all have read he consulted with his buddy from old times about everything that they did. Thus, questioning Hashemi is questioning Rahbari!

    What happened then?! The leader for some reason that is beyond me supported Ahmadinejad for 8 years. This support was inclusive of offensive foreign nuclear and military policies. What happened in the end? Hashemi’s strategy prevailed and what he had said 12 years ago is now getting implemented, Direct talks with the US was one. As Mr. ordinary or someone else said he is a shrewd and a smart man. After eight years of Mahmood which was a disaster, now everything done is by Hashemi and his team.

    عاقبت تحمل سختی رهبران چیست؟
    اى پيامبر] آيا به نفعت شرح صدرت نداديم؟ و بار سنگينت را فرو نهاديم آن بارى كه براى تو كمرشكن بود پس [بدانكه] قطعاً [باهر]سختى آسانى هست (ج16فرهنگ قرآن ، ص642)

  91. Rehmat says:


    After comparing Ayatullah Hashemi with Imam Ali – I guess your next comparison will between the Butcher Ariel Sharon with Moses.

    In case you need some help – I recommend you to study Old Testament.

    In 2011, in an Op-Ed, Rabbi Dow Marmur at Toronto’s Holy Blossom Temple (Toronto) suggested that Holocaust should be added as the “Eleventh Commandment” to cover Israel’s war crimes.

  92. fyi says:

    ordinary says:

    July 24, 2015 at 6:41 pm

    His position was one of dissimulation and living a lie.

    Unfortunately, neither Mr. Rafsanjani nor others – including the bulk of the Iranian people – are willing to admit that living under the strictures of Fiqh is not possible and insistence on doing so will lead to the disintegration of the Iranian state.

    As long as Islam and Fiqh are presumed to be identical, this cleavage and problematic will persist.

    Such people, ultimately, cannot find any religious fault either with Taliban, or ISIS, or with Iran during the Naseri Period of the late Naseraldin Shah – everything is/was perfectly in alignment with Fiqh.

    By the way, Arabs – in any day – love Mua’awiyah and prefer him to Imam Ali.

  93. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 25, 2015 at 7:18 am

    The offensive nuclear strategy has left Iran in a position to quickly build nuclear weapons if the security situation for Iran deteriorates.

    There was no other way.

  94. Rd. says:

    pragmatic says:

    “What happened then?! The leader for some reason that is beyond me supported Ahmadinejad for 8 years. This support was inclusive of offensive foreign nuclear and military policies. What happened in the end? Hashemi’s strategy prevailed and what he had said 12 years ago is now getting implemented, Direct talks with the US was one.”

    You sound like the american polity who keep harping, the sanctions brought IRI to negotiating table or that IRI was making a BOMB!!?!!?! There is the perceived reality promoted by the western msm and polity and then there is the real life.

    You seemed so enumerated with anything and every thing with Mr Rafsanjani? That also ‘seems’ to be one of the characteristic of Mr Rafsanjani. It is all about rafsanjani and not ‘Islamic Republic of Iran’ as a whole entity. In that by itself, is A great flaw.

  95. Ferri says:

    Naturally people who like Rafsanjani cannot possibly see any positive aspects about Ahmadinejad; in fact they hate him like the plague. There is no objective view in their analysis but pure hatred.

    No matter how the anti-Ahmadinejad/Pro-Rafsanjani clan wants to frame it Ahmadinejad was the President of the “people”, the masses, not only in Iran but for the mainstream Arab public. He was the most popular leader in the Arab world along with Hassan Nasrallah. Here is a Shiite, Iranian President who won the hearts and minds of majority Sunni-Arab public; something which brought fear and resentment to the elites and the puppet dictators in those countries. When asked why the people of the street like him, he is a “Shiite” and an “Iranian” – the answer was we look at him as a “Muslim” who defends all of our rights.

    He was blunt when outside of Iran and equally blunt when in Iran, but always was and still is the man of the people. He of course had to be black-balled for raising issues no one dared to raise whether outside of the country or inside. Is there any wonder why there was a fierce campaign against him in the last 2+ years of his public office.

    As for Ayatollah Khamenei he continued to state that his views are more similar to that of Ahmadinejad. And in one of his latest public speeches in front of the “Nezam” he made it clear that all of Iran’s significant accomplishments in the nuclear field were conducted during the past 10 years – i.e. the Ahmadinejad period.

    Iran’s nuclear negotiating team benefited from all of the progress which was done in the nuclear arena under Ahmadinejad to then claim victory with the P5+1 and a break-through in dialogue with the US. What “Victory”, is still left to be seen! Was it a surrender of Iran’s independence and sovereign rights or was it a break-through, history will tell.

  96. fyi says:

    Ferri says:

    July 25, 2015 at 9:37 am

    Tell them brother…

  97. pragmatic says:

    Just today…

    آيت‌ا… هاشمي به مثابه درخت تنومندي است كه وزش بادهاي مخالف تنها لبخندي بر لب او و دعايي در دلش براي اصلاح تندروها مي‌آورد.

  98. Amir says:

    ما بچه بودیم یک عده تو نماز جمعه میگفتن مخالف هاشمی، مخالف رهبر است، مخالف رهبری دشمن پیغمبر است. بعدا شد مخالف هاشمی دشمن پیغمبر است. یکی از
    اون شعاردهنده ها رو الآن پیدا کردم.

  99. Amir says:

    And pray tell me Mr Pragmatic, when you say Hashemi was this leader’s first president, are suggesting the leader appoints the president? Otherwise someone might say Bani sadr was Emam Khomeini’s first president, or better still, Ahmadinejad was agha’s third president, and so forth.

    We in our family didn’t like what we percieved as a tactic to cause a rift between these two friends, but we were wrong and as you have stated yourself, Hashemi’s plan was different from that of the lawful head of state of Iran, and our loyalty rests with those mentioned in the constitution.

  100. pragmatic says:


    What I meant was very clear, the first president of his leadership was Hashemi. No, he doesn’t elect presidents. You guys are criticizing Hashemi’s presidency and you are saying that all the current problems of Iran were his fault, then why the leader didn’t stop him or punish him during his eight years as his presidency? Why is he still in Iranian politics. Before you answer this, think twice. If you are going to give me some BS and distorted facts, then please bear me! Please! Every day I am reading a bunch of nonsense and bullshit replies with animosity.

    I can’t wait for the day that the headlines of all the newspapers and Iranian websites says “Ahmadinejad is arrested”. Thus far, two of his vice presidents are in jail, take some fruit salad to Evin and talk to each other about how great Mahmood is. Well let me correct myself, Rahimi is no longer on his bandwagen. Thus you and Baghaie can praise him as much as you wish.

    Let’s forget about Hashemi, let’s talk about how a fourteen year old girl enriched uranium with a couple of pots. Let’s talk about his monthly visits to different states which cost the people of Iran millions of dollars. Let’s talk about how isolated Iran was during his clean government.

    You guys are either blind or traitors or morons.

  101. Ataune says:


    Why you would want any former president of IRI arrested?
    That is from a legitimacy point of view among the worst thing to happen to the political system in place… any political system in any place.
    This would as well be a personal disaster for Hashemi and his family, having gained every political, and economic, fame and gain they have now thanks to the Revolution and to the system in place.

  102. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 24, 2015 at 3:05 pm

    “If he has changed, he can publicly apologize for his own individual actions and extent sincere apologies to any an all.

    That is the first step if one to believe him.

    Next, he could publicly lobby for the changes to the electoral laws – for a start.”

    I think that is a tall order to ask for. Concepts like public apology, challenging and being challenged with dignity and criticism are alien to Iranian culture. In fact, even if he comes out and does apologize for the excesses -such as ingraining tazahor and hypocrisy in society through trumping merit in favor of fake pashm-o-rish or for uprooting Iran’s indigenous private industrial structure and torturing Iranian industrial entrepreneurs like Haji Barkhordar- I do not think the people will understand what the apology means and know about its utility in progress of a nation.

    In a culture such as Iran, it will be seen as a sign of weakness and “being eternally wrong”. I personally think the most vile and unforgive-able failure of Mr Hashemi was his failure to return the confiscated wealth and belongings of people like Haji Barkhordar while Mr Hashemi’s family and friends were running around looting Iran. I am sure Mr Hashemi and others will have to answer to and will be held accountable by the likes of Haji Barkhordar who are waiting for them on the other side of this reality. These thoughts should be quite troubling for an octogenarian of a religious disposition.

    But Mr Hashemi despite his promotion of financial corruption, cultural destruction and his pathetic management of war, did some good stuff too. For instance, he was the first leader in Iranian history (to my knowledge) who tried to promote and make heros and heroines out of young Iranian geniuses in science. He had taken a deep interest in making sure Iran perform excellently in science olympiads for high school students. He used to personally receive these olympiad students, giving them a hero’s welcome with full red carpet protocol from airport to presidential palace, in a more elaborate manner than any movie star or sports star ever could wish for. One of those students was Dr Mirzakhani. If it was not for Mr Hashemi people like Dr Mirzakhani would not have shone. Mr Hashemi by giving these bright kids the right environment made sure these very few young Iranian talents could rise up. Though even in this arena, there was huge mismanagement but it was the first time, indigenous science and mathematics talent was made into an honorable treasure at the state level. I think his overall pathetic presidency had only this one good thing. After his presidency, of course he has been generally a negative force in the country specially during the kapak movement.

    I agree with you that he should try to lobby for change. But I think the goal for which he is lobbying is a huge one and goes beyond electoral laws. I estimate that he is lobbying to modify the seat of Rahbari, to either make it into a consultative assembly or to make it into having a limited time in office arrangement. These modification apparently, are to be implemented after Mr Khamenei (and Mr Hashemi as well). A kind of posthumous signature of Mr Hashemi on Iran’s history. If he succeeds, ultimately this will become what he will be remembered for.

  103. Smith says:

    15 year old boy built a mini nuclear reactor in his home:

  104. Smith says:

    How I built a nuclear reactor at the age of 13 | Jamie Edwards | TEDxCERN :

  105. Smith says:

    13 and 14 year old nuclear fusioneers:

  106. Smith says:

    This Teenager Will Revolutionize Nuclear Power | Archives | NBC News:

  107. Smith says:

    President Obama listening to a briefing by a teenager nuclear fusioneer:

  108. Smith says:

    Now ain’t science fun?

  109. pragmatic says:


    Haji Barkhordar was not tortured nor arrested, so stop saying this BS all the time. His factory and businesses were confiscated. He returned to Tehran in early 90’s and he got his house back. He died a few years back in Tehran due to old age and alzhiemer. His son started their exclusive agencies which they has prior to the revolution in Iran in early 90’s. So stop lying and giving wrong facts to people. Currently Badr Electrics is one his sons’ companies in Iran, which they have the exclusivity of Toshiba brand and many other electronic equipments.

    Go to search the google and you see.

  110. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 25, 2015 at 12:44 pm

    To wish for the arrest and trial of Mr. Ahmadinejad is to wish for the demise of the Islamic Republic of Iran for, in the absence of a Rule of Law, any and all charges or sentences against him could equally be brought against the next President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    Such a precedent would weaken the Presidency of the Islamic Republic and the fear of being tried through the machinations of this or that faction would lead to the paralysis of the state and state organs.

    I hope that people in Iran are not so stupid to open the door to the destruction of their state and demise of their sovereignty through this door.

  111. masoud says:

    Smith says:
    July 25, 2015 at 1:27 pm
    That’s quite dumb. You really should be embarrassed.

  112. Smith says:

    حاج برخوردار یزدی حدودچهارده شرکت را تاسیس کرد و در سطح کشور گسترش کرد که با وجود گذشت زمان هنوز این شرکتهای در بین مردم نام آشنا و معروف است

    1. شركت پارس الكتریك
    2. شركت تهران الكتریك
    3. شركت باتری سازی قوه پارس
    4. شركت پارس الكتریك
    5. شركت لوازم خانگی
    6. پارس شركت كالای الكتریكی البرز
    7. شركت كشت و صنعت جیرفت
    8. شركت فرش پارس
    9. شركت كارتن البرز
    10. شركت كاشی پارس
    11. شركت سرامیك البرز

    حاج محمدتقی برخوردار از كودكی در تجارتخانه پدر كار می كرد تا اینكه 18 ساله شد و دیپلم گرفت و به بهانه تحصیل به تهران آمد. اما به تحصیل در دانشگاه رغبتی نداشت، كار دولتی را نیز نمی پسندید و بیشتر دلباخته تجارت بود. در تهران حجره ای در سرای امید روبه روی مسجد شاه خرید و تجارت را پیشه كرد. كارت بازرگانی نداشت و تا سال ها به نمایندگی از پدر و سه برادر دیگرش در شركت خانوادگی پدر كار می كرد.

    پس از فوت پدر در 1340 بود كه برادران برخوردار مستقل شدند و محمدتقی به همراهی برادرش هاشم كار را پی گرفت. پدر مذهبی نگران منحرف شدن اخلاق پسر بر اثر آزادی های زندگی در تهران بود اما شواهد نشان می دهد كه این اتفاق نیفتاد و همه اطرافیان می گویند محمدتقی راستی و سلامت نفس و نماز را تا آخر حفظ كرد.

    محمدتقی تا 25 سالگی به صادرات و واردات در شركت پدر مشغول بود و پس از استقلال به واردات وسایل مدرن خانگی پرداخت. برخلاف پدر كه خرید و فروش محصولات كشاورزی را پیشه كرده بود، محمدتقی علاقه عجیبی به وارد كردن لوازم مدرن زندگی آن روزها مثل پنكه، رادیو، یخچال و ماشین حساب داشت. 15 سال طول كشید كه او به فكر ساختن همین وسایل در ایران بیفتد. این كار در آن زمان جسارت بسیاری می خواست.

    برخوردار با اینكه تحصیلات دانشگاهی نداشت، دارای فكر مدرنی در مدیریت شركت هایی بود كه تاسیس می كرد. این فكر در زندگی خانوادگی او نیز نمایان بود. در 33 سالگی تصمیم به ازدواج گرفت و برای این كار، زنی را كه قبلاً ازدواج كرده بود و بچه هم داشت انتخاب كرد. این كار با سنت رایج آن سال ها جور در نمی آمد اما برخوردار اعتنایی به این مسائل نداشت.

    او در سال 38 شركت پارس الكتریك و در سال 47 شركت تهران الكتریك را برای واردات و گرفتن نمایندگی شركت های معتبر بین المللی بنا نهاد. او به تدریج نمایندگی شركت های توشیبا، آكائی، سان سوئی، سیكو، جنرال الكتریك، كندی، الیوتی و دووال را به دست آورد.

    از سال 41 برخوردار دست به كار تولید برخی از محصولاتی شد كه وارد می كرد. این كار برای تاجر جوانی كه می خواست پیچیده ترین محصولات آن روزگار را تولید كند، خطر بزرگی محسوب می شد. اولین شركتی كه تاسیس كرد، شركت باتری سازی بود. در سال 41 با همكاری شركت ری.او.واك امریكا، در سه قطع باتری تولید كرد كه بر آن «قوه پارس» نام نهاد. ابتدا امریكایی ها 85 درصد سهام شركت را در اختیار داشتند اما چند سال كه گذشت، برخوردار توانست 70 درصد سهام را از آن طرف ایرانی كند. قوه پارس در 12 سال، سه كارخانه تاسیس كرد.

    یك سال بعد، در سال 42 حاج محمدتقی بزرگ ترین كار زندگی اش را انجام داد و شركت پارس الكتریك را تاسیس كرد. او موفق شد در كارخانه های این شركت رادیو و تلویزیون بسازد و در سال 56 تلویزیون رنگی هم تولید كرد. محصولات این كارخانه تحت لیسانس توشیبا، شاوب لورنس و بعدها گروندیك بود. پارس الكتریك در اوج كار خود، سالانه 200 هزار دستگاه رادیو و تلویزیون تولید می كرد.

    پارس توشیبا كه اكنون به پارس خزر معروف است، از دیگر شركت هایی بود كه برخوردار در سال 47 پایه گذاری كرد. او با همكاری توشیبا و بانك توسعه صنعتی و معدنی این كار را انجام داد و در كارخانه هایش آبمیوه گیری، پنكه،چرخ گوشت، بخاری، هواكش و پلوپز ساخت. قرار بود در همین شركت ماشین لباسشویی، اتو و كولر گازی هم تولید كند كه به انقلاب برخورد. شركت لامپ پارس توشیبا هم در همان سال شكل گرفت و لامپ رشته ای و فلورسنت تولید كرد. فعالیت های برخوردار به تدریج توسعه می یافت و بالا رفتن قیمت نفت و رونق اقتصادی نیز به آن كمك می كرد. البته او پیش از گران شدن نفت، شش شركت تاسیس كرده بود. برخوردار در سال 54 شركت لوازم خانگی پارس را با همكاری جنرال الكتریك امریكا راه اندازی كرد تا در ایران یخچال و فریزر و ماشین لباسشویی بسازد. این شركت اكنون یكی از شركت های مهم لوازم خانگی ایران است.

    برخوردار تنها به لوازم خانگی بسنده نكرد. او تصمیم گرفت شركت هایی تاسیس كند كه به طور تخصصی لوازم برقی تولید می كنند. با همین فكر، در سال 51 شركت ورشكسته كالای الكتریك را خرید تا سرپیچ و كلید و پریز تولید كند و بعدها به ساخت انواع ساعت سیكو رو آورد. در سال 54 با همكاری لگراند فرانسه و بانك توسعه صنعتی و معدنی، شركت كالای الكتریكی البرز را تاسیس كرد كه كارش تولید انواع كلید و پریز، دوشاخه، آنتن و فیش تلویزیون بود.

    كشاورزی یكی از سنت ها در خاندان برخوردار بود و او در اوج روزگاری كه تلویزیون و پلوپز تولید می كرد، به فكر تاسیس شركتی برای كشاورزی و صادرات محصولات خصوصاً پسته كه سنت خانوادگی اش بود، افتاد. در سال 51 شركت كشت و صنعت جیرفت را تاسیس كرد. این شركت توانست یك سردخانه، كارخانه رب گوجه فرنگی و كارخانه تن ماهی داشته باشد. در همان دوران برخوردار به تولید فرش هم رو آورد و شركت فرش پارس را تاسیس كرد. در سال 50 این شركت كار خود را برای تولید فرش ماشینی، موكت و موكت نمدی شروع كرد. فناوری كارخانه های این شركت از آلمان و سوییس و انگلستان آمده بود. برخوردار تولیدی لباس هم داشت. او در سال 54 شركت پوشش را راه اندازی كرد كه مخمل، حوله، بلوجین، جوراب و لباس زیر تولید می كرد.

    حاج محمدتقی با اینكه نیروی خود را بر لوازم خانگی متمركز كرده بود اما در دیگر صنایع نیز دستی داشت. او در سال 52 سه شركت كارتن البرز، كاشی پارس و سرامیك البرز را تاسیس كرد. كارخانه كارتن سازی او دو بار سوخت و تجهیزاتش از بین رفت اما دوباره با اصرار برخوردار احیا شد. برخوردار به عنوان سهامدار نیز در چند شركت از جمله لامیران (تولید انواع تیغ)، سیمان كرمان، آبگینه (تولید انواع شیشه) و كمپرسورسازی ایران (تولیدكننده تجهیزات مورد نیاز لوازم خانگی پارس) سهامدار بود. اشتیاق و تبحر او در اقتصاد باعث شد به عضویت هیات مدیره سه بانك و یك شركت بیمه نیز دربیاید. او در 15 سال 13 شركت تاسیس كرد و بهترین دوران تولید لوازم خانگی ایران را گذراند.

    روش مدیریتی او نیز مدرن بود. برای مثال تبلیغات برای برخوردار بسیار مهم بود. محصولاتش بروشور داشت و در شهرهای مختلف نمایندگی مجاز داشت و سرویس سیار را برای تعمیر محصولات در منازل راه اندازی كرد. او به تدریج در كنار شركت های تولیدی تلاش كرد شركت های خدماتی و سرمایه گذاری مجزایی درست كند. بر اساس روش های نوین مدیریت، بخش صنعت را از بخش بازرگانی و خدمات جدا كرد. به همین دلیل شركت پارس شید و شركت خدمات پارس را تاسیس كرد تا بخش فروش شركت لوازم خانگی پارس و پارس توشیبا را بر عهده بگیرند. شركت های صنعتی پارس توشیبا و لامپ پارس توشیبا هم شركت سرمایه گذاری پارس توشیبا را بنا نهادند تا سرمایه گذاری از تولید جدا باشد.

    شركت هایی كه برخوردار تاسیس كرد، شركت پوشش ، ری. او. واك، كشت و صنعت جیرفت و فرش پارس تعطیل شده اند و برخی شركت ها مانند لوازم خانگی پارس، پارس خزر، لامپ پارس، سرامیك البرز و كاشی پارس به كار خود ادامه می دهند. اما برخوردار پس از عمری تلاش مستمر برای صنعت لوازم خانگی، آن روزها را هیچ به یاد نمی آورد.

    به دنبال ملی شدن شرکت ها و کارخانجات صنعتی ایران از جمله اموال آقای برخوردار که بعدها در اختیار بنیاد مستضعفان قرار گرفت، او پیش از یک سالگی انقلاب، از ایران خارج شد و این هجرت تا سال ۱۳۷۰ادامه داشت که به سودای بازپس گیری اموالش به ایران بازگشته بود.حاصل این بازگشت فقط بازپس گیری قطعاتی زمین در رفسنجان و استرداد منزل شخصی اش بود.

    13 سال پس از مصادره شدن كارخانه هایش توانست تعدادی از آنها را بازپس گیرد اما دیگر پیر شده بود و نای كار كردن شبانه روزی دهه 50 را نداشت. سكته سال 74 هم به این ناتوانی افزود و به تدریج آلزایمر آن همه جوش و خروش را از او گرفت و گوشه ای نشاند.

    تا اینکه روز جمعه سی و یکم تیرماه 1390 که او چهره درنقاب خاک کشید از آن همه فعالیت كارنامه ای مانده به شكل كتاب كه علی اصغر سعیدی و فریدون شیرین كام تحت عنوان «موقعیت تجار و صاحبان صنایع در ایران عصر پهلوی: زندگی و كارنامه حاج محمدتقی برخوردار» نگاشته اند. شاید اگر آنان گزارش تلاش های برخوردار را چاپ نكرده بودند، مصرف كنندگان لوازم خانگی پارس نیز به همان آلزایمری دچار می شدند كه خود برخوردار را گوشه نشین كرده بود

    Mr Hashemi was the president when one of the godfathers of Iran’s industrialization was begging for his confiscated wealth to be returned to him.

    Mr Hashemi ignored the pleas of Haji Barkhordar and many like him, despite Mr Hashemi having immense power and influence at the time to correct the wrongs.

    Mr Hashemi acted selfish and without any vision.

    Mr Hashemi should have known better, having himself coming from business background.

  113. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 25, 2015 at 1:58 pm

    The concept of politics for these kind of people is jealousy, revenge and “personal exercise of power”.

    Not unlike barbarians, who lynched the previous rulers for gratification of present one.

  114. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    July 25, 2015 at 2:04 pm

    I suspect that the Tehran Revolutionary Court returned his property; that court has numerous such rulings and has annulled confiscations of properties of many people.

  115. pragmatic says:

    شوك آخر براي محمود احمدي‌نژاد
    مشايي هم….؟

    حالا هر چه هست احمدی نژاد به صحنه سیاسی اینگونه نگاه می کند. اما این در شرایطی است که از فضای سیاسی جور دیگری به او نگاه می شود . به یک معنا اصلاح طلبان و بدنه اجتماعی آنها که هنوز همان حس گذشته را به او دارند و البته نه او را به عنوان یک رقیب بلکه به عنوان یک خاطره تلخ در ذهن تصور می کنند .
    در سمت دیگر دنیای سیاست نیز اصولگرایان تمام تلاش خود را می کنند به هر طریقی اعلام برائت کنند از نسبت سیایس با احمدی نژاد.
    اما احمدی نژاد گویا این را بهتر از سیاسیون می داند که نباید روی احزاب و جناح ها حساب باز کند .
    او می خواهد او را شبیه احمدی نژاد سال ۸۴ نشان دهد .بدون شک به همین دلیل است که او دوباره کاپشن بر تن می کند حتی در گرمای طاقت فرسای تابستان. به همین دلیل است که او به جای همنشینی با هنرمندان به مسجد نشینی روی آورده و هیات رفتن!
    اما آیا مردم باز به او فکر می کنند ؟
    واقعیت این است که مردم تفکرشان نسبت به او تغییر کرده است .
    او برای مردم دلیل ایجاد برخی شرایط نامطلوب اقتصادی است . خصوصا ماه های آخر دولت او آن بلاهای سنگین سر اقتصاد ایران آمد . برای جماعت ارزشی نیز محمود احمدی نژاد از همان زمان قهر یازده روزه و بعد از آن کوتاه نیامدن از همنشینی با مشایی ، دیگر آن فرد سابق نیست.
    باید ببینیم محمود احمدی نژاد چونه با این شرایط کنار خواهد آمد .

  116. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 25, 2015 at 2:12 pm

    The issue is this: “Why make an issue of Mr. Ahmadinejad or Mr. Rafsanjani?”

    قحط الرجال است ؟

  117. Rehmat says:

    @ fyi – Mr. Rafsanjani says ISIS and other so-called “Islamists butchers” were created by the Zionist entity.

    In March 2015, West’s “moderate” Iranian leader and mentor of current “moderate” president Hassan Rouhani, Ayatullah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former president of Iran, blamed the Zionist entity for creating ISIS, Boko Haram and other terrorist groups killing innocent people.

    “Deviating streams like the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Boko-Haram and the ISIL have been formed through the aid and support of certain countries, specially Quds Occupying regime,” Rafsanjani said.

  118. Rehmat says:

    On July 24, 2015, the US National Archives released the final batch of nearly 350 classified photographs taken by former vice-president Dick Cheney’s staff photographer inside the White House Operations Center, on September 11, 2001. The photos show George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Gen Colin Powell and national security advisers having discussions inside the deep underground bunker while the New York World Trade Center(WTC) and Pentagon were hit by mini nuclear missiles.

  119. pragmatic says:


    Hashemi could not do anything about people like Haji Barkhordar. All the confiscations were through the Komiteh Frmaneh Imam (hojatoleslam Nayeri was the head of it until a few years back) now it’s under Beyteh Rahbari. Last year Ayatollah Hashemi in an interview bluntly said we made a lot of mistakes one was confiscating Barkhordar and Iravani’s. Haji’s cousin through different father was the one who helped Hashemi go to construction business prior to the revolution. Hashemi was well of before the revolution. He had a nice villa in Dezhashib. After he was assassinated he bought the current house which is by Imam’s house from a sarhangeh artesh in Jamaran.

  120. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 25, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    Oh, no. Just mastmaali. They returned his house and some land, plus perhaps giving a few import licenses to his son or something. Actually giving import license to an industrialist is rather an insult.

    His main companies like Lavazem Khanegi Pars was never returned. Those were the actual wrongs which pushed back Iran in industrial development. Still they feel shame to write the proper history on the company’s website mentioning Haji Barkhordar:

    Haji Barkhordar, despite begging and sitting for hours every day outside the offices of revolutionary courts, waiting and standing up in respect for every clerk and goon who used to enter and exit there, he was not given back his wealth. He was ridiculed and tortured. At the end, when a journalist asked him about advice for young entrepreneurs, he said, he wished that he had not done it all and if he was young, he would have just built a single small company and would do nothing to enlarge it or expand.

    Mr Fyi, these are the main reasons behind why no body, not young and not old want to found and develop productive companies in Iran. Because at any moment, things can be taken away and the owner hanged high and dry. And Mr Hashemi was part and parcel of those who tortured these great industrialists of Iran. All done to promote the cargo cult and its objectives.

  121. Smith says:

    The point here is not about a single person. It is about having the courage to confront and stand up for what one believes to be right.

    Dr Ahmadinejad had that courage. Whether when he had to stand up to baradaran ghachaghchi or to the corrupt elites in majles AND judiciary.

    Mr Hashemi on the other hand proved to be quite “pragmatic” and only acted on things he thought were “pragmatic” for him whether in private life or politics. I would not call such a person a “Principalist” one at all.

    Even before Mr Hashemi’s presidency, when such confiscations were happening, he was not a powerless guy. He and Mr Khamenei both enjoyed exclusive access to Mr Khomeini and had his ears. They did nothing to stop the wrongs being committed. The mere acceptance that wrongs were done when one has become an octogenarian is not enough. Iranian nation wants to see wrongs corrected and the future possibility of their committing again abolished.

    In other words, talk is cheap. Specially when one is an octogenarian.

  122. Smith says:

    Similar population level. Please note the Ahmadinejad era.

  123. Smith says:

    Jesus Christ is continuing to impart technological power to his followers (only white ones with agnostic/atheist tendencies):

    Too bad Hazrat Mohammad is not upto task.


  124. Smith says:

    Jesus Christ:

    How Jesus Christ helps British Universities to innovate.

    What can I say? Except Jesus!

  125. Nasser says:

    Ambassador Bhadrakumar further expands on a familiar topic, but what stood out for me was:
    “Indeed, that is a myopic thesis bordering on the naivety, born out of sheer ignorance of both the complicated US-Russia-China pantomime played out in modern history and contemporary world politics as well as China’s own grit to “rise” (led by a visionary leader), but even some lionized names in our strategic folklore such as the late K. Subrahmanyam seemed to have genuinely subscribed to the airy thesis.”

  126. Nasser says:

    I mistakenly left out half the quote above. The sections I wished to highlight should read:

    “It has been a pet thesis among many strategic analysts in Delhi through the past decade or so that China’s rise was primarily due to the big help it got from the US (against the backdrop of bipolar world politics) and India too can similarly gain by harmonizing its foreign policies with Washington’s global strategies and thereby encouraging the US to help make it a first rate world power .

    Indeed, that is a myopic thesis bordering on the naivety, born out of sheer ignorance of both the complicated US-Russia-China pantomime played out in modern history and contemporary world politics as well as China’s own grit to “rise” (led by a visionary leader), but even some lionized names in our strategic folklore such as the late K. Subrahmanyam seemed to have genuinely subscribed to the airy thesis.”

  127. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    July 25, 2015 at 3:49 pm

    I think India should not aspire to be a China at all. Not at least until they have figured out what they want to be as a nation.

    This is what Mr Lee Kwan Yew had said about India:

    “India is not a real country. Instead, it is 32 separate nations that happen to be arrayed along the British rail line. The British came, conquered, established the Raj, incorporated under their rule an amalgam of 175 princely states, and ruled them with 1, 000 Englishmen and several tens of thousands of Indians brought up to behave like English.

    I am against a society which has no sense of nurturing its best to rise to the top. I am against a feudal society where your birth decides where you stay in the pecking order. The example of that, par excellence, is India’s caste system.

    India is an established civilisation. Nehru and Gandhi had a chance to do for India what I did for Singapore because of their enormous prestige, but they could not break the caste system. They could not break the habits.

    Look at the construction industries in India and China, and you will know the difference between one that gets things done and another that does not get things done, but talks about things. . . . It is partly because India is such a diverse country – it is not one nation, but 32 different nations speaking 330 different dialects. . . . In China, it is 90 per cent Han Chinese all speaking the same language, with different accents, but reading the same script.

    If you stand up in Delhi and speak in English, out of 1. 2 billion people, maybe 200 million will understand you. If you speak in Hindi, maybe 250 million will understand you. If you speak in Tamil, 80 million people will understand you. So there is an enormous difference between the two countries . . . . We are comparing oranges and apples. . . . Let me not be misunderstood. The upper class in India is equal to any in the world but they face the same hurdles.

    The average Indian civil servant still sees himself primarily as a regulator and not as a facilitator. The average Indian bureaucrat has not yet accepted that it is not a sin to make profits and become rich. The average Indian bureaucrat has little trust in India’s business community. They view Indian businesspeople as money-grabbing opportunists who do not have the welfare of the country at heart, and all the more so if they are foreign.”

  128. Smith says:

    Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian:

    با نگاه کردن در شانه گوسفند مشکلاتمان را حل کنیم!


    اکنون می دانیم که معارف بشری همیشه و در هر دوره تمدنی، به صورت یک مجموعه و در قالب دانش های مکمل عمل کرده و یکدیگر را به لحاظ مبانی و انگیزه ها و انگیخته ها در جهت حل معضلات ذهنی و زندگی آدمی، همپوشانی می کنند


    تا زمانی که این مجموعه منسجم و مورد تأیید است، همه چیز آرام است اما هر گاه میان این معارف ناهماهنگی ایجاد شود برخی از دانشمندان نوگرا را به شک خواهد انداخت و در صدد حل آن تردیدها برخواهند آمد. این گروه اگر بتوانند تردیدی در آن حوزه فکری خاص آن عالم یا کل مجموعه بیندازند، درست نقش گالیکه و کپرنیک را در خراب کردن فرهنگ قرون وسطی بازی خواهند کرد. اینها معمولا راه را برای بعدهای باز می کنند تا باز هم معارف قبلی را ویران تر کرده و طی یک دوره طولانی مجموعه معارف تمدنی تازه ای را بنیان گذارند.

    در این مجموعه معارف به ظاهر منسجم، همه چیز با هم هماهنگ است. فیزیک آن با شیمی، هر دو با پزشکی و هر سه با تصورات عامیانه عمومی که معمولا برای همه چیز تحلیلی ارائه می دهد و آدمیان را قانع می کند تا مسیری را در زندگی طی کنند، مشکلات خود را حل کنند و بی دغدغه یا با دغدغه کمتر زندگی کنند.

    یک جمع تمدنی با این مجموعه، ممکن است قرنها زندگیش را سپری کند، و متوجه شکافهای موجود در آن نشود. پیداست که همین امر که دلایل متعددی می تواند داشته باشد، عامل توقف تمدن او خواهد شد و از جایش تکان نخواهد خورد و توسعه نخواهد یافت.

    هر بار که یک مجموعه تمدنی، سفت و سخت به این نقطه رسید که اجازه تردید به هیچ کسرا در خود نداد، باید بداند که درجا خواهد زد و همانجا خواهد ماند. این امر نه فقط شامل تمدن های قدیم بلکه در تمدن های جدید هم چنین خواهد بود


    اما در هر حال، اگر بپذیریم که بشر در حال پیشرفت بوده و هست، باید نگاهمان به آینده و هدفمان پر کردن شکافها، بر طرف کردن عیبهای فکری و ذهنی به هدف تحول درست باشد. محافظه کاری، البته همه چیز را آسان تر می کند و نمی گذارد بدن مردم بلرزد، اما بسا راه پیشرفت را ببندد


    برخی کسان هم هستند که در مجموعه جدید معرفتی ـ تمدنی بسر می برند اما از نظر فکری تعلق خاطر به مجموعه های پشین دارند و اگر شما نسبت به بخشی از آن مجموعه ها اظهار تردید کنید، خوششان نخواهد آمد.

    باید بدانیم که بسیاری از معارف پزشکی قدیم، راه حل و درمانها، و سخنان شگفتی که ابراز شده و الان که مطالعه می شود، خنده دار به نظر می آید، در آن روزگار، مورد قبول مردم بوده و با عشق به آنها می پرداختند. چون راهی جز اینها نداشت. جالب است که هنوز هم کسانی که در آن عالم قدیم زندگی می کنند، همین تصور را در باره برخی از آن معارف دارند در حالی که خودشان با کمترین مشکل، به درمانگاه های مدرن مراجعه می کنند و فقط در مواردی که خیلی خطری ندارد از آن گیاه ها و علف ها میل می نمایند


    همه این ها را عرض کردم که بگویم یکی از این علوم با اهمیت در اقوام قویم و از سری علوم پیشگویانه، علم شانه گوسفند است. نگاه کردن در شانه گوسفند و دیدن علائم مختلف رنگی و برجستگی و فرورفتگی در بخش های مختلف آن، نوعی پیش گویی را مطرح می کرد که می توانست در اساسی ترین بخش های زندگی آدمی موثر باشد. آدمیان به پیشگویی سخت علاقه مند بودند و چون بسیاری از مشکلات را نمی توانستند با روابط محدود علمی موجود حل کنند، دل به این می بستند که عالمی از این دست، دزد خانه آنها را معرفی کند، یا پیش بینی کند که این جنگ چه سرنوشتی خواهد داشت، یا سال آینده، سال پرنعمتی خواهد بود یا نه. و حتی این که گوسفندان او که الان چندین کیلومتر از ده دور هستند، در حالی بسر می برند. امسال گوسفندان و زیاد خواهد شد یا کم. این ها مشکلاتی است که حالا برخی از آنها را با انگشت نگاری، یا موبایل یا دوربین مخفی و غیره می شود حل کرد، اما روزگاری که اینها نبود، آیا بشر چاره ای جز پناه بردن به آن ابزارها داشت، حتی اگر به نظرش نامطمئن می آمد؟ در حال حاضر اگر یک چوپانی موبایلی به همراه داشته باشد، می تواند بسیاری از پیشگویی ها را که قدیم با نگریستن در شانه گوسفند عنوان می کردند، جبران کند.

    به هر حال علم نگریستن در شانه گوسفند برای پیش بینی از علومی است که در سایر اقوام هم بوده است.

  129. M.Ali says:

    Why do middle eastern countries have the absolutely worst policies?

    So, Turkey first helps destabilize Syria, its frigging LAND neighbor, and now after fully allowing ISIS to grow and Kurdish terrorists to roam free, changes its mind and decides to get militarily involved because it is getting out of hand? Who, over the age of 5, didnt forsee this?

    And lets not forget Saudi’s prolonged Yemen campaign run by its Playstation Defense Minister?

  130. M.Ali says:

    Smith, is that the Prime minister of a 2 million population country comparing his work to a 1 BILLION population country?

    Thats like how some Iranians try to compare Iran to frigging Dubai.

  131. M.Ali says:

    And whats all this stuff about Rafsanjani. He is a smart, cunninh politician, and good for him, but since when are we turning him into a selfless saint? He run against Ahmadenijad, lost, and cried foul like a child with temper tantrum and the only reason nothing came out from his calls for fraud in the election becausr no one cared.

    And then 4 years later he tries again and is willing to bring the whole system down just to get his way.

    I mean, awesome that he always lands on his feet, but why are people who shout the loudest about democracy and liberalism and pragmaticism usually the absolute least respectful to the wishes of the public. Its only democratic if their candidat wins, if not, the whole system should burn.

  132. ordinary says:

    @Rehmat says:
    July 25, 2015 at 8:08 am

    Apologies brother. Imam Ali (as) is recipient of divine supreme covenant and the model human. It was not intentional.

    PS: I did read all divine books to understand before I made my plea, in the path of life, to perhaps strengthen my application for acceptance, God willing, perhaps some day, to rank of at least the lowest Moslems.

  133. ordinary says:

    fyi says:
    July 25, 2015 at 9:26 am
    You said.:
    1. “…not willing to admit that living under the strictures of Fiqh is not possible and insistence on doing so will lead to the disintegration of the Iranian state.”
    2. “As long as Islam and Fiqh are presumed to be identical, this cleavage and problematic will persist.”
    3. “Such people, ultimately, cannot find any religious fault…”

    Challenging and complex! I have been thinking about these points too. Please don’t judge too fast:

    1. I agree. I myself was a naturalist, and had I lived in Iran in my raw age, I at least fear, I would be reported – left in jail or hung, worst of all, I would not have discovered Islam. My dad was a devout moslem living in Iran the only phrase he ever uttered to me was “son, continue your reading”, years later I called and apologized for the pain I had caused him.

    I was concerned about kids living in west, but I was proven that: even in really western Iranians families, if there was chance to sometimes meet a moslem man in a family one that could wisely reason in its right time, then after a time, you would usee Islam growing in kids. Kids are very smart, they read use logic, differentiate and find God themselves in due time (i.e. God leads those worthy of it).

    But I am not ready to make a conclusion. Hopefully we’ll discuss further later.

    2 . To me Islam and Figh mean Church and State. To separate church and state is hypocrisy. It is not ok to be a man with 2 different yardstick or conducts – at home or office. IMHO, this is not the problem, it can’t be, none of the books preach it.

    Man is responsible for his conducts on earth in all circumstances – God says life is a test in all books, earth is not meant to be a heaven, it is not meant for man to live a dream on earth – because he will undoubtedly miss the big picture.

    The event of Hudaibiyya is sometimes misinterpreted; it was not a compromise, nor a contradiction or hypocrisy. Man must always fight against oppression, but with intelligence as his mantle, shortest distance is straight path and it does not necessarily lead to a war.

    3. “Such people” are conceited. Such people, per Quran lost their mind and their faith and their path, I don’t have Quran in front of me now, not precisely but it says “like mules, they carrying the books”.

    Moslims have a right to have a land, a society governed as close as possible with Islam – where can they go to do this, while the earth is open and secular for others.

    At the same time not people of a land is ready to be a moslim on day 1, and Quran is clear about “no compulsion in religion”.

    Also, commercialism, taken to new heights, in the west, does really steal people’s life – fine if you one is an adult, but children are vulnerable.

    What is the solution, to give up is to accept hell. The profit (as) and Imam Ali (as) also dealt with similar issues. I am finding myself coming back to this again: we (everyone) are being tested and it is easy to loose the sight of this – we will be passing or failing our QA (quality assurance), this life is not to be confused with heaven, and God says he did not create us in vain, and he stated his expectations clearly.

    One is responsible for his conducts while alive and for the effects of his actions and lack of it (when he was faced with the opportunity) to the eternity.


  134. Nasser says:

    Smith says: July 25, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    Thanks for your response. Everything you outlined there is true of course and I too agree that the Chinese experience is not replicable by India.

    But I think in the post I linked to, the good Ambassador was making a different point entirely. That being, too many people and especially Indians seem to denigrate the Chinese experience by attributing all its successes to the US and further seem to believe that a servile attitude to the US might result in similar development to take place in India as well. I believe he is right to chastise this attitude present in many third world peoples that development cannot occur without hand holding from the West in every step of the way; as if aliens descended from the heavens and gifted technology transfers to the West that they themselves will dole out to the rest of the world.

    The rest of the post tended to criticize the shortsightedness of an excessively anti Iran posture (for as per his previous writings that would only further lock out India from its own near abroad and especially so in Afghanistan). But I didn’t highlight that point as fyi here has been saying the same thing for a while now and I am of the belief that Pakistan is the country Iran should try to be more friendly to.

  135. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    July 25, 2015 at 1:08 pm

    Because they can; and clearly demonstrating that there is still a very large group of Iranians who are willing to cut off their own noses to spite their faces.

    In other words, even after 100 years, they have not yet figured out how to operate a constitutional system of the government.

  136. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    July 25, 2015 at 8:19 pm

    I fully agree, dear Nasser. These are deluded cargo cults.

    Regardless of what others do, Iran must wake up and chart a new way for herself. Specially now that a breathing time has been bought.

    There is no time for delusion anymore. At least not for Iran (India, Pakistan, Iraq, etc etc still have time). Iran’s population pyramid has started to invert. In less than a generation there will be more elderly than youths. This will not go down good if Iran does not wake up NOW. Without technological sophistication and accumulation of wealth, only God knows what will happen then.

  137. pragmatic says:

    Smith says:
    July 25, 2015 at 2:37 pm
    The point here is not about a single person. It is about having the courage to confront and stand up for what one believes to be right.

    Dr Ahmadinejad had that courage. Whether when he had to stand up to baradaran ghachaghchi or to the corrupt elites in majles AND judiciary.

    So you’re saying AN is good because he stood in front of Khamenie, sepah, Ali and Sadegh Larijani? GOod, how about his stand in front of people of Iran? I laugh at those who claim he was the most popular president, he won both elections with help of invisible hands!! Lets not forget what Karoobi said in 1384, LOL

  138. kooshy says:

    Pragy- Time to measure up

    Ok, let’s assume Rafsanjani the best man in Iranian politics ever since Cyrus the great, he is the savior of Iran, the most democrat the best visionary, strategist etc. and Ahmadinejad the worst guy ever in Iran’ politics, now what? What are we the people of Iran supposed to do with this information you gave us and we accepted about this guy?, What do you want to do, or if you can say to do with this guy, should we elect Rafsanjani as president again, I guess he is very happy with guy in right now, should we pull down the current SL and put This Nut guy in SL place, do you want a great square in his name, a mausoleum, what do you want? For life of me I can’t understand what is the point of discussing about him his character and political past without knowing what he or you want now? , why don’t you have the balls to say what is your end aim? Instead of zig zagging and dodging avoiding to say what you want and what your end game is, come forward and say what your strategic goal is that’s a better discussion or debate instead of I calling him thief your calling him Amir Kabir. Enough with this shit what is it you that you can’t say, if you can’t say it you shouldn’t continue.

  139. Ferri says:

    fyi says:

    July 25, 2015 at 2:17 pm


    And Kooshy
    kooshy says:
    July 26, 2015 at 1:42 am

    Very well put.

  140. pragmatic says:

    Obviously you guys have a short memory. For so many years you have been praising and advocating Ahmadinejad and all his work. From nowhere I showed up, bringing the truth and reality to your attention. Nothing more and nothing less.

  141. Rehmat says:

    Hi pragmatic – When was the last time you looked into your Israeli mirror?

    Basar al-Assad could be a “tyrant” in Zionist day-dreaming, but he loved by country’s non-Muslim communities. No matter what the Palestinian occupiers think about Assad – he certainly is not called SPOOK, Terrorist and CRIMINAL, according to Israeli professor Nev Gordon.

  142. Rehmat says:

    Uri Avnery: Netanyahu helped Iran become regional power!


  143. Amir says:

    In a sort of revelation I realized when Mr Pragmatic says “where there so many luxury cars on the streets and so many skyscrapers before Ahmadinejad”, he can’t be someone who has benefited from connections with Hashemi (to line his pocket); he is pissed as hell at those who flash their wealth, when people are shouldering the sanctions (the ever patient Iranians), he is maybe 95% like myself.

    So, if I have accused you of anything, I’m very sorry Mr Pragmatic (although, this time I was very careful not to throw accusations your way).

    By the way, during Hashemi’s term in office, there weren’t many options available, so those riding Toyotas (what we called Patrol, the Land Cruisers I suppose?), and sometimes Mitsubishi were the equivalent of whoever you find distasteful today; they were there back then, maybe you didn’t see them.

    And they did all sorts of stuff; dividing large swaths of desert among themselves, and then designing the plans for pipelines routes, which would of course have to pass through their lands, and bingo!

    They were and are devouring this country like a bunch of wild boars.

    Ahmadinejad, and what went wrong or how could he be channeled to more positive ends, needs another post.

  144. pragmatic says:

    اخرین نکات من در مورد ایت الله هاشمی
    امام خمینی (ره)فرمودند هاشمی زنده است تانهضت زنده است و بهترین تعبیر همین تعبیر امام .است اقای هاشمی همانند خورشیدی است که نورافشانی می کند ممکن است لکه های ابر بیایند جلوی این خورشید را موقتا بگیرند ولی دائمی نیست. هاشمی نمی خواهد کار اجرایی انجام دهد بلکه می خواهد کار فکری کند و دور گذشته نیز که شورای نگهبان وی را برای ریاست جمهوری رد صلاحیت کرد به دلیل محتوای فکری وی نبود بلکه به دلیل سن ایشان بود.آنها اعتقاد داشتند که ریاست جمهور باید کسی باشد که همیشه بدود لذا به همین دلیل وی را تایید صلاحیت نکردند .

    درمورد نقش هاشمی در انتخابات مجلس دهم و مجلس خبرگان: آفتاب آمد دلیل افتاب، از انتخابات ریاست جمهوری یازدهم بیش از دوسال می گذرد و دوسال قبل وقتی اقای هاشمی و خاتمی بیاینه به نفع اقای روحانی دادند زمینه موفقیت روحانی را تضمین کردند. اگردر مجلس اینده لیستی اماده شود و آقای هاشمی و رئیس دولت اصلاحات به عنوان نیروهای فراجناحی و اصلاح طلب یا اینکه هاشمی و رفسنجانی و دونفر از برجستگان اصولگرا همانند لاریجانی و ناطق نوری نیز آن لیست را امضا کنند قطعا اکثریت قریب به اتفاق کرسی ها مجلس را می توانند در اختیار بگیرند.

  145. Amir says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 26, 2015 at 12:58 pm

    I agree with the second half of your argument, because many “principalists” are lacking in principles.

  146. masoud says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 24, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    Are you living in some kind of alternate reality? It was unrer the reign of Karbasci that skyscrapers started sprouting like mushrooms, and permits for same where handed out like abnabats. In completely residential two story building neighborhood, you could round the corner and be face to face with a thirty story condo complex. It was rafsahanis legacy: an economy of bribes.

    As for who was best for ‘the elites’ take a look at this graph an tell me what it tells you about Iran’s income inequality:

  147. Kooshy says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 26, 2015 at 12:58 pm
    اخرین نکات من در مورد ایت الله هاشمی

    Prag. Cut and paste from Iranian or any site(s) without referencing who and where it was coming from is cheap, serious blogging is welcomed no matter if it’s oppose or for of any issue, as long as the reader’ intelligence is respected. Otherwise is easy to find out if this was your own words, or you took it from somewhere else’s any try to make belief its your ideas.

  148. Smith says:

    Another view on why this is not about a single person. Both Mr Hashemi and Dr Ahmadinejad are now part of the past, the history. They had their chance.

    Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian:

    درسی که احمدی نژاد به ما داد

    اینجا است که می خواهم مفهوم این جمله را که «احمدی نژاد چه درسی به ما داد» توضیح بدهم. راستش تمام تصورات ما بر باد رفت. من احمدی نژاد را کاملا امتداد خط راست نمی دانم، اما هماهنگ با راست عمل کرد و این جناح هم همه چیز خود را، همه سرمایه های خود در طبق اخلاص گذاشت و تقدیم احمدی نژاد کرد. او هم، همه را یکباره برداشت و با سرعت باد جلو رفت، رفت و رفت و رفت و چون چشمش را بسته بود، محکم به دیوار کوبید. درست مثل یک ماشین پر قدرتی که تمام میراث اخلاقی و ارزشی را در یک ماشین بریزد و به دیوار بزند. ماشین متوقف شد، بسیاری لت و پار شدند و تنها و به زحمت عده ای پیاده شدند.
    اینها وقتی به اطراف نگاه کردند، دیدند فکر مذهبی که خراب شده، به مراجع توهین شده و آنان کنار گذاشته شدند. به رهبری بی حرمتی شده، افکار منحط و خرافی جای افکار مترقی مطهری و طالقانی و بهشتی را گرفته بود. سلامت مالی که چه عرض کنم، آنچه این روزها رخ می دهد همه هویداست. من اصلا نسبت به شخص احمدی نژاد و این که او چیزی برده و خورده نه شاهدی دارم نه ادعایی، اما می دانم که چپاول به شکل های مختلف در حاشیه دولت بود و این را امروز قوه قضائیه با دستگیریهای اخیر نشان داده است.
    حال باز هم می گویم خدمتی که احمدی نژاد کرد این بود که جریان راست را تا نقطه نتیجه گیری برد. جمعیت راست نشین را متفرق کرد. برخی تغییر کردند و برخی پایداری. جوری شد که آقای لاریجانی که در دوره خاتمی از روسای این جناح بود و با قدرت از مواضع آن دفاع می کرد امروز در جایگاهی دیگر است که دست کم میانه چپ و راست است. مرحوم عسکر اولادی که پنجاه سال در خط راست مانده بود، به نوعی عقب نشینی کرد و آن گونه شد که دیدیم و می بینیم. تقوایش کم مانند بود. ما که دیگر هیچ و آن استاد فلسفه هم که ذکر خیرش در ابتدا رفت، استادی که نه فقط تجربه سیاسی شگفتی را پشت سر گذاشت، بلکه فکر می کنم از آن افکار و اندیشه هایی هم که داشت و روزگاری پشتوانه بخشی از جناح راست بود، دست شست یا لااقل در آنها تجدید نظر کرد، جای خود دارد. دوستانی هم داشتیم که و لو در خط راست ماندند، چون جنسا آدم های محافظه کاری بودند، اخلاقا خجالت کشیدند خود را منتسب به دولت احمدی نژاد کنند. اصلا در یک جمله عرض کنم، احمدی نژاد مخ خیلی ها را تکان داد.
    این است خدمتی که احمدی نژاد کرد، ما و خیلی ها را مانند ناطق نوری از خواب بیدار کرد و بنده امروز ابایی ندارم که بگویم سالها افکار دیگری داشتیم و جور دیگری فکر می کردیم. این مرد نشان داد که مسیر این گونه تفکرات کجاست. باز هم عرض می کنم حتی امروز هم تعلقی به راست یا چپ ندارم، حالا بیشتر دلم می خواهد، بخوانم و بنویسم و بیشتر بدانم، اما اینها حکایت گذشته است که اگر دوستی این ادعا را می کند که مبانی فکری عوض شده به او بگویم که اولا که تغییر جای نگرانی ندارد و هیچ سماجتی برای ماندن در افکار قدیم نیست، ثانیا این که دیگر بحث چپ و راست نیست، بحث دانستن و شفافیت است. بحثم اصلا مربوط به یک شخص به نام احمدی نژاد نیست. بحث نتیجه گیری از یک اندیشه و یک رفتار است. این که چگونه با دنیای بیرون برخورد می کند و چطور یک جریانی را که این قدر با تجربه است، استخوانهایش را خرد می کند و نشان می دهد که گرفتار پوسیدگی شده است. حالا راست مثل چپ که زمانی سرش به سنگ خورد، سرش به دیوار خورده، باید به فکر بازسازی خود باشد. تحولات جهانی ازعالم سیاست گرفته تا فکر، و درست همین پدید آمدن القاعده و داعش و خیلی از مسائل دیگر مانند شکست اخوان المسلمین و دنیایی از تحولات باید ما را به سمت و سوی نوعی اصلاح فکر پیش ببرد. این روزها شکست خوردگان در عالم اسلامی زیادند. دیگر نه فکر نوی وجود ندارد و نه آثار تازه ای که موج ایجاد کند. حالا داعش است که در حال ایجاد موج است. بازگشت به افکار قدیم و صرفا تکیه به گذشته نه این که نشد باشد که صد البته داعش بازگشت به افکار خیلی قدیمی تر برگشت، بلکه یک الزام فکری برای ساختن دنیای بهتر برای مسلمانهاست. ما باید افسار خود را دست علم بدهیم نه دست احساساتمان. ما باید نقشه راهمان را با ابزار عقل و دانایی، ترسیم کنیم نه صرفا بر اساس سوابق و گذشته مان. ما به هیچ روی نباید از تغییر نگران باشیم و بهراسیم. باید به آن افتخار کنیم. البته که ساختار شکنی زودرس هم سبب شکست جریان چپ در کشور شد، به همان میزان محافظه کاری هم دشواری های خاص خود را دارد.

  149. Smith says:

    Please note that the most important point, Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian is making above is:

    ” این مرد نشان داد که مسیر این گونه تفکرات کجاست ”

    ” ما باید افسار خود را دست علم بدهیم نه دست احساساتمان. ما باید نقشه راهمان را با ابزار عقل و دانایی، ترسیم کنیم نه صرفا بر اساس سوابق و گذشته مان. ما به هیچ روی نباید از تغییر نگران باشیم و بهراسیم. باید به آن افتخار کنیم ”

    This is the sum of it.

  150. Rehmat says:

    On June, 4, 2015, the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) brought together two top officials from the so-called “Middle Eastern Enemies”; Israel and Saudi Arabia. Dore Gold, director-general of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and former security advisor to prime ministers Gen. Ariel Sharon and Netanyahu, and former Israeli envoy at United Nations, shook hands with Maj. Gen. Anwar Eshki, chairman, Middle East Centre for Strategic and Legal Studies, Jeddah (SA). The meeting was chaired by no other than the convicted former White House Jew staffer Elliott Abrams, who is a senior fellow at CFR.

    Dore Gold who is author of books, The Rise of Nuclear Iran, with picture of Ahmadinejad on the cover, The Fight for Jerusalem, which historically never belonged to Jews during the last 2,500 years, and Hatred’s Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (2004). It seems Gold has finally come to the conclusion that Israel must regain its rightful place in Global Terrorism.

  151. Pragmatic says:


    Hashemi is not past! He is the present. He was the main force behind Rohani’s election. He had to do a lot with nuclear talks.

  152. Pragmatic says:

    Kooshy – you are a cheap shot. Even as you moron are claiming if I copy someone’s say, it means that I believe in it. It comes out of my mouth or somebody else’s.

    The more I read your lame comments, the more I realize how narrow minded you are.

  153. Pragmatic says:

    Smith fantastic post by you. Jafariyan basically pinned AN’s supporters.
    He said what I’ve been saying all along.
    Btw, are you making fun of him by calling him Dr professor, etc….

  154. Amir says:

    Pragmatic says:
    July 27, 2015 at 12:31 am

    Proves Dr Jaffarian’s feelings (read ego) have been hurt by harsh comments he has received from Mr Smith, and he couldn’t just let go of them. Problem is, once a cargo-cultist, (almost) always a cargo-cultist -> meaning: if one doesn’t understand the meaning of religion correctly, s/he wouldn’t understand science correctly either; it’s called choosing either of the extremes.

    Some one who thought himself a devout Muslim (but was just using religion as a cover, a justification for being lazy or not using higher faculties) and one’s belief system is shattered before one’s eyes, is very likely going to embrace the extreme opposite narrative; worshiping Science as one’s new deity.

    Didn’t take others that far, wouldn’t take this person anywhere, either.

    If someone’s eyes have been opened, should s/he refuse to look for the root cause of one’s mistakes? Should one take another “path to nowhere”?

    بعضی وقتها غرور ابلهانه ما باعث میشه یه خودمون بگیم من که از فلانی بیشتر حالیم میشه. اصلاً دوره زمونه عوض شده، این حرفا مال قدیمیاس. اصلاً از کجا معلوم که فلانی منظورش این طور بوده؟ منتها اینا بهانه س، خودمون هم میدونیم

  155. Amir says:

    و یک جمله هم خطاب به استاد جعفریان
    این چیزهایی که شما الآن بهش میگین علم، جزء خرافات آیندگان خواهد بود، همونطور چیزهایی که شما تحت عنوان خزعبلات مینامید دستاوردهای علمی گذشتگان بودند.
    در همین حیطه کاری بنده، بیوانفورماتیک کار رو به جایی رسونده که ما متقاعد شدیم تقریباً راهی برای شناخت بعضی مسائل (با عقل بشری) وجود نداره. یعنی فهم ما در حد درک اثر نهایی و غایی یک متغیر بر یک پیامد هست ولی تعاملات بین متغیرها عملاً بینهایت هستند و در مقطع فعلی راهی متصور نیستیم که بتوان تمام این برهمکنشها را متوجه شد.

    و متوجه هستیم کاملاً محتمل هست در آینده (چه بسا ریاضیدانان همین امروز) به این حرف بنده بخندند و یا راه حلی ارائه دهند، یا بگویند اصلاً ایراد بنده موضوعیت نداشته است

  156. M. Ali says:

    ordinary says:
    July 25, 2015 at 8:06 pm

    I agree.

    I’m not a religious person or a big believer really, so I have no personal issue with separation of church & state, but I can’t understand how a person who claims to be religious can be an advocate of the separation.

    Specially when it comes to the Abrahamic religions. They are not personal, spiritual, go-sit-in-your-home-and-pray religions. They were all involved in changing THE NOW of the societies. In Mohammad’s time, anyone could pray to any God at the Kabaa. Prophet Mohammad could very easily have revealed the Quran, and stayed peacefully at Mecca, and his followers could go to Kabaa, pray, and all go home.

    But Islam wasn’t a personal, spiritual religion. It was to shape the society. As we go back, each of our Prophet was somewhat similar. Jesus was crucified, not because of his personal beliefs, but because he was going at lengths to change the status qua. Moses was involved in a mass exodus of his people. Zorastarian gave farming instructions to follow in Avesta.

    The reason the west easily tolerates people’s beliefs is because it doesn’t threaten their main belief system, such as Capitalism in USA. They are equivalent to the Quraish rulers in Mecca. They had no problem to which idol a native or a foreigner would pray to as long as nothing was changed in their society by this worship. That’s the same way in societies which advertise “separation of church & state”. It’s to reduce it to irrelevancy as a social tool.

    But to repeat. I’m not religious, so I can function perfectly in a non-religious state. However, people who claim they are following the words of their religion closely and are followers of it, separation of church & state is the biggest misunderstanding of their own religion.

  157. Rehmat says:

    M. Ali – Your religion logic reminds me Michael Lucas, one of Hollywood’s top porn actor and producer, who said that he hates all religions especially Islam – but would do everything in his power to keep European Jewish occupation of Palestine.

  158. kooshy says:

    Pragmatic says:
    July 27, 2015 at 12:08 am

    “If I copy someone’s say, it means that I believe in it. It comes out of my mouth or somebody else’s.”

    Pragy, that’s typical of self-centered, mentality, as a curtsey (giving credit to the reader’s intelligence) to the reader one needs to be polite enough to his readers to tell them who the source and author is, cutting and pasting from an Iranian site and calming this is “my last word on Hashmei” and when you get cut you end up saying “oh, so what I think the same as the author did “it’s worth shit to the reader. Sneaky deceptive behavior (Moronic) is typical mindset of the group you find yourself close to.

  159. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 27, 2015 at 1:21 am

    As I previously reminded you, it would do you good, if you did not reply the questions arising in your mind with your own assumptions. It would be better to ask those questions openly and search for their answers in real world. Using self generated assumptions not based on reality and often having roots in our inherent prejudices, to fill the gaps in our knowledge, will only result in bigotry and formation of Isis type ideology.

    I have only respect for what Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian does. My harsh comments are not actually directed at him (please provide examples if you dispute this). I rather find my positions quite aligned with his positions on most issues. I think we should call the akhonds who are doing real academic work, with their full titles instead of reducing them to Dr J or even J. The reason is, only such akhonds can change the future of Iran (and even Islam). So they must be respected. Sadly this is the only motivation we can provide them for this critical job of theirs.

    The meaning and concept of cargo cult is actually quite simple. It is a cult that has no understanding and the will to understand the laws of nature and their applications, refusing either their existence, their utility or both. This cult can not bring itself to let go of aspects of its ideology which are based on magical spirits and instantaneous interventions of gods.

    Such a cult when confronted with technological products of a scientific society, such as iPhones, computers, ELISA assays, MRI, relief providing medicines and planes, gets overwhelmed with desire to own and use these products. But since such a society can not bring itself to make an ideology supporting science, it then goes on modifying its existing magical philosophy to encompass the modern technological products as well as the fruits in the afterlife. The result is creation of a belief system in which if they adhere to spiritual rules of the cult ever more closely, their desired products will start falling out of heaven and gods would deliver the goodies to them. The gods could be the white man or spirits of various descriptions of heavenly nature. It matters not.

    Dr Amir, as I had alluded before, it is the current interpretations of Islam that are being shattered. Not science. To shatter science you would need an intervention by a force greater than Universe. An Omnipotent entity with computational powers much larger than Universe itself and probably reaching infinity. Humans can not even hope to do that. Even thinking to attempt such an impossibility is lunacy. Since to shatter science you would need to have computational powers comparable to the entity who created Science (with capital S) in the first place. And if we assume that this entity is Omnipotent as well, then you are declaring a War (with capital W) which you have no hope of winning. It is safer to re-interpret Islam than to wage War on Science which if you are a believer then you must accept it to be a Sign of His. The most consequential Sign of His perhaps.

    Already we are seeing the shattering of all current interpretations of Islam. Emergence of Isis, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Taliban are a testimony to this. All the while the performance of Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Monarchies, Muslim democracies and Secular Islam and Conservative Islam and any thing falling in between are quite abysmal, shameful and devoid of any good and coherent, sustained and rational expectations.

    Dr Ahmadinejad was a great and visionary leader. Someone whose actions are going to be studied, interpreted and reflected upon long after the likes of Mr Hashemi have been forgotten. What Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian has written about Dr Ahmadinejad does not even scratch the surface. Dr Ahmadinejad disabused the most emotional segment of Iranian society of their delusions. Usually it takes centuries and an expensive educational campaign to achieve what Dr Ahmadinejad did in less than a decade. He shattered the last remaining traditional refuge of cargo cult charlatans. The refuge of Islam and conservatism and fake rish-o-pashm. He really put Iran through its paces, and pushed it to limit. He shattered the گوساله سامری, Iranians had made for themselves.

    Now it would be very unfortunate and very undesirable if it is allowed the cargo cult charlatans to escape towards a new refuge, such as in white man’s good grace, or to other various delusions and to take advantage of this situation whether using haleh noor of an octogenarian or something else. As Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafairan says, the correct course of action is not to coin new idols and gods for ourselves but instead in his words we should:

    بخوانم و بنویسم و بیشتر بدانم

    تغییر جای نگرانی ندارد و هیچ سماجتی برای ماندن در افکار قدیم نیست، ثانیا این که دیگر بحث چپ و راست نیست، بحث دانستن و شفافیت است

    تحولات باید ما را به سمت و سوی نوعی اصلاح فکر پیش ببرد

    ما باید افسار خود را دست علم بدهیم نه دست احساساتمان. ما باید نقشه راهمان را با ابزار عقل و دانایی، ترسیم کنیم نه صرفا بر اساس سوابق و گذشته مان. ما به هیچ روی نباید از تغییر نگران باشیم و بهراسیم. باید به آن افتخار کنیم

    And you are wrong about bioinformatics. Bioinformatics is a science of approximation. It is not the reality itself, but its simulation. Approximations are always useful and enlightening to shed light on reality. But they are not reality themselves. Such sciences depend much on power and accuracy of their tools, eg the computational power. The inefficiencies you see now are by no means an inefficiency of science. To claim such a thing is ludicrous. Galileo used the leaning tower of Pisa as his tool in his famous experiment on the fall of the objects in a gravitational field. Using this simulation he drew an approximate understanding of gravity. Now we have more accurate tools and can go about generating more accurate understanding of it all:

    This is how science works. And that is why it is unbeatable. Because it depends on reality itself, rather than cooked up interpretations of religion. Please note here the difference between religion (a revelation of a set of desired human state for here and after) and spirituality which is human’s emotional need. This I had told you earlier:

    “There is more to this world than mere we know about it. But this does not mean what we know is not real. The important thing is for the spirituality to come to terms with the reality (not other way around). And this is not my job. This is the job of an akhond.”

    And this is why, what people like Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian are doing is important. Since they have the responsibility to re-interpret religion and construct new spirituality that takes into account the reality of sciences.

  160. pragmatic says:

    مستندات جهانگیری از تخلفات 294 میلیارد دلاری احمدی نژاد

  161. Amir says:

    Dang I wrote half a page and all is lost!

    Smith says:
    July 27, 2015 at 11:48 am

    Dear Smith,
    I was reading your post till I reached “it is the current interpretations of Islam that are being shattered. Not science”.

    Forgive me if I have misunderstood you, but did you think I was talking about you here? I was meaning Dr Jaffarian’s interpretation of Islam has been shattered.

    I can’t recall what I had written, but I’d like to thank your part about bioinformatics. I had thought of it as a new mathematical modeling approach; one in a series of models to interpret data, of course with great promise, but not necessarily the end of science.

    Also, I had my idea about the way you addressed Dr Jaffarian; I’ll put that aside 😉

    I hope Dr Jaffarian wouldn’t take thinking instead of fruits of thinking (although the first step is to know the outcome, and then the cause).

    I’d like to add that I don’t know Dr Hojjatol-Eslam Jaffarian that well; his writings were reminiscent of some of my colleagues and professors who have recognized our shortcomings, have seen more attractive models, but couldn’t ultimately ofrmulate a way to bridge the gap, and they have given up; doing nothing themselves, telling younger colleagues to leave the country and discouraging those who remain (although where I currently work has a different atmosphere).

    My problem is that I land in the middle of a discussion, and I interpret things based on my past experience.

  162. ordinary says:

    Being presumptuous perhaps… are the film makers doing their job, aligning their interest with their conscience? They can easily show:

    1 – many like rich politicians and religious figures and Bazarys have not performed their duty, not their ethical duty nor in religious duty, that they could benefit, fame in this life and the credit afterlife – if they are to be a role model – to do something effective for their society while they have a chance – generally to show what Smith has been drumming into deft ears.

    2 – reasonably educated and experienced people, both inside and outside the country, especially the retired crowd, have not organized to engage in duty of philanthropy (how many trips one should travel, how many steaks one should eat, not to mention Opium and Alcohol and throwing dollars on belly dancers…) – that they have not values themselves they have not once put their education and experience to work for feel the natural adrenaline produced from doing good overtakes the highest exhilaration they ever experienced in life – when help the less fortunate – in free teaching, professional training, craft and art training, camping, fund raising, also to get involved in the labor work showing humanity and humility.

    3 – this “befarmaied, drill your opinion into my head” that is prevalent in raising children, uttering but not listening, judging too fast – is hurting themselves and those around them – essentially to show that: a person is never alone and God is watching; and also to show that: a person has a duty to his conscience.

    Many topics: like patience pays, duty in performing his accepted job, hot to treat people, boss, wife, subordinate, ordinary people, driving, environment, education, cheating, tax evasion, evasion of duty to family, society etc, etc.

    I mentioned film makers, but also writers (for adult and children), newspapers – it is time for editorials to consistently write about these topics exemplify the Good. Bad will always exist but Good must be given the center stage.

    Perhaps we should write daily letters and emails to these writers, critics, and film makers to make them aware they are expected to help out.

  163. ordinary says:

    Sorry for so many typos, in my last post.

  164. ordinary says:

    Smith says:
    July 27, 2015 at 11:48 am

    Akhonds, obviously you despise, you said Akhond Jafairan will fix Iranians who suffer from Islamic spirituality disorder? I am not sure he is speaking what you believe you hear – which elm (science)? – I don’t see much on internet.

    But Islam, however you refer to it: “spirituality”; then extrapolating to ISIS is really out of place. You are also implying a moslim scientist is an oxymoron – an anomaly, but indeed they exist in plenty.

    Kindly explain: “Dr Ahmadinejad disabused the most emotional segment of Iranian society of their delusions.”?.

    You had alluded in the past, that people’s wealth is not proportional to their learning or feeling of duty – hopefully I did not misunderstand you. In my expansion on that, I would say because we are not developed in religion or philosophy to deserve responsibility of that wealth. The remedy for this 3000 year old patient will only require recalibration to Islam (for Moslims), Ethics (secular) and both (for flip floppers). Cargo cult exists in all groups but once duty is understood action follows. On the other hand I respectfully disagree with your radical diagnosis in your latest post.

  165. fyi says:

    ordinary says:

    July 27, 2015 at 7:26 pm

    ISIS is not doing anything that is unsupported by Islam – especially under Omavid Khaliphate.

  166. Rehmat says:

    On July 24, 2015, Devlin Barrett (no relation to 9/11 denier Kevin Barrett PhD) reported at Jewish Wall street Journal (WSJ) that Barack Obama administration is preparing to release Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard as a sweetener for Netanyahu to board on the US-Iran gravy-deal.

    According to the Jewish daily Forward, the White House officials denied WSJ claim, saying that Pollard’s release on parole on the due date or earlier has nothing to do with Israeli opposition to the nuclear agreement between the so-called P5+1 and Iran.

    However, as a pressure tactic to show American public that Obama administration is trying to sell a bad deal to Israel; first 50% increase in annual military aid to Israel and now the release of a convicted American Jew. The ‘smoking gun’ news was parroted by several Jewish newspapers and networks, such as, The Jew York times, Time Magazine, YNet, Newsweek, CNN, FoxNews, NPR, Daily Mail, Independent UK, etc.

  167. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 27, 2015 at 1:26 pm

    Not at all. I said it in context of Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian. That we should not chastise any one including him for having started to think. This would discourage people from thinking. If anything thinking should be encouraged, even when one does not necessarily agree with its content.

    The difference between some one like Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian, and other kind of professors and thinkers is that he is an akhond. And I have come to believe that only an akhond can change Iran’s cultural parameters allowing it to become a thinking nation. This can not be done by anyone else (as it was the case in Christianity too eg the central and critical role of Dr Thomas Aquinas in turning Europe into a thinking race). Even Iranian atheists who live in the West are incapable of thinking and creating. The most they can do is monkey around and pretend to be “sophisticated”. But they have nothing to offer the world just like their religious counterparts.

    People need to understand that their problems arise from their lack of enthusiasm for exploring and discovering the milieu they are living in. From their lack of any deep thinking and desire to learn new and question more. Depending on emotionalism whether of religious or anti-religious nature, can not take them far and in a good direction. We have to bring ourselves to completely and fully trust science and thinking. From Newton to Darwin to Einstein to Feynman. Failure to do so, will only mean suffering. Both for Muslims and Islam.

  168. Pragmatic says:

    Smith – your last post was fantastic and informative. Thanks for sharing.

  169. Smith says:

    واقعا خجالت هم خوب چیزیه. کدوم علم؟ مگه ما چند تا علم داریم؟ علم یکی بیشتر نیست بقیه که همه خرافه و چرت و پرت اند.

    کدوم علم؟ همون علمی که این صفحه نورانی جادویی رو درست کرده که تو و امثال تو بیاین روش و از من و امثال من چند تا فکر نو یاد بگیرین. کدوم علم؟ همون علمی که وقتی بچه ات مریض میشه جون بچه ات رو میزاری کف دست عالمش که حتی زیر تیغش هم بره.

    کدوم علم؟ بدبخت بیچاره٬ علم دوچرخه منظورمه

  170. Amir says:

    @Smith, 9:51 pm
    Sure. I’m not disputing that.

  171. Pragmatic says:

    Smith: tell them brother.

    Now, whoy is it that all the Muslim countries are behind the Western countries in regards to technology? It’s simple, one reason which is very important one is the separation of church and state.

  172. Ataune says:


    “ISIS is not doing anything that is unsupported by Islam – especially under Omavid Khaliphate.”

    Your statement, if taken for valid, which is obviously what you intend us to do, would mean that under your interpretation of Islam (which I would say sounds quite literal like – as you surely know – the Salafists way of thinking and unlike the majority of Sunnis and Shias) killing innocent civilians is a supported act of war. The examples to the contrary are abundant and one naturally comes to mind: when the secularist and socialist Saddam was gassing his fellow Muslim neighbors, Iran under the political leadership of a Muslim was refusing to do the same against Iraqi civilian and soldiers.

    You wouldn’t claim that the political decisions of the founder of the IR cannot be construed as supported by Islam, would you?

  173. Amir says:

    Church and state (figuratively speaking) were separated long before the revolution, and that got us where?

    I “suppose” you’d say somewhere better than where we are today, but I beg to differ.

  174. Amir says:

    I honestly doubt that anyone living in Iran is disputing the totality or your argument. While people in the West have a lot of ethical problems with stem cells, nobody in Iran has any concerns about the issue, in principle. A very informative study would be fatwas (religious decree) of Emam concerning Medical issues.

    Even belief in Emam-e-Zaman ارواحنا فداه doesn’t automatically mean sitting on one’s bottom and waiting to be delivered. I’m sure you have heard the adage that البته خدا روزی رسان هست ولی بالأخره باید یک سرفه ای هم کرد. I read on this site someone arguing that nuclear infrastructure and know-how must be achieved (and maintained), so that the capacity would exist for Emam-e-Zaman, to decide what to do with that.

    While there seems to be inconsistencies between relying upon God and pursuing worldly ends, Muslims have figured all these things long ago (گفت پیغمبر به آوای بلند، با توکل زانوی اشتر ببند).

    And those who use religion as an excuse, would use rationalism or science or reason in the same manner. You very aptly described Iranian atheists who aren’t different from their religious counterparts; cargo cult wouldn’t be resolved by walking the walk or talking the talk. One should think the thought, and that’s why I’m sure separation of church and state isn’t going to do much for us.

    But you know all of this.

  175. Amir says:

    I’m not implying stem cell research equals original thought; I meant my marje-e-taqlid isn’t standing in the way of my research. He has unshackled me; I still have to make the movements.

  176. pragmatic says:

    Andak Andak Jamea Pakan Meeresad :))

    Let’s not forget criticizing Dr. Ahmadinejad’s previous governments are a great thing to do and its not escaping the reality, it’s inevitable. His current performance does not have any place. He was the hero of the hardliners and one party which their time has expired. If you look into the core of it, they do not have a role in the status quo. Maybe some of the hardliners underneath his mask have some activities, but he himself does not have any specific policy. During his reign, which was the cleanest government of Iranian history, they had a blank checkbook, which they signed it as they wished! Instead of making a smaller government, he grew the government to a bigger size. They employed many that they were not appropriate for their jobs. I personally have seen five of them in a governmental office. They were hired because they were from the same city as the president of that organization. As a matter of fact 1000 people from that city were hired! One of them was 24 years old without a diploma sitting with two experts in a same room. Every time that I went there he was playing a game! Dr. Ahamdinejad closed down the budget and program org, because he didn’t want any check and balance! One of his honors was reducing 1000 pages budget to a 26 page and proudly said it can be fit in your jacket pocket! :)) During his tenure the budget of a city or a ministry was solely in the hands of the governor or the minister respectively, what this meant? A blank check, hence: CORRUPTION. Once again, I have to reiterate that 700+ billion dollars were smoked and nobody has found out yet where they were spent. Those revenues were an opportunity for this land which we never dreamed of it!

    Rest assured, many years from now the historians will write that Iranian people made the greatest mistake of their history by electing Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

  177. pragmatic says:

    اسمیت جان

    “کدوم علم؟ همون علمی که این صفحه نورانی جادویی رو درست کرده که تو و امثال تو بیاین روش و از من و امثال من چند تا فکر نو یاد بگیرین. کدوم علم؟ ”

    ناز نفست

  178. pragmatic says:

    It’s time for American Jews recognize they have been duped.

  179. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    July 28, 2015 at 12:00 am

    The appeal of ISIS is to the common understanding and aspiration of very many Muslims – Shia and Sunni – who identify Islamic Government with a state completely based on Fiqh/Sharia.

    What ISIS does is not against Fiqh – on the contrary – for example, the burning of the Jordanian pilot alive in “Just Retribution” for him having caused civilians to burn alive through his act of bombing is securely based on the principle of Qisas.

    That principle of Qisas in Fiqh – “Just Retribution” – derives from the Quran and Sunnah and is now part of the Iranian Law – has been for many years.

    What principle of Fiqh can be invoked to negate that specific practice of ISIS?

    Sunni Doctors in Al Azhar have not found and argument and I am unaware of any contrary arguments from the Shia side.

    Shia and Sunni all express shock, shock, that ISIS is doing what it is doing; calling it names – savage, barbaric.

    But everything that ISIS does has a justification in Fiqh/Sharia.

    Muslims know this (Shia or Sunni or Ebadi) but they are not yet willing to confront the problematic that Fiqh poses.

    Significantly, the late Mr. Khoemini’s answer was the Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist over Fiqh and that person’s prerogative on suspending – but not abrogating – the secondary ruling of Islam per Expediency of State.

    My own answer was to enlarge the corpus of Revelations in Islam by recovering the authentic message of the Christ Jesus from the 4 gospels and abrogate that which has gone against the Word of God – such as stoning.

    The only silver lining that I see in ISIS and before them in Taliban is that it will force Muslims to think hard about their religion.

    People are free, in my opinion, to chose to live as they wish; some may wish to “Live in Tents” – like the 7-th century Arabs – as the late Mr. Khomeini observed to one of those “stupid mullahs” in his correspondence. Very many Muslims may wish to live in polities that – in comparison to US, EU, Russian Federation, China, are in various stages of barbarism or savagery.

    But they also then must accept that by choosing to live like that they have condemned themselves and their progeny to be forever under the suzerainty and power of the more powerful civilized states.

    That would mean that Muslims living in such barbaric arrangements should at least remain quiet when the powerful states walk all over them, disrespect them, exploit them, denigrate them etc. That is what they have chosen.

    You cannot protect people aganinst the consequences of their own actions.

  180. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    July 27, 2015 at 11:56 pm


    Please take a look at intellectual history of the Medieval Europe and you will see that the separation of church and state did not exist then but the Europeans had already surpassed, by the 12-cntury, the Muslims in philosophy, technology (clocks, wind/water mills), Algebra etc.

    Separation of Church and State came much later, after the Enlightenment.

    Furthermore, the basis of the separation of Church & State – the Hadith of Jesus to give to Emperor his portion and to God his – does not exist in Islam.

    Searching for a secular political order in Islam is a chimera – both Ottomans and Safavids were strong because they were not secular.

  181. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 12:09 am

    That is not true. There has never been a separation of “Church” and state in Iran whether before Islam or after. It is not even possible to do that in Iran either.

    Separation of Church and State is actually an interpretation of Christianity and has no parallel in Islam. I do not think it is even possible to create such an interpretation for Islam.

    And as Mr Fyi noted above, this has nothing to do with progress in sciences. In fact, science progressed when there was civil war and revolution in France, when there was fascism in Germany, when there was gigantic financial corruption in US, when Church reined supreme in Italy and when in Japan they used to believe their king is a god.

    These excuses do not work anymore.

  182. Pragmatic says:

    For a stint time we had church and government separated. During the Reza Khan.

  183. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    July 28, 2015 at 10:58 am


    Under the late Reza Shah you had bayonet secularism – the only form of separation that is practicable in Islamic polities.

    Separation of church and state in Islamic polities requires military dictatorship – you cannot have a constitutional order.

  184. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:30 am

    Those are not the problems Dr Amir. You have to learn to look beyond these.

    When Church used to prohibit the heliocentric solar system; science still progressed. When Church prohibits birth control, the science still progressed. But in Islamic lands, science is dead. Whether in ‘secular’ Turkey or in ‘Islamic’ Iran.

    Dr Ahmadinejad poured alot of money into biotechnology. And the akhonds also, fully supported it as you mentioned yourself. What was the result? Did anything new come out of Iran? A new class of medicines? A new discovery? A new invention? A new idea?

    The problem is somewhere else. Nikolai Sergeevitch Krylov, pushed forward the limits of theoretical physics when starving in Russian winter, fighting at the front, and surrounded by Nazi troops. In the trenches, he was developing his theory. Under the draconian atheist system of Stalin. Gregor Johann Mendel pushed forward the limits of biology while being very much a Churchman. There are literally a million examples are out there.

    These excuses do not work anymore. We have to find out what is the problem with us. Why we are incapable of thinking and what is the reason. We have to go to the root of this singularly important problem. Without this, there will be no salvation.

  185. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 11:09 am

    I made a correction, in my next post, where I said religion isn’t standing in the way of progress; responsibility rests with the individuals now.

  186. Karl.. says:

    Isnt this disgusting?
    Now suddenly they want to hold hands with Iran after all these hostile years.

  187. pragmatic says:

    What do you mean by “No”? He took the CHADOR away, he put the mullahs influence aside. In past 400 years that was the only STINT time that we didn’t have that much of Akhoonds influence in the government. I am not saying entirely.

  188. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 12:45 pm

    That is right. But it is not the whole story. The milieu has to change so an individual can progress. Right now the Iranian milieu or the Islamic milieu in their structures do not allow for such a thing to happen. And this is where the Doctors of religion have the critical role to play. Philosophical frameworks have to be created to allow for thinking and questioning. Much like what Dr Thomas Aquinas did for Christianity when he formulated doctrines on free will and intellect, removing structural conflict between faith and reason.

    Without such a framework, I am afraid, there will be no mass movement towards a thinking society. One individual here or there maybe, but not a consistent intellectual movement. Without this framework for a productive milieu, you will get a Khawarizmi and Khayyam and then a thousand or so years later a Mirzakhani or another. These few also pretty much outside of what you might consider Islamic milieu.

  189. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 28, 2015 at 1:01 pm

    By “no” I mean this:

    Safavid state was based on Shia Mystical orders.

    In the Tobacco Movement, in the Constitutional Revolution, in the Oil Nationalization, and lastly in the Islamic Revolution that Akhunds were either prominent or among the prominent leaders.

  190. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 28, 2015 at 10:06 am

    In Turkey, the Reza Khan experience actually ran for quite a longer period. But at then end, Islam returned in the form of MB and Isis.

    During this militant secular period of Turkish history, nothing came out of it. No invention, no discovery and no ideas. Pretty much like any other Islamic polity of secular, monarchic, Islamic, hypocrite, democratic, Taliban or any other variety.

    Now Turks are oscillating between militant secularism enforced by F-16’s and the militant Islam enforced by human bombs.

    Absence is the thinking, intellect and reason. Whether when there was a Caliph or when there is a “democratically elected secular president/prime minister protected by F-16’s (from his own Islam)”.

  191. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 11:09 am

    All I could say is I think we are talking about two completely different things.

    About biotech:
    I’m a newcomer to the filed, but during short conversations with my professor, I have learnt that there was a mismatch within the whole thing, for example there were expensive microscopes, but not the cheap lab animals, in certain institutes (doing systematic research is difficult, so many people would try to circumvent that; you might wonder why they had chosen research in the first place, but many were “directed” towards research, whereas they had been trained to work in commercial settings).

    Still, biotechnology is one of the more promising fields in our academe; there are many young, energetic and motivated individuals who are really interested in doing something; if you think biotech. is in a bad shape, that would be truly disheartening.

    And I’m not well-informed to say much about new drug discovery; I’m worried that we have to follow the broader road-map which has been laid out (maybe 30-40 years ago). True innovation would start from a more fundamental place (we must have a solid biology research program first; without that we might be able to progress for some time, but eventually we would have to halt, and wait for new ground-breaking innovative concepts from somewhere else).

    Overall, I’m not that pessimistic; even though many young Iranians have a very twisted idea about the way the country is run, or the cause of tensions between US and Iran, or the way Iran should be run, they don’t have a vested interest in keeping their society back, so I think in the long-term they’ll figure out a way.

  192. pragmatic says:

    Mogerini was in Tehran today.
    تا دوسال پيش خوابشم نميديديم 4 تا آدم حسابي وارد اين مملكت بشن..تا بود چاوز و اردغان و مورالس بود…واقعا ظريف متشكريم

  193. ordinary says:

    To start, Jaffarian discredits Sadra and Bahar on the basis that he does not understand them!! Then he pulls couple of 6th century books claiming that Islam in the past 1000 years deceived Iranians hence they reason they are behind in science. Ignoring that until the Islamic Republic, she never had a merit based democratic election, ignoring that Iran’s 36 year strides in sciences and technology were under Islamic rule and its fruits are orders of magnitude larger than it achieved in the last 1000 years.

    Looking into the past 1000 years of Iran, can we identify a period where she had a more capable government? Or a stronger nation? Or a higher value and promotion of sciences?. Is it fair for some of us close our eyes and belittle blaming her for not having achieved 300 years of US science and technology in 30 years. How much science and technology did US develop in its first 30 years under besiege?

    Constant pessimist arguments made by our brighter people (like Smith) and the self-proclaimed intellectuals like Jaffarian, makes them the worst enemies of science and progress (unfortunately the first does not realize and the second is a charlatan).

    I wonder if the like of Smith are really scientists or politicians? In the Soviet Union when religion was banned, when sciences were hostage to the state and funding was directed to cronies, when students and scientists where demoted and fired from the universities and workplace if the state found a trace of religion in them (I have a few of them around me who explain), they found pride in scientific work as the way to maintain sanity, beggars couldn’t be choosers they worked on anything in any condition and found satisfaction in it. Iran’s environment is far from Soviet’s, there is privatization, free market, access to internet and libraries freely, yet these pundits find so much fault in the system you wonder if there is an ulterior motive. Both politicians and scientists knows it takes time, efforts, money, markets, and genius that is a very few that has to come together to make the potent environment to make a break out, what is this lack of patience – will it not make them enemy of science?


    Elm-e docharkeh!!!? You’ve found an Akhond who claims to have found the root cause of Iran’s scientific retardism – that it is a brain deficiency simply caused by Islam as demonstrated by couple of books from 6th century!. Let me counter it, by claiming the obvious, that it is: the disease of high expectation coupled with the deficiency of impatience – typical in modern Iranians like you want to jump before they learn how to walk!.

    Do you think the Naseredin Shah is the exemplification of the Iranians of its time? was Mamadreza Shah exemplification of Iranians of his time? Hence those subset of books written by friends of Akond Jaffarian the justification as to how Iranians have been thinking since the 6th century – hence the scientific retardism!

    Does the philosophy and code of ethics you follow tell you to assume people you don’t understand are naive? Even if so, what does your philosophy tells you about your duty – that you must find an slippery Akond to twist their brain from one sort of numbness (which has been lasting since 6th century), to a new numbness (by trying to convince them, they are 1000-year-dumbs using one of their kinds – so that they move out of your way)? And tell me how many scientists a country of 70 million needs, are we lacking scientists or jobs?

    Secular modern intellectuals have always been the cause of brutality and oppression in Iran, because their righteousness blinds them. Know that to modernize is a farce, it means all you got is rotten – these guys make good enemy of the perfect, they kill the good, and find themselves left with nothing.

    As for the broader Iranians, they always respected science, and those who spend their life to make something out of it. They believe it can help them tremendously. The issue of capital injection must be promoted by media honoring those that do as Quran says jihad with their money. God is Iran’s friend and Islam is his teaching.

    PS: Jaffarian, says: it is permissible to debate hadith and discard it, but Quran too has many questionable points requiring a modern debate. On top of it he claims he does not believe in Noah’s story and the ship. He looks like Smith hidden in rope of an Akhond? Please place you hopes on someone else, as this one’s fake.

    Mr. Smith, thank you for the link. Respectfully, I bet on your good intentions regardless of our differences.

  194. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:13 pm

    I don’t think I have enough knowledge to make comments on your words. Thanks for your patience and attention.

  195. ordinary says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:26 pm


  196. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:13 pm

    I just wanted to add that if there are people who are afraid that thinking could erode their belief, devising a way to alleviate some concerns would be necessary.

    Again, we have never been taught anything like that in school.

  197. M.Ali says:

    Karl.. says:
    July 28, 2015 at 12:54 pm

    Of course, she will come to Iran given the agreement we have signed. Inspections whenever they want, a weakened army (restrictions on our army in exchange for less restrictions on consumer items!), and so on. Even Fabius is having a hard on for Iran now.

    For certain politicians and their supporters, they wouldn’t mind going back to the Shah era or being another Jordan or Saudi Arabia.

    And to a monarchist like Pragmatist, who posted,
    July 28, 2015 at 1:26 pm

    Mogerini was in Tehran today.
    تا دوسال پيش خوابشم نميديديم 4 تا آدم حسابي وارد اين مملكت بشن..تا بود چاوز و اردغان و مورالس بود…واقعا ظريف متشكريم

    Shame on you. You consider people who threaten us, had a war siege on us, and are forcing us to turn into a weaker country, “adam hesabi”? I can’t wait for your generation to die out. You people are willing to sell out our country, just so you will have the honor to one day have US President come to our country! Oh my god, that would be so great!! Maybe he will give us the absolute honor to visit Tehran!!!

    I’d prefer Chavez ANY DAY of the week instead of people like you cumming in their pants because Fabius is visiting us.

    Good, let this go on. After the deal, I was very concerned about the path the country was going in. But now I see that that idiots who have a hard on for anything west are being given a rope to hang themselves with. They overreached themselves in 2009 with their failed color revolution, by making moronic choices. They did the same back before Ahmednijad came to power, by paving the way for people to distrust them so completely that they were willing to vote Ahmadenijad over a Kingpin with connections coming out of his ass. And they are doing the same now.

    The only way these idiots can truly fail is for the society to actually see them in action. As long as they are writing blogs and giving speeches and talking on BBC Persia, then certain Iranians might think that they might be on to something. But give them the venue to actually ACT and everyone sees how empty they are.

  198. Jay says:

    History is replete with those who believed that a person’s characteristic, attitudes, abilities, and behavior are determined by one or more aspects such as race, religion, gender, etc. etc. Because they are so convinced of their abilities as a profound thinker – as Hitler was – they are convinced that they have been able to reduce this extraordinarily complex world to a few factors that they understand.

    Facile arguments about topics of the Enlightenment, the Church-State separation, religiosity, spirituality, or moral code offers the self-appointed profound thinker the opportunity to reduce complex cultural and societal problems to a simplistic but cognitively attractive short list.

    In committing this error of judgement, those who make these facile arguments should consider the possibility that they may be guilty of being thinly informed – the same error that they continually accuse others of (often in the context of calling them using pejorative names).

    In instructing young minds, it is a good exercise to ask them to turn their power of rational thoughts to shine a light on their criticisms. Does their rational mind suggest that their criticism contains instructions for a path to success? And, if it does not, does it serve a purpose in informing of an ill previously unnoticed? And, if it does not, does it serve to address their feelings of personal frustration? If it does, then it merely serves a personally therapeutic purpose.

  199. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 28, 2015 at 3:28 pm

    “Would it make sense to fix the hours of Ramadan to those of the latitude at Mecca?”

    You can pose that question to the young minds in Pakistan – you will be killed.

    Of course, once one is dead, that the murderess’ characteristic, attitudes, abilities, and behavior were determined by one or more aspects such as race, religion, gender, etc. etc. become a moot point.

  200. Karl.. says:

    US to let go of israeli spy
    Obama do whatever Israel tells him apparently, relly pathetic leadership.

  201. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    July 28, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    I am afraid that the response misses the point entirely. The fact that the murderer did not have the courage to use reason is a personal fault – not of race, religion, etc.

    These matters are complex and this complexity is often the source of bigotry. For example, those who brandish Enlightenment often forget to reconcile its principle of tolerance with obvious exclusion of women, servants, and Jews from its call at the time.

    The kind of flippant and simpleton-like belief that these complex matters can be reduced to, for example, religious belief, is the kind of bigotry I was hoping to bring to attention.

  202. nahid says:

    What happend to Mehdi Hashemi (aghadzadeh dozd)

  203. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 28, 2015 at 4:14 pm

    I think you are unfamiliar with Islamic milieu.

    The late Mr. Khomeini, his wife and his children were shunned in Qum as being ritualistically unclean – “najis” – because he was teaching Muslim Philosophy.

    To them, he was not Muslim – what part of that you do not understand?

  204. fyi says:

    nahid says:

    July 28, 2015 at 4:16 pm

    That poor boy; had to abandon his Ph.D. studies at Oxford – per a statement by Mr. Rafsanjani – to come back to Iran and stand trial for his role in the crisis of 2009.

    No mention has been made of all those tens of thousands of Pound Sterling that he was receiving to support the “Oxford Branch of Islamic Azad University”.

  205. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 28, 2015 at 3:28 pm

    Although I agree with you that Muslims or for that matter any other polity could not slavishly copy UK or US and expect to get that same result.

    The patterns of history and context of the cultures would prevent that.

  206. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    July 28, 2015 at 4:20 pm

    I understand that your point reduces a complex problem to a simple slogan. I understand that.

    Perhaps you should explain, at least to yourself as a start, as to how “islamic milieu” is experienced outside of the culture, the environment, the history, the person’s social and economic context, etc. etc.

    It is more fruitful to address issues at the core rather than provide anecdotes with little context. There are plenty of absurdities in this world that provide instances to generalize upon – but, we all know that generalizing from an example alone is not rational.

  207. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:25 pm

    I think the essence is the same what you are talking about and what I am.

    Well, that is the story EVERY WHERE. There are shortages and there are bureaucratic hurdles and else. In fact in a thinking society these challenges often lead to novel ideas and discoveries on their own. For example lack of lab animals leads to innovations in non-animal models of doing research. These small on-the-ground problems are part of the life everywhere. Without challenge there is no progress. And these problems are part of the challenge not separate from it. Ideal conditions and programs do not exist in reality. Only idealists do (and actually matter by and large).

    If you remember, Mr Fyi sometime ago had advised you that the most important thing with regard to research is asking questions. I think you should look into how many new questions you have raised or you have heard from others in your line of work. Questions whose answers if found, would advance human society and result in generation of new knowledge. This is more important than lab equipment, US-Iran tension, funding or anything else.

  208. Smith says:

    No. I am not a Hojatolislam Valmoslemin.

    And the burden of proof is on those who claim Iran is a science loving society to show us what groundbreaking ideas have come of Iran in the past 800 years.

  209. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:49 pm

    That is the central problem.

    Both among Mo’men Iranians as well as those Iranians who are only cultural Muslims. Iranians fear thinking. They are afraid of it and it does not matter whether they are practicing Muslims or have become atheists. And no body needs to teach this fear in schools. It is so much ingrained in Iranian culture that it is part of Iranian psyche now.

    You can even see it manifested in Iranians who are atheists, completely against Islam and live in West. But because they are cultural Muslim (despite their monkey fake sophistication), they fear thinking as much if not even more than their religious counterparts. A mere question or a mere thought provoking remark would send them into a fit of hysteria. And it matters not whether they are IRI loving Muslims, communists, monarchists, secular, agnostics, atheists etc etc. The reaction is the same.

    But the debate on this issue you brought up is old and continuing:

  210. Smith says:

    Mr Nasser,

    It seems they have learned a thing or two:

  211. Smith says:

    Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian:

    این که تصور کنیم پس از آشفتگی در اوضاع امنیتی ایران از نظر داخلی و خارجی، جریان تجدد آمرانه شکل گرفت و رضا شاه به قدرت رسید، و معنایش این باشد که مردم دیگر نه دنبال آرمان های مشروطه و حقوق مدنی بلکه صرفا در پی حفظ استقلال و جلوگیری از هرج و مرج بودند، دست کم به صورت کلی درست نیست بلکه حاوی نوعی تناقض هم هست. تناقض این است که تجدد آمرانه، خود حاوی مفهوم «تجدد» است و از ارکان تجدد، توجه به حقوق مدنی و باور و تعهد نسبت به پارلمانتاریسم است، در آن صورت چطور می توانیم بگوییم در تجدد آمرانه ما از اهداف نظام سیاسی مشروطه به خاطر حفظ استقلال و رفع هرج و مرج دور شده ایم. در اینجا، یا شما باید از تجدد بویژه مفهوم جامع آن دست بردارید و صرفا بحث نظام استبدادی را به هدف تأمین استقلال و امنیت مطرح کنید، یا اگر عنوان تجدد را حفظ کردید، آن تحلیل را کنار بگذارید. در واقع مشکل این تحلیل این است که به مفاهیم به صورت یک منظومه و ساختار جامع نگاه نمی کند.

    به نظر بنده تفاوت «زمان» پیش از تعطیلی مجلس و «زمان» پس از آن، یعنی دورانی که به تدریج به قول شما تجدد آمرانه شکل می گیرد، امر دیگری است. ما پیش از تشکیل مشروطه، نظامی داشتیم که در سایه استبداد و انضباط تعریف شده در دولت قاجاری، مانند همه دولت های کهن دیگر، استقلال و امنیت و حقوق عرفی و شرعی خاص خود را یکجا تأمین می کرد. وقتی با تجدد آشنا شدیم، اساس آن نظریه و نظام در فکر و عمل بهم ریخت. یعنی نظام سیاسی مشروطه، نوع تأمین حقوق مردم و امنیت در سایه قانون جدید و مصوب مجلس، همه آن ساختار را دگرگونه وصف کرده و پیشنهاد های تازه ای داشت.

    با شروع انقلاب مشروطه، استبداد به مقدار زیادی حیثیت خود را از دست داد (چون تجدد آمد) و تمام ساختاری که مبتنی بر آن بود، فرو ریخت. قرار بود نظام جدیدی درست شود که همزمان می باید استبداد را محور می کرد اما استقلال و امنیت و حقوق مدنی را در تعریف جدید حفظ می نمود. اینجا بود که کار در عمل اشکال پیدا کرد و ما نتوانستیم با انقلاب مشروطه (به هر دلیل مثلا نارسایی های مختلف آن یا نداشتن فرهنگ تجدد یا طی نکردن مراحل رسیدن به تجدد که غرب رفته بود و…) به این نقطه برسیم.

    انقلاب مشروطه گذشته را ویران کرد، اما بنای تازه ای را که مورد انتظار مردم و اساسا نیاز جامعه ما در همه ابعاد بود فراهم کرد. اشکالات زیادی بعد از مشروطه پدید آمد که بسیاری را فراری داد. استقلال خدشه دار شد و ایران همچنان صحنه تاخت و تاز روسها و انگلیسیها و سفارتین آنها در تهران بود. اقتصاد ملی شکل نگرفت، چرا که بنیان های اقتصادی لازم در جامعه وجود نداشت و بر اثر بی توجهی های فراوان، اقتصاد ما آسیب دیده و ارکانش متزلزل شده بود. بنابر این پول لازم برای تأمین امنیت نبود. مجلس و قانون به رغم دخالت های فراوان در اوضاع شهرها، نتوانستند حقوق مدنی را تأمین کنند. عقل اجتماعی لازم هم برای تحقق مشروطه و انتخابات آزاد و تجدد همه جانبه وجود نداشت. سیستم قضایی سنتی هم کشش تحولات جدید را نداشت.

    همه اینها به معنای این نبود که ما نیاز به «تجدد» که یکی از ارکانش مشروطه و حقوق مدنی جدید بود، نداریم. در واقع ما بعد از مشروطه نمی توانستیم به گذشته برگردیم. لاجرم باید راه تازه ای پیدا می کردیم که بتوانیم استقلال و امنیت و اقتصاد و حقوق را در سایه آن حفظ کنیم. برای رسیدن به این نقطه، به دلیل ضعف های بنیادی که وجود داشت، راه حل های دیگری ارائه شد که یکی از آنها این بود که اگر ما نمی توانیم همه اینها را زیر سایه تجدد یک جا داشته باشیم، بر ما لازم است بخشی از آن را محقق کنیم. مانند این فکر که ما برای رسیدن به تجدد می توانیم فعلا از حقوق مدنی و قانونی و پارلمانتارسیم صرف نظر کنیم، اما به زور هم که شده باید «تجدد صنعتی و ساختاری» را منهای آزادی های سیاسی، محقق کنیم در آن صورت، هم بخشی از تجدد را داریم، هم جلوی هرج و مرج و ناامنی را خواهیم گرفت. نهایت حقوق مدنی فعلا و موقتا کنار گذاشته خواهد شد و آزادی های سیاسی سلب خواهد گردید.

    خلاصه ماجرا آن که، ما در مشروطه، تجدد خواه شدیم و برای تحقق آن ابتدا به یک ساختار جامع می اندیشیدیم که مانند غرب شویم. وقتی امکان تحقق آن از آن راه فراهم شد، تلاش کردیم از استبداد و آمریت استفاده کنیم. در این صورت ماهیت مسأله چندان فرقی نکرده بود و حرکت به سمت تجدد در حال انجام بود، اما مشکلات، ما را وادار کرد تا روشها و ابزارها را عوض کنیم. البته می پذیریم که برخی از مشکلات مقطعی که باز همانها هم نشان از عدم موفقیت در تحقق یک سیستم جامع برای رسیدن به همه اهداف نوگرایی بود، مردم را از بسیاری از مظاهر مشروطه هم متنفر کرد. در واقع، بسیاری با این که تجدد می خواستند و همزمان استقلال و امنیت، فکر کردند که مشروطه گل و گشاد و دولت های مستعجل بی شماری که طی پانزده سال پس از مشروطه سر کار آمدند، عامل بیچارگی آنها هستند. اما هیچ کدام اینها به معنای دور شدن از تجدد نبود.

    یک اشکال مهم در جنبش سیاسی ایران از «تنباکو» تا «نفت» و حتی بعد از آن، این است که تکلیف ما روشن نیست. به چه معنا؟ به این معنا که معلوم نیست ما همه مشکلاتمان را زیر سر بیگانگان می دانیم و معتقدیم که با قطع دست آنان از کشورمان، به همه چیز خواهیم رسید یا آن که باید اساس مشکل را در درون خودمان جستجو کنیم و برای رفع آن نیاز به مشروطه و قانون و آزادی و حقوق مدنی را پیشنهاد کنیم. این اشکال، به موقعیت خاص تاریخی ما و وضعیت بین الملل بر می گردد. ما کشوری که مستقیم زیر سلطه استعمار باشد نبودیم، اما گرفتار استعمار و دسائس آن بوده ایم. فشار خارجی را در جنگهای ایران و روس چشیدیم و با همه اتحادی که بین ملت و علما و سلطنت بود، نتوانستیم (یعنی عاجز بودیم) با آن مقابله کنیم و بخاطر از دست دادن بخشی از سرزمینمان تحقیر شدیم. همان زمان هم از خارجی متنفر بودیم و هم به آرامی فهمیدیم که یک مشکلی خودمان داریم که همانا «عجز» و ناتوانی است.

    این وضعیت ادامه پیدا کرد تا جنبش تنباکو که یک باره بر خارجی شوریدیم. این جریان 15 سال قبل از مشروطه بود. در آنجا مشکل ما مبارزه با خارجیها بود و این امر آن قدر در طول آن سالیان تکرار شد که به صورت یک امر ثابتی در اندیشه سیاسی ما درآمد و به عبارتی در وجود ما نهادینه شد. در واقع خیلی تحقیر شدیم و تلاش کردیم از این تحقیر بیرون بیاییم. همزمان و به خصوص در مقایسه با وضع خودمان با غرب، ایده هایی مطرح شد که گویا مشکل به خود ما بر می گردد و باید اصلاح را از خودمان شروع کنیم. بعد از تنباکو آرام آرام به سمت حل آن از راه دیگری که اساس آن تغییر وضعیت خودمان بود رفتیم. انقلاب مشروطه پاسخی به این تحلیل بود که مشکل در درون خود ماست. یک جای کار ما ایراد دارد که باید درست شود و آن همین است که مثلا استبداد باید از بین برود. تا آن موقع استعمار مشکل بود حالا استبداد. با این حال، آن اشکال که اول عرض کردم وجود داشت.

    یک گونه دیگر هم می توان این مشکل را شرح داد. تحقق خارجی مفهوم «ملیت و هویت ملی» که در نظام مشروطه امر مهم بود و تبلور آن در مجلس شورا بود، صورت داخلی اش احترام گذاشتن به حقوق مردم بود، در حالی که صورت خارجی اش جلوگیری از سلطه خارجی بود که ملیت ما را یعنی استقلال یک ملت را زیرسوال می برد. وقتی ما بانک ملی در مجلس اول درست می کردیم به هر دو شق قضیه توجه داشمی و بین این دو دایما در رفت و آمد بودیم. البته مبارزه با خارجی یک جاذبه هایی هم داشت. هر وقت می خواستیم کسب وجهه کنیم از این اهرم استفاده می کردیم. کار بی وجهی هم نبود، چون دول خارجی هم ما را تحقیر می کردند و فرصت رشد این گرایش را در ما فراهم می کردند.

    همه این توضیحات را عرض کردم که بگویم تکلیف ما روشن نبوده است. این که می بینید در نهضت ملی شدن شدن صنعت نفت طی سال‌های 29 ـ 32 ما همچنان بین این دو در رفت و برگشت هستیم. در آن مرحله، نمی دانیم می خواهیم مشروطه را محقق کنیم و به هویت واقعی و ملی خود برسیم یا دشمن خارجی را از کشور برانیم و در سایه آن رهایی یابیم. به نظر می رسد در نظر دکتر مصدق، امر دوم آن قدر مهم شد که حتی فرض تعطیل شدن مجلس را به دلیل آن که مانعی بر سر راه وی بود، مطرح و آن را عملی کرد. یک اشکال دکتر مصدق همین بود که تحت تأثیر همان روحیه مبارزه با خارجی، به اندازه کافی به اصول مشروطه در مقایسه با اصل مبارزه با خارجی احترام نمی گذاشت. در واقع و شاید هم نه از سر اعتقاد به این امر، بلکه در پروسه ملی شدن صنعت نفت این وضعیت برای او پدید آمده بود. البته نمی توانم بگویم از قبل نبود. او رضا شاه را هم محصول سیاست خارجی می دانست. بنابرین اساس فکر او را مبارزه با دشمن خارجی شکل می داد. باید در داخل، حتی با تعطیلی مجلس، محدودیت ایجاد می شد تا در مبارزه با سلطه خارجی پیروز شویم.

    البته در نهضت ملی، من جریان جدی مقابل این طرز فکر را که مثلا گروهی سخت به اصول مشروطه وفادار باشندد و طالب حفظ آن، قائل نیستم. در واقع مخالفان مصدق خیلی مشروطه خواه نبودند و بیشتر برای از میدان بدر کردن رقیب مطلبی را مطرح می کردند. وقتی کسانی با مصدق درگیر شدند، روی مجلس و قدرت آن تکیه می کردند اما فکر روشنی برای تحقق مشروطه وجود نداشت. خارج از این منازعه میان دو گروه که هر هم طرفداری ملی شدن نفت بودند، این بود که در جریان این جنبش، صورت تمامی تاریخ ما «مبارزه با خارجی» شده بود و این برای هر دو طرف مهم بود. این صورت، اهمیت زیادی برای حقوق مدنی و آزادی های اجتماعی و اصول مشروطه قائل نبود، چون اصل، مبارزه برای ملی شدن نفت بر ضد انگلیس و غرب بود و جنبش برای همین شکل گرفته بود. بحث این بود!ا ساکت باشید تا نفت ملی شود بعد ببینیم چه باید بکنیم.

    بنده همچنان مشکل را در وضعیت دوگانه ای می دانم که ما گرفتار آن شده بودیم و تکلیف خود را نمی دانستیم که ریشه اصلاح و تجدد در درون ماست یا استعمار مانع آن است. در بیشتر تحلیل های سیاسی ـ‌ تاریخی ـ تمدنی که ما از مشروطه شروع کردیم همواره این ابهام وجود دارد. هنوز هم ما دلیل این ابهام و چالش هستیم. دلیل آن هم شرایط خاص تاریخی و اقتصادی ماست. البته یک دلیلش هم این است که در امر پژوهش در این زمینه شفاف نیستیم تا حقایق را درست بیان کنیم. بسیار احساساتی و ضد خارجی هستیم و این به دلیل همان شرایط تاریخی، برای ما یک اصل شده است. سخت تحت تاثیر گذشته تاریخی خودمان هستیم و از آن دل نمی کنیم، و به آموزه هایی که ما را از سلطه سیاسی دیگران پرهیز می دهد بیش از آموزه هایی که ما را از جهل می رهاند، باور داریم.

    در جریان پیدایش روشنفکری چپ در ایران از شهریور 20 به این سمت، نامی که به عنوان امپریالیسم به غرب داده شد و علیه آن تبلیغ شد، تا عمق جان جریان فکری ایران تأثیر گذاشت. آن زمان، دنیای مدرن به دو بلوک کمونیستی و سرمایه داری تقسیم شده بود و تبلیغات کمونیستی که شکل انقلابی و انسانی و کارگری داشت، تمام تلاش خود را در بی اعتبار کردن غرب صرف کرد. حالا شما باید یقین کنید که این مسأله به عمق جامعه ما نفوذ کرد و فکر چپ ضد غربی را در ما نهادینه ساخت. بنده کاری به این که این مسأله درست است یا خیر ندارم، مهم این است که طوفانی از انتقادها نسبت به نظام سرمایه داری در ایران مطرح شد و با ادبیاتی کم مانند، و با حمایتی که روشنفکران ایرانی در دهه بیست از این تبلیغات کردند و خودشان وارد میدان شده هم سخت در آن دمیدند و همراه با آن شدند، غرب برای بسیاری از آن اعتبار سابق افتاد.

    نکته دوم این بود که پس از 28 مرداد و با دخالت رسمی قدرت های خارجی عمدتا انگلیس و امریکا برای حمایت از استبداد پهلوی در ایران، ضدیت با غرب که از قبل هم کما بیش در ایران بود و اشاره کردیم که کمونیستها هم سخت در آن دمیده بودند، در سطح سیاسی و مردمی افزایش یافت. می دانیم که بخشی از چهره های ملی ما در ملی شدن نفت، امید به امریکا داشتند، اما همراهی امریکا با انگلیس، راه هر گونه هواداری از بخشی از غرب را در میان روشنفکران بست. این بدبینی ها همزمان جنبه سیاسی و اقتصادی داشت، اما با ارائه جایگزین برای آن که در یک مرحله، ایدئولوژی مارکسیستی بود، و بعد اسلام، بُعد فکری هم به خود گرفت. در هر حال از نظر سیاسی حاصل این دو نکته که عرض شد این بود که نوعی بدبینی شدید نسبت به غرب در میان عامه ایرانیان پدید آمد.

    نکته سوم این بود که از نیمه های دهه سی و بیشتر در دهه چهل و پنجاه، «تفکر و مظاهر تمدن غربی» هم در معرض انتقاد و هجوم قرار گرفت. این که ریشه این امر در کجا بود، لابد آنچه اشاره کردیم بخشی از آن را توضیح می دهد، اما این بار «مذهب» هم که خود را معارض این مظاهر می دید و از آنها تعبیر به فساد می کرد، به میدان آمده بود. توجه داشته باشیم که مذهب از زمان مشروطه، مورد حمله قرار گرفته و از صحنه تمدن و سیاست عمومی کنار رفته بود. اما حالا دوباره در حال بازگشت و عرض اندام بود. این بازگشت هرچند تدریجی و کند بود، اما چون اکثریت مردم هنوز دیندار بودند، زمینه پذیرش داشت و می توانست یک خطر جدی علیه غرب باشد که شد. درست در زمانی که از غرب، غربگرایی در سطح عمومی در ایران باقی ماند، و کنار بی اعتباری که غرب سرمایه داری برای حمایت از استبداد پهلوی و ضربه به منافع ملی ما پیدا کرده بود، این بار، غرب فکری و تمدنی هم زیر سوال رفت. به عبارت دیگر، حالا نه تنها مارکسیسم مدعی جانشینی برای غرب بود، که این بار دین هم دوباره به عرصه جامعه بازگشته و مدعی آن بود که تمدن غرب معیوب است و باید بر اساس مراجعه به گذشته و اسلام، تمدن جدیدی را بنیان گذاشت. این همان داستانی است که به انقلاب اسلامی منجر شد. جلال آل احمد و شریعتی و دو نمونه روشن این طرز فکر بودند که حتی روی روحانیون میانه رو اما منتقد هم تاثیر گذاشتند.

    حالا نتیجه این امر این شده بود که غرب بد است و چهره اش بسیار کریه و غیر انسانی. در عوض می توان از آلترناتیوهای دیگری که ممکن است مارکسیسم یا مذهب باشد استفاده کرد. مارکسیسم و مسلمانان، عموما از غرب متنفر بودند و علیه آن می نوشتند، هرچند گاه توجیهات متفاوتی داشتند. چپ ها آتش این معارضه را بیشتر کرده و روی مذهبی ها هم تاثیر داشتند.

    اکنون به پاسخ پرسش شما برگردیم که چطور در این میانه، اصول مشروطه هم بی اعتبار شد. هرچه بود مشروطه، یک پدیده غربی بود. حالا اگر غرب بد است، مشروطه ی آن هم خیلی چیز خوبی نیست و بالاتر، مخالفان انقلاب مشروطه هم که ضد فرهنگ و تمدن غرب بودند، آدم های خوبی هستند. دفاع جلال آل احمد از شیخ فضل الله که مخالف مسلم مشروطه بود، از همین زاویه بود. این دفاع به انقلاب رسید و بعد از انقلاب هم همواره از شیخ فضل الله به عنوان یک چهره ضد غرب ستایش شد.

    در دوره اخیر پهلوی، این قدر کار غرب، خاک بر سر شده بود که حتی انجمن شاهنشاهی فلسفه هم که وابسته به دربار بود، مرتب علیه آن کتاب منتشر می کرد و سعی می کرد آلتوناتیو دیگری که فکر فلسفی و حکمت خسروانی و جاویدان خرد بود جانشین آن کند.

    البته در همین دوره، مردم عادی هم گرفتار برخی از مظاهر غرب شده بودند که رفتار آنها به عنوان شاهد مثال از ابتذال و بیهوده گی استفاده می شد. در یک کلام، جلال آل احمد و نوشته های او در انتقاد از روشنفکری و مشروطه و غرب و غربگرایی، نماد این طرز فکر بود.

    البته به نظر می رسد، امام خمینی (ره) ضمن آن که در همین چارچوب حرکت می کرد، مطلقا اعتقاد به دیدگاه های رسمی شیخ فضل الله در زمینه مشروطه و مجلس نداشت، گرچه از ضد غربی بودن او خوشش می آمد و از او دفاع می کرد. اما از نظر فکری خیر. شاهد آن که امام، تمام اصول مشروطه را در عمل، منهای سلطنت که سخت از آن متنفر بود، پذیرفت و پیاده کرد. سعی کرد از برخی از تجربه های نوین استفاده کند و مدل تازه ای را مطرح کند. ایده آل امام، نوعی مشروطه اسلامی منهای سلطنت بود که در قانون اساسی جمهوری اسلامی خود را نشان داد، یعنی جمهوری اسلامی با مجلس و انتخابات. این به این معنا بود که امام عمیقا به مشروطه و آزادی های آن باور داشت، اما می کوشید اینها را با عمل به اسلام وشریعت اسلامی تطبیق دهد. ایشان و طی یک دهه به تدریج دریافت که دشواری هایی در این زمینه وجود دارد که در قانون اساسی دوم دست به اصلاح زد، اما چنان که می دانیم هنوز هم برخی از دشواری های هست و وفادار بودن همزمان به این دو جریان فکری و رفتن به مسیری که به ایجاد نوعی تلفیق همزمان برای حفظ حقوق خلق و خالق بینجامد، و راه حل های قانع کننده تری بدهد، نیاز به زمان بیشتری دارد.

  212. Kooshy says:

    M.Ali says:
    July 28, 2015 at 2:26 pm
    From Pragy’ very first post It was very easy to know how he thinks and what he is after, he just don’t have the guts to say what he really “ticks” for. As I wrote before he not only likes and thinks green but I bet he even shits green.

    I wrote a lengthy post that for greens Khatami and Rafsanjanis are just the facilitators since they know they don’t have a the popular support for directly challenging the system they hope by empowering well known figures within the system they can facilitate a weakening destabilization like in 09, I have long argued and debated this bunch here in LA. Some of them in their moment of stupidity evens hope that U.S. Or Israel will one day bomb Iran, so to make the system falls down Iran will be de-islamized

    Green’s goal is regime change, they share this goal with their U.S./EU neocon idols, as well as MEK, and Israel/ zios , and the Arab tyrannies they all want the Islamic Iran to end, they all have different reasons and interests but the same goal to get to their interests.

    Since none of the groups and entities mentioned above have any meaningful popular base in Iran, their only hope to achieve their goal is utilizing popular personalities accepted and within the system that can be empower to move and oppose the leadership of the constitutional system. They are correct to think the easiest way to brake the system and change IRI is to weaken its leadership.

    Although their goal of regime change is shared, their reasons are different, as you can read Prag’ posts, he hates the Islamic part of Iran he likes separation of church and state but like the Zio Smith he has no idea what that means and if that can be implemented not only in Iran but anywhere else when Christmas is a state Holliday, etc.

    Smith the Zio wants to demoralize Iran by saying you are behind because you are Muslim and you can’t catchup since you want to stick to Islam, Pragy also don’t like Islam but he is already demoralized since he thinks all Iran’s problem is because of Islam.

    They both are wrong since they both either don’t know the history of Iran and Islam or in case of Smith and FYI zios they try to ignore it. My father ( who was a famous historian) once told me “Iran can’t and wouldn’t have survived without Islam and so is true for Islam wouldn’t have survived without Iran.”

  213. ordinary says:

    Akond Doctor Rasool Jafarian is characterizing / re-basing Islamic revolution as “molded by debates and “shol kon seft kon”, and not based on a sound philosophy. He is out of his mind, it is practically impossible.

  214. ordinary says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 1:20 pm
    July 28, 2015 at 5:12 pm

    Let me ask you now, when will you stop telling rubbish? What fear of thinking? You fail to understand moslim’s “logic and reasoning”, you conveniently assume it does not exist, why? Because it does not match yours – your righteousness!!!

    Moslims are either believers or disbelievers, Atheists are same as moslim disbelievers. There is no different label or group called “cultural Muslims” they are all disbelievers. Believing moslims often swing from being a believer and join their buddy with disbeliever – due to of weak conviction. As a moslem’s devotion to faith increases he fluctuates less and stays on the believer side. A moslim that succeeds in first step of being a moslem, has no time for rubbish, he runs against time to elevate himself, there is much work ahead of him and every moment is precious – hence you find them in constant reading and prayers thinking they are secluded (while they are really building themselves). In contrast disbelievers are constantly engaged in whatever they like and usually with each other despising the swingers, ironically respectful or otherwise unconcerned with the believers (as they find believers interesting – strangely occupied and free of the worldly desires, surprisingly culm or satisfied, surprisingly very healthy physically and mentally in very old age).

    MB, ISIS, Taliban, followers of Aaisha, followers of Ali, et all, they are all the Omma. They all fast, the all try to meet for Hajj, they all pray. They are all wrong sometimes and right some other times – every group of them – God will Judge among them – they are all swingers.

    Problem is with disbelievers and swingers. This is where disbelievers righteousness collides with swinger – when the swinger is acting in its “believer state” but has no conviction to hang on to it. The antagonism helps the swinger in feel as if he is acting on religious duty, and disbeliever feels swingers are hypocrites and an obstacle to good living environment.

    Swingers remain in this state for almost all their life, and God will judge and send them to hell or heaven based on their deeds. Same as disbelievers except that disbelievers have their lack of believe heavily against them, for consciously having chosen not to participate in the battle for God.

    State of life for swingers: when there is oppression, killing, bombing, swingers themselves deal with it or endure it, when others come and take sides they get hurt in the middle of something they don’t understand – these outsiders don’t understand that when they hurt swingers, it does not matter to the swingers (it will not change them, because the swing) and so they endure – as it is shown in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, etc.

    Conceptually, Moslims don’t have a country, they are a nation broken up by borders each ruled by a tyrant, antagonistic to one another as they are.

    Since swingers are more or less willing to kill one another, they don’t really care for “your” medicine, or “your” logic nor “your” science. If they have money they buy your products, medicine, doctors, if they don’t they endure. So you see it does not have anything to do with 6th century, it also has nothing to do with Islam – it is actually the lack of conviction. Total disbelief itself looks at creatures as ultimately independent creatures where life ultimately is accidental and has no future value after death and death no one can avoid.

    Since the Islamic Republic, Iran started on sciences that fit its purpose. Other sub-nations imported products to stay on par. Some for offense as in ISIS others mostly for defense. ISIS takes free weapons from the coalition who finds ISIS to serve their aim, ISIS don’t care their aim matches some else’s – they swing like others.

    Would believers care about science – they are indifferent, but will chose to have it to provide it to swingers and disbelievers because those groups feel a need for it. God will not cause a shortage of disease and famine to Man. God will promote the progress of minds in science and its application, every now and then there is a genius that opens unleashes a new crave among the producers and consumers; “life” will be most interesting in disbeliever’s side. The goal God has set for Man is spiritual evolution of Man.

    Ayatollahs Khomaini and Khamenai, including several philosophers who gave their lives, and several more, took a huge risk / gamble on their own life / afterlife with Allah, for the sake of achieving the seemingly impossible goal once observed under David(as), first for themselves, then for Iranian population – alas who understands? If a devout molsim was hurt, or an innocent blood (moslim or not) was let, God will weight it against their achievements – they may end up in hell or heaven God only knows. As to the population everyone will be judged to the extent of his responsibility and will answer for their failed duties bad and good actions. Ayatollahs and the religious body in general will be scrutinized heavily – for the ought to have known.

    Is hell or heaven important, you bet it is – for it is a permanent abode versus this life where we are renters and will leave it taking nothing with us.

    God is the Omniscience, the Omnipotent, the first and the last, the creator of the 7 skies, the lowest you have called Universe, God created the earth (1 or 2), and the creatures , the man and the jin, drinking water drops accumulated flowing for you to drink, etc, etc, and God let them on earth “antagonistic with each other” to find who finds the path and how they will race to him.

    Now that it is all spelled out for you what do you want to do about it? there are ~2 billion moslims. I suggest you find a research job in another span of earth and stop diluting yourself with the idol you made for yourself called Iran. God owns it, God own the earth and creates centers of action to keep God in face of people around the earth, so no one can claim God was not present even for a moment.

    Now there is a very slim chance Islamic Republic might succeed; it will be an unfortunate event if it fails, I for one will wish for it to succeed however it fails it will be ok to moslims. Iran is a fortunate country, the center of trail, and we are the fortunate to watch how this will unfold. AllahoAkbar.

  215. Rehmat says:

    @ordinary – Let me correct you.

    Muslims are NOT a race like Jews.

    There is NO compulsion in Islam. But once one choose to be a Muslim of free will – then there is “compulsion” to do a few things to look like a Muslim; perform daily prayers, pay zakat, get involved in charitable work, have some fasting in month of Ramadan, don’t kill a human-being (Muslim or non-Muslim), don’t get involved in adultery, drinking alcohol or being part of the ‘Chosen People (LGBT).

    So, in conclusion, the next time some jerk call you “a radical Muslim”; don’t apologize, be proud.

  216. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 4:53 pm

    About the second paragraph of your post, I should say I look at the problem from technical aspects (not a philosophical one); there were serious shortcomings in methods and equipment, but people weren’t doing actual research, otherwise they would have “seen” those shortcomings and subsequently tried to overcome them.

    You are talking about the root cause of lacking enthusiasm for doing the whole process (“seeing” the problem [some people even deny there are problems], finding a solution, and implementing it).

  217. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 28, 2015 at 5:12 pm

    I think that’s a common drive (psychological) in all mankind; challenging one’s beliefs is destabilizing, it makes one uncomfortable and it’s not easy.

    But tell me please, is the average person more of thinker in the West, than the Rest?

  218. Karl.. says:

    A question,
    isnt this way of sitting with the shoe a disgraceful manner in middle eastern culture?

  219. Pragmatic says:

    1) Nahid mehdi is vacationing with family in chaloos.
    2) we haven’t learned not to accuse! Now I’m a monarchist!


  220. M. Ali says:

    That’s mostly a no-no in Arab cultures. I’ve not noticed any such sensitivity in Iran.

  221. M. Ali says:

    a) you claimed that Iran’s golden age was the 70s
    b) you are an advocate of separation of church & state, and you used Reza Shah as an example of when Iran went through that route

    Those two indicate a pro-shah ideology.

    There are also other clues in your statements. For example, you show very little love for elections. You prefer Iran being in bed with France & USA, and are ashamed of our links to Chavez. And so forth.

    I don’t understand why you are not honest in your convictions. You glide around.

  222. M. Ali says:

    Larijani, chairman of Majlis, was just complaining that a certain person has said Ahmadenijad’s & Mashaei’s dog has more dignity than Larijani.

    I mean, you have to sort of feel sorry for the guy. He is one of best connected politicians in Iran and lost to an upstart like Ahmadenijad in 2005 and EVEN after the President has finished his term, his shadow still seems to hound him.

    He also said that certain people were claiming that he is not criticizing the deal because he was put in power by Hashemi…well, if the shoe fits, Ali-jan…

  223. pragmatic says:


    1- Indeed, economically the golden era of 70’s was the time that Iran both economically and industrially advanced. I bet you were not even born then.

    2- Yes, I like to see the separation of church and state. You cannot implement the rules and laws of 1400+ years ago in the 21st century. If today you go to the streets of Iran and talk to people they all like to see church out of the politics. But you won’t get this, you know why, because you are too religious to comprehend it.

    3- I am an advocate and I am on his excellency’s bandwagon, Hazrateh Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani. This said, how could I be a monarchist? I am a man of truth. I cannot deny that Reza Khan was the man who took us to where we are today. I cannot deny that Mohammad Reza Shah did many good things for Iran. I am not as biased and inane like you and your kind. If we didn’t have all the arms, Shah bought and stored, do you think we could have prevailed the war with Iraq? I was in the war not you. The Iranian Army with educated generals and trained soldiers stopped the Iraqi aggression. I am sure you think Agha Mohsen and his friends without any military background were conducting the war! Rest assured, they were not in the beginning. Then after if you might know they had a lot of difficulties with the Army. I am sure you know there were many issues in conducting the war between Martyr Sayyad Shirazi and Agha Mohsen. Who sent all the pilots to the US to get trained? Thus, the father and son did some great stuff in this country. Be pragmatic, accept the truth. Yes, they did many wrong things too, one would be being so dependent on the US. Do you think all these highways in Tehran have been designed after the revolution? No, honey, they were all in previous regime plans.

    I am not a monarchist, mosadeghi (khaen be iran), nor am I a glider. I am a pragmatist.

    The only solution for us to get pass the awful eight years and make Iran the strongest country in every aspect being Shia Islam, Industry, Culture, Economy, and morale is to listen to Ayatollah Hashemi. As a member of his but I can attest, he sees beyond the box and he wants the best for Iran. Of course you and your like thinking he wants it for money. He doesn’t need it. In a few years he will die, you think his coffin has pockets. But you and like you do not get it, merely because you all are blind biased. If you go back to the letter he wrote to Hazrateh Ayatollah Ozma Khamenie (damat hefazata) he predicted what will happen. In numerous interviews since 84 he said bluntly, why he rejected and fought Dr. Ahmadinejad’s governments.

    The history will judge his place in Iranian history. The irony is that still he is the man! Still, he is the one everyday being attacked. If he is done and finish (as Basiji claims) then why is he still the main man, why is he still being attacked? Why people listened to him and voted for Hassan Rohani?

    Ghanji, Abdi, Shariatmadari, Naimi Salim, Mohammadi, Mesbah, Alamolhoda and many others tried to undermine him, but it backfired on them. Who was behind Rohanies success?

    Last but not least, most of you who don’t live in Iran do not have a bit of understanding of today’s society. You guys are so raw in Iranian politics that make one wonder, why you are so narrow minded?

    I am a pragmatic who sees the truth and the reality.
    Long Live I R A N

  224. Karl.. says:

    M Ali
    July 29, 2015 at 1:54 am

    Thanks for letting me know!

  225. M. Ali says:

    Then say what you mean, Pragmatist. You are very sneaky and indirect with your ideologies. It’s difficult to have debates, if we don’t know what you actually stand for.

    For example, being pragmatic does not equal being contradictory. A person can’t claim to be a huge supporter of the Islamic Republic of Iran & at the same time, advocate a separation of church & state, because those two are complete different systems!

    I’m not saying you shouldn’t be a fan of separation of church & state, but then don’t claim to be supporter of the current system at the same time!

    Being a fan of Shah is the same thing. You claimed Hashemi was a true revolutionary, and did a lot for the revolution, was always close to Imam, etc, and then you say, before the revolution, Iran was in its golden age, and Shah was great. This is contradictory. Then shouldn’t you dislike Hashemi for helping to destroy the golden age?

    Also, let me also address a few of your argument fallacies,

    “I bet you were not even born then.”

    This is such a weak argument. This would mean that all debate should only be strictly regarding our age limit. And since the oldest person alive is 166 years old, this would mean that anything before 1900 should be completely discarded. Because, no one was born back then.

    “If today you go to the streets of Iran and talk to people they all like to see church out of the politics”

    Anecdotal nonsense. Why have elections or statistical science, when we can go on a bus and get the full picture of the society in 5 minutes?

    Even in the smallest gatherings, it is usually preferable to gather information using a scientific logic, otherwise we might come up with incorrect assumptions. For example, if a company wants to get customer feedback, it tries to have a plan in place for the best way to gather this information, rather than randomly going to the streets and saying, “So what do you think of our company?”

    ” But you won’t get this, you know why, because you are too religious to comprehend it.”

    I have no problem with assumptions but as long as it is based on something. I have never claim to be religious in this website and I don’t think I have made arguments based on religious beliefs. Actually, some posts before yours and in this thread itself, I actually did say, “I’m not a religious person ”

    “I am not as biased and inane like you and your kind”
    “Of course you and your like “
    “But you and like you do not get”

    Who exactly is my kind and my like? Even people who I agree with sometimes in this site, have big difference with me.

    “most of you who don’t live in Iran”

    This is like your first fallacy about how I wasn’t born back then, so I can’t understand. I live in Iran, but even if I didn’t, I don’t see how that invalidates our ability to have a reasonable opinion. People don’t live in space either, but it appears that scientists have a pretty damn good idea about a lot of things outside of Earth.

  226. kooshy says:

    Insulting heroes who DID go to war, and sacrificed their lives to save Iran to be a country to go back to for those who purposely stayed outside is cowardice, people who avoided going to war have no right even as a childish form of TAGYEH to claim otherwise. It is an insult to all Iran war heroes who did go to the sacred war. Please avoid doing that again, debating and arguing not means to not have principals, you should at least have principal for yourself if not for me and everybody.

  227. kooshy says:

    Pragy, here is one for you it’s up on your ally, from who else the favorit neocon media outlet WashTime.

    “Iran’s Green Movement reform activists see hope in nuclear deal to ease oppression”

    “Some leading voices in the so-called Green Movement, crushed in the aftermath of the disputed 2009 election and the political protests it sparked, say it is now only a matter of time before the deal — and the easing of Iran’s economic and political isolation — will lead to reforms at home, but others are skeptical.”

  228. fyi says:

    ordinary says:

    July 28, 2015 at 7:40 pm

    That is fine, trying to make oneself morally better etc.

    The late Shah Sultan Hussein was doing the same thing too.

    But his deep involvement with Religion – “Din” – and obscure points of Shia Tradition helped usher in the destruction of Safavid State.

    Chaos, starvation, disease, murder, rapine followed the disintegration of the Safavids and lasted until the late Aqa Muhammad Khan Qajar restored the state.

  229. pragmatic says:

    M.ALI –

    First of all, it is hard to have debate with you and your kind. Merely due to being one dimensional and ardent about your imaginations. You guys are like MKO and Communists. They have to have the last say and it is their way or highway.

    Secondly, if thus far you can’t see for what I stand, that’s not my problem. But since you seem to be a nice lad, I’ll tell you what I stand for once again. I stand for my country and its immaculate people whom have fought an eight year war, a life full of unnecessary hardship and eight years of lies and deceits. I have to attest for a stint time we were approaching the right track (Khatami reign). But he ruined it with his impotence.

    Thirdly, I am not contradictory. This is what you perceive. It is not my problem how you look at it. You should sit down in your solitude, and start contemplating on the values you believe in, such as the eight years of Pakan government. I am a supporter of IRI, but at the same time I see in the future we might see the separation of church and state within the Islamic Republic. Systems within themselves can be altered. It is doable, but it will take years of educating people. It is done by having legitimate parties. This is what a wise man like Hashemi perceives of Iran and he knows one day this will be the case.

    Fourthly, why do you consider me a fan of Shah? You see, here is the big difference between you and I. I vividly explained how I feel about the accomplishments of Pahalvies. Are you arguing that there was not any accomplishments during their 50 years? If you do, then I can’t have a debate with you. Since you were born after the revolution you think nothing was accomplished during those two men. This is where you lack knowledge. My friend, I am not pro monarchy, but at the same time I can’t lie to myself! I gave you some examples, but as usual, you and your kind eschew them! Read the books about Qajar dynasty and you see how those fuckers ruined Iran in every aspect. Then go read what Reza Khan did to Iran. Now, this doesn’t mean I’m pro Shah! It means as a PRAGMATIC I can tolerate the goods made by my foes. This is the difference between you and I. Where did I say Shah was great? You see, you and your kind can’t read or you distort the facts. I like Hashemi because he grows with his time and he is a pragmatist. At the same time I believe he has made mistakes too. I am not an avid fan of his behavior in the beginning the revolution, however, he has changed and altered some his viewpoints about the most imperative matters of IRI. So don’t assume! Golden era: From 1968 we saw a revolution in our industries. Our car industry was started then. Iran National which is now called Iran Khodro was one one the biggest car manufacturers of the Asia. Our shoe factories such as Kafsh Meli, Bella, and Vien were exporting to European countries. We had so many textile factories which were exporting high quality to overseas. I can use so many examples from different industries. You see, these are the facts which we cannot put aside, but you and your kind do. Now does this mean I am pro monarchy or shah? No, it doesn’t. I can see the good and the bad during that era.

    Fifth: Your answers show that how uneducated you are about the accomplishments prior to the revolution, that is why I said” you weren’t born then”, now I can add that you even didn’t take your time to go and read about Iran then and prior to Pahlavies!

    Sixth: Yes, go and talk to people and you see they like to see a different IRI or not, whereat the clergy do their preaching and the civilian do run the country. But you haven’t, because the truth is bitter! You live in a La La Land, where ever that is!

    Seventh: I see sporadically people that live abroad and when they come to the mother land. They don’t have a vague idea about what is going on in Iran. By their posts I personally can see that they are clueless. I really mean it. They come for a few weeks to party. They do not go to the core of the matter. If they do is going to shopping malls or bazaar. They just want to see what they dreamed of. Their problem is not being able to see beyond their self made box! That’s why I call them inane!

    You did read my previous post verbatim, how come you didn’t comment about that mother fucker Shah, who spent billions to make a strong military in Iran? That son of bitch piece of shit bought all those F-4’s, F14’s and so on and so forth to shove it up his ass?! That cock sucker sent our pilots to the US to get trained to come back and do air shows?!

    My friend, learn to see the good and the bad done by people. Yes, Shah and his father took the freedom away from me and you. They messed around with our religious beliefs. They were both weak against so called super powers. And many other things that I can’t think of, BUT, one can’t claim they didn’t do shit for this country!

    Out of now where today in mehr shahr of karaj, I met a gentleman in his early sixties. He mentioned that he was a member of Javidan Guard (google to find out who they were). I asked him you were prisoned or you were let go after the revolution? He retorted that he wasn’t prisoned, proudly he said to me with a high voice, we were the ones who fought the war (especially in the beginning). Then he said you think people like Rezaie they knew anything about a war?! He had tears in his eye. I asked him General Neshat and Bigleri were rightfully executed? He said no, they were real soldiers and if they were alive they could have made a big difference in the war. So, IRI has done many good things for Iran, but due to lack of experience in the beginnin, they also have made some mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes and now imagine you have people of different ideas running a country. We experienced it with Ay. Ozma Montazeri, and then Azari Qumi.

    Read more about Iran, starting the safavid dynasty. I hope I have answered your acquisitions!

    I’m out!

  230. M.Ali says:

    Is it pragmatic and logical to support and love a guy who helped bring about a stop to a golden age of a country?

  231. Rehmat says:

    American Jewish journalist and author, Steve Lendman, posted an article supporting Nasrullah’s stand against the Zionist regime, which debunks the US and Israeli lies about Hizbullah.

    “Hizbullah is a legitimate part of Lebanese government. It’s not a terrorist organization as Washington and Israel claim. It’s born out of Jewish army’s 1982 invasion – devastating naked aggression slaughtering nearly 18,000 people mostly civilians including Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camp massacres,” Lendman said.

    The massacre was carried out on the orders of Gen Ariel Sharon, a Crypto-Jew, who was born to Jewish father and Russian Christian mother. Sharon never converted to Judaism based on Halaka, the Jewish Shari’ah laws.

    “Hizbullah is more than a political entity. It has a military wing for self-defense – not the naked aggression the way America and Israel operate. It provides vital social, charitable, educational and healthcare services. It established dozens of hospitals and schools. It enjoys widespread support, specially among Shias comprising over one-third of country’s total population,” Lendman added.

    “Israel’s high crimes take many forms. Muslims are targets for praying to the wrong G-d. Thousands are wrongfully imprisoned for political reasons,” Lendman claims.

  232. Pragmatic says:

    See you are wrong again. At later years of his reign (Shah) he was so despotic that he was in verge of destroying the country. He was also in his own lala land. He thought he was the king of kings and he wasn’t in touch with reality. That is the people.

    I hope your not going to reply with another cheap shot comment. Consequently I hope you understood what I wrote.

    In the meantime, I remain Ali Jan.

  233. Pragmatic says:

    Also around 1975 our economy started to collapse.

  234. Amir says:

    Based on the ongoing discussion between Messrs pragmatic and M. Ali I must admit Mr Smith is correct when he says Iranians don’t want an un-Islamic political system; they want an efficient one.

    And I could add Iranians possibly mean “efficient”, “transparent” or “meritocratic” when they talk about “democratic”.

  235. Kooshy says:

    Pragmatic says:
    July 29, 2015 at 11:36 am
    “Also around 1975 our economy started to collapse.”

    Lots of corrections and changes to earlier statement that Iran’ golden economic era was 1970s so far half of that good time has gone under corrections” it reminds me of Mr. Rohani’s government $159 billion blocked funds, correction it is $130b no it’s $113 b no, no, no it’s $29b, maybe some was loaned to Oxford for a good Phd in higher education in leafing.

  236. M.Ali says:

    The revolution work didnt start exactly at the end of the 70s.

    Its completely illogical. Let me explain,
    1) the best age of iran was the 70s
    2) the best guy is the one who revold against that

    Do you understand why i have a logical issue with thia? You then give round around ways to make this contradiction to work. For example, you say the economywas collapsing aftet 1975, so here is two things then,
    1) How much is this a golden age if half way through the golden decade the economy was about to collapse?
    2) Did Rafsanjanj became anti-system after 1975 when the economy was about to collapse?

    At this point in this debate, I’m not anti or pro shah or anti or pro rafsanjani. I”m just trying to figure out the logical incostintancies. I have a huge problem with this becaude i think one of the biggest things that harm our country are these illogical incostintancies.

  237. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 10:03 pm

    That is fine. Technical aspects are very important too. No doubt about that. It’s just, time comes when you shall realize that the core problem is not them but the inherent unthinking. Since if thinking existed and trusted, the technical problems would have been solved scientifically eg using the science of management.

    Amir says:
    July 28, 2015 at 10:06 pm

    It is true. But without risking change, there will be no progress.

    No. The average Westerner is no more different than the average person in Iran. Probably less than one percent of Western population are the thinkers. The rest live off the fruits of these thinkers. The average Westerner of religious disposition goes to Church, votes based on his faith, goes to religious shrines which have reputation for miracles (from curing diseases to solving financial problems), prays his/her rosary, pays alms and etc etc. The one with no religious disposition also lives life according to whatever ideology he/she has taken up for him/herself.

    Though there are some cultural differences between an average Iranian and an average Westerner. The average Westerner is more of a risk taker, more of a challenge accept-er, more tolerant of others views and rights, more diligent, more self confident and self aware, more trusting of others in his/her society and more inquisitive and hopeful. He or she gets fascinated by fiction and ideas.

    But the main difference comes to how rational thinkers think and go about doing things. If you have been paying attention to what Mr Khamenei says, he always mentions “nokhbegan”, these are the people who are supposed to be that one percent (not the general public). They do not exist right now in Iran. But if ever they come to being, then Iran can certainly be another Germany or Japan. Currently in Iran, the concept of a “nokhbeh” is one who is visited by some kind of holy spirit in his sleep, and tricks the holy spirit to give him some formula for quick cement. Next day, he presents his quick cement to the gullible public, sporting his pashm on his face and then by the next week, he is on the street harassing girls who are showing ankles. I do not think (please correct me if I am wrong here), this is the concept of a nokhbeh in the mind of Mr Khamenei.

  238. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    July 29, 2015 at 12:24 pm

    It was under pressures of war and poverty over many centuries that the English were forced into promoting people with high-caliber of integrity and problem-solving skills.

  239. Pragmatic says:

    Your real problem is reading between the lines. You have your mind set on one thing.

    I said starting 1968 then I said sometime in 1975 we started to see our economy collapsing. Thus the Holden era was between those years.

    Apparently you didn’t get what I said about the accomplishments of those years.

    First you wanted to name me a pro monarchy.
    Now you are trying to say Hashemi became anti monarchy after the year 1975!! What is your problem. Please go back and read what I wrote.

    Why are so slow?! Go find a few books which the history of Iran up till now has not been distorted in them and read them thoroughly, then come talk to me.

    You are truing yo pin me to something!

    Can somebody explain in farsightedness to Jim what I’m trying yo convey?

  240. Pragmatic says:

    In farsi to him

  241. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 29, 2015 at 12:32 pm

    That is so true. It is a shame that others who also faced wars and poverty could not do the same, though.

  242. Pragmatic says:

    Smith do you want
    I suggest you start reading works if Urania philosopher Dr malekian.

  243. Smith says:

    Imbeciles who think Goedel and Heisenberg had anything to do with prevalent Iranian public’s view on life and after life, debunked below.

    Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian:

    پروژه خیالی جهانی سازی تشیع توسط بروجردی ـ انیشتین را چه کسانی دامن می زنند؟

    یک نوع از تاریخ نگاری، طرح دروغ های بزرگ بی شاخ و دمی است که از بس شگفت است هیچ چاره ای جز باور کردن آن نیست تا از شر آن راحت شد. نمونه اش این که نیوتن شیعه بوده و بحار الانوار مرحوم مجلسی را ترجمه کرده که الان هم نسخه آن در صندوق اماناتی در لندن نگهداری می شود.

    سالها پیش خبر شیعه شدن انیشتین و ارتباط وی با آقای‌ آیت الله بروجردی منتشر شد. بعدها آن خبر را سایتی منتسب به بیت ایشان منتشر کرد و به توصیه های فراوان که این مسأله یک دروغ شاخدار است، هیچ گاه حاضر نشد آن را بردارد.

    زمانی هم بنده دریافتم که شخصی به نام سجادی مدخلهایی در دایره المعارف تشیع نوشته و ضمن آن سلسله ای از اباطیل و دروغ ها را در باره شیعه شدن لئوناردو داوینچی و نیوتن و ارتباط آن جریان با علامه مجلسی و وجود رساله های نادر در صندوق اماناتی در لندن و شخصیت موهومی به نام مهدوی که تا به حال رنگ خود را نشان نداده، نوشته است.

    وقتی آن یادداشت ها منتشر شد، دایره المعارف تشیع ضمن عذرخواهی اعلام کرد که این شخص رفتاری نامتعارف داشته و از آنجا اخراج شده است. بعد هم همین آقا، نامه ای برای بنده نوشت و ارکان دایره المعارف تشیع را متهم کرد. اما فی الواقع و خارج از منازعات آنها، احساس کردم سجادی یا با همدستی افرادی، در حال نشر شبکه ای از دروغ پردازیها و عجایب در باره موضوعاتی هستند که گویی تشیع در حال تبدیل شدن به یک مذهب جهانی در غرب است و هر آدم مشکوکی که در غرب درگذشته اند حتما شیعه بوده و از او یا آنها رساله هایی هست و تا بحال هم صدایش در نیامده است. اگر هم مرده و کسی نمی تواند بررسی کند، مطالبی به او نسبت می دادند.

    جالب است که سلسله ای از استفتاءات در باره برخی از مسائل جنسی هم از ناحیه عده ای از جوانان شیعه در ترکیه از آقای خویی در اینترنت یافت شد که بسیار عجیب و ترویج گر نوعی همجنسگرایی و البته تحت پوشش حمله به فمنیسیم بود.

    این داستان پایان ندارد و همچنان در اینترنت و جاهای دیگر رگه هایی از آن یافت می شود. اخیرا لینکی توسط یکی از دوستان فرستاده شد که پرده دیگری از این ماجرا بود.

    تحقیق اسکندر جهانگیری پیرامون نقش نیلز بو دانمارکی در طرح جهانی سازی تشیع / سرنخ ترور جان اف کندی. خارج از متن رساله.
    همان طور که در وبسایت بالا می توانید ملاحظه کنید باز هم اسامی انیشتین و علامه مجلسی و برگ های تازه ای در باره همین آقای نیلز که به صورت مشکوک در سال 1962 کشته شده می یابید. با این قید که این یک سال پس از فوت آیت الله بروجردی بوده است. گویا شبکه ای برای جهانی سازی تشیع در غرب بوده که این هم یکی از حلقه های آن بوده است.

    این همان حلقه ای است که یک سر آن هم به حمیدرضا پهلوی بر می خورد که فقیه بوده و آثار حقوقی مهمی در دفاع از تشیع نوشته و اخبارش در همین داستانهای ساختگی آمده است. وی شرحی بر لمعه نوشته که نسخه آن هم در همان صندوق امانات نگهداری می شد.

    داستان صندوق عجیب و غریبی که لندن بوده و اماناتی در این باره در آن نگهداری می شود و بسیار سری است در تمام این داستان هزار و یکشب وجود دارد و باز هم نام دکتر ابراهیم مهدوی در آن به چشم می خورد. نسخه ای کهنه در جایی پیدا شده و در آنجا نگهداری می شود. و از این سری عجایب و غرایب.

    به نظرم اگر هم چیزی به نام تشیع انگلیسی باشد باید سرنخش اینجا باشد و الا آنچه این روزها به اسم تشیع انگلیسی است محتملا می تواند یک نوع شیخی گری جدید و فرقه سازی تازه باشد که بارش روی جهالت و تعصب مذهبی است نه روی توطئه دیگران که ممکن است مثل دفاع از بابیه زمانی از آنها هم در معادلات سیاسی خود حمایت و استفاده کنند. در این باره باید تامل بیشتر کرد هم در درک اصل آن و هم نوع تعامل با آن.

    اما رساله این نیلز بور خیالی هم جالب است. یک عبارت از آن وبسایت این است که گویی طرح جهانی سازی تشیع که با کار مشترک انیشتین و بروجردی به سرانجام نرسیده بوده قرار شده توسط آقای نیلز به انجام برسد که….

    نیلز بور، در این رساله، با کمال شگفتی، و همانند اینشتین، اسلام را بر همگی ادیان جهان برتری می دهد؛ و با بیاناتی حزن آور و اندوهبار، تأسّف می خورد که “نقشۀ جهانی سازی دین اسلام و مذهب مترقی شیعه” با درگذشت آیت الله بروجردی و اینشتین، به هدف نرسید و چون – طبق آنچه نیلزبور درآنجا مینویسد – حدود یک سال از درگذشت نابهنگام آیت الله بروجردی گذشته، خود نیز آرزوی مرگ می کند! و سفارشاتی را محرمانه، برای جان اف. کندی و برخی از افراد خاندان نجیب زاده های انگلیس نوشته است؛ که معلوم می شود وی قصد داشته، با ثروت کلان نجیب زادگان انگلستان- که با وی همعقیده شده بودند – “کِنِدی” را یاری دهد تا دین اسلام و مذهب مترقی شیعه را به عنوان “مذهب واحد جهانی” معرفی کنند و مسیحیت و یهودیت و آیین های دیگر جهان را از بیخ و بن ریشه کن سازند… ولی یک سال بعد از سال نگارش این رساله و مرگ نیلز بور، در سال 1963م “جان اف. کندی” نیز با گلولۀ شخص ناشناسی از پا در آمده است!

    می بینید که این دفعه پای جان اف کندی هم به میان آمده است.

    به هر حال این داستان سر دراز دارد و مع الاسف نمی دانم کی و کی قرار است کسی ته این ماجرا را در بیاورد. سابقا در باره ترجمه بحارالانوار توسط نیوتن هم مطالبی از اینها نقل کرده بودم:

    برخی یادداشت های سابق بنده را هم در این باره اینجا می توانید ببینید

    Note: See the above link for the weblinks mentioned in this article.

  244. M.Ali says:

    You keep moving things around to try to make sense of uour contradictions.

    So the golden era was from 1968 to 1975 when it started to collapse?

    I didnt say hashemi BECAME anti monarchy after 1975. Im6saying that he was anti’monarchy before that right? That means he was against the government taht was responsible for the golden age right? He was taking actions to bring it down right?

    So, how do you reconcile these two facts to yourself? A prson you love was against the government that had ushered in a golden age for iran?

  245. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    July 29, 2015 at 1:06 pm

    Yes, a sad phenomenon where by one tries to compensate for one’s real or imagined shortcomings by taking refuge in a Fantasy Land.

    These people should write Fantasy Fiction and create alternate histories in which the late Isaac Newton – an alchemist – become a Shia Muslim and thus changes the course of world history.

    There are a lot of such counter-factual historical novels in the English language which have made their authors, if not very rich, at least materially comfortable.

  246. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 29, 2015 at 12:24 pm

    One issue I find very odd is that (for example in life sciences) decision makers have been stressing the importance of basic sciences (to get a good understanding of nature), thinking (as in original research) and critical appraisal; we are not seeing the break-through yet. Either 1) we are professing something and acting differently, or 2) the problem is something else.

    It’d be much obliged if you could share your own experience, if you think that is possible (or please tell me if you know what is wrong). For a starter, I could say I’m not putting all my effort into this (I don’t know what my plans should be; I’m working on an observation that requires at least one year of intense work. But I also want to seriously enter the filed [and I’m going to need further training/ education] but I fully understand a Ph.D. doesn’t make one a researcher [there are hundreds of them around already] and I “think” I believe it’s my “taklif” to push biology research forward [as much as I can] so it would be unjustified to think about what would happen in the future or what would be my prospects for employment [there’s a God who would feed me then, as He’s feeding me right now]).

    About the second part of your comment, the way you put it, nobody in his right mind would dispute your argument.

  247. Pragmatic says:

    My son

    Imam and his followers were against the monarchy! The didn’t care if the economy was good or bad. They wanted an Islamic regime. Btw, FYI if ayatollah broojerdi was still alive we never would have had a revolution. Because he was the only marja and the strongest. After his death then in qum we had the maraje salaseh: ased kazem shariatmadari, ammadreza golpayehghani and marashi najafi. At the same time in najafi we had abolghasem khoie, in mashad milani and in tehran khoda bia morz khonsari.
    If you like I teach more about the clerics.
    گودرز به شقایق چکار داره!
    تو.چرا انقدر خرفت هستی.

    Go read my comments a few times maybe you’ll get it.

  248. Smith says:

    The science of ophthalmology in Iran at its peak;

    Hojatolislam Valmoslemin Professor Doctor Rasool Jafarian:

    مروری است بر نسخه به ظاهر پزشکی برای رفع درد چشم و درد سر، اما با استفاده از طلسمات که برای مقدس کردن آن از بسم الله و حروف مقطعه و… استفاده شده است.
    ما مسلمانان در طول یک صد و پنجاه سال گذشته، هر بار از گذشته خود صحبت کرده ایم، عمدتا روی جنبه های مثبت آن تکیه کرده ایم. این البته بسیار خوب است، به ویژه برای روحیه دادن به نسل جدید. اما در کنار آن، بهتر است روی جنبه های منفی نیز گاه تاکید کنیم. این کار دو نتیجه دارد. نخست این که اولا با این کار ما نوعی ارزیابی معتدل را به مخاطبان خود از همان نسل جدید خواهیم داد. این که خیلی نسبت به پیشینه خود غرّه نشوند و فریب نخورند که همه چیز دارند، بلکه بپذیرند که برخی از چیزها را دارند. دیگر این که وقتی نقاط ضعف و منفی را روشن می کنیم، سعی کنیم علل آن را نیز بیان کنیم. این که چرا و به چه دلیل آن نقاط ضعف را داشته ایم.
    در سالهای اخیر، وقتی در یادداشتهایم روی این نکات دست می گذاشتم، متهم می شدم که میراث علمی گذشته را انکار می کنم. در حالی که اساسا چنین انگیزه ای نداشتم و ندارم. ما باید نقاط قوت و ضعف را همزمان ببینیم. اما به دلیل این که زیاد روی جنبه های مثبت کار کرده ایم، چشممان از جنبه های منفی دور مانده و به همین دلیل دقیقا علل درجازدن خود را در علم نمی دانیم. بنابرین اگر بنده نمونه ای در این زمینه بیان می کنم، نظرم تحقیر گذشته نیست، بلکه توجه دادن به جنبه هایی است که از آنها غفلت شده است.
    بارها عرض کرده ام که تلفیق روشهای مختلف در حوزه های متفاوت علمی، یکی از دلایل اصلی عقب ماندگی است. این امر وقتی شکل بدتری بخود می گیرد که برخی از شبه علم ها وارد حوزه علم های طبیعی می شوند که هیچ راهی جز تجربه، راهگشای مشکلات آنها نیست. این که مثلا با طلسمات عجیب و غریب بخواهیم درد چشم را شفا بدهیم. می دانیم که داستان دعا جداست و نه ما مسلمانان که تمام مردم دنیا، پناه اصلی شان خداوند متعال است. شکل تصرف خداوند در امور، ربطی به جنبه های تجربی و علمی ندارد. ما دقیقا با چگونگی آن هم آشنا نیستیم. اما به هر حال می دانیم که خداوند عالم، این عالم را در تصرف خود دارد و از ما خواسته است که در مواقع مشکل از او بخواهیم آن را حل کند. اما نباید بحث طلسمات را که گاه از آیه و حدیث و بسم الله وغیره هم استفاده می کنند با دعا مخلوط کنیم. این خود یک دشواری است وسبب مقدس شدن کار طلسمات می شود که در فقه همانها مشکل جدی هم داشته است.
    در اینجا می خواهیم یک صفحه از درمان چشم را با توجه به طلسمات که در یک نسخه خطی آمده نشان دهم و بگویم این قبیل نوشته ها تا اندازه میان ما نفوذ داشته و می توان حدس زد که چه اندازه ما را از کار علمی دقیق دور می کرده است. البته می دانم که چشم پزشکی در تمدن اسلامی تا چه اندازه پیشرفت کرده بوده و منکر آن نیستم. اما توجه داشته باشیم که در کنار آن، این قبیل امور، بخش مهمی از حل و فصل دشواریها را به ظاهر پوشش می داده و آن تخصص حتی در یک درصد پزشکان ما هم شناخته شده نبوده است.

    اینجا یک نسخه پزشکی با این ویژگی هست که هیچ نشانی از آن به عنوان یک کار تجربی نیست. از سوی دیگر، مطلقا بحث از دعا و راز و نیاز با خداوند نیست. اما استفاده از کلمه بسم الله و حروف مقطعه قرآنی در آن هست. هیچ روایتی هم به عنوان پشتوانه وجود ندارد و ارائه نشده است. البته دو بیت شعر عربی کنار آن هست که در باره امام علی علیه السلام است. فکر می کنیم این روش، تا چه اندازه می توانسته است تاثیر منفی روی رشد علم در میان ما مسلمانان داشته باشد.

    این شما و این هم نسخه: See the link above for the photo-scan of this gem in ophthalmology

    آنچه در این نسخه آمده به این شرح است:
    از جمله مجربات جهت دفع امراض و اوجاع اعضا به نحوی که از مشایخ کرام قدس الله اسرارهم به این فقیر رسیده و اجازه داده اند آن است که:
    – اسم آن عوض را به عربی ملاحظه نمایند
    – و هر یک از حروف آن را در میان حروف 1 هـ الله نوشته
    – مرتبه دویم ترکیب نموده
    – مرتبه سیم الف ها را نوشته حرف آن عضو را بعد از آن نوشته
    – مرتبه چهارم ترکیب نمایند در میان مربع کهیعص حمعسق بدین صورت مثلا در «وجع عین» [درد چشم] بعد از بسمله به صورت بنویسند: بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

  249. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 29, 2015 at 1:16 pm

    Exactly right. More important than that, such fiction opens up mind to new ideas and possibilities. Fiction has played a critical role in developing Western thought system. But for that, there must be a good “neyat” rather than the charlatan way of doing things.

  250. M.Ali says:

    So, let me get this straight, you support an anti-system religious ayatollahs who didnt care anything about the economy even though you think the economy was good and you think a seperation of church and state is better?

    Why the heck you would you support them then!

  251. pragmatic says:

    Okay, here is my final say about our not going anywhere debate:

    Kiss My Ass!

    Since you are so adept in reading between the lines,, give me your interpretation of the above.

    Here is my good friend (Sadegh) talking to your guy (SalimiNamin)

  252. pragmatic says:

    For Ali and like him who don’t know many things about the past:

    بیگانگی نسل جوان با انقلاب

  253. M.Ali says:

    I was just trying to figure you out and see how you can be pro-revolution and claim iran had a golden age in 70s. Why would you want to destroy something golden? Or how could you be for a person who helped bring about a religious alternative to a secular system and claim you like the secular system more?

    Do you understand that i am making no judgement calls on religion, shah, or any side. I’m just trying to figure out how a person can support someone for destroying something he thinks is good.


  254. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 29, 2015 at 1:18 pm

    That is fine and necessary but the problem is creativity does not and can not come as a result of issuing orders. Breakthroughs and creativity do not come simply from “understanding” and “criticism”. Breakthroughs come from new questions. Not the classroom type of questions for example how many eyes a normal cow has; but new questions for example why the cows have two eyes? It is a different kind of understanding than the one expected in societies like Iran. It is the desire to understand the unknown, not the already known. In such a thought system how and why are more important than what. It comes from a mindset which has been freed from slavery of past and present. Such an ultimate free mind then brings about breakthroughs.

    Another aspect of this, is the demanding nature of creativity. Since the mind is giving birth to something new (not regurgitating and understanding the works of others but understanding the unknowns of nature or creating anew based on realities of nature). It is not easy. Basically you can not look at this as a one year workload. You have to look at it as a lifetime of workload. It is not really a job. It is a lifestyle. A complete way of life based on reason and evidence. You put in everything you have into it, like a monk. Everything else then takes a distant secondary priority to this way of life you choose for yourself.

    It is even more difficult in a country like Iran where governance system and the milieu are not supportive of what you are about to do. You will have to burn for it and basically as a man you will have to tell yourself: “If I don’t achieve it, I am not going to make it to the men’s room”. There is no short cut. Specially if one is not inherently a born genius. You can read life stories of people like Koch, Pasteur and others who lived such a life. This kind of life is basically beyond a job or a career. In many instances you will have to sacrifice yourself and many of your current desires (and others around you eg. family and friends). Genuine curiosity, imagination, questioning and diligence would become your tools of the trade. Your enemies would be un-reason, unthinking, doubt and doubters.

    But I must advise you that I am not much farther than yourself in my professional endeavors. As I reminded you before, you have Mr Fyi here to learn from. He is the person, you are searching for. I am sure you have professors and teachers and colleagues in Iran, who can help you with technicalities and such. But to understand the totality of it, you will need someone like Mr Fyi to guide you. You are lucky to have met him here. He can guide you in this totality aspect of it. You will specially need him since you are not living in West, where there are many Mr Fyi’s in universities and research institutes guiding the youths.

    PS. And since I do not want to sound bleak and pessimist I recommend something cheerful to you here, which basically shows to you what is going on in a creative mind. This would be important for you to know (since living in Iran, you have never met any creative mind). I recommend that you read a short book: “Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!” It is not really a book of physics or anything. Just how a thinker goes about thinking and doing in life.

  255. M.Ali says:

    “This would be important for you to know (since living in Iran, you have never met any creative mind).”

    Shut up, you racist prick. Good job making assumptions on 8p million Iranians

  256. pragmatic says:

    Because the revolution was not about economy. (read what Imam said about economy). It was about ideology, it was about islam vs monrachy.

    Next question? Oh I should say next cheap shot at me?

    Bebin man ke dastetu khoondam, faght you are making an ass of yourself.

  257. masoud says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 29, 2015 at 2:57 pm
    M. Ali is right. If you supportted the separation of church and state, how could you support the Islamic Revolution?

    You should go back to the drawing board and rethink your persona.

  258. masoud says:

    Smith says:
    July 29, 2015 at 2:31 pm

    Trust me. Sitting around your mom’s house and spewing this kind of venom and won’t do anything to help with your psychological problems. I know the world is a scary place, but go out there and try to make something of yourself. Even if all you can get is a hammal job. Cleaning toilets in peoples houses would be much better for your confidence than what you’re doing to yourself now.

  259. pragmatic says:

    I didn’t then I do now. I am sure as I alluded earlier we’ll see this sometime in future.

  260. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 29, 2015 at 2:28 pm

    So, Mr. Goroori is also one of those “stupid mullahs”.

  261. Nasser says:


    Even though that post wasn’t directed towards me, I must still thank you for the book recommendation. And also thanks for the heartening link you provided earlier.

  262. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    July 29, 2015 at 3:24 pm

    You are welcome Mr Nasser.

  263. masoud says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 29, 2015 at 3:16 pm

    Well then if you’ve become dissapointed with your choice to support the revolution just come out and say so. I’d probably feel silly if I were you. There’s no shame in it though.
    You supported the revolution four decades ago, but now you want to roll it back. It’s not something you’ve got to dance around.

  264. ordinary says:

    Who cares!

    There is so much rubbish on the internet. I wonder, for Jafarian’s ability to entertain a group of followers by “regurgitating rubbish”, are we to care? – it is a free country!

    Why are we to presume it makes a difference to Iranian moslims that Newton was a Shia or a Jew? That the brainteaser increases devotion to Islam? that the law of large numbers fails here, those deceived will not realize that science and religion are hence not antagonistic – so none will become a scientist; and for these claims and the similar claims since 6th century science has suffered in – a nation deceived! What line of reasoning, what lineup of followers, what hope!

  265. ordinary says:

    Rehmat says:
    July 28, 2015 at 8:37 pm

    I’ll keep that in mind. Thanks.

  266. ordinary says:

    fyi says:
    July 29, 2015 at 3:22 pm

    Indeed! what an idiot!

  267. fyi says:

    ordinary says:

    July 29, 2015 at 7:25 pm

    He was not an idiot; he was a devoted Muslim who did not care one whit about anyone else – certainly not the future generations.

    Every time that a person is murdered or raped in Afghanistan, he would be partly responsible for it.

  268. kooshy says:

    The Good, is Dr. Jafarian, I know Dr Jafarian ever since 2006, back then before I meet him Fars was publishing his opinion and analysis articles on regional politics, especially on Levant he was very accurate, ever since I meet him we had a few short exchanges on politics of the region, I have read couple of his books (specially the “History of Shieh ” which I recommend) and I usually read his blog posts, he is a historian and a bibliographer focused on Tashayouh.
    He is good guy he is a devoted Shieh clergy and well-studied and he really loves Islamic Iran and he means well and is very respected in clergy’ circles, in and by his continued
    critics (and I think sometimes he overdo it) of the Iranian old mentality, way of thinking in and outside of the religion he is not trying to demonize to destroy, on the contrary he is trying to challenge the Iranian society, he wants to bring out the best of them, he thinks Iranians will standup to the challenge when their faces are rubbed on the ground.
    I have hear similar complaints from his old employees when he was the head of library of Majles, and some of his past students, they all say he is tough guy to please. I also have heard he did an excellent job while in Library of Majles.

    The Bad, bad guy is our Pragy, he is bad because he thinks he’s the smartest guy around and everybody else is dumb as an stick, for this way of thinking he often gets cut in his own shit ( like his case with our Ali today, someone should have told him before he started he should check with FYI on his experience with Ali) when he gets cut in his own shit, his usual way out is to “leave politics for a few days”(which is typical for greens) to recover and clean up till things calm down. When he sneaks back in to politics again, he starts with same old style and mentality like nothing was learned.
    He loves Iran if it was possible to have it placed somewhere in middle of Western Europe, and not east of Germany. He doesn’t like Islam he thinks the reason Iran is not France is Islam. What he doesn’t know is real history, analytical history, if he knew history he would have known, if it was not for Islam and Safavid Shieh there wouldn’t have been an Iran remaining for him to dislike today, like what happened to the Roman Empire. Or perhaps there wouldn’t have been a France today since she came to existence due to the crusades. He wants his church and state separated not knowing what it means or even if it’s possible, not only for Iran, but for any Abrahamic religion majority state.

    The Ugly, ugly are the zios here including our own trios zios, not only they hope we are dumb like a nails, so they can deceive true Iranians into thinking ill and low of themselves, but more importantly deep in their agenda they also mean bad for Iran and Iranians. They demonize Iran and Iranians for being behind in all sciences, they try to convince Iranians it is all because of their religion, Islam, and they try and want Iranians to believe they can’t catchup as long they are so attached to their religion, Islam. Their aim is Islam, the shieh Islam, since they correctly identified that the glue that kept and unified Iran together, is Islam, the shieh Islam they are trying to convince Iranians that the religion they are attached to, the religion they love so much, and the religion it glued and saved their country through ages, is the source of their backwardness, the cause of the diseases they can’t cure the science they don’t have, (never mind and never the less if indeed you have the scientist that can, and know, how to cure your diseases we will make sure they are not around for long), they want you to voluntarily give up the glue that unifies you, so you become weaken, that is what that makes them to be the ugly. They don’t care, and they ignore and they hope you don’t know the relation of science, literature in Islam and Iran. I wrote yesterday that I learned if it was not for Islam like Roman Empire Iran wouldn’t have lasted, Islam was the unifying glue to take Iran through its dark ages, and if it was not for Iran with her scientist and literarily scholars, artist and poets Islam wouldn’t lasted, they don’t want you to know this they try to hid it from you, they are the real ugly.

  269. Rehmat says:

    Both Republican and Democrat candidates lining-up for Jewish Lobby’s financial and media support are trying to beat even fanatic Israeli leaders when it come to Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hizbullah. The latest such stupid statement comes from former Arkansas governor and GOP hopeful for 2016 presidential nominee, Mike Huckabee, which was even slammed by some of Israeli leaders including Ron Dermer, Israeli ambassador in Washington, and the American Jewish lobby groups, such as, ADL, NJDC and AICE – but ZOA called Huckabee’s Holocaust comment appropriate.

    According to Jewish propaganda Breitbart New, Huckabee said: “This President’s foreign policy is most feckless in American history. It’s so naïve so that he would trust Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of The Oven.”

    For a sensible person, it’s become impossible to decide who to believe. For example the longest-serving Jewish Congressman, Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich) in a statement Tuesday, supported US-Iran nuclear deal claiming it will generate more financial, military and moral support from Washington.

    In May 2015, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu demanded $45 billion in aid from Obama administration in return for blessing the US-Iran deal.

  270. Amir says:

    Smith says:
    July 29, 2015 at 2:31 pm

    Thanks! That was most helpful.

  271. Smith says:

    Amir says:
    July 29, 2015 at 10:38 pm

    You are welcome Dr Amir.

  272. Pragmatic says:

    Masoud the issue with idiots like is not evolving.

    Henry wanna be:
    Go read my conversation with Ali and see who got out of it with a smile?

    He is an idiot biased Moran like you and your kind. Screw you and all the communists

  273. Pragmatic says:

    Once again tohmat va narava by Henry wanna be!

    Kosskhol we have the government and soon we’ll have both the Parliament and khobregan.

    Long live Hashemi

  274. Pragmatic says:

    What do u believe in?

    Ali you don’t have any more question or comments? If you don’t hesitate to ask.

  275. masoud says:

    Pragmatic says:
    July 30, 2015 at 12:15 am

    I really didn’t understand what you just said in this last post, or the one right after it. Who is Henry?

    AnywaybI just want to make sure were on the same page here. You want Iran to revert to it’s early 1970s economic state, because that was a golden, right? You’ve also become disenchanted with the idea of the Islamic Republic and want to revert to a separation of church and state. Isn’t that right? Also, you have contempt for people like Chavez and Lula, who you don’t consider to be ‘serious’ and want Iran to associate itself with European powers, rather than the global south, isn’t that correct?

    And the reason you are so very excited about Ayatollah Rafsanjani, as you sllike to call him, and Mr. Rouhani, is because that’s what they are aiming to deliver? I’ve got everything right so far, haven’t I?

    If that’s the case, well, you’ve certainly got a legitimate point of view. I just want to be sure I understand where you’re coming from.

  276. M.Ali says:

    Pragmativ, my questions are better clarified by masoud. I was mostly interested in figuring out your convictions and what you stand for.

  277. Pragmatic says:

    M. Ali,

    Henry is a clandestine name referred to a doodool tala who has a brain constipation.

    You got it all wrong as usual. Your problem is exactly the same as Henry, brain constipation. I don’t have time to repeat myself. Lastly, let me take a word or two from your hero: Boro onjayee ke misoozeh ab beriz.



  278. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Muleteer Cargo Cult Basijis Win 22 Medals at Math, Physics and Computer Olympiads

    Tu ruhet, kun-kesh!

  279. nahid says:

    در همایش احمدی‌نژادی‌ها چه می‌گذرد؟

  280. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    When Don Akbar goes be darak inshallah soon, somebody has to become the new Don of the Rfasanjani crime family.

    That means you have to find a new rectum to live in.

    Which rectum do you prefer, Agha Mohammad or Marashi?

    محمدهاشمی حرف آخرش را در باره جدایی از کارگزاران گفت/ اختلاف اصلی با مرعشی

    گفتنی است جمله معروف:”ما لیبرال دمکرات مسلمان هستیم” را حسین مرعشی گفته بود.

  281. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    محمد هاشمی: از کارگزاران جدا شدم چون مقلد امامم نه لیبرال

  282. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    همین موضوع بود که با واکنش محمد هاشمی عضو هیات موسس حزب کارگزاران و رئیس کمیته سیاسی این حزب رو به رو شد و او پس از اظهارنظر رسمی سخنگوی این حزب مبنی بر ” لیبرال دمکرات” بودن حزب کارگزران، این ایده‌ها را انحراف از مرام حزب کارگزاران دانست و حتی پیش‌بینی کرد که با این روند، کارگزاران به سرنوشت حزب منحله مشارکت دچار خواهد شد.[۲]

    برادر رئیس مجمع تشخیص مصلحت نظام که گفته بود دلایل استعفایم از حزب کارگزاران را در آینده شرح خواهم داد، امروز در گفتگو با روزنامه اعتماد مصاحبه جنجالی سخنگوی این حزب را علت استعفای خود بیان کرد و گفت: اظهارنظري توسط يكي از بزرگان حزب انجام شد كه اعلام كرد حزب كارگزاران حزبي است “ليبرال دموكرات مسلمان”.[۳]

    وی در توضیح اظهارنظر جنجالی حسین مرعشی که واکنش های متعددی را نیز به همراه داشت، عنوان کرد: «ما در جامعه اسلامي هستيم و اين واژه‌ها با هم نمي‌خواند. ليبراليسم امروز در برابر اسلام قد علم كرده است. ليبراليسم با اسلام قابل جمع نيست. به عنوان يك لفظ قشنگ است اما محتواي آن با محتواي حزب ما همخواني نداشت. برخي واژه‌ها مطرح مي‌شد كه موضوع ملي‌گرايي را پررنگ مي‌كرد. ما ملي‌گرا نيستيم.»

  283. masoud says:

    Pragmatic says:
    July 30, 2015 at 3:33 am

    You really do seem to have alot if time on your hands. What part of my characterization was inaccurate?

  284. pragmatic says:

    Bah Bah I see that BiB the man is back. How are you? Welcome back, we all missed your posts.
    Ghorboneh koonet ta baad.

  285. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Agha Mohammad or Marashi’s rectum?

    In which Don’s rectum do you prefer to live in “passa” Don Akbar?

  286. pragmatic says:

    To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.

  287. pragmatic says:

    When a U.S. president demanded inspections of a nuclear facility in the Middle East (and failed) –

  288. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    It’s a simple question.

    Do you agree with Mohammad Hashemi-Rafsanjani that Hezbe Kargozaran has left Imam’s path and they will end up like Mosharekat…

    …or do you agree with Marashi and bach-e kooni Quchani and identify as “liberal democrat-e Mosalmun”?

  289. pragmatic says:

    Salam BiB joon, khoobi, khooshi? Why are you so upset again? I just agree with Ayatollah since I live in his rectum.

  290. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    July 30, 2015 at 12:25 am

    I believe in Constitutionalism and Rule of Law as it prevails in Anglo-Saxon countries as well as very uniquely in Switzerland.

    They are the highest achievers in this regard.

    I also am a deep and committed believer in the idea of Human Liberty.

    May be some day, somewhere, a Muslim country can reach to a level of Constitutionalism and Rule of Law prevailing among the Anglo-Saxons – I will not live to see it since that is the work of centuries.

  291. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    I’m not upset, only curios whether you agree with Don Akbar’s brother that Kargozaran has left Imam’s path and will end up like Mosharekat or are you a “liberal democrat-e Mosalmun” like Marashi and bach-e kooni Quchani?

    So when Don Akbar dies you will die with him as you live in his rectum and live off his ann, right?

    Why are you afraid to answer a simple question, angal-jooni?

  292. fyi says:

    nahid says:

    July 30, 2015 at 7:05 am

    I am not sure why there is all this bickering about Mr. Ahmadinejad and Mr. Rafsanjani and their administrations’ records of accomplishments and failures.

    They got elected, managed Iran for 8 years, and left the executive office.

    آیا قحط الرجال است در ایران؟

  293. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    old man,

    …”believe” being the operative word

    …your religious-like “belief” in “Constitutionalism” and “Rule of Law”- of course all of them capitalized- makes you blind to the actual, real, empirical, historical racism, elitism, imperialism, theft, murder and colonialism that is an INHERENT AND ESSENTIAL part of the Anglo-Saxon history

    …and recognized as such by Anglo-Saxon scholars and thinkers, not the opinion of ignorant inferior muleteers that would make it easy for ogde-i immigrants like yourself to dismiss (see racism).

    “Constitutionalism” and “rule of law” as abstract theoretical matters are good things which most rational humans would agree with but what you don’t understand is that the world is not theoretical and abstract- it’s real with negative sides that you have to deal with in addition to the positive points.

    The thing that is clear evidence of your emotional immaturity and intellectual dishonesty is that you insist that Muslims/whoever focus on the negatives of their real history and disregard the positives while you yourself refuse to do the same with regards to “Anglo-Saxons”.

    This is why you are ultimately a charlatan and an academic dilettante.

    Despite your refusal to deal with the historical negatives I don’t need to point out that you accept all those things inherent and essential in Anglo-Saxon history as you have made numerous racist and elitist statements and you don’t deny it.

    In any case, you will never be an Anglo-Saxon or Swiss. Don’t let their “politeness” fool you, to the vast majority of them you are in the end an immigrant sand-nigger.

    The irony is that you do a very very Iranian thing: you are self-hating and gharib-parast.

    The other irony of course is that as many Anglo-Saxons have argued before, an “unwritten constitution” as in the UK does not really constitute “Constitutionalism”.

    I doubt that you have taken the time to research this debate (see dilettante).

  294. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    The important point is that you recognize that your “belief” in constitutionalism, rule of law, “human liberty” etc. is a religious belief, no different than Christianity, Judaism, Islam, cargo cultists, douche-bag techno-utopian fascists etc.

    You are a “believer” like the rest of us.

    You chose your belief and have lived a life according to it and you will soon see the reality of it when you die.

    The difference between you and “Anglo-Saxons” is that you were born into Islam and then chose another “belief”.

    It won’t be pretty for you on the other side.

  295. Karl.. says:

    July 30, 2015 at 9:47 am

    How many in the middle east do you think seek to live according to that kind of western models of living?
    Isnt this idealism what caused the Iraq war (‘we must bring freedom and democracy’)?

  296. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 30, 2015 at 11:14 am

    If you are a Muslim living in London, no one is going to molest you to conform to this or that person’s idea of how you should behave or talk or walk. Certainly no one in the Government of Her Majesty the Queen.

    If you get into legal trouble – whether you are a Muslim or not – you do can be certain to get a fair hearing and a fair treatment; you do not need to be concerned if Judges have been bribed by someone or some powerful personage in the state or outside of the state has rigged the judicial proceedings against you.

    Furthermore, again as a Muslim living in London, the state – Her Majesty’s Government – does not disqualify your favorite candidate or (candidates) for elected office because he or she is (they are) insufficiently English.

    If you are living in UK, you will meet hundreds of Muslims – very many of them with roots in Pakistan – that are living completely on the payouts given to them by Her Majesty’s Government. This in itself is a supreme act of Love – Charity; something that Islam both in the Quran and in Sunnah exhorts Muslims to do.

    In all these respects I do not see any life-style changes – unless you be arguing that Muslim lifestyle and culture inevitably and invariably entails bribery, miscarriage of justice, oppression, dictatorship, etc.

    Those Muslims who claim to wish to live an authentic Muslim life ought to be able to articulate what is wrong with the conduct of Her Majesty’s Government in UK which is against the Principles of Islam.

    Those Muslims with a bit of knowledge of Iranian History who wish to state that they want to live good Muslim lives ought to be able to say why the late Shah Sultan Hussein or the late Hadji Mirza Aghasi were good instance of emulation for a clean Muslim living.

  297. fyi says:

    In regards to your last question:

    Americans, Russians, Europeans do not have the transformative power to change other countries for the better – witness India or Pakistan or Algeria.

    It was their hubris that they could do so which led to their failures.

  298. nahid says:

    Dear fyi
    It is not about personalty it is about how to manage country
    to put the country for sale by high payment (rafsanjani and gang) or stand up on your own feet and make the best of what you can do without kissing any butts.

  299. James Canning says:

    Bussed-I Basiji,

    Hundreds of thousands of Iranians (or their children) now live in the US and very few of them adopt the stance of “sand-niggers”. They in fact are flourishing.

  300. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    old man,

    Having lived as Muslim in London for many years, I’m confirmed in my view that you are entirely detached from reality and living in your own bubble.

    Your description of what the UK is, is akin to fairy tale- one you have to believe in order to rationalize the fundamental treason who committed against your own self by rejecting your homeland and “original” religion (you see that’s a pun on your “fetrat”).

    By rejecting Iran, you ultimately rejected yourself.

    You are a zealous a convert as they come.

    Her Majesty’s Daeshi…and like the Daeshis you’re a sand-nigger from some foreign origin doing the work of a mercenary. Congratulations.

    No use debating with brainwashed cargo cultists like you.

    For the record, just open any UK newspaper on any day and read about miscarriages of justice by judges and police on any number of subjects- race, religion, child abuse, corporate corruption, political scandals- all “miscarried” and covered up by corrupt, lying, child molesting, murdering British police officers, MPs, ministers, attorneys and judges- most of them “enlightened” freemasons.

    Again your denial of the bleeding obvious being reported in UK newspapers on a daily basis confirms your less-than-ideal mental state.

  301. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    You’re such a funny old racist. As usual you didn’t even get what I said.

    “…and very few of them adopt the stance of “sand-niggers”.”

    Comedy gold!

  302. pragmatic says:

    I don’t listen to what his brother or his wife’s cousin say. I hope I have answered your below par question. What could I expect from an animal like you? Your brain functions the best at -5 below par. You and your kind ask stupid questions.**(M.Ali we are gradually getting to the point that you are getting to know who are your kind)** It’s okay I personally will answer them in your level of thoughts.

  303. Smith says:

    Automatic facial recognition in complete darkness:

    Please note that the Pakistani scientist leading this research could not have done so if he had remained in his Pakistani milieu. He had to be in German milieu to shine.

    Much like the case of Dr Mirzakhani, a two time gold medal winner in mathematics olympiad. She had to leave her Basiji milieu and settle in American milieu, study with Americans, work in America and marry a Westerner in order to shine.

  304. Kooshy says:

    Ops, out just in time when professor Zio makes another of his faulty prophesies. A good informative read for the Zio who want believes how safe the UK is for the Muslims. Just safe enough that according to NYT they rather go to Isis Beheading State(IBS) in war zone Syria then staying in the UK.

    “Human Rights Watch Markets ISIS As Safe Haven, Then Laments About It

    A piece in the New York Times reports about second generation immigrants in Britain who now emigrate to the Islamic State:

    Leaving behind the Western opportunities their parents came to Britain for, those young Muslims make for a promised land of religious virtue, Muslim community and righteous revolution.
    “It’s the ultimate marketing success,” said Mr. Akunjee, who represents the families of three teenage girls who recently absconded to Syria. “They manage to sell a war zone as a Muslim safe haven.”

  305. Smith says:

    A “Basiji” olympiad medal winner of Iran:

  306. Karl.. says:

    July 30, 2015 at 11:36 am

    Algeria, Palestine, Egypt, etc who did the people vote for? They voted for islamic parties, the western liberal parties I assume you would support is absent, not because they are disqualified but because the people dont seek to live according to that lifestyles, theories, ideologies.

  307. Smith says:

    دهخدا همیشه همیال سیاست بود، فکر تدوین لغتنامه را هم باید منتج از رویکرد او به سیاست دانست. چنانکه خود گواه داده است، باید به “سلاح وقت”، یعنی آموختن “علوم امروزی” مسلح شد تا بیگانه و مستبد بر ما “آقایی روا” ندارند.اما “آموختن آن اگر به زبان خارجی بود؛ البته میسر نمی شد و اگر بر فرض محال میسر می‌گردید، زبان‌ها که اساس ممیزات ملت است، متزلزل می‌گشت؛ پس بایستی آن علوم و فنون را ما ترجمه کنیم و در دسترس مکاتب بگذاریم و این میسر نمی شد جز بدین که اول لغات را لازم داشت. این بود که من به فکر تدوین لغت نامه افتادم”.
    دهخدا با لغتنامه‌های قدیمی ایران همانند لغتنامه فرس به همت اسدی طوسی، شاعر و سراینده گرشاسپنامه، در قرن ۵ هجری قمری با حدود ۳۰۰۰ کلمه و برهان قاطع تالیف محمد حسین بن خلف تبریزی در قرن یازدهم با ۲۰۰۰۰ هزار کلمه آشنا بود. اما آنچه دهخدا در سر داشت به گفته خود این بود که “همه لغات فارسی زبانان تاکنون احیا و در جایی جمع‌آوری نشده و چه بسا لغات زیادی است که در کتب دیگر، خصوصا در اشعار آمده است که ما آن‌ها را در اینجا [لغتنامه] نقل کرده‌ایم.”
    او با توجه به نارسایی‌های لغتنامه‌های پیشین اضافه می‌کند: “هزاران لغت فارسی و غیرفارسی در تداول به کار می‌رود که تاکنون کسی آن‌ها را گرد نیاورده یا اگر گرد آورده به چاپ نرسانیده است. ما بسیاری از این لغات را به تدریج از حافظه، نقل و سپس آن‌ها را الفبایی کرده‌ایم.”

    کاری را که دهخدا یک تنه آغاز کرد، تبدیل به یک موسسه و همکاری افراد بسیاری شد. به ادعای خودش در تمام مدت تدوین لغتنامه، هیچ وقفه‌ای در کار نینداخت جز در زمان درگذشت مادرش و چند روز بیماری.
    در این باره او نوشت که کار لغتنامه “عمر هفت کرکس” می‌خواهد: “این کار به هیچ فصل و قطعی، بیرون از بیماری صعب چند روزه و دو روز رحلت مادرم – رحمه الله علیها- تعطیل نشد و به جز اتلاف دقایقی چند برای ضروریات حیات در روز، می‌توانم گفت که بسیار شب‌ها نیز، در خواب و میان نوم و یقظه در این کار بودم. چه بارها که در شب از بستر برمی‌خاستم و پلیته می‌کردم و چیز می‌نوشتم.”

  308. pragmatic says:

    My Last post in regards to Hashemi Rafsanjani. After this I won’t talk about him anymore. It’s no use.

    Why there is so much attention given to Hashemi? I will tell you why, and then I’ll ask you the questions, in return I expect decent replies without any biased , lame and profanities (if you will). I appreciate your participation.

    The reason is, first, his impact on the political developments of the country and, second, his outlook on foreign policy. The western and Arab countries consider Hashemi as one of the most significant political personalities of Iran during the past few decades.

    Do you agree?

    They have considered him as one of the important foundations of the Islamic Republic of Iran. On the other hand, Hashemi is known in the West as a pragmatist politician.

    IMO, this is a correct analysis. When one looks at Hashemi’s record, we see that even during the 1980’s, which was the first decade of the revolution and an idealistic and revolutionary atmosphere dominated the country and no one could think and speak otherwise, Hashemi, with his pragmatism, attempted to solve many of the international problems Iran was faced with, particularly its relations with the US. However, these attempts were defeated when some radical and revolutionary groups revealed negotiations with McFarlane. Later, Hashemi played an important role in ending the war. This is while some people, without considering the realities of war, intended to continue the war (bardadar Mohsen and some of his subordinates). Knowing the existing problems, Hashemi acted along this path and Imam Khomeini approved this realistic outlook and accepted Resolution 598. He actually blocked the way for those who intended to continue the war and create more problems for the country (that’s why some of the current sardars are against him). During his presidency, Hashemi had the same pragmatist view on foreign policy and Iran’s relations with the world and made attempts to remove the tensions in foreign policy. Due to certain problems that were created, détente with Europe did not take place, but it was enforced with the regional countries, particularly the Persian Gulf Arab states and Saudi Arabia, henceforth relations with these countries improved.

    Do you agree thus far?

    Of course some might say that the “detente” was manifested during Hojatoleslam ol muslimin Khatami. However, IMO the preparations made during the Hashemi presidency made the enforcement of détente possible when Khatami was president. We saw that this policy led to the improvement of Iran’s relations with many countries of the world including the European countries. During this time, Iran’s relations with countries like France, Germany, Spain, Italy… were in their best possible state since after the revolution. Our priority wasn’t Venezuela, Bolivia, Borsina faco and some countries that is hard to locate on a map!

    Any comments?

    Hashemi pursues interaction with the West and détente in Iran’s foreign policy. It is obvious that the western countries wish for someone in Iran who knows the language of the world and can solve their current problems with Iran. Rohani as Hashemi’s candidate for presidency and eventually becoming Iran’s president has pursued this. We will witness a period of détente with the West and improvement of Iran’s relations with the countries of the region and Europe. 5+1 and signing the nuclear deal was indeed the first step.

    Internal Politics:

    Most of you have accused him of corruption. But corruption runs rampant in the Islamic Republic, but the corruption itself is actually not very relevant. Everyone knows that most of the power players in the system engage in corrupt practices of all kinds. What is relevant is that when Hashemi publicly asked Leader “Hazrateh Ayatollah Khamenie” to get Ahmadinejad to retract his accusations, His Excellency Rahbari ignored him. Ahmadinejad with his cunning behavior made a rift between two Ayatollahs for 8 years. But thank God they are once again beside each other to protect IRI. Since then Hashemi has been playing the game cautiously. As a founding member of the establishment, he has huge vested interests in keeping the Islamic Republic system intact. Hashemi’s influence relies heavily on his ability to maneuver in a way that helps lead to the neutralization of the President, SL and the IRGC, without letting the system collapse completely. This is why Imam Khominie said ” Nehzat Zendeh Ast ta Hashemi zendeh ast, “. I don’t think Imam said anything without thinking twice about it.

    Do you agree?

  309. pragmatic says:

    Smith: What is your opinion in regards to Ahmad Khasravi, Taghizadeh and Alameh Ghazivin?
    I vehemently like to know.

  310. pragmatic says:

    ئیس دولت‌های نهم و دهم گفت: ما اهل دعوا و فحاشی نیستیم، این اعمال متعلق به عقب افتاده‌های تاریخ است، ما به کسی جز آمریکا هجمه نمی‌کنیم.


    I think his excellency Dr. Ahmadinejad has a short memory! Khaso Khashak, Nateq and Hashemi are thieves (two of his buddies are currently staying at Hotel Evin). Standing in front of Supreme Leader, and so on and so forth. Why does he have to be so deceitful? What does he want from these people?

  311. pragmatic says:

    Ali Jan this happened today on IRINN. Your kind were asking the questions. Here is one the questions which should be candidate for joke of the year! In majles ra bayad dareshu ghel ghereft. Ina az khoja oomadand? Allah o Allam!!

  312. pragmatic says:

    Do you remember what I said about KSA relationship with the US, please read

  313. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 30, 2015 at 2:56 pm

    In Algeria the Islamic parties were prevented from forming a government. Thus, we cannot say how it would turn out.

    But my broader point was that currently, in Europe at any rate, Rule of Law is most respected in UK and Switzerland; and there is nothing inherently un-Islamic about that.

    Furthermore, the governing structures of the United Kingdom and Switzerland stand as the longest constitutional orders that has ever existed. In that they are worthy of study and emulation.

    As a matter of fact, Switzerland is a very peculiar model of participative democracy that has no parallel that I know of in the world. It has little to do with Westminster-style parliamentary democracy. Citizens participate directly and frequently through votes on all sorts of issues with many referendums held over a year, and the state is of a federal structure.

    It seems to work — for them. No doubt it could only be replicated in a similar-size country. Interestingly, they all work together, even though they speak 4 different languages and there are as many ethnic entities… It goes to show it is possible to have a fully functioning multi-ethnic state where every group’s rights are respected.

    And both in Switzerland in UK governing structures I do not find anything anti-Islamic.

    These comparison among countries are relative; no country would be perfect since Man is in State of Fall.

    But perhaps those people who promised the “Government of Ali” but delivered “Islamic Disaster” instead might wish to study Switzerland and UK, perhaps they can learn something form those 2 countries.

  314. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 30, 2015 at 3:54 pm

    You are reading too much into that.

    The Iranian offer was a division of the Middle East into spheres of influence between Iran and US.

    “So that we do not work at cross-purposes to each other.” said Mr. Shamkhani.

    That offer has not been taken, in my opinion.

  315. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    The problem is that it is YOUR OPINION that it is a “disaster”, not a “fact”, but you think your opinion is a fact.

    Like I said, deluded and detached from reality.

    You see your inability to acknowledge and understand this is evidence of your bad intentions and/or stupidity. There is no third option.

    For the record, read Imam’s testament he never claimed anything that you call government of Ali. In fact he clearly say that the work has just begun and it will take a long time.

    Funny, constitutionalism and rule of law among Anglo-Saxons is the work of centuries, but among Iranians immediately after a revolution that overturns 2,500 plus years of feudalism and monarchy we have “disaster”.

    Why the double standards old man? Hint: Self-hating ogde-i immigrant racism.

    I mean why so generous when it comes to the gharib Anglo-Saxons, so ruthless on your own people? You remind of the Hezbe Tudeh guys you were willing to sacrifice their own country for the interests of the Soviet Union.

    Only you are doing it as Her Majesty’s daeshi mercenary. Pathetic gharib-parast.

    You’re like a brainwashed scientologist when it comes to the UK.

    For the record, you might want to read the articles that have recently appeared in most daily newspapers regarding just how widespread slave-ownership was in Britain even among middle-classes and just how much of British wealth today is based on slave labor.

    As far as Switzerland is concerned, yes it’s unique in Europe and many Swiss call it “glorified provincialism”.

  316. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Good to see you have memorized the bullshit in Hashemi’s memoirs and actually believe it.


    It’s clear that you are really afraid to answer a simple question. Don’t want to get on the wrong side of the future Don, right?

    Anyway, you will have to either go into Marashi’s rectum or Mohammad’s rectum when your current rectum-host dies. If you don’t, you will die along with the ass that you live in.

    I would recommend that you choose Mohammad’s rectum as your new source of ann when Haji kicks the bucket because at least he chooses Imam over “liberalism”.

    Whatever you do, don’t choose the “neo-liberal” Muslims over Imam’s path my dear razmandeh janbaz brother, cause if you do and when then you go to meet your hamrazm-ha in the next world they will stick an RPG up your rectum.

  317. Jay says:

    Rule of law is not most respected, in Europe, by UK and Switzerland as claimed. In terms of discrimination, UK has a poor ranking for a European country. There is no data for Switzerland, so we don’t know.

    As I stated earlier, opinions are great, but facile statements without context and removing complex issues to slogans is not helpful.

  318. Jay says:

    Amending my statement with data…

    Google “world justice project” and read the rule of law index to see real data regarding UK.

  319. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 30, 2015 at 5:33 pm

    Which country has superior conformance to the Rule of Law than UK on the continent?

  320. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 30, 2015 at 5:35 pm

    A ranking that rates the Republic of Korea – with apartments built over mass graves of civilians, with no accounting of the disappeared over the last 60 years etc. etc. etc. – above the United Kingdom is unreliable – in my opinion.

    The compilers have no experience with Korea.

  321. Kooshy says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 30, 2015 at 3:54 pm
    “Do you remember what I said about KSA relationship with the US, please read”

    For any F***ing BS you can think of and have opinion on, there is someone else among the 7 billion inhabitants that shares your perception, specially if you just look within likeminded, which is what you just did, enthkhab is green.

    I think self-centeredness has taken its toll on you, you should take another walk up the Champs-Élysées to Tajrish for a coffee, ( excuse my English mr Oxford) Please let us know if it worked and was help and if you feel better, take a picture of Fabius in Iran with you, one never knows ” yahho didi kar Kerd”

  322. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    July 30, 2015 at 6:28 pm

    Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but without any data or measure, they are beliefs.

    Beliefs are perfectly fine and respectable, but recognizing them as such is valuable.

  323. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 30, 2015 at 6:28 pm

    I agree with you on the anglosaxon progress in law. The modern law as we know it, basically was invented by them, even the legal structure of Iran from majles to courts structure depends on anglosaxon innovations in this regard.. But it is rather a small technicality to rank the countries in the top of the list. Just like only trivial differences rank the top students. We should focus on this set of data brought up. Here is the link:

    The topic of discussion should rather be Iran’s position on that list. Why it is so pathetic? And what governing structure is doing to remedy it? What transparency measures are being developed to improve Iran’s rank.

    Please note that Iran is ranked 88th below Uzbekistan, Sierra Leon, Liberia and Ghana etc etc.

    Now that is quite some data. Government of Ali or not, the data shows the conditions are deplorable.

  324. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 30, 2015 at 7:24 pm

    Sweden, a case I am familiar with, does not have the “Right of Bail”.

    UK does.

    Mexico does not.

    Iran does.

    Make your own case as you wish.

  325. Smith says:

    Khasravi, Taghizadeh and Ghazvini were great men of their time. I do not know them well enough to comment on them. And even if I did, I do not see how that could be of help today. My concerns are of holistic nature and am interested in totality of things. I deplore making idols specially of past men (not that we in Iran have any of such statue). Holistically Iranian milieu did not have (and still does not have) the structural capacity to use these men and many like them to make Iran a better place. Such men found utility for themselves in European milieu and Western thought system. As they still do. From high school olympiad medal winners to occasional thinkers. Those who refuse to take refuge in West, will eventually live a depressed and unfulfilled life full of discomforts.

    But even these men mentioned above, I doubt, knew or cared about the holistic meaning of what they were doing. They similar to many Iranians of those times were simple honorable men who were not hypocrites. When confronted with Western progress and rational scientific advancement, these men became perplexed and saw the answer to Iran’s problems being cultural and political “Europeanization” of Iran. They could not see that Iranians could not and will never be able to become Europeans. Because of their national identity, geographic reality as well as because of Islam and race. Hell, even Peter the Great could not Europeanize Russia a country that already shared alot with Europe including religion, race, history, geography and even most of its alphabets. Iran by comparison having a different religion, race, history, geography and a crippled alphabetic system (with no Vowels), had/has no chance.

    Nowadays, such men have greatly adopted to their sorry reality and have become hypocrites. They love cars, computers, planes and MRI’s but simultaneously do not want to see their daughters becoming ballet dancers, figure skaters and catwalk stars. The only way it is possible to pull it off, was for these men to have become thinkers and inventors who built their own stuff but without the catwalk and dance part, in effect becoming role models for their own daughters. Since they lacked the intelligence for such kind of a job, they hypocritically went on to take the goodies, the planes, the computers, the MRI’s, all other such cargo and some how now desire to go back in time to 6th century. They want to live in 6th century with 21st century cargo which they can not build themselves.

    They thought the world is going to be short lived and if for a while they kept on importing cargo, soon there will be the end of the world or atleast their personal death would some how end it all (stick their heads in the sand literally, forever). But unfortunately, the end is not in sight and they failed to develop a thought structure which allows the society to build their own cargo, while taking into account the intricacies and sensitivities of their ideal way of life. So, now despite shunning the development of a new thought system, ironically they are finding out that their daughters are becoming cheap ballet dancers and catwalk slaves right before their own eyes and in their own country and in their own homes. Truly ‘scary’ stuff.

    After all where from the cargo comes, people do have such rituals, catwalk dancing and all. These rituals of the producers of the cargo then have become increasingly a point of contention. Our “liberals” see these rituals are of utmost necessity if we are to progress, while our “conservatives” believe that as long as we have money (read oil, natural resources, rents etc) we can import cargo and afford doctors and medicines and planes without having to take up these rituals. This is the politics of Iran for the large part in the past couple of centuries. Whether be it our “liberals” or “conservatives”, they are both cargo cults. The only difference between them is their degree of tolerance for some Western rituals. None have been able to see that the core of the modern Western civilization is actually empirical reason and scientific way of doing things.

    And the blame for all this should go to the doctors of religion in Islamic world who failed to develop philosophical frameworks of a thinking society and the moral ideals for individuals and nations. They have been busy in the words of Mr Fyi, “debating the Zakat of a three-year old female camel” for the past 800 years.

  326. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    July 30, 2015 at 8:14 pm
    fyi says:
    July 30, 2015 at 6:28 pm

    “I agree with you”

    for life of me Why am I not surprised I don’t know. For real FYI, “Empirically” speaking whatever data Jay tables for proof, we all know is not good enough to top or contradict the prophesies of his eminence the professor Ziocentric of Zeocentral fyi. Shame on you. Anyway zios like you have no shame.

  327. Jay says:


    I engaged the discussion to point out the role of beliefs – something that some deny.

    I hear “agree”! Once men “agreed” that earth was flat, and the we were the center of the universe!

    Agreements among men are beliefs that belie bewilderment or despair. This is a human condition!

    Those able-minded to occasionally rise above their own self-dictates of reality, in a moment of serendipity, are blessed.

    I am not blind to the monumental task ahead of Iranians. Constructing an Iranian civil society has been in the works for some time – through trial and errors – and will be in the works for time to come. And, although I find the intellectual exercise of comparing Iran’s system to the west interesting, I find the use of this exercise as a means to bash Iran rather useless.

  328. kooshy says:

    “The Middle East will never be the same: Why the Iran pact is a historic triumph”

    Without a shot being fired, the United States and Iran have effectively ended an era of outright hostility

  329. pragmatic says:

    This Jahghist Basiji sounds like this guy I know. That guy I know is a self centered idiot that moved from England back to Iran with hopes of becoming a strategist in the system! But he is a big time efrathi (hard-line) that he is more of a harm than help to the system. He says it himself that he is very efrati. He writes in Raja news and sometimes in Bardar Hossien’s daily (under another name) as someone else told me. He is a nice fellow, but not as bad dahan as our own jaghal. He is also lost between Hard line Islam and luxury life of England! He loves luxury life style but he is an ardent efrati, too. Indeed you sound like him Jahgist azizeh del.

    As far as his khayemal vatanforoush Koosy is concerned, I don’t get eight of ten sentences he writes! First his sentences lack comma, full stop and ….. Then, I don’t get what the fuck you talk about? Fabios, Tadjrish, champ elysse ??? Go get a life Ahmadinejadie communist.

  330. pragmatic says:

    Ahmag! It was a triumph for Iran more than the US. By the way, why you hate the Jews so much? I guess years of living in Germany has had some toll on you! Hitlerish effect on you. Ohmm I see… Rest assured, if we were back in late 30’s you most definitely would have joined the brown uniforms of 3rd Reich. You sound like one.

  331. pragmatic says:

    Smith – Thanks for the reply. I agree with you.

  332. masoud says:

    Pragmatic joon,
    You do seem to have an abundance of time on your hands. But I still haven’t gotten any answers out of you. It seems like you enjoy going out on a whole bunch of tangents. Can you please respond to me on whether I’ve correctly understood and characterized your bsdic position? If I am mistaken in any of my assessments, can you clarify specifically, they are? I’m just going to repost what I wrote before just so everything is easier to follow:

    You want Iran to revert to it’s early 1970s economic state, because that was a golden, right? You’ve also become disenchanted with the idea of the Islamic Republic and want to revert to a separation of church and state. Isn’t that right? Also, you have contempt for people like Chavez and Lula, who you don’t consider to be ‘serious’ and want Iran to associate itself with European powers, rather than the global south, isn’t that correct?

    And the reason you are so very excited about Ayatollah Rafsanjani, as you sllike to call him, and Mr. Rouhani, is because that’s what they are aiming to deliver? I’ve got everything right so far, haven’t I?

    If that’s the case, well, you’ve certainly got a legitimate point of view. I just want to be sure I understand where you’re coming from.

  333. kooshy says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 30, 2015 at 11:05 pm

    Pragy- if for some reason, Fabius’ recent trip couldn’t open Champs-Élysées for the walk up to the shining hill, you still can take the good old Pahlavi Road up to Tajrish, and feel like you are back in “the golden age of 70s”, like Michel Fox in back to future, the good thing is, you can move back and forth as much as you like, do your green flip flop as often as you can, go forward in your own time machine, to when Laughing Nut job will be president again, in his 90’s. Dream on.

  334. pragmatic says:

    1- Economically, I like to see Iran in a situation that we import technology and the know-how we don’t have and it helps us to grow the employment. At the same time with these new technologies and our natural resources we can tenfold our export revenues. Even more than our oil and gas revenues. I guess in the early 70’s we were importing necessary technologies. I believe in that era we had more educated, sophisticated and less corrupt men in our government. Don’t read between the lines, I am not saying Monarchy was better, don’t get there, I say it before hand.

    2- The past 36 years experience shows us if we separate state from the church we can advance in a faster paste. There are certain elements in religions that is by the way of the advancement of modern societies.

    3- I don’t say we should not have relationships with countries such as Venezuela and Bolivia or in your case Borsina Faco! What I say is let’s not make a big fuss about these third world countries, which we got so cozy with due to our issues with others. Do you agree? What did we get out of AN’s lovely relation with Chavez? Playing Futsal together? Who is seeing after our investments, there? Did they invest here in Iran? Let’s first fix our issues with ME, Europe and America then go after global south as you say!! Gaveh ma shir nemideh mashallah be shashesh! All I see we have put money into their economy, what have we got in return? Let me guess, if Koosy had to answer this he would say, HEGEMONY!

    4- I like Hashemi because he is a pragmatist. Hashmei on the contrary of you and your kind likes to see Iran as the major player in today’s politics in every aspect. He moves on with the status quo of the world politics. He is not stagnant. But you and your kind don’t see this, because you are brained wash and biased. He is a devil for you guys. But the likes of Mesbah, alamolhoda, and ahmad khatami are angels. You and your kind for many years have tried to topple and undermine him. Have you succeed? No, you haven’t, and each time he has returned stronger than before with more of our population behind him. He is like gorbeh morteza ali! But yet he is residing over you and your kind. It is arduously so hard for you guys to comprehend the fact that Ayatollah Hashemi is IRI.

    Now let me revert the questions to you, if I may, what do you think?

  335. M.Ali says:

    You didn’t really answer his question clearly and directly. You talk like a politician. You say a lot without saying much.

  336. Karl.. says:


    But isnt the Rule of Law (as we understand it today) primary a product of western thinking, going back thousands of years? The middle east have no such grounded history concering this and therefore we dont see such societies or theorizing by its people?

  337. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Multiple choice question for angal tu kun-e Haji who likes to goh-mal instead of answering simple questions.

    Please choose A or B:

    A. Hezbe Kargozaran has left Imam’s path and will end up like Mosharekat.

    B. I am a “liberal democrat-e Mosalmun” like Don Hossein and kuni Quchani.

  338. Amir says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 31, 2015 at 12:24 am

    The part you are talking about employment is true [mostly]; but please bear in mind that those industries would almost certainly be energy-intensive industries, and those with little added value (since we presumably have a “relative advantage” in those fields).

    And they (the West) are going to go to extreme lengths to prevent us from gaining any useful technologies, see link:

    I mean, what is so inherently wrong with us, that we shouldn’t chart a new path?

    Since I was in high school, I wanted to replicate the chemical chain in photosynthesis in an industrial scale, enhancing it, and alleviating the problem of food shortage; I didn’t follow up on that, but just imagine what much much brighter people could do.

  339. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Jay-jan, Kooshy-jan

    The point is that old man and douchebag are “believers”- zealous, intolerant and dogmatic believers of the worst kind.

    Her Majesty’s Daeshi, Nial Ferguson wanna-be, Brit empire cargo cultist, brainwashed wog, immature, dilettante.

    Confused, arrogant techno-utopian fascist douche-boy, the kind that burns ants because he was bullied and now has lost all sense of mercy, compassion and humor only vomiting reams of information to feel good about himself- a serious mental case.

    Hey nothing wrong with that, right?

    Yes, it would be nice to have a real conversation about many things but if the goal is just bashing Iran, then whatever any of us would post becomes bait for them to spew their hate.

    Our hosts don’t seem inclined to do anything about it.

    I would argue that the very notion of trying to “repeat” whatever happened in the Anglo-Saxon world or Switzerland in other places is a load of bullshit.

    A load of bullshit which is the heart of what old man is saying.

    Every country has its own history and unique path it must go.

    I have said before over the years, that the most important event in Iranian history- all of it- has been the Islamic revolution and the establishment of the Islamic Republic.

    It has been a revolution in every sense conceivable- spiritual, social, economic, political- you name it.

    The change in Iran in the last 36 years is not understandable for most people. Doucheboy wasn’t around to see it before and old man hasn’t seen it since- and even if they had seen it they wouldn’t understand the depth and implications of the case.

    So let’s try to “rationally” understand why these two would spend years and months and so much of their life focusing on the negatives of Iran and Islam and slandering, belittling, ridiculing and insulting whatever positive their is?

    It’s very strange, all this empirical evidence about the growth and development of precisely the things these clowns are concerned about- technology, science, political processes, increased social awareness and education etc. and yet they spend every moment shitting on precisely these things and dismissing the evidence.

    What’s going on here?

    1. They genuinely care and it’s just their way of getting the rest of us with inferior intelligences to wake up.

    2. They have serious mental issues and this is a kind of therapy and mental relief for them.

    3. They are paid by US or UK or Israel or Saudi to come to websites and bash Iran- similar to the plan that wikileaks published about what the UK online strategies are.

    4. Other possibilities which I would be glad to have a discussion about.

  340. Rehmat says:

    Sami Yusuf performs in Israel – his music banned in Iran

  341. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Agha has said there are two things we should learn from the west:

    1. “Talash”- effort

    2. “Khatar-paziri”- risk-taking

    The rest of the stuff being claimed about the west are on the level of beliefs of zealous neo-converts.

    Don’t believe the hype.

    Sentences such as:

    “…None have been able to see that the core of the modern Western civilization is actually empirical reason and scientific way of doing things.

    And the blame for all this should go to the doctors of religion in Islamic world who failed to develop philosophical frameworks of a thinking society and the moral ideals for individuals and nations. They have been busy in the words of Mr Fyi, “debating the Zakat of a three-year old female camel” for the past 800 years.”

    …evidence a very shallow level of understanding of western civilization and history, of Islamic civilization and history- I would say the level of a high school sophmore essay.

    If it makes some feel better to “believe” this version of “history”, then go ahead. But remember one would not be qualitatively any better than the believers one likes to shit on.

    You see this is the problem of just copy-pasting and repeating the words of the latest intellectual crush- as a general rule.

    Like I said, reading and studying, religion, ethics, philosophy and yes of course history makes one a better scientist, a better human being.

    Similar to the newly converted western Muslims, you newly converted to “western civilization” rush to join the western pendant (hey douchebag, new word kinda like your new favorite word “millieu”) of Daesh and idealize western civilization- and then accuse us of idealizing Islam and Islamic civilization.

    It’s time to move on intellectually from Her Majesty’s western civilization daeshi mindset and become a little “self-critical”- you know that’s just another way of saying “scientific”, right?

    “Western civilization”- assuming for a moment there is actually such a thing and we can agree on its definition (which we cannot)- has good and bad things- as does “Islamic civilization”. So let’s agree that we will be “self-critical” in all cases and not “destructive”, right?

    Sorry, I forgot old man has already admitted that he is not interested in doing this because it doesn’t pay him much to do so.

    So how much does it pay these days to shit on your homeland, old man? I’m genuinely interested to know how much.

    There were two guys in Shiraz a couple years ago who blew up a Hussainiyyah packed with women and children- it was a blood-bath. Turns out they did it for 8 thousand dollars a piece.

    Surely such stellar intellectual work that you do must pay more, right?

  342. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 31, 2015 at 6:58 am

    The URL which Mr. Jay posted, in my estimation, was another opinion.

    I especially found the assignment of Korea to a higher state of Rule of Law than UK to be incredible and not serious.

    I have some knowledge of Korean scene and that is just not accurate.

    But let us, for the sake of argument, accept that ranking.

    Even then UK and Scandinavian countries are basically at very high level of Rule of Law where as Islamic Iran is were exactly?

    Where are the Arabs and in general Muslims?

  343. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    July 31, 2015 at 12:24 am

    On your number 4, there are times that one needs fighters and Mr. Rafsanjani was found not to be a fighter on the issue of supreme importance to the survival of Iran, Iranian people, the Shia and the allied states and peoples.

    That issue was the Iranian Nuclear Industry and he was willing to give up that nascent industry to be “pragmatic”.

    That is, he was willing to risk the survival and coherence of the Iranian state so long as Iran could be allowed to import from the West.

    His pragmatism, in my opinion, consisted in consigning Iran to the “Nowkar” ranks among states/countries.

    When he was first elected, he talked about a good talk about increasing domestic productions etc. But he never acted on them – to my knowledge – in any significant degree. He never made capital available to entrepreneurs etc. for small industrial concerns – which is what Mr. Ahmadinejad attempted to do.

    In regards to secularism – I think you are historically wrong and I think you are unfamiliar with the Western European Intellectual History – specially the 9-th to 14-centuries.

    For example, the idea of “state” was first formulated in Europe in the Middle Ages, there was also vast developments of the Roman Law, and the formula that the late Galileo used for motion along an inclined plane had been first derived by one of those “Logic Choppers” that lived in a religious milieu.

    I do not think anyone knows how to cause un-thinking people who have for centuries lived on the strength of being traders and middle men to become builders, thinkers, innovators and problem-solvers.

    You need to move from a country dominated by “dalal”-mentality to one of “problem-solvers”.

    I think the Economic Siege War of US-EU to eviscerate Iran and to destroy Iran’s social fabric was a great blessing for Iran and the Iranian people precisely because it forced them to move out of that “dalal” comfort zone.

    There is no other way.

  344. fyi says:

    Amir says:

    July 31, 2015 at 7:54 am

    Excellent idea; I am already excited about it.

    Please see here:



  345. fyi says:

    Perhaps you can write a review article in Persian about animal photosynthesis?

    The most important thing is that first step – take that first step on executing your research program.

    And if you cannot complete it and realize your ambition, that is also fine, others will build on the foundations that you have laid – following on your path.

    I also have some thoughts around the idea of Charged Particles and the Electromagnetic Field (Light) being analogues of the Metaphysical principle of Duality/Polarity and God’s Immanence in the Universe – specially in the light of the late Suhrewardi’s Philosophy of Light.

  346. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    July 31, 2015 at 9:47 am

    The original point was about your contention regarding UK!

    Now, if you wish to recant your earlier assertion and discuss the relative position of Iran, let’s do so.

    Unlike others, I have never asserted that my opinions are anything but opinions. What I try to do is to be careful and examine the evidence for my opinions in the least biased way as I am able to – not involving my own preconceptions.

    I am continually amused by those who claim to be dedicated to the philosophy of the scientific method yet fail to apply it to their own selves and their own views. This practice is not very complicated! It is the mere recognition that we must at least examine (carefully) and be cognizant (constantly) of the presence and the extent of our own biases and be honest (tirelessly) about guarding against it. One word: falsifiability!

  347. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    July 31, 2015 at 10:29 am

    Yes, I should have stated: “in my opinion UK is the supreme example of the Rule of Law in Europe”.

    My apologies for being inexact.

  348. Karl.. says:

    July 31, 2015 at 9:47 am

    Not sure what you are implying, that the islamic/arab world are at the bottom of the list? We already know that, why they are at the bottom is in my opinion, as already stated, because there is no base/support for that path.
    Nor have more “secular” states in the middle east chosen this “Rule of law” path, have they?

  349. kooshy says:

    Professor Zio, akafyi- the baby killer regime you work to protect, and refuse to condemn, because as you have admitted on this site before, it has financial burden on you, has just proudly and heroically killed another baby. I hope you are enjoying your life defending the baby killers.

    “Israeli regime, settlers face Palestinian anger over killing of toddler”

    “Eighteen-month-old Ali Saad Dawabsha burned to death when Israeli settlers threw incendiary objects at Palestinian houses in the village of Duma, south of Nablus, early on Friday. The baby’s parents and his four-year-old brother were also injured in the attack.”

  350. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 31, 2015 at 10:59 am

    Precisely; this is a systemic/civilizational problem.

    But you are unaware of what the Islamic revolutionaries and many rank & file Iranians expected and believed on the eve of triumph of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

    “Islam has never been implemented; this is the first time in history that we are going now build the Islamic Just Society.”

    That they over-promised and under-delivered is the point I was hoping to make.

    Once one admits that one has a long way to go to reach the level of UK, or Sweden or Switzerland in the Rule of Law – then and only then – one can start to remedy the situation.

  351. Karl.. says:


    I didnt say it was cvilization at all. And there is “no long road” to go since these people (dont take my word for it, just look at the region and see what they believe about these theories) simply dont seek to mimic western states and their systems of governance. I dont see how we on the one hand hear all this stuff of “cargo cult people” as some people call them, but then, they do want the same people to keep applying theories, systems, views from the west because it worked so well in the west. What is it?
    This debate dont lead to anything so I depart now.

  352. Smith says:

    It is very important for every Iranian to understand this:

    Chew it, eat it, digest it, sleep on it and think about it.

  353. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    July 30, 2015 at 10:38 pm

    Thank you for the link Mr Nasser.

    Very important for every one who thinks they can “buy” technology and then sit on their arrse to read it. Technologies get old and obsolete. When Shah bought F-4, it was the technology of its day. Now it is an obsolete relic. Only a thinking society can truly be independent and sovereign. A thinking society that can solve its own problems without having to make deals and negotiate importation of some goodies. In fact as history shows, it is the world that has to depend on such a thinking society to solve the world’s problem.

    And I think the “break out” capacity the author writes about, should not be taken as only nuclear in scope. It is every technology that makes possible for a society to live in comfort without having to pay Jizya to world masters. From internal combustion engines to microprocessors to medicines to helium cartridges for MRI and the MRI itself among many other products of thinking. Failure in becoming such a thinking problem solving society, will mean North Korean lifestyle in case of break out. Failure to break out will mean Libyan lifestyle. It is not really a matter of choice for Iranians. It is only a matter of choice for that author and the West.

  354. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    July 31, 2015 at 12:00 pm

    There are 2 issues.

    The first one – the “Cargo Cult” approach – that is what the late Mr. Taqizadeh was suggesting Iranians do: “We must all become Europeans from head to toe.” and then – by implication – “good times would follow and we will be as rich and as powerful as any European state.”

    So this is an instrumentalist approach: performs steps X, Y, and Z – exactly as European do and you will be just like Europe – say France.

    But Iranians are not Europeans – the history and culture is vastly different even though there are points of contacts such as the existence of Revelations in both Iran in Europe, as well as ancient, pre-Revelation historical states, as well as a distant common heritage of Ancient Greek Rationalistic tradition.

    The second issue is that given that the “Cargo Cult Approach” has failed, over a period of 160 years – from the time of the late Mirza Taqi Khan to the present, what can be done?

    [Failure here basically means that Iran (and others) are still dependent on inputs from Europe and North America for new ideas, new scientific advances, new techniques in medicine, dentistry, pharmacology, philosophy, literature, films, drama, poetry etc.

    They are not yet autonomous and indigenous producers of that which they need.]

    And I think nobody knows what to do.

    In practice, then, this opens up the scope for vast amount of experimentation and trail-and-error to find a model of indigenous and autonomous development the products of which can address the needs of the Iranian people – materially and spiritually.

    Note that this experimental empirical approach does not preclude the adaptation of European ideas, techniques etc. but it is not based on slavish adoption of them either.

    So far, only Russia and Japan have been able to achieve this and in both cases the initial impetus came from the state.

  355. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    July 31, 2015 at 12:30 pm

    One of the things that fascinates me about Western culture and specially in context of anglosaxon legal system is their ability to use almost any kind human and natural resource. That is even those things and peoples which are not wanted by other nations and cultures and are seen as undesirables are taken up by the West and turned into useful stuff (at least for the West). As if the Universe and its resources are mere spare parts to be used in Western schemes. A huge ware house of a Universe supplying the material for imagination and machinations of the white man. Even Iranians be they Taghizadeh or others were/are only merely the parts in this whole schemes of the West.

    Examples are many. For instance one of the biggest critics of West and its policies is Dr Noam Chomsky who is often quoted by anti-Western forces as well as received as an intellectual in the West itself. But Dr Chomsky himself has been working for this very system in a university which is directly and indirectly funded by Pentagon and US government with many of his own research having had applications in strengthening the system he criticizes. Such a thing is almost impossible to see in a place like Iran. For example to see an Iranian doing cutting edge research in a premium research institute funded by Iran’s ministry of defense, while publicly criticizing IRI and this all not only not resulting in political instability and shoresh kheyabani but actually in strengthening of the system as a whole. It is truly amazing.

    West even has some use for Takfiris and recently has found a use for IRI as well. And they are also very good at recycling when they stop needing some parts or in storing them for future use.

    In Western fiction, there are these aliens and ET’s which are super intelligent and highly resourceful force. But I say, from the perspective of cargo cults such as Iran, we are already experiencing such a force in the shape of the white man.

  356. James Canning says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    I rejected your contention that Iranians in the US can expect to be treated as “sand-niggers”.

  357. Nasser says:

    Smith says: July 31, 2015 at 12:24 pm

    Thank you. I thought about your writings while reading the piece because in his own way but in a more incomplete manner the author was saying the same thing you and fyi have been saying.

  358. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    July 31, 2015 at 12:54 pm

    Yes, this is indeed very true in the United States.

    Foreigner come in and ask: “Are you telling me that I can do anything I want within the Law and no one bothers me?”

    “Yes, you can, just stick to the legal path and go for the realization of your dream.” – they are told.

    And so it goes.

    I knew many families from Tehran as well as small towns in Iran who came to US with certain amount of money, started small businesses and really prospered – they became multi-millionaires – owning many shops and other businesses.

    Likewise I knew Koreans, Lebanese and others who equally became very successful in US – really wealthy and well-to-do.

    And I knew American communists whose entire educational costs were being borne by the United States government and they were, as you say, adamantly opposed to US imperialism.

    The thing about Americans is that they are not afraid – they are brave people.

  359. M.Ali says:

    A lot of our genius posters here seemed not to understand the difference between correlation and causation.

  360. Nasser says:


    I am sorry to once again trouble you with this but I forgot to ask before why do you consider the Italians to be more civilized than the English? Wouldn’t Britain be the analogue of Japan?

  361. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    July 31, 2015 at 2:28 pm

    Just walking in the streets of Italy one could feel/see it in their interactions among one another.

    Absolute sense of security – young women walking alone in darkened streets without any fear.

    And as opposed to UK, I did not sense roughness – aggressive illiterate belligerence – among the Italians – unlike UK.

    And then of course is the long history of culture and education and research in Italy – their Medieval universities that were modeled after Muslim universities, their thinker during Medieval times, the so-called Renaissance period, etc. all the way to the present time.

    England was never a country of refinement and culture – they learnt all of that from others.

  362. Nasser says:

    fyi says:
    July 31, 2015 at 3:08 pm

    Thank you once again.

  363. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Yes, an expert on Sweden and Korea…and Italy and Britain…and Switzerland…and Islam and photosynthesis and Charged Particles and the Electromagnetic Field…and Sohrevardi…and…the rule of law…and…uh…

    …all the subjects you have pontificated about over the years…cannot be recounted…you’re fuckin amazing…


    Hey at least you have douchebag and Nasser crawling up your ass.

  364. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Let’s look a little closer at the “truly amazing” west, shall we?

    Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an Oligarchy


    HARTMANN: Our Supreme Court has now said, “unlimited money in politics.” It seems like a violation of principles of democracy. … Your thoughts on that?

    CARTER: It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it’s just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. And the same thing applies to governors and U.S. senators and congress members. So now we’ve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the election’s over. … The incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebody’s who’s already in Congress has a lot more to sell to an avid contributor than somebody who’s just a challenger.

  365. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    A little hint when doing propaganda work:

    Try occasionally to be self-critical and publicly acknowledge the possibility that your view/analysis/opinion could be wrong, even if you’re not wrong.

    It gives your audience the impression of being honest and creates goodwill.

    Also in case you missed it, Jay had a suggestion for you as well:

    “I am continually amused by those who claim to be dedicated to the philosophy of the scientific method yet fail to apply it to their own selves and their own views. This practice is not very complicated! It is the mere recognition that we must at least examine (carefully) and be cognizant (constantly) of the presence and the extent of our own biases and be honest (tirelessly) about guarding against it. One word: falsifiability!”

    You see, when you don’t do that and arrogantly lecture everybody else with a ton of cut and paste bullshit and recycled shit and naive odes to all things western and white men, your positive points get lost.

    Like your ostad, your behavior only makes sense if you’re paid to come on websites and shit on Iran and all things Iranian.

    Of course only a mentally unstable, oghde-i khaen douchebag would do such a thing for so long, right?

  366. Kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    July 31, 2015 at 4:30 pm

    BIB Aziz

    This could be how his title on his ziocentral (Memeri) business card is.

    The ostade alameh, professor FYI Ziocentric, chair of all ever known to mankind, ever science the Big Bang.

    For me in this site, his immediate, impulsive and most often unthoughtful prophesies, and the immediate approval by his duo “baronies” are a source of fun, to play whack a mole. Jay and Ali are also very good playing, whack a mole. But I have a new source to whack up, our new nut job the Pricky Pragy.

  367. M.Ali says:

    Bib and kooshy, what am i amazed is that, apparently, all iranians are idiots and cant havr a unique thought but still it seems that those two genius (fyu and smith) are iranians. So does that work? If all iranians are gentically morons, that shouldnt they be morons too? Of they aren’t morons and are iranians, then shouldnt it be possible other iranians are also not morons?

    So, thy are either geniuses and not iranians or iranians and not geniuses.

    According to thier own theories in the last million posts in the last few years.

  368. Jay says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    July 31, 2015 at 5:04 pm

    Thank you for pointing it out. I try to engage everyone positively and I meant that sincerely.

  369. Rehmat says:

    Obama: Iran deal critics gave us Iraq war

    Speaking to the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention in Pittsburgh via phone, Obama likened the US-Iran deal critics to the powerful neocons (mostly Jewish) in Bushes administration, who pushed US into Iraq War based on anti-Saddam lies.

    Obama said that the people who were “so quick to go to war” and who claimed that the war will take only a few months. The same people are now “chest beating” and popping off soundbites that don’t help the debate. He also said that instead of running into a military conflict with Iran, the US should only send troops to harm’s way as a last resort.

    Obama said that US-Iran deal opponents are running a $20 million campaign to kill the deal in the US Congress. He was referring to the campaign lead by Jewish group, Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran, affiliated with Israel Lobby AIPAC.

  370. Sakineh Bagoom says:

    BiB, Jay, Kooshy, Ali,

    The conclusion of the following guide is this: “From Truth Comes Peace ”
    The hasbara couldn’t derail the talks, it’s now fighting against the way forward.
    As suggested in the guide, keep shining a light on their BS. Way to go brothers. I salute your tenacity.
    Oh, and check out the word in the top box.

  371. pragmatic says:

    @basiji jaghal

    you wrote this to FYI or Smith “Try occasionally to be self-critical and publicly acknowledge the possibility that your view/analysis/opinion could be wrong, even if you’re not wrong.”

    Akhe bacheh obnaie, have you read your own comments? akhe kireh don akbar tu dahanet, do you follow what you say yourself?

  372. pragmatic says:

    Bib, Kooshy, Jay, M.Ali et al,

    Once again Sadegh chewed one of your kinds!

    Bib- fill in the blank: -ir d-n -kba- tu -oonet.

    باسمه تعالی
    جناب آقای دکتر محمدباقر قالیباف
    شهردار معظم پایتخت دامت‌توفیقاته
    با سلام و تحیات، همزمان با سفر وزیر خارجه فرانسه به کشورمان، شهرداری تهران اقدام به چاپ پوستر اعتراضی به این سفر نمود. پوستر نشان می‌داد که قرمزی «فرش قرمز»ی که زیر پای آقای لوران فابیوس گسترده شده آغشته به خون قربانیان واردات خون‌های آلوده از آن کشور می‌باشد. البته اعتراض دیگر آن است که چرا فرانسه در جریان مذاکرات هسته‌ای مواضع سخت‌گیرانه‌ای علیه ایران اتخاذ می‌نماید. جناب آقای قالیباف، نمی‌دانم موضع‌گیری‌های شهرداری در قبال سیاست خارجی چقدر در حوزه وظایف شهرداری قرارمی گیرد و آیا شهرداری‌های کشورهای دیگر هم همچون بلدیه تهران خود را موظف می‌دانند تا در خصوص سیاست خارجی کشورهایشان هم موضع‌گیری نمایند. آنچه مطمئن‌تر هستم آن است که بعید به نظرم می‌رسد جنابعالی و سایر معترضین به داستان خون‌های آلوده خیلی علم و اطلاعی از کم و کیف آن داستان داشته باشید. برخلاف پوستر شما و برخلاف هو و جنجال‌هایی که رسانه‌های اصولگرایان به راه انداختند، خون‌های آلوده نه تعمداً به ایران ارسال شده بود و نه ایران تنها کشوری بود که فرانسه به آن فراورده‌های خونی صادر کرده بود. به یک دوجین کشور دیگر هم آن خون‌ها صادر شده بود ازجمله به آلمان، آرژانتین، عربستان و…ضمن آنکه صدها نفر در خود فرانسه هم به‌واسطه مصرف آن محصولات جان باختند. در محاکمه‌ای هم که همان وقت صورت گرفت شخص آقای فابیوس که در آن مقطع نخست‌وزیر می‌بودند تبرئه شده اما وزیر بهداشت فرانسه و شمار دیگری از مقامات آن کشور محکومیت یافتند.
    در خصوص نقش فرانسه هم در مذاکرات هسته‌ای، اگرچه برای ما دشوارمی بود اما فراموش نکنیم که فرانسه هم همانند هر کشور دیگری علی‌القاعده می‌بایستی مصالح و منافع ملی خودش را در نظرمی گرفت نه اینکه چگونه موضع‌گیری کند که به مذاق ما ایرانیان خوش آید. جناب آقای دکتر قالیباف، این البته نه اولین‌باراست که جنابعالی شهرداری را وارد سیاست خارجی می‌کنید و نه آخرین بار خواهد بود. نصب بیلبوردهای توهین‌آمیز به رئیس‌جمهور آمریکا از اقدامات دیگر جنابعالی بوده. نمی‌دانم آیا ۱۳ میلیون مردم تهران کی به جنابعالی وکالت دادند که اختیاردارید تا بودجه شهرشان را خرج تبلیغات سیاسی معطوف به انتخابات برای خودتان نمایید؟ آیا درست است که برای جلب رضایت جریان تندرو از بودجه شهرداری هزینه نمایید؟ به نظر می‌رسد جنابعالی مصمم هستید تا برای چندمین بار بخت و اقبال خودتان را برای احراز کرسی ریاست جمهوری بیازمایید. همه این بیلبورد بازی‌ها بعلاوه تلاش و تقلاهای دیگرتان ازجمله انتقاد تند از تیم مذاکره‌کننده هسته‌ای در بحبوحه مذاکرات، موضع‌گیری‌های بی‌وقفه علیه اصلاح‌طلبان، توهین به «فتنه گران» حمله و انتقادهای مداوم از دولت آقای روحانی جملگی در جهت برآوردن آن آرزوی دیرینه‌تان می‌باشند؛ اما همان‌طور که در جریان کارناوال تفکیک جنسیتی که در شهرداری به راه انداخته بودید عارض شدم، صد از این مجلس‌آرایی‌ها را هم که بنمایید، اصولگرایان در تجزیه‌وتحلیل نهایی شما را نامزد اصلی خودشان نخواهند کرد. سه بار این تجربه تلخ را آزموده‌اید اما همچنان امیدوار هستید. نمی‌دانم خادمین و مشاورین سیاسی‌تان چه مشورت‌هایی به خاک‌پای ساحت معظم اقدس جم جاه معدلت آثارتان معروض می‌دارند؛ اما از این دعاگو بشنوید که حکم «از این‌طرف رانده و از آن‌طرف مانده» را پیداکرده‌اید. اشکال کار اینجاست که اصولگرایان می‌بینند چگونه برای جلب رضایت آنان حاضر می‌شوید تا اصلاح‌طلبان را لگدمال نمایید. چه تضمینی هست که فردا برای جلب رضایت یک گروه دیگر به آنان پشت نکنید؟
    ممکن هم هست که بفرمایید بنده خبث طینت دارم و زمانی که اقدام به برافراشتن بیرق و بیلبورد آمریکا و اروپاستیزی می‌نمایید تنها فکری که از مخیله مبارک عبور نمی‌کند انتخابات ریاست جمهوری و جلب رضایت اصولگرایان است؛ که بنده از شما واقعاً پوزش می‌طلبم. درعین‌حال ناچارم عرض نمایم که صدالبته این جزء حقوق خدادادی حضرت‌عالی است که همه خیابان‌ها و کوچه‌پس‌کوچه‌های پایتخت را غرق بیلبوردهای ضدآمریکایی بنمایید. منتهی آیا مطمئن هستید که اهالی پایتخت رضایت دارند که عوارض نوسازی و سایر وجوهاتی که به بلدیه می‌پردازند بجای نظافت شهرشان و گسترش فضای سبز آن صرف مبارزه با آمریکا بشود؟ چرا برای یک‌بار هم که شده نظر موکلینتان را جویا نمی‌شوید؟
    ایام به کام باد
    صادق زیباکلام
    نهم مردادماه یک هزار و سیصد و نودوچهار

  373. Amir says:

    fyi says:
    July 31, 2015 at 10:10 am

    fyi says:
    July 31, 2015 at 10:14 am

    Thanks, I’ll start to put my thoughts on paper.

  374. pragmatic says:

    M.Ali – You and your kind are morons. No doubt. When one reads your kiri posts and tokhmi questions he/she can’t decide if you are a ghater or an olagh. Now go zad khayeh jaghal and henry wanna be.

  375. Amir says:

    A question for those concerned:
    Did you start posting comments on this site (and I hear there was one before this) as a “defense” of Iran/ Islamic Republic, and then ended up on either side of the debate over nuclear negotiations (one side arguing for reaching a deal, another against it)?

    Or did some of you started posting as a defenders of Iran/ Islamic Republic, then were gradually convinced that maybe the Leveretts are right, that the US should come to terms with the Islamic Republic (inevitably the Islamic Republic should come to terms with the US as well), and that can’t happen, without a nuclear deal?

    Or did some of you read the Leveretts arguments about the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic, and thought to yourself if that’s a reason for “rapprochement” with the said state, then its legitimacy should be defended at every turn?

    If you (dear reader) have finished this, now think about this: do you think the relationship between Iran and other powers would be any different this time?

  376. pragmatic says:

    Amir joon – I personally heard that they are some in this blog whom are distorting the facts left and right. I was told they are making a hero out of Dr. Ahmadinejad. That is when I stopped by. Since, I have stayed and you know the rest.

    Iran had no choice than sitting around the table and try to negotiate the best for her, which she did in this case. Who ever tells you that we could have continued with the sanctions is full of shit. Two years ago when his excellency our Leader talked about Narmesh Gharehmananeh it was obvious that soon we’ll solve our issues with the West especially the US. As simple as his excellency’s statement.

  377. Kooshy says:

    Pricky Prag joon

    If you think this Haifa boys here are for your fucking green ideas and Rafsanjani you must be out of your f***ing mind. Grow up boy, the minute the can they will get Massoud and Maryam joon in to cut your dick and stick it in Rafsanjani’ amameh. Grow up, you are no visionary, ideological insistency doesn’t make good strategic decisions, you greens are totally void of that.

  378. Pragmatic says:

    Once again one of our esteemed pundits accused me of something! Cocky say something that makes sense.

  379. Pragmatic says:

    Ablah ! Who said that I’m pro or con of Smith and FYI ideologies? Why you are so much into assumptions? Why you don’t accept that as of this time you and your kind have lost to us? I mean we etedalyoon. You keep going around the bush.

    I like reading Smith’s & FYI posts. At least you learn something and it makes one to go and search if what they are saying is correct. Are you jealous that they have more knowledge than you? The last loss for you and your kind was our deal with 5+1.

  380. Kooshy says:

    Pragmatic says:
    August 1, 2015 at 12:57 am

    Pricky Prag.

    I don’t mind, almost everybody knows more than I do, but never the less, deep down in you, you know one thing that I know very well, which is; that you are always wrong on what you think I know.

  381. M.Ali says:

    Pragmatic, I did not read the full article you posted, but the gist of it was a Mr Zibakalam putting our Tehran mayor down for putting up anti-France amd anti-USA posters?

    Thanks for posting it. If I knew such a letter existed, I’d have posted it myself to show the way some people think when it comes to their people and their people’s enemies…

  382. M.Ali says:

    Amir, some of us have been here for a long time, in the aftermaths of the attempted color revolution. Leverett’s appeal to some of us has been about encouraging USA to accept Islamic Republic of Iran as is. The idea is that the narrative in USA should change in regards to accepting Iran’s legitimacy.

    My main issue with current deal is the narrative isn’t changing. US still insists on threatening Iran.

    This means that nothing will fundamentally change in my humble opinion.

  383. M.Ali says:

    “The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, whose inspectors’ role in implementing the Iran nuclear deal has become a flashpoint on Capitol Hill, will privately brief members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next week.

    Read more:

    So, we are putting our faith in the hands of an agency that is answerable to the US Senate?

  384. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Angal tu kun-e Hashemi,

    Let me say something about Zibakalam clearly because you don’t seem to get it:

    His job is to do these things as a “blitzableiter” for students primarily and secondarily for idiots like you. And he gets paid well to do so.

    By whom? By the rectum that hosts you, among others.

    Now you claim to speak German so you will certainly know what “blitzableiter” in this context means, right genius?

    Zibakalam has no academic/intellectual credibility whatsoever and even the kids that cheer him make fun of him.

    Let’s not forget, Zibakalam is the Tehran univ. political science “professor” who when he wanted to write a letter nominating Ali Mottahari for the nobel peace prize sent the letter to the Swedish embassy.

    Unfortunately for him, the nobel peace prize is given by Norway.


    Anyway he has figured out a way to get paid well in the Islamic Republic.

  385. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Ostad-e goh-mali,

    Do you think Hezbe Kargozaran has left Imam’s path and will become like Mosharekat?

  386. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    It’s a very interesting development that Don Akbar’s brother has resigned from the party he founded and practically led for many years because he thinks that they are deviating form Imam’s path.

    He says that when the party proclaims itself as “liberal democrat” they will end up like mosharekat

    Marashi and Quchani have made a coup d’etat in the party right when the party came back out the dark ages following Rohani’s victory.

    Marashi has always been west-loving oligarch, and he doesn’t want to miss out on the new wave oligarchy sweeping the world either.

    Marashi doesn’t even try to hide things anymore like before.

    So when angal tu kun-e Hashemi at the same time talks about “his excellency our Leader” but can’t clearly distance himself from the “liberal democrat” we see the usual nefagh that is the problem of left and Hashemi angals in the history of the IRI.

    Let me spell it out for all angals: You can’t be a follower of Imam and “his excellency our Leader” and a “liberal democrat” at the same time!

    Apparently Agha Mohammad understands this and the angals don’t and they are still gooz-pich because they are worried about where the ann that feeds them will come from when Haji goes be darak.

  387. Amir says:

    M.Ali says:
    August 1, 2015 at 3:41 am

    Alright! Alright! Thanks!

    Now! You say “… accepting Iran’s legitimacy.

    In a completely non-threatening voice, I want to ask you, why do you care about that?

  388. Pragmatic says:

    Hey jaghist – thanks for making me laugh. Are you a standup comedian? If not, I suggest you look into this lucrative profession. Who cares what marashi or Muhammad are saying. You see asghghal if one likes political views of Hashemi it doesn’t mean he follows what others say.
    I explained before if you hate Hashemi then you should hate everyone who has been part of the IRI.

    The way you are saying Hashemi is about to die, how do you know?

  389. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Like I said, kheyli khari.

    Of coure I don’t know when any of us will die but he’s definitely on the death-watch list…khoda hefzesh kone (not).

    “I explained before if you hate Hashemi then you should hate everyone who has been part of the IRI.”

    Only a retard who doesn’t understand manteq would say such a thing.

    Of course I can hate Hashemi and like other people in IRI! You are exceptionally khar.

    Of course the reason you say that is because YOU think that Hashemi equals the IRI, which is of course not correct. Of course because you are an angal in his kun and he is your whole universe.

    I hate Hashemi and love Imam and Agha. See how that works, ahmaq.

    And of course it matters that Mohammad has left Kargozaran and thinks they are no longer halal. I know you REALLY don’t want to talk about this little problem because your mamuriat on this site is to talk about Ahmadinejad.

    I know in matlab kheyli gooz-pichet karde but I got news for you, Don Akbar will have to say something about it soon.

    Why don’t you ask your “bot” what he thinks about the fight between Mohammad and Marashi and kuni Quchani?

    This is will be your conversation:

    -“Haj Agha I’m sorry to disturb your afternoon nap, but there is a problem…”

    -“Is it Mehdi again?”

    -“No it’s Agha Mohammad and Mohandes Marashi”.

    -“What happened?!”

    -“Well, Mohandes Marashi said publicly that Hezbe Kargozaran are liberal democrat-e Moslamun and Agha Mohammad resigned from the party and said he is muqalede Imam not liberal”

    -“Vay! Khak tu saram!”

    -“Sorry Haj Agha, people are asking what your opinion is.”


  390. M.Ali says:

    Amir, I think it’s important only in terms of building a relationship. You can’t have one without the other. If the west doesn’t accept Iran as it is, then they will continue trying to undermine it.

    This website and the previous one is mainly about Iran-USA relationship and in that context, the Leverett’s have always argued that a long term relationship can be built only if USA accepts Iran as it is now.

    Let’s not forget that Leveretts argue that their recommendations of USA changing their narrative and approach to Iran is not for the benefit of Iran, but that they believe helps USA’s long term middle East policy.

  391. kooshy says:

    Amir Jaan, I have no idea how old you are, but I have been reading and writing here ever since the old site “Race For Iran” Around 2007 or 8.
    How and why I got here was simply access to other opinions was becoming easier due to the World Wide Web of information. Fortunately for the world and unfortunately for the US/Israel warmongers, right around 911 accesses to internet and he abundant information on any event, opinions or different sides of any debate was getting much easier not only for people in west but also for people in poorer countries like Iran. So one can imagine before this new easy access to other information like opinions from Iran, on Iran as well Iranian side of arguments, the only easy and daily access to news and opinions were what was given and was available on MSN and the western media. Because of this new possibility to reach out from comfort of home or anywhere else on demand, I started to read and become familiar with the Iranian side of purpose, reason and opinions of Iran and her worldviews after the revolution. From what I have read, our hosts had a similar experience analyzing and understanding Iran’s side of her purpose, reasons and views and that made them to form and shape their own opinions. This is how we crossed and I found this site.

    What I am talking about is similar to what just happened yesterday (we have that here every day) on this site. Alameh Zio fyi, as his usual pulled an opinion out of his butt without any reference or backup about the rule of law in UK/ Swiss, etc. his two Haifa boy sidekicks, both, immediately agreed and approved like it was a fact, if it was not for Jay’ quick check and search on internet, his prophesy wouldn’t have been challenged (he got cut with his pants down, but he doesn’t learn) forcing him back out and apologize and say he should have said In His Ziocentric Opinion. This was not available to us and my generation before we either had to accept and swallow what they feed us at face value or become disinterested.
    IMO, one of the reasons, which has made Americans to be disinterested in international events and news, is because they were not given (allowed) to much foreign information (they still are not) but they ( the new generation) now know that they have other means other than MSM, and that is the biggest danger that the American deep state is fearing.

  392. Amir says:

    @M. Ali
    Thanks for your reply! So… you agree with reations between Iran and US (based on mutual respect) like any other two countries.

    Do you feel comfortable with telling me the way you feel about standing up to the US’ Imperialism (or estekbar or arrogance or whatever that you call it?

  393. Amir says:

    Thanks for your honest and detailed response.
    If that’s of any value, I was born in March of 1987 (esfand 1365).

  394. Amir says:

    Thanks forr taking the time to write back.

  395. fyi says:

    Amir says:

    July 31, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    The relationship between Iran and US & EU will remain adversarial for the near future; 3-5 years and the strategic competition will continue.

    China is indifferent to Iran – she assess that Iran is not worth the trouble at this time for her to try to strengthen – they prefer Pakistan; a real vassal state of China.

    Russia needs Iran to remain independent but not too independent or too powerful.

    So Iran’s struggle for strategic autonomy and for the assertion of national power will continue and opposition to it from US, EU, Russia and Arabs, and Turks and Israelis as well.

  396. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Which Presidential Candidates Are Winning the Money Race

  397. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    List of Million-Dollar Donors in the 2016 Presidential Race

    from NYT

  398. pragmatic says:

    و هنگامى كه در دريا به شما سختى برسد،هركه را جز او مى خوانيد،[همه] گم مى شوند; پس چون شما را برهاند و به خشكى رساند[ازاو]روى مى گردانيد! (ج13فرهنگ قرآن ،ص485

  399. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Let’s look a little deeper at the “truly amazing” civilization than newly converted gharb-parast daeshi sand-niggers do, shall we?

    Hey, he’s a white man and he should know, right?

    Deep State America

    Democracy is often subverted by special interests operating behind the scenes.

    By Philip Giraldi July 30, 2015

    Turns out white Americans aren’t so different than Turkish Muslim muleteers…


    “In truth America’s deep state is, not unlike Turkey’s, a hybrid creature that operates along a New York to Washington axis. Where the Turks engage in criminal activity to fund themselves, the Washington elite instead turns to banksters, lobbyists, and defense contractors, operating much more in the open and, ostensibly, legally. U.S.-style deep state includes all the obvious parties, both public and private, who benefit from the status quo: including key players in the police and intelligence agencies, the military, the treasury and justice departments, and the judiciary. It is structured to materially reward those who play along with the charade, and the glue to accomplish that ultimately comes from Wall Street. “Financial services” might well be considered the epicenter of the entire process. Even though government is needed to implement desired policies, the banksters comprise the truly essential element, capable of providing genuine rewards for compliance. As corporate interests increasingly own the media, little dissent comes from the Fourth Estate as the process plays out, while many of the proliferating Washington think tanks that provide deep state “intellectual” credibility are similarly funded by defense contractors.

    The cross fertilization that is essential to making the system work takes place through the famous revolving door whereby senior government officials enter the private sector at a high level. In some cases the door revolves a number of times, with officials leaving government before returning to an even more elevated position. Along the way, those select individuals are protected, promoted, and groomed for bigger things. And bigger things do occur that justify the considerable costs, to include bank bailouts, tax breaks, and resistance to legislation that would regulate Wall Street, political donors, and lobbyists. The senior government officials, ex-generals, and high level intelligence operatives who participate find themselves with multi-million dollar homes in which to spend their retirement years, cushioned by a tidy pile of investments.

    America’s deep state is completely corrupt: it exists to sell out the public interest, and includes both major political parties as well as government officials. Politicians like the Clintons who leave the White House “broke” and accumulate $100 million in a few years exemplify how it rewards. A bloated Pentagon churns out hundreds of unneeded flag officers who receive munificent pensions and benefits for the rest of their lives. And no one is punished, ever. Disgraced former general and CIA Director David Petraeus is now a partner at the KKR private equity firm, even though he knows nothing about financial services. More recently, former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has become a Senior Counselor at Beacon Global Strategies. Both are being rewarded for their loyalty to the system and for providing current access to their replacements in government.

    What makes the deep state so successful? It wins no matter who is in power, by creating bipartisan-supported money pits within the system. Monetizing the completely unnecessary and hideously expensive global war on terror benefits the senior government officials, beltway industries, and financial services that feed off it. Because it is essential to keep the money flowing, the deep state persists in promoting policies that make no sense, to include the unwinnable wars currently enjoying marquee status in Iraq/Syria and Afghanistan. The deep state knows that a fearful public will buy its product and does not even have to make much of an effort to sell it.”

  400. Jay says:

    Sakineh Bagoom says:
    July 31, 2015 at 9:10 pm

    The guide was interesting reading. Thanks! I was familiar with much of the tactics, but collecting it in one place and within one story was valuable.

  401. Jay says:

    Sakineh Bagoom says:
    July 31, 2015 at 9:10 pm

    The guide was interesting reading. Thanks! I was familiar with much of the tactics, but collecting it in one place and within one story was valuable.

  402. M.Ali says:

    Amir, I’m still figuring out how I feel with such a complicated question!

  403. Jay says:

    pragmatic says:
    July 31, 2015 at 9:56 pm

    I don’t know what “…chewed one of your kinds..” mean. Can you contribute to a meaningful dialog by spelling out exactly what you are trying to say?

  404. pragmatic says:

    Why It Matters Whether an Attack on Palestinians Is ‘Terrorism’:

    I read an article with the above title. Israeli settlers are suspected in the latest attack in the West Bank in which a Palestinian toddler was killed. But, how the attack is labeled raises legal as well as semantic questions.

    Per Henry Wanna Be (HWB), FYI and Smith are (as HWB claims) are zios. I vehemently would like to know FYI and Smith notion of this matter.

  405. pragmatic says:

    جه می کنه حاج اقا. احسنت
    لطفا گفته های یک سرد و گرم کشیده انقللاب یار و یاور راستین امام و حضرت ایت الله خامنه ای را بخوانید. ودرس بگیرید. متشکرم

    حرف بعدی آقای هاشمی مطابق رسم معمول این سالها، بازخوانی اشتباهات است. اشتباهاتی که نقطه اوجش در دولت قبل بود. هاشمی ناگفته های زیادی از آن روزها دارد. نه از تخریب خودش که از تضعیف نظام. از تخریب اقتصاد و سیاست خارجی گرفته تا تضعیف فرهنگ و اعتقادات مردم. هاشمی می گوید واقعاً بازگشت اینها کار آسانی نیست. بعد هم ادامه می دهد حالا هم که یک روحانی پا پیش گذاشته. شانه زیر این بار سنگین داده. آقایان شده اند مانع و مانع گذار. واقعاً این درد را باید کجا برد که 8 سال مشوق و مبلّغ یک جریان انحرافی باشی. کشور را به لبه پرتگاه ببری. کمر مردم را زیر تحریم ها خرد کنی. نظام را تا آنجا که می توانی تضعیف کنی. بعد هم امروز مدعی دلواپسی نظام و توافق هسته ای بشوی؟!.
    حرف بعدی آقای هاشمی حرف ولایتمداری است. هاشمی به صراحت هشدار می دهد به مخالفان توافق هسته ای. دلواپس یا غیر دلواپس. هاشمی می گوید با توافق مخالفید به نام خود مخالفت کنید. رهبری را مقابل اکثریت مردم قرار ندهید. حرف رهبری صریح و روشن است. برای مخالفت با توافق هم با هیچکس تعارف ندارند. اگر قرار به توافق و مذاکره نبود، بی اذن ایشان قدمی از قدم برداشته نمی شد. چه رسد به امضای توافق و تصویب قطعنامه شورای امنیت!.
    حرف آخر آقای هاشمی، حرف آرمان های انقلاب است. آرمانی که حرف اول و آخرش مردم است. مردمی که قرار بوده و هست که باید سکاندار اصلی اش باشند. هاشمی از انحراف از آرمان انقلاب هم می گوید. انحراف از آرمان انقلاب. یعنی فقیرتر کردن روز به روز مردم. یعنی نحیف کردن روز به روز فرهنگ. یعنی از “اسلام پابرهنگان” برداشت کنی باید پابرهنگان را زیاد کنی و از فرهنگ هم چیزی جز چند تار موی زنان نبینی!. آرمان انقلاب را باید دوباره نوشت. باید دوباره خواند. سیل انحراف سالهای گذشته. چیزی از آنها باقی نگذاشته. هاشمی آرمانهای انقلاب را دوباره می خواند. برای آنها که تمدن امام را نفهمیده اند. برای آنها که تحریم ها را نعمت می خوانند. مبارزه را هدف گرفته اند و جمهوری اسلامی را منزوی می خواهند و تمدن بزرگی را که امام می خواست مهجور. هاشمی آرمانهای انقلاب را دوباره می خواند. با صدایی رسا. هزینه های زیاد و پشتکاری تاریخی.
    روایت مصلحت همچنان باقی است…

  406. Pragmatic says:

    Standup Comedian aka Jaghist- You have been claiming Ghochani is kooni, apparently it takes one to know one! oops!

    You and your accomplice are doing your utmost to make a rift between Agha and Sardareh Sazandehghi with feigned allegations. Where this awe is coming from? Their friendship is shuddering you. Isn’t it Mr. knowing it all? I can see your adversity. Since I know more than you, believe me, there is not any disordance between the two. Now keep prancing around! I know it is an ordeal for you to digest this fact, it all comes out of your ferocity.

    I don’t if you believe in religion (I am not like inane pal here to assume) at least have some piety. Stop distorting and extolling facts and figures. You are a ferocious man.

  407. James Canning says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    I am a great fan of Philip Giraldi and he does an excellent job of summing up the grotesque situation that obtains in the US.

  408. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    First of all, congratulations you get the award for funniest “English-but-really-Farsi” rant so far this year.

    Very funny!

    If you were educated you would know that the use of the word “kuni” here is majazi not haqiqi.

    Of course as a “liberal democrat Mosalmun” Quchani does not distinguish between kuni and gheyre-kuni and believes they are equal.

    Which brings us back to the question you refuse to even address because you are a coward and paid angal.

    A follower of Imam- like Agha Mohammad- does not think that a kuni and gheyre kuni are equal. A “liberal democrat” like Marashi and Quchani do.

    Which one do you agree with? Are you a follower of Imam or a liberal democrat?

    “Since I know more than you, believe me, there is not any disordance between the two.”

    Well I guess that settles it.

    Oh please tell us who you are, please will you! Oh please, please, please!

    I’m sooo excited to be speaking to such an important person who has so secret personal close information about the relationship between Hashemi and Agha.

    I see that you must be a very special angal tu kun-e Haji because he called you to come to this website to deal with the Ahmadinejad lovers and you are Hajis confidante!

    I kiss your feet (not)!

    Hey guess what. Even if Agha- my Rahbar and marja- likes Hashemi, I don’t!

    But I know some things too and reality is not exactly as you say. Of course your view from inside Hajis rectum makes it a little difficult for you to see reality.

    “Now keep prancing around!”

    Oh my God, I’m laughing so hard…

    “You are a ferocious man”


  409. fyi says:

    pragmatic says:

    August 1, 2015 at 12:38 pm

    Again, Mr. Rafsanjani alludes to the “Nekbat Islami” and expresses some regret – without taking personal responsibility or making any apologies.

    Let it be so since he cannot compensate or otherwise address the humiliations and suffering that had been inflicted on many people in Iran due to the policies that he and his colleagues had endorsed – during his Speakership of the Majlis or during his presidency.

    But what are his positive policy prescriptions?

    He is not saying the following:

    – “If you vote for us, we will restore the electoral law to what it was in 1980 and will end disenfranchisement of those non-bearded crowds.”

    – “Our Party’s program is the annulment of Hejab Laws.”

    – “We support a multiplicity of political parties and will work to remove restrictions on them.”

    – “Those harassing Iranian women have nothing in common with our party’s platform.”

    – “The Moral Police will be disbanded under our party’s government.”

    But he is not making any such statements – because – ultimately – he does not believe in them.

    He is a man, in whose own words, “will not give democracy” to people.

  410. Pragmatic says:

    Stand up comedian: I really think you are a kuni not in majazi mode! :)))

    I answered your kiri (majazi) question so many times, but since you are in love with my kir (not majazi) you like to ask the question numerous times. It’s fine with me as long as you won’t bite. Ablah, I am not a follower of Marashi, Ghuchani Kuni (Majazi) nor am I a follower of Mohmmad. You got it archloch! Du bist eine dumpkoff! When your master is still alive and he is like a thorn in your eye why should I follow anybody else? You are INDEED a KHAR . You are the true meaning of the anecdote “ghoosaleh oomadi o gav ham miri”.

    It’s irrelevant who I am. It suffices to say I am the one who has revealed your true face. Out of nowhere I show up and I break all your pots and pans. You are still in a state of shock. I was told to come to this site just because of you. I get paid to undermine you. You are very famous if you don’t know. I came here to put an end to your pageantry. Now, I have a news for you two more of your buddies (pakan) have been arrested. You’ll hear it soon. BTW, I rather be in Haji’s rectum than being a rectum itself like you.

    Last but not least, majazi or non-majazi eat shit and die.

  411. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Your German is as bad as your English…zum kotzen.

    Who gives a shit about you angal…

    The big gooz-pichi is happening in Haji’s rectum (where you live) because in a week or two he will have to say whether he supports Hezbe Kargozaran neo-liberal democrat with Marashi and Quchani or whether he supports Agha Mohammad and Imam’s line.

    This is a very very big problem for you asshole! Don’t run away from the problem tarsoo!

    This and Mehdi starting his prison term will be very difficult on Haji…he will need the support of loyal angals like you.

    “Out of nowhere I show up and I break all your pots and pans. You are still in a state of shock.”

    Oh my God, I’m laughing so hard…just tell me something, please…do you wear a cape when you show up out of nowhere?

  412. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    H.M. Daeshi,

    Seeing that you are an expert on well, EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE, would you enlighten us about the two angals- douchebag and Nasser- that are crawling around in your rectum?

    How good does it really feel?

    Thanks in advance.

  413. Kooshy says:

    “It’s irrelevant who I am. It suffices to say I am the one who has revealed your true face. Out of nowhere I show up and I break all your pots and pans. You are still in a state of shock. I was told to come to this site just because of you. I get paid to undermine you.”

    Oh shit, I didn’t think ayatollah Nut job will send his best man with immaculate Oxford English and German to this site to “seat us in our place” oh my god all along I was only concerned with NutandYabo’ Goldberg zios ,
    Who ever thought we will have to face off ayatollah Nut job’ Rambo better know as Pricky Prag of Oxford. Now, I am so scared of Pricky coming here that if greens start their favorite slogan, ” na gazeh na lobnan janam fadaye Israal” I wouldn’t protest and say anything .

  414. M.Ali says:

    An interesting article about Iran’s unique kidney transplant, something certain people sometimes attack Iran on, but shows that going against the current world norms might be unpopular, but can be ultimately better for people,

  415. masoud says:

    Has Khameini published a book on the liberation of Palestine? This what I’m reading in the news, but the only source cited is a known crackpot.

  416. Pragmatic says:

    Jaghal – You are upset after all those eight years you haven’t been able to put hajagha away.
    Badjoori dareh misoozeh, NA? LOL

    You are always upset, angry, rage? Bezan hey bezan shayad behtar beshi

  417. Pragmatic says:

    We are anticipating on khobregan election. Heroic people of Iran are getting ready to make another epic day in month of Esfand. Two elections on a same day. Landslide victory is conceived. Lest at that time our imbeciles here might awfully realize how wrong they have been. Undoubtedly they’ll continue with their outdated rhetorics. I vividly can imagine a private conversation between our famous pundits jaghist and Henry wanna be, allow me to enlighten you.

    Hwb: Aló, Aló, are you there pumpkinpie?
    Jaghist: yes, yes what is it homeboy? (as usual it’s that time of the month for him, he is angry).
    Hwb: why are you so cold?! It’s hurting? have you followed the election? Once again we got it deep.
    Jaghist: nevermind that, I’m concerned with pragmatic.
    Hwb: what do you mean my dear strategist?
    Jaghist: are you a fucking moron? He’ll chew our asses, we are going to look like two fools in front of our astute followers! Vagean khari. You know how acute he is.
    Hwb: well, we continue with our usual distorting and deviating the situation.
    Jaghist: I got to think twice about it. I don’t want to look dummier than I look now.
    Hwb: I have an idea. Let’s keep attacking three Zios.
    Jaghist: I’m not so sure. I rather consult with our team, m.Ali, Jay, masoud, Nahid and sakineeh.
    hwb: ya that sounds good. Okay I let you go, but take a few more of your anger management pills.
    Jaghist: will do, so long.
    Hwb: take kir, I meant care.

  418. wakeupworld says:

    Did Iran get a good deal out of 5+1? I personally think she got the wrong side of the stick! If not, can one explain it to me otherwise?

  419. Rehmat says:

    On July 28, 2015, Jerusalem-based news website, The Times of Israel quoted Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk saying that Tehran has “drastically decreased financial and military aid” to Gaza-ruling Islamic resistance Hamas since latter’s refusal to support Syrian Assad regime. Damascus trained Palestinian fighters and provided accommodation and financial aid to Khalid Mashaal, Hamas political bureau chief in exile for years.

    “Abu Marzouk’s remarks came on the heels of a visit by senior Hamas officials to Riyadh in what has been deemed indicative of a shift in allegiance from Shiite Iran, which has provided it with arms and money in recent years, to Sunni Saudi Arabia,” stated the news site.

    Abu Marzouk and Saleh Aruri had accompanied Khaled Meshaal, who visited Riyadh in July 2015 at the invitation of Saudi government. It was Meshaal’s first visit to Riyadh since he closed his operation in Damascus three year ago. It came at the heel of Emir of Qatar’s $250 million bribe.

    “Iran has become the main financier of Hamas. Therefore, the movement didn’t cut its relationship with Tehran. Hamas is waiting to change the Saudi position, even change the Egyptian position and open the Rafah crossing,” Zionist news website, Middle East Eye, commented on Meshall’s Riyadh visit on July 20, 2015.

    Interestingly, on April 20, 2015, The Times of Israel quoted Radio Israel saying that a high-ranking Hamas official was arrested by Saudi police for allegedly “money laundering and smuggling”.

    On February 21, 2000, the Jew York Times called Israel “a paradise for money laundering”. In March 2015, Israeli police arrested three Israeli Jew businessmen for smuggling arms and building material to Gaza Strip and celling it to Hamas for millions of shekels.

    On May 31, 2013, UK’s newspaper Telegraph reported: “Iran has cut up to £15 million a month in funding as punishment for not supporting Syrian regime.” It seems, Iran could have been funding Hamas as much as the US annual military aid to Israel ($3 billion)!

    Considering Hamas leaders who stood against Israel-US-EU blockade since 2006, would be so stupid to expect financial aid from Saudi ‘royals’ who gave Israel $16 billion aid during 2012-2014 period. Riyadh has been providing funds to pro-Israel Jewish lobby groups for decades in order to swing Washington’s foreign policy against the Islamic Republic.

    Saudi ‘royals’ also bankrolled military coup against president Morsi, who committed ‘anti-Semitism ‘ by opening Egypt-Gaza Rafah crossing for humanitarian aid to 1.7 million Palestinian trapped inside Israel’s Nazi Concentration Camp. Morsi, who is sentenced to death by Egypt’s Crypto-Jew military dictator Gen. al-Sisi for being a member of anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood – never broke diplomatic relation with Tel Aviv.

    According to the US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) 2002 report on ‘terrorism against Israel’ claimed that Hamas has an annual operational income of $20 million – 10% of which comes from Khamenei Foundation. It also said that “Hamas armed activities represent a small portion of their resources.”

    Washington and Tel Aviv, on the other hand, insist that while Hamas receives money from Iran, Syria, UAE governments and Islamic charities in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, the US, UK, Canada and some other countries for its government operation and social works – Islamic Jihad receives its total annual budget of $2 million entirely from Iran and Syria.

    Hamas/Islamic Jihad have used Iranian rockets to defend Gaza civilians from Israel’s airstrikes in the past. Israel has claimed that Hizbullah military wing provide Hamas military training and some of arms it receives from Iran via Syria.

  420. Pragmatic says:

    Rohani live

    درست گویی بهتر از درشت گویی است. زد به هاله نور

  421. Pragmatic says:

    I love the way he is alluding to Dr.’s eight years. So acute. An astute, adept and great student of hajagha

  422. fyi says:


    Mr. Zanganeh on Oil etc.

    وی درباره موضوع دکل نفتی هم گفت : یک دکلی به مبلغ 88 میلیون دلار توسط یک شرکت خریداری می شود به نام تاسیسات دریایی که این شرکت نیمی متعلق به صندوق بازنشستگی نفت است ونیمی دیگر متعلق به تعاونی بازنشستگی ناجا وپرسنل عادی در آن سهیم هستند ، اما جالب است که بگویم شرکت خریدار این دکل کلا 20 روز از عمرش می گذشت که اقدام به این خرید کرد و چند روز قبل از خرید این دکل از شرکت آرژانتینی دکلی می خرد به مبلغ 66 میلیون دلار و بعد اقدام به فروش همان دکل می کند به مبلغ 88 میلیون دلار، و جالب تر اینکه در روز معامله قرار داد تحویل دکل امضا می شود اما دکلی تحویل داده نمی شود و بعد از آن 20 درصد از پول پیش پرداخت می شود بعد از مدتی هم شرکت اولیه صاحب دکل ( فروشنده ) قرار دداد را فسق می کند به دلیل اینکه پولی به او پرداخت نمی شود از طرف شرکت تاسیسات دریایی اما از طرفی تمام 88 میلیون دلار را به حساب شرکت واسطه واریز می کنند به این ترتیب شرکت آرژانتینی فرروتونا دکل را برمی دارد و می رود این بود تمام ماجرا.

  423. Pragmatic says:


  424. Amir says:

    I was trying to come up with a name for a cell type for a couple of days and suddenly I realized I was trying to find an English name and then translate it into Farsi!! Speaks volumes for my woes.

    The leader had said Farsi should become a reference language for scientific literature; I think untill enough original thought hasn’t been accumulated, that wouldn’t happen.

  425. M. Ali says:


    I think a country’s progress is sometimes like losing weight. If you look at the mirror everyday, it doesn’t appear that exercising and diet is doing much. But if you keep at it, eat healthy, exercise regularly, and then after a while, compare (instead of today and yesterday) today and two years back, you will see the vast improvement that has come over you and the accomplishments you have achieved.

    It’s important to put Iran’s accomplishments in perspective.

    I was looking through my personal book reviews (well, let review and more random notes on books i read), and want to copy what I wrote on a book called “Modern Persia”. Don’t be fooled by the modern part, it was written in 1897, so it was modern back then.

    These were my comments back when I read it in 2011,
    “The world hasn’t changed. More than hundred years back, the situation was not much different. This book, written in 1897, was by an Iranian Christian, writing about Iran, to an American audience. In it, he denounces the Iranians, puts down the government and the society, and claims the missionary work of the American churches are the saving grace in Iran.

    In 2011, we still have this. The missionary is different nowadays, the religion isn’t necessarily blunt Christianity, but Western Democracy. Most of anti-Iranian pieces written in the media today are written by Iranians, most of the most vicious supporters of aggression against Iran are Iranian-Americans. It seems, the battle of West Vs Iran is not new. It started since the days of the Romans and the mantle has been passed from one country to another, and their aim has always been to bring the Iranian people to its knees and make them westernized.

    Daniel is a shameful Iranian, and his ilk are everywhere today, under the guise of pro-democratic advocates, but the message is always the same. The Iranians are backwards and have a low standard of living, and the only way to save them, is through the message of the White Man. Whether it’s the Church or the State, the aim is the same. Cripple Iran.”

    Here is my comments on another book I read in the same year. Pesia Revisited, written in 1896,

    “Khomeini once said something along the lines of, whenever the west says anything bad about you, know that you are on the right track. This book, written by a British General, proves not only that statement but also its inverse. You know his lavish praises on certain situations and Kings in the book is only prove how much these Iranian decisions and Kings disadvantaged Iran.

    The Qajar period did little to help Iran progress in the world. Their kingship was froth with concessions to Russia and British, of which the General writes in such a way as if Iran is advantaged through their help.

    It is always so expected and yet so distressing to realize how little the west have changed in their way in regards to the east. Even during the Qajar days, the west writes in such a way as if they wear HELPING us. Their relationship with Iran is written in a way that we, as Iranians, should be happy and pleased and our Kings commended for the concessions, and any revolt against this status quo to be discouraged, not due to the harm it does to the west, but as they claim, the harm it does for the good of Iran.

    In the book, they lavish praise on Naser al-Din Shah Qajar. He was the king that gave multiple concessions to foreign powers, of which they plundered Iran’s resources, in exchange for capital that the Shah wasted. One such case was his concession to allowing Britain to have the full monopoly on Iran’s tobacco (sale, purchase, and processing). It was only withdrawn due to widespread public outcry, including a fatwa that called for the complete ban on tobacco smoking. It apparently was so binding in people’s eyes that even Shah’s wives would stop him from smoking. In the author’s eyes, this amazing unity of Iranian men and women against foreign intervention, bypassing their own rulers, is written in a way to claim that the Iranians were shortsighted and they didn’t know the monopoly would have brought multiple benefits to the Iranians. Probably, in his eyes, the way the East-Indian Company brought to India.

    It is clear that they believed their own bullshit and it is clear they still do. The biggest shame is that there are still a lot of Iranians that still get led astray. Shame on us. “

    With this, I want to show that we have, after the revolution, finally chosen a path that is supposed to be fully sovereign and this is a huge challenge. We don’t even have good models in the region to take a lot of ideas from.

    Sure, we are behind western powers in terms of scientific and technological advances, but that’s not because of what we are doing today, but what we did many years ago. Read some materials regarding Iran, and compare Iran versus, let’s say, France, a hundred years ago. The gap was oceanic. But the gap isn’t as vast today.

    You can even compare recent history. Look at the cinemas. Compare films during Shah’s dynasty of, let’s say, 60s, and then compare them to western films in the 60s. Ours look so outdated in terms of visual. All those 60s nostalgic films Iranians sometimes love with Behrouz Vossoughi makes it look like it was made a hundred years before Fritz Lang’s 1931 film, “M”.

    However (if we don’t compare expensive CGI fest films), today’s Iranian cinema doesn’t LOOK that different than western cinema. And so on in many other fields.

    If we are improving day by day, even if slowly, who is doing the improving? It’s definitely not me, and its certainly not armchair critics from abroad, its hardworking, intelligent young people (hopefully like you) who each are doing their small part, and who might not even themselves realize that each of their work is like one brick, being stacked on top of it each other, to make a great wall.

    Apologies for the badly written semi-rant, but I’ve noticed a bit of negativity in your recent posts. Please, don’t be like that. You can’t sleep at night and wake up in the morning and see, hooray, all problems have been solved. No one is going to come and solve the problems for us. Like a fat man going on a treadmill, he will find it hard, slow, painful, and will be mocked by others around him. But the only way to get healthier for him, is to remain on the treadmill, and to be positive.

  426. Pragmatic says:

    As I said the other day.

    فوری/ اعلام کاندیداتوری آیت الله هاشمی برای انتخابات مجلس خبرگان / «ملی گرا» و «انقلابی ها» پای صندوق های رای حاضر شوند/ نتیجه‌ی مثبت و منفی‌ِ این انتخابات، به همه برمی‌گردد

    All I can add to this is:

    درودبه همه دلسوزان انقلاب ودوستداران رهبری
    درودبه سردارسازندگی .بامید موفقیت برای شماوایران

  427. Karl.. says:

    As we all knew knew, now Obama threat to bomb Syria

    Why did Syria stopped its WMD program anyone? Hopeless!

  428. Pragmatic says:

    Guys something new was revealed today, in line with Haleh, Mammeh, and Ghablameh, It was posted in hard line site Mashreghnews and was re-posted by entekhab.


  429. M. Ali says:

    “درودبه همه دلسوزان انقلاب ودوستداران رهبری”

    This is what I don’t understand again. A while back you were talking about the separation of church & state and how we had a golden age in the 70s, and now again, Velayat Faghih & the Islamic Revolution is the best?

    No consistency as far as I can see.

  430. nahd says:

    dear M. Ali
    It is obvious, that he is paid agent just let him make living.

  431. nahid says:

    dear M. Ali
    It is obvious, that he is paid agent just let him make living.

  432. M. Ali says:

    Guys, look at Kerry’s clear summary of the deal. Karl, Nahid, Kooshy, BIB, etc, I think its interesting to see the way American officials are selling the deal (its in English with farsi subtitles),

  433. M. Ali says:

    Pay attention to the part where Kerry says that they have worded the resolution in such a way that any member state of the group can call in a resolution to see if the sanctions suspension can continue and it will therefore take only one of them to veto “no”.

    Man, how can you even negotiate fairly with a country of lawyers?

    If I could understand correctly, I think the part he refers to is this section,

    ““11. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, within 30 days of receiving a notification by a JCPOA participant State of an issue that the JCPOA participant State believes constitutes significant non-performance of commitments under the JCPOA, it shall vote on a draft resolution to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph ‎7 (a) of this resolution, decides further that if, within 10 days of the notification referred to above, no Member of the Security Council has submitted such a draft resolution for a vote, then the President of the Security Council shall submit such a draft resolution and put it to a vote within 30 days of the notification referred to above, and expresses its intention to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue by the Advisory Board established in the JCPOA;”

    So, you see, the vote won’t be, for example, to reintroduce sanctions, because then Russia could easily veto it and the resolution would die. But if the vote is for, “should we continue the relief”, then it is easy for USA to veto no, and the sanctions will come back.

  434. M. Ali says:

    Sorry for breaking up my posts, but in addition to my previous post, notice the next paragraph,

    “12. Decides, acting under Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations, that, if the Security Council does not adopt a resolution under paragraph ‎11 to continue in effect the terminations in paragraph ‎7 (a), then effective midnight Greenwich Mean Time after the thirtieth day after the notification to the Security Council described in paragraph ‎11, all of the provisions of resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008) and 1929 (2010) that have been terminated pursuant to paragraph ‎7 (a) shall apply in the same manner as they applied before the adoption of this resolution, and the measures contained in paragraphs 7, ‎8 and 16-20 of this resolution shall be terminated, unless the Security Council decides otherwise;”

    So, basically, if at ANY time, ANY of the countries raises an issue, ALL the members of the security council need to vote yes, to have the sanctions relief continue. Of course, this means that since a country is bringing up an issue, they will also have the ability to veto the resolution (of continued sanction relief), meaning that we are the beck and call of the security council at any time.

  435. Pragmatic says:

    M.ALI azizam,

    Instead of reading my posts try to learn to write. When you are asking some to read your post, like where you wrote: Karl, Jaghal, HWB, Nahid, etc… For “people” you don’t use “etc”! You say “et al”. Ex: Jaghal, Hennry Wanna Be, M.Ali aka Khengali and et al, please read the following:

    Now, ghorbonet beram, googooli magooli, I said the ultimate for a country to advance the state and church have to get separated. This might happen ten years or 20 years or never.

    As far as the 70’s is concerned, how many times I have to repeat myself? The issue is that you are either an idiot or you are acting like you don’t get it. Either way it’s not my concern. Go back and read what I have wrote. All I can say is that you think everything done in previous regime was awful and bad. But me as revolutionary person who was involved I can attest that the previous regime did some good stuff for this country. An example is that after 36 years we have not been able to built an olympic village like the one in Tehran which has the Azadi stadium in it. As your mentor used to say go drop the water in the place which is burning.

    In regards to the article 41 and bla bla, apparently it tells us that we were not the ones who brought the US to the negotiation table? Reality is bitter. DA!

    Let me use this post and say this: We are very happy that Mehdi is going to Jail. As we were happy Faezeh served her term. There is no difference between my children and Hashemi’s. At the same time I hope Dr. Ahmadinejad is going to return the court call :))

    Khayli chakeratam,
    Zat zeeyad

  436. Jay says:

    M. Ali says:
    August 3, 2015 at 6:34 am

    In my view, this agreement was not negotiated on the basis of trust, nor was it negotiated as a lasting agreement. If all the sanctions are “snapped back” – so be it. So long as sufficient time has elapsed to enable Iran to establish alternate routes for financial exchange – the worst part of the sanctions – the rest will not be as damaging. There is a long history of breaches by the US of the deal she has negotiated – this will be no different. The folks that oppose this deal are concerned about letting Iran off the hook long enough to enable her to establish commercial and financial exchanges that SWIFT will have difficulty controlling. I agree with you that the deal, as structured, is not a good deal for Iran – but, in the short term only. In two to three years, the specifics of this deal will not have any functional influence.

  437. Pragmatic says:

    JCPOA summary of nuclear provisions[37]

    Capability Before JCPOA After JCPOA
    First-generation centrifuges installed 19,138 6,104
    Advanced centrifuges installed 1,034 0
    Breakout time 1–2 months 1 year
    Centrifuge R&D Unconstrained Constrained
    Stockpile of low-enriched uranium 19,211 lbs 660 lbs
    Stockpile of medium-enriched uranium 430 lbs 0 lbs

  438. Pragmatic says:

    To: M.Ali, HWB, Jaghist, Masoud et al,

    You youngsters should read the following thoroughly and verbatim.

    تاریخ، بهترین درس عبرت برای کسانی است که نمی‌خواهند تجارب تلخ گذشتگان را تکرار کنند. امروز نیز تاریخ مشروطه و بازگشت استبداد در چهره مشروطه‌خواهی، باید برای ملت ما درس عبرت آموزنده‌ای باشد تا فریب کسانی را نخورند که نیات شوم خود را در زیر شعارهای تند و انقلابی پنهان ساخته‌اند تا مگر خدای ناخواسته دوباره راه سلطه‌گران را به این آب و خاک باز کنند و آب رفته را به جوی بازگردانند.

  439. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    August 2, 2015 at 11:33 pm

    Yes, reconnection with the World Economy only makes Iran more vulnerable to future economic wars with dubious gains at home.

    As we saw in case of the “Missing Oil Rig” – there is brazen theft of public funds under Mr. Rouhani’s administration with nary a peep coming out of the Iranian Judiciary.

  440. fyi says:

    Amir says:

    August 3, 2015 at 12:28 am

    That is why it is so important to write text books in Persian.

  441. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    August 3, 2015 at 9:34 am

    None of the so-called “Political Parties” in Iran support true democracy; i.e. restoration of the electoral law to that which existed in 1980.

    None of them.

    And do you know why?

    Because they would not get votes if the un-bearded are allowed to stand for elections.

  442. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    August 2, 2015 at 9:37 pm

    These are systemic problems as the case of “Missing Oil Rig” that I posted clearly testifies.

    It matters not, evidently, who is the President of Iran.

    There is this brazen case of theft of state funds and what is Mr. Larijani doing now?

  443. Amir says:

    Bib, Kooshy, Jay, M.Ali et al (wink wink)

    Once again Sadegh UN-chewed one of your kinds!

    با سلام و تهیات، در خصوص نامه سرگشاده مورخ 8 مردادماه به آن مقام منبع، در فقره بیلبورد «فرش قرمز» اشتباهی رخ داده که بدین وسیله از بابت آن از جنابعالی پوزش می‌طلبم.بنده آن تصویر را در صفحه اول روزنامه شرق دیدم و تصورم آن بود که بیلبورد جدیدی از شهرداری می‌باشد؛ اما ظاهراً موضوع آن تصویر کاری هنری می‌بوده و ارتباطی با بیلبورد نداشته، از این بابت بنده از شما پوزش می‌طلبم.

  444. Amir says:

    @M. Ali
    Thanks for your kind comments.

    We could debate for a long time (and I think we agree with each other to great extent already); the gap might have decreased, but I’m talking about surpassing them.

    And pessimism, is relevant I think.

  445. Pragmatic says:


    Indeed, that is the problem currently we have with the existence of political parties. I am sure as we move forward all these matters will be solved by time.

    In regards to your second post directed at me, unfortunately our politicians should learn that sometimes taking off from politics wouldn’t be a bad idea. They can sit out for a term or two and watch closely what is occurring in the society; being economical, cultural or political, eventually candid themselves with fresh ideas. But they candid themselves in each term because they do not want to miss all the benefits they are receiving. It is called “Raant”. Then on the other hand, it’s not their fault entirely. Merely due to us PEOPLE. We don’t research their qualifications, backgrounds and what they really would like to do for the jurisdictions. I’m contemplating of entering the election.

  446. Pragmatic says:


    You are a great man. The more I read your post the more I realize that you are a normal man without any complex (OGHEDEH).

    Since you are a young man, the only advise I have for you is to read the sites and magazines of both sides of the equation. Do not let populist people deceive you with their offensive bullshit. They have changed their political opinions so many times that they are lost in their own shit. They are good swimmers when they see the water they go with the current.
    The worst thing is that they believe they are the Kissengers, Brezinski’s, Chomsky’s of Iran. They are deceitful and very adept in distorting the facts. As you have seen numerous times here in this blog.

    Good luck man.

  447. M.Ali says:

    Jay, I’m not very confident these guys will do that. Everyone involved (both sides) are probably more concerned about their political careers rather than planning years in advance. However, the lesson that Iran can’t work well with USA such current circumstances is more valuable then stopping and restarting enrichment.

    Amir, I don’t think any great inventor worked in pessimism. Wanting to surpress them is right and fully doable. But knowing where we should go should not be at the expense of not appreciating the efforts of others that brought us here.

    Pragmatic, I didn’t say Shah was all bad, but you have to appreciate that to someone who isn’t you, your contradictions are weird. It’s like you supported and still support an Islamic revolution that you hope will reach a golden age that you helped get rid of and that you destroyed a government that had seperated church and state to bring in an Islamic government so that, in 50 or 60 years, you will have a government that seperated church and state. Seems a strang, roundabout way to do things.

  448. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    August 3, 2015 at 11:49 am

    If you are going to stand for elections then, regrettably, in order to win, you have to adopt dissimulation.

    You have to grow a beard, start showing up in mosques etc., borrow your wife’s cosmetic to enhance that mark on your forehead and in all manners pretend to be the Most Pious Muslim since the 12-th Imam went into the Greater Occultation.

    How can one live a life of Lie in order to promote Truth?

  449. Amir says:

    Pragmatic says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:02 pm

    I’m a nobody, honestly.

    😉 حالا هندونه ها رو دوتادوتا نذارین زیر بغلم

  450. Amir says:

    M.Ali says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    I’m not sure what comment I made, that signaled not appreciating others’ contributions. That would be awful indeed.

  451. Pragmatic says:

    Nahid khanum – On what base you said what you said?! I’m sorry for you and your kind.

  452. Pragmatic says:

    This is for you and your kinds + Nahid the new member of accusers.
    دلواپسان قطعنامه ۵۹۸ چه می گفتند؟

  453. kooshy says:

    “Once again Sadegh UN-chewed one of your kinds!’

    Amir- I don’t think he UN-chewed or even was willing to UN-chew on billboard matter, IMO the better description of what happened to the clown is “ az,houlghomesh dar awardand”
    IMO, Zibakalam is a clown, and I agree with BIB, he is a pressure cooker pressure release valve, every government and system in world has a few, at that he is good other than that he is a clown.As far as I have followed no one is taking him serious.

  454. Jay says:

    M.Ali says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    Nothing is for certain, but there are numerous indications.

    The following opinion piece by Escobar may be of interest to you: – although, in full disclosure, I always read Mr. Escobar’s writings in tandem with a grain of salt!

    The noises are being made by SCO as well as high-ranking officials in Iran.

  455. fyi says:

    Pragmatic says:

    August 3, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    The electorate evidently pines for Piety in its elected officials.

    The search for Piety and Pious men thus leads to the promotion of the impious and the opportunists.

    Just like the labeling of people into Muslims and not-Muslims leads to more and more problems….

  456. kooshy says:

    Pragmatic says:
    August 3, 2015 at 1:29 pm
    “Nahid khanum – On what base you said what you said?! I’m sorry for you and your kind.’

    Prick Prag. Of Oxford

    Since you are labeling almost everybody on this blog with some sort of “kind” why don’t you elaborate and describe what kinds there are and which “kind” you yourself fit in?
    Is so un-smart, and frankly childish, high-schoolish (did you ever get over your high school days in Najafabad? Back in golden years I suppose?) to think you have an ambiguity here, so you can take both sides of an issue, flip flop back and forth, you can’t.
    It seems you just didn’t learn enough here on this site, getting cut with your pants down with your BS on Golden years and separation of church and state, etc. If one values his own opinions, one need to stop embarrassing himself, you should have been thought that in Najafabad High back in the golden years. I wrote this before. as always, your problem is that you think (wrongly) you outsmart everybody else on the planet, that really is not smart. Your Kind is not a nice polite word, you yourself wrote here “you were sent here to stop some of the “kinds” you dislike”, if so what Nahid said it shouldn’t have upset you.

  457. Kooshy says:

    Jay says:
    August 3, 2015 at 3:25 pm
    M.Ali says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    Jay and Ali

    Based on US’ long and various agreements track record, I think US eventually will cheat and make every effort to punish Iran, that is if US’ geopolitical standing stabilizes and improve. If so in that case, and under a new improved power she can reintroduce and force her clients to readopt any economic / technology sanctions she imposes on Iran and on the rest of the world.

    In mean time on nuclear technology according to Mr Salahi’ Majles presentation, It wouldn’t make a whole lot of difference for the next 10 years, since Iran for sure has no intention of make Nukes, and since her next few reactors are not even on paper yet, her IR8 will not be operational till next 8 years, and more importantly she doesn’t have enough Uranium to fuel Bushar alone. If you read Salahi’ testimony he said one year fuel need for Bushar is 60 tons in 5 years they could produce only 19 tons. Apparently they don’t have enough yellow cake and mining to fuel multiple reactors. This was know to all concerned ever since 1970s.

    All and all as per Mr Salahi Iran'( and also many years a go per Mr. Etemad’) peaceful nuclear energy production, like majority of other countries is not economical or totally viable without foreign participation. But nevertheless Iran has shown she has the know how and technology and the industrial base to make and use nukes if it comes to need. Sanctions based on strategic need of US can come and go regardless of Iran’s nukes case.

    IMO for Iran to keep US at check in next few years and as long as US is not coming to term with Iran,recognizing Iran’s power and her interests, Iran needs not to allow US and her clientele’ strategic position in ME improve. IMO, this was evident in SL’ recent speech(s) and his letter to President Rouhani right after the agreement. Of course US will try the same. Overall I don’t see much has changed except the rhetorics on both sides.

    In US there are as much people and groups unhappy with this deal as you found in Iran, the same is true with the happy crowd on both side. That should mean the deal is well split on the internal political divide, Rouhani’ interview yesterday was a sales pitch rather than informing the nation, meaning not yet he has a comfort edge to avoid explanation and justification (does he in SNSC?), same is true for Obama and Kerry.

  458. Jay says:


    With regards to industrial developments in the nuclear field, I agree with you that Iran has not acquiesced in any practically significant way. In the research area, there will be a small delay in the development part, which is manageable.

    Iran must (and I believe will) use this time to solidify her political position and her allies in the M.E. She will also establish alternate financial exchange mechanisms.

    Any future sanctions will have a smaller impact – more manageable – irrespective of US position.

    Regrettably US will eventually resort to the war option, whether realistic and practical or not, and Iran should be prepared for that as well.

  459. kooshy says:

    Jay says:
    August 3, 2015 at 6:50 pm


    I have couple of reservations/ thoughts on your position.
    1- If as per your recommendations and my believe Iran should and will improve her political position especially in her region, and to some extend can and will improve her economic vulnerability then US and her allies will have even less chance of resorting to a war as they had when US was much more regionally and globally stronger.
    2- I don’t see for next decade or so petro dollar’ fiat currency position can be replaced considerably even if KSA gets a regime changes, as a result no matter what when next sanctions come everybody including China, India and Russia and EU will economically participate with the financial hegemon in chief, the reason I say that is that the US hasn’t even allowed any meaningful oil trade in Euro.
    3- Iran’s and her allies Political and Military position has improved on two fold politically the world has seen that 6 Super doper powers had to seat and negotiate a peace treaty with Iran, so that’s political improvement which IMO has nothing to do with any Iranian administration is the Nizam’ undertaking (which is even strnger than an administrative decision). Militarily Iran openly is supporting her allies and says so and so far they have put up good proxy war, where US’ regional clients, had to directly get involved in show of force under a destabilizing pressure for need to do something KSA hitting poor Yemen for nothing and out of nothing, same goes for Turkey attacking Kurds, both their actions have and will swing more alliance, need and credibility to Iran’s position.

    In conclusion, IMO is easier for Iran to find political allies to improve her Political/Military position than to find viable economic allies, as is evidenced by their combined position of Iran, China, Russia with regard to their political positions on various theaters of conflicts vs that of economic participation which is more difficult for Russia or China to participate more confrontational with the west to help Iran.

  460. kooshy says:

    Prick Prag

    Did you ever think to go back to Najafabad High to finish your diploma; it’s just a thought in case you are serious on taking a high position in Ay. Nut Job’s next administration in the other word, you can always make a short cut and go straight for Oxford doctorate like Agha Mehdi he got his in “Leafing Public Funds for Daddy’ color revolution”, sounds like he finally is going to write his dissertation in Hotel Evin. Don’t forget Ab-e-Maeveh Anar Noogh ham ageh dastreseh Khaash tarehsh.

  461. Pragmatic says:

    Go get a life. I careless what you guys say. Accuse me, so what. Tu yeki ke boro dareto bezar. Koss mashangh

  462. M. Ali says:

    ” Amir says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:38 pm

    M.Ali says:
    August 3, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    I’m not sure what comment I made, that signaled not appreciating others’ contributions. That would be awful indeed.”

    You probably didn’t and I was being a bit touchy, because I keep reading many posts in this site from Iranians who act like 80 million Iranians are idiots and aren’t doing much.

  463. Pragmatic says:

    M.Ali. Hahaha I have the same feeling about you and your kind in regards to 78 million Iranians

  464. Pragmatic says:

    It is so estrange to see Araghchi’s comments being eschewed here like what happened in Iran!!

  465. Pragmatic says:

    Video of Ayatollah Hashemi regarding his talk with M.H. and his talk with Imam Khamenie (damat hefazeh)

  466. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    August 3, 2015 at 9:14 pm

    The rationale for war-making appears strangely irrational! On the face of it, a future war with Iran would be more costly and deadly, yet it remains likely. As recent as a few months ago, the US military was conducting war game simulations vis-a-vis Syria. A game involving chemical attacks and hundreds of thousands dead! One would hope that rational decision makers would stop a war on Iran – I am skeptical. Winning and losing is not the only objective in these wars. If I can’t have it, then I will make sure that you can’t either – that is the philosophy underpinning the rationale for these wars. US and clients will continue conflict in order to keep resources scarce for the emerging economies – to slow their growth, to impede their progress.

    FinCen and SWIFT correspondent transactions are deadly weapons that the US, and only the US, can wield against any adversary at will. CIPS, the BRICS response to swift (and mainly China’s response), is the attempt to create a counterbalance. The recent Chinese market meltdown was a shot across the bow. The US explained that it would not tolerate a competitor in no uncertain terms – and, soon after, CIPS was watered down and China’s markets returned to “semi-normal”.

    For China and Russia, alternative to SWIFT is a must, and some of this change is happening organically through crypto-transactions etc. Petrodollars will remain the dominant force, but cracks have already appeared and Iran will (must) take this time to fully exploit them.

    KSA and Turkey are not simply client states – they are dependent states. The entire socioeconomic infrastructure that supports the dictatorship in KSA will collapse should the US decides to pull out. KSA has no local capacity to build, manufacture, operate, manage, or maintain without the help of the US. That is why these client states will continue to fight proxy wars at any cost – Saudi family and Erdogan cronies are fighting for their own survival! Regardless of Iran’s improving political clout and military advances, the US and allies will continue to advance the war agenda because if they can’t have the resources, they want to make sure no one else has them!

  467. Rehmat says:

    On August 1, 2015, members of a newly-formed group Forgotten British Heroes Campaign held a wreath-laying ceremony near Trafalgar Square, London, in remembrance of Jewish terrorist attacks on British servicemen, Crown servants and civilians in British occupied Palestine in the late 1940s. The wreath-laying ceremony was followed by an indoor meeting and film show in West London. The meeting was addressed by Jez Turner of London Forum, Peter Rushton, assistant editor Heritage and Destiny magazine and Lady Michele Renouf, director of Telling Films.

  468. Rehmat says:

    fyi – When Rabbis call seven billion non-Jewish people around the world being “dogs” – and created to “serve Jews” – is the real problem, don’t you think so?