It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fighting tears, shah's son calls crisis a 'moment of truth'

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael


While I don't think there are too many Iranians pining for the Pahlavis, it's interesting to note how Gen Franco in Spain decide in 1969 that his successor would be the grandson of the Bourbon King Alfonso who was deposed in 1931.

Immediately after Franco's death in 1975 Juan Carlos became King of Spain and still is today.

A very different set of circumstances and personalities. Still ...

A hardline ultra-conservative rule succeeded by a monarchy.

Patriarchy rules.


Mike





It's pretty hard to tell obviously what's going on inside of Iran right now mmichael for obvious reasons. Irna and the official news agency sites of Iran are down and not on the Internet and haven't been since the 15th.

While of course the Iranian government is going to distort events when they themselves broadcast them at least we would know what they themselves are trying to pitch but we don't really even have that benefit right now.

My own Twitter account at the request of another ATS member is set to GMT 3:30 Theran Time and my Twitter Profile says I live in Tehran. I was asked to do this to slow down the process of the Iranian Government trying to weed out Twitter dissidents in Iran.

However it is that easy to pretend you are in Tehran when fighting an Internet Propoganda war, with the point being we can't be for certain people who claim to be in Tehran or any part of Iran broadcasting eyewitness accounts are even in country let alone broadcasting truthful accounts of what is going on over there.

While it is hard to tell how large and how wide spread the demonstrations are and just who all is, and just why, and who might be winning or loosing in them, one thing does seem possible and that is just about every candidate and every mullah as well as the Supreme Leader has (a.) been tainted by some form of accusation whether true or slander that is going to be seen as truth or slander by various parties (b.) normal commerce has probably slowed or ground to a halt.

The longer normal commerce is slowed or ground to a halt the more a society slips into anarchy, with stores closed and people unable to get basic food stuffs and medicines you have the makings of a growing humanitarian crisis.

The longer a humanitarian crisis drags on the more desperate people become for it to end...and ideally you need some untainted party that everyone can look to as not having been a part of the melee and controversy to step in and act as a neutral or authoritarian party to straighten it out.

That then becomes a situation where potentially you could introduce someone like the Prince into the situation as someone everyone can look to as being not so much above the fray but not involved in the fray and someone whose idealogy makes him impartial to any of the affected parties but whose geneology makes him by definition one of their own and not an outsider.

It's a long shot gamble but the way things are being set up currently they do seem to be creating the type of situation on the ground over there where you could take that kind of long shot gamble.

Make the masses hungry enough, fearful enough, tired enough and desperate enough for some return to order and an end to chaos and then anything becomes possible.

We don't really know what's going on inside of Tehran right now, but while the Shah's son is being promoted by powerful factions in the media in Washington and New York there is a chance a network of activists loyal to him are on the ground inside of Iran attempting to do the same thing.

We don't know about that yet or it's progress but we might see that better in the days ahead, and as you pointed out with Franco, anything is possible?

Good observation Mike, thanks for posting it.




posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   


Make the masses hungry enough, fearful enough, tired enough and desperate enough for some return to order and an end to chaos and then anything becomes possible.

We don't really know what's going on inside of Tehran right now, but while the Shah's son is being promoted by powerful factions in the media in Washington and New York there is a chance a network of activists loyal to him are on the ground inside of Iran attempting to do the same thing.


Now that brought back memories of South America, almost identical tactics, the only difference is, in South America the women were far more pretty.

I do feel sorry for the agents in Iran at this time, not only do then need to be careful not to be uncovered but they don't have pretty woman like the Cubans have.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I think the people who want the Pahlavis to return are out of their minds.

Obviously, they either don't remember or were spared from the Shah's brutality. The secret police. The extravagance and wealth while the rest of the country toiled under the sun.

This is why the words of the Shah's son and the former Queen are so empty. The Shah is not above the violence being perpetrated against the protestors. He has already proven that.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo
 


I couldn't agree more with you there. I am sure there is a certain small number of Iranians living here in the United States that were the elitist class that had life exceptionally good in the Shah's Iran who would love to see a return of the Shah. That small elitist, affluent and international class of Iranians enjoyed an unparalleled lifestyle of privelage, freedom and wealth under the Peacock Throne.

The vast majority of Iranians weren't so lucky and the reality is that the Shah's regime was so repressive and unfavorable to the common Iranian the Mullahs and Ayatollahs would really have to work overtime and go pretty far with their own restrictions and laws to even come close to matching the brutality and unfavorable ellements of the Shah's regime.

A lot of Americans get confused and think that life for the average Iranian got much worse under the theocracy the mullahs and students created in 1979 but the reality is it was a vast improvement for the majority of Iranians and there are no happy memories of greater freedoms and well being during the 26 years the Shah reigned.

There was a real growing movement towards real democracy and equalities in Iran in 1952 before Operation Ajax and the CIA put the Shah on the Throne.

It's highly doubtful any Iranian born after 1935 has any recollection what it was like to have real political and religious freedom in Iran or any government or system that has been more favorable towards them than the theocracy that's existed since 1979.

That's what most Americans never quite understand when they imagine what the people of Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Iran really want.

The majority of them don't even have a conceptual idea of what ideals we try to get them to accept through invansions, guns, bombs and coups!



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar


Make the masses hungry enough, fearful enough, tired enough and desperate enough for some return to order and an end to chaos and then anything becomes possible.

We don't really know what's going on inside of Tehran right now, but while the Shah's son is being promoted by powerful factions in the media in Washington and New York there is a chance a network of activists loyal to him are on the ground inside of Iran attempting to do the same thing.


Now that brought back memories of South America, almost identical tactics, the only difference is, in South America the women were far more pretty.

I do feel sorry for the agents in Iran at this time, not only do then need to be careful not to be uncovered but they don't have pretty woman like the Cubans have.


Soviet Union Dictator Joseph Stalin once said "People are like chickens, you can pluck out all their feathers, leave then naked, defenseless, humiliated and helpless and they will happily scamper around your feet for a few kernels of grain"

The Rockefellers and the Rothschilds of the world know this and so does every despot really.

Take away what people covet and desire and keep them perpetually beholden to you and in motion for you for a little bit of it here and there.

I have met some very beautiful and handsome Iranian women when I lived in Los Angeles and Washington D.C., some of them were incredibly stylish and exceptionally worldly.

One thing I have found living in culturally and racially diverse places like Los Angeles, Washington D.C. and Miami is that many people from other nations and foreign cultures and Iran is by no means excluded from that all do often tend to think of us Americans being culturally backwards, that many of us are simple 'redneck' farmers with little sense of culture or fashion.

Many a Persian, Arab, Mexican, Cuban, Argentinian etc., etc., has been surprised when invited to my own home to see signs of culture like fresh cut flowers and hung artwork and classic books that they really believe our John Wayne culture doesn't expose us too.

In many ways despite what our press tells us, and how we percieve ourselves internationally as Americans, most foreign nations and cultures and people really are about as ignorant as how the average American really thinks, feels and lives as we are about the people who aren't born, raised, live in America or wear I love McDonald's T-shirts.

People are people my friend, and it's the differences in human beings that I most admire, celebrate and love!

The world is an oyster full of endless pearls if one can only find the time to view them in the context that makes all people lusturous in their own special way!

Thanks for posting my friend.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
I am sure there is a certain small number of Iranians living here in the United States that were the elitist class that had life exceptionally good in the Shah's Iran who would love to see a return of the Shah. That small elitist, affluent and international class of Iranians enjoyed an unparalleled lifestyle of privelage, freedom and wealth under the Peacock Throne.

The vast majority of Iranians weren't so lucky and the reality is that the Shah's regime was so repressive and unfavorable to the common Iranian the Mullahs and Ayatollahs would really have to work overtime and go pretty far with their own restrictions and laws to even come close to matching the brutality and unfavorable ellements of the Shah's regime.

A lot of Americans get confused and think that life for the average Iranian got much worse under the theocracy the mullahs and students created in 1979 but the reality is it was a vast improvement for the majority of Iranians and there are no happy memories of greater freedoms and well being during the 26 years the Shah reigned.



While I don't disagree with the primary thesis of this, it's hard to say what Iran would be like had there been a different regime in the last 30 years.

Many things happened. The country was politically destabilized and a brutal war ensued in the 80s. Something many Iranians will not forget or forgive. Oil prices and growing revenues greatly influenced the politics of Iran and the entire region.

An irony is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has positioned himself as a protector of the common Iranian against not only the insidious West, but also the growing corruption among the ruling clergy, some of whom have benefited enormously. More than one Ayatollah who has spoken out on this has been severely reprimanded by the state. The new role of the Revolutionary Guard and their power is another major development.

So in a period of growing resource revenues, changing social values, a new global configuration, it is hard to say whether the Iranian people have been best served by their current leadership. There are argument against this as well as supporting the claim.

We have no way of knowing how the Shah would have responded to these changes. He may have become more repressive and greedier, his son may have taken over and been more liberal, less corrupt.

My strong impression is that the current regime has become abusive of their their trust, taken on an adversarial political agenda which does not benefit the ordinary Iranian, and has not reinvested the resource wealth back into the system sufficiently.

We are in the 21st Century, and a pragmatic representative government concerned for the well-being and future of the growing populace is what's needed. Not an ongoing response to past injustices and an assertion of religious principles as politics.

It's all about the future. Who offers the best options and the ability to implement them. That's who should be running the country.


Mike










[edit on 26-6-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Well, I disagree that the Islamic regime has been a blessing for Iranians. Its pretty obvious that they aren't what a lot of Iranians thought they were going to be when they overthrew the monarchy in 1979.

What cannot be denied, however, is that the dissenting voices in Iran, however legitimate they may be, are the minority. The vast majority of Iranians support the regime so in us supporting the dissenting voices, we are supporting only those protestors, not Iranians as a whole.

The big thing to remember is, the U.S. is wrong about Iran, has always been wrong about Iran, and will continue to be wrong about Iran.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Well, I disagree that the Islamic regime has been a blessing for Iranians. Its pretty obvious that they aren't what a lot of Iranians thought they were going to be when they overthrew the monarchy in 1979.

What cannot be denied, however, is that the dissenting voices in Iran, however legitimate they may be, are the minority. The vast majority of Iranians support the regime so in us supporting the dissenting voices, we are supporting only those protestors, not Iranians as a whole.

The big thing to remember is, the U.S. is wrong about Iran, has always been wrong about Iran, and will continue to be wrong about Iran.



Please don't misunderstand that I am a fan of Iran's theocracy or any theocracy. I sure would not want to live in Iran.

I do believe that a larger number of people in Iran have enjoyed a better quality of life under the theocracy than they did under the Peacock Dynasty.

I imagine for the very religious of any religion living in a theocracy would have to be the penultimate end all be all.

I know many devout left and right wing Christians here in the United States would love for religious morals and beliefs to be mandated into law here.

Yet I do suspect that a fair percentage of Iranians if not a majority would prefer not to have to live under Sharia law or any type of overly authoritarian and ultra rigid code and system of laws.

Just like most Christians would prefer to go to church on Sunday and as for foregiveness for their sins rather than have to face a government mandated punishment for their religious and moral sins.

My real point is I don't think most Iranians know anything different than Sharia Law and the Theocracy so don't hve anything to compare it to, and I would wager though I could be wrong that the Iranians unhappy under the Shah were and have been and are happier under the Theocracy as opposed to the Shah or at least I hope so for their own sakes since it was their own previous courage and revolution that brought Sharia Law and Theocracy to them.

Life is a funny old dog though, I wonder if any of us are ever completely happy with the state of affairs?




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join