Iran Under the Shah

The International Herald Tribune ^ | January 06, 2006 | Her Majesty Farah Pahlavi

[F14 Pilot]

Thomas Friedman's article, "A shah with a turban" (Views, Dec. 24), poignantly illustrated the rift between Iran's clerical dictatorship and the country's population, especially the youth. However, an inappropriate headline and cartoon by Kal undermined what was informative and valuable in his article.

The implication that the shah's reign bears any resemblance to the present regime is inaccurate. Under the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iranians enjoyed incomparably better lives than what they have to endure today; moreover, the prospect for a stable Middle East appeared promising.

Jews and other religious minorities thrived and prospered under the shah, who promoted religious freedom and tolerance. During World War II, Iran assisted many Jews fleeing the Nazis by issuing them Iranian travel documents, a policy that was continued for Middle Eastern Jews expelled from their respective countries.

Farah Pahlavi, New York

[F14 Pilot]

MEK speaker at work again?

[F14 Pilot]

That guy supports those the Shah's enemies here and there!

Check his previous posts and his blog! LoL

I'd not waste my time explaining these things here to MEK supporters

[ozzymandus]

Welcome to FR. Too crowded at DU?

[F14 Pilot]

ZOT?

[F14 Pilot]

You were there in 1970s.

Please enlighten us on how Iran was under the Shah

[Fred Nerks]

thanks, I checked it out. Disgusting.

[Khashayar]

It seemed to be a country where people were happy, prosperous and free to choose!

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

There was a consitutional monarchy in 1953 before the CIA supposedly "overthrew" Mossadegh... how was it "almost 1979"?

Mossadegh and the two mobs overthrew the constitutional monarchy. The CIA and iranian military restored it. Had it not been restored, Iran would have been either a soviet satellite or, more likely, an islamic republic. Mossadegh's gamble was to stay in power by balancing one against the other, an obviously untenable position in the long run.

[F14 Pilot]

PM Mossadegh wasnt popular in 1953 since he drove the country to become a Soviet ally and he couldnt manage the economy well enough to feed ordinary people!

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

It was for the same reason that so many people continue to rally behind Democrats in the US; pandering to the most ignorant, least-productive members of society will always generate a certain level of devotion. It's true in any society at any time in history. The trick is to not let that element hold sway.

As I've always put it, it is not the rich against the poor. It is the very rich (through paid surrogates) and the poor against the middle. And the agenda is always under control of the rich. (That's why no Blacks in leadership with the Democrats.)

[humint]

MEK speaker at work again?

F14 –My friend, I’ve never claimed to speak for the MEK nor am I persuaded by anyone’s politics without careful analysis. FR provides an outlet to express diverse views and I admit, the occasional “Amen!” I’ve received from my fellow freepers has felt good. I do not claim to represent those who agree with me or anyone other than myself at this point.

What I do hope to do with my posts is to be a part of the RESOLUTION we are all looking for. You are an important part of that resolution but I fear that you are more apt to label me than you are to consider my point. The “point” is to achieve a plausible and Free Iran, an Iran not likely to collapse at quarter century intervals.

Over the months F14 I’ve read your posts with enthusiasm and have witnessed growth in your character. Whatever has happened in your life, I know, through your writings that you are a better person than the hack that first complained at my original FR content. Yet you still tend towards labels and that is a frustrating behavior to say the least. All that I ask is that you recognize the importance of resistance against the empire the current Iranian government intends to create.

I disagree with monarchy at a fundamental level and this disagreement may be the determining factor in whether or not we can ever become allies. The name Pahlavi has no more significance than my own last name. Authority is derived from demonstrative ability, nothing more.

In my opinion, the root cause of Americans “warm” war with Iranians today is the exclusivity of Valeyat e-Faqhe. Valeyat e-Faqhe ignores me in that I know that someone, an Iranian like me, could never have the opportunity to become Supreme Leader of Iran. This discrepancy is the definition of a class system. Glass ceilings were created to be shattered. Awkwardly enough, there are similarities in the Valeyat e-Faqhe system to the historical record of Iranian monarchy.

I believe Americans arrived at this undesirable state of relations with Iranians through American official’s support for Iranian monarchy and then their abrupt retraction of that support. Both you, and proponents of Valeyat e Faqhe, have to face the reality that Americans operate at a political and social pace that is unmatched anywhere else in the world today. The ebb and flow of American political power represents the diversity of Americans and their freedom, not hegemony.

I freely admit, American influence, an undeniable force, has destabilized Iran, not because of differences between Iranians and Americans in my opinion, but because of similarities! At every stage of Iran’s long struggle for democracy I see similarities between Iranians and what defines Americans. Valeyat e-Faqhe is an aberration from the similarities I’ve witnessed, as is monarchism. It is, albeit imprecisely, the erratic fluctuations between these two politics that truly represent the Iranian people.

So I ask you, what do we do now? Is it not yet clear that the Iranian people are impervious to the force of the lies of monarchs and clerics? I say, “set them free from both!” Their latent greatness exists! Let Iranians define themselves! This is the only true path toward peace between Americans and Iranians. Americans have already accepted Iranians in all of their variations. Now it is time for the leaders of Iran to do the same. Where will you be, F14, when Iranians force Iranian leaders to decide to accept Iranians as Iranians and let them define themselves?

[F14 Pilot]

I wonder why you keep defending an Islamic/Marxist terroris cult which has no place among Iranians and the rest of the world?

You seem to have more faith in friends of Saddam

[speedy]

It is the very rich (through paid surrogates) and the poor against the middle.

Absolutely. Just like in times past, the king would draw support from those dependents at the bottom of the rung, while the ambitious ones in the middle were trying to enlarge the scope of freedom.

[nuconvert]

What I see on your blog (though I haven't read all your entries)is a load of whitewashing of MEK, mixed with anti-Shah propaganda.
The latter is acceptable from Iranians, as not all loved the Shah, though they'd certainly take him over what they've had the past 27 yrs. (Though the vitriol in the excerpts you choose to include is a bit over the top for even the people who aren't crazy about the Shah.)

Your whitewashing of the MEK, sticks out like a sore thumb.

Thanks for the link

[NY Attitude]

Prior to August 1978, the mood of the Iranian people was upbeat, friendly and eager to assist Americans. New Years (Iranian No Ruz) was always a delight. Signs of construction (Schools, hospitals and roads) were everywhere. Cities were being modernized and merchants flourished.

[denydenydeny]

It's simply a disgrace to compare the Pahlavis to the monsters running Iran currently.

[NY Attitude]

Her Majesty Farah Pahlavi responds to NY Times article There were many outside influences to get rid of the Shah. Money was provided by these outside sources to cripple the economy through labor strikes, transportation was almost nonexistent because of labor strikes and general restlessness among those that were unemployed by striking. Some country wanted a warm water port, one country was trying to bribe the Shah into something that wasn't exactly kosher and he the Shah balked. In August 1978, things started to turn against the Shah and his family. There nightly blackouts, riots, running gun battles between Pro Shah and pro Khomeini forces, and other acts of mayhem. The Shah had deployed is forces into the cities because guns were practically available on street corners and mercenaries from other countries were being seen on a daily basis.

[F14 Pilot]

http://www.farahpahlavi.org/greco.html

http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=12&d=12&a=5

[NY Dreamer]

my family lived in an american compound in esfahan, iran, for about a year. it was a warm, friendly country for part of the year and we loved being there. when the political/religious struggle intensified, we could see tank fire from our roof and there were iranian soldiers on the roofs of the perimeter houses. my son and i were evacuated during the holidays of 1978; my husband stayed behind. it was nerve wracking to know he was alone there and could be hurt. i used to watch the news every day and when the news showed the shah and his family leaving, i cried. i knew the iran we had known was no longer and that my son and i would not be going back. thankfully, my husband and the other americans who stayed behind arrived safely home. the middle east was stabilized by that iran's presence. i believe the undermining of the shah by jimmy carter was a political blunder that has had far reaching reprecussions. his domestic and foreign policies were ill advised. i am glad to see her majesty speak out. thank you for all your posts regarding iran.

[F14 Pilot]

I am glad to hear this as well!

Thnx