Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Jaffar_is_in_use

Do you prefer the current "Islamic Regime" or shah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Jaane Rabb said:

Take this for example: "In 2008, the Iranian Parliament voted to prohibit itself from monitoring organizations that the supreme leader controls, except with his permission". It sounds dubious.

Iran is not a monolithic entity where its centralized under one power. If you look at the Iran's constitution, only 5 articles apply to the Wali Fagih, 38 for presidency and 37 for parliament ( two groups that are dominated by the westernized liberals ). Wali Fagih, simply directs and guides on internal matter at this point, it's up to different aspects of the government to listen to him or not based on religious duty. 

Think of it this way, when ISIS invaded Iraq, and Ayatollah Sistani gave fatwa to fight them, what legal authority did he have other than religious obligation of his followers? People could have ignored his call. Now, in Iran we have authorities in power who ignore and do as they like. It's up to the people to remove them from power through listening the Wali Fagih and his guidance. 

In the last parliamentary election, the Wali Fagih called on the masses to not vote for those the west supports. The people did the exact opposite, and here we are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reason why people in Iran voted this way is because they fell for the 'hype' that the West is trying to spread in Iran and elsewhere. They show pictures and scenes that were created on a Hollywood set, not in real life. These people in Iran don't know what real life in the US or West is like. They only have this image in their mind. An image that is not connected to reality is hard to deal with because it is not 'evidence based' so giving them all the evidence in the world would not change this image. 

I think the best solution (although the US government would never allow it because it would destroy the 'myth', which is what they use and count on) would be to give everyone in Iran who wants it a visa to the US so they could come and live here. Then they would see the reality and most would realize that their life is actually better in Iran, despite all the current problems.

Also, for Iranians that have relatives in the US that come back to Iran, those relatives will share whatever details they can to make themselves look better. They are not sharing reality with you, they are only sharing those details that they choose to share. This is not reality. In order for you to know the reality, you would actually have to go to the place and see for yourself, which you probably don't have the opportunity to do, so it better to, as Imam Jaafar Sadiq((عليه السلام)) said, 'Follow what you know and leave what you don't know'. This includes leaving what you 'think you know' because someone has shared some highly bias and selected details with you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Revert1963 said:

It is not my impression that there is an "iron fist stance to any critique" against the system in Iran. When I was there people quite openly expressed criticism without fear of reprisals. Even at times when I was wearing a chador and came across as a "regime stooge."  It is not my impression that Iran is a dictatorship. I was surprised how much of the western media propaganda about Iran that is untrue.

My experience was different when I was there few years back. There was me, a couple of my family members and my relative who was living in Iran at the time. He (the relative) was giving us a tour of Bibi Masooma Qom's haram. When we got to the scholars section, this guy came and stood beside us. He was listening to my relatives speech (in English). He followed us for the rest of the tour and beyond the exit point. Then my relative spoke to him in Farsi and he walked away. Relative told me it was an agent making sure there were no anti-government speech.

 

14 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

What's your opinion on this below? Do you believe Khamenai is the most qualified for his role presently? Is it true that he cannot act as a marja for anyone inside Iran?

On 24 April 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini issued a decree convening an Assembly for Revising the Constitution. It made several changes in the constitution, in Articles 5, 107, 109, 111, eliminating the need for the Leader to be a marja or to be chosen by popular acclaim. It made permanent the Expediency Discernment Council to work out disagreements between the Parliament and Council of Guardians, and eliminated the post of Prime Minister. The amendments were thought to be established because no marja had given strong support for Khomeini's policies -[13] The amendments were approved by the voting public on 28 July 1989

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jaane Rabb said:

My experience was different when I was there few years back. There was me, a couple of my family members and my relative who was living in Iran at the time. He (the relative) was giving us a tour of Bibi Masooma Qom's haram. When we got to the scholars section, this guy came and stood beside us. He was listening to my relatives speech (in English). He followed us for the rest of the tour and beyond the exit point. Then my relative spoke to him in Farsi and he walked away. Relative told me it was an agent making sure there were no anti-government speech.

I think that would be a weird place to make an anti-government speech, but as far as I know the Iranian government keep an extra eye on people from United States and Britain. And I think with good reason. Those are the countries most likely to send spy's. 
I didn't experience anything like that. Of cause when I visited the Imam Khomeini shrine there was strict security that all visitors has to go through. I couldn't bring my camera and there was armed guards with visible weapons. However there is a real treat of terrorist attacks in such places, so I think these measures are necessary. The guy that spoke to your relative could potentially have been a security guard trying to make sure they wasn't checking out the location prior to a terrorist attack. Even if your relative is a person that would never do such a thing, security personnel has to check these things. That would be exactly the same thing I western countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rah, this is madness. This was posted a year ago and people are coming back to it.

don’t really have anything to say. But since Im into cars, The Shah of Iran, Owned a Bugatti 57C (Fastest car of its time and costs nearly $40m today), custom made for himself. And a Lamborghini Miura Sv. Which are both insane cars, but both of these cars were basically never driven as the Shah of Iran himself has said the roads were not good enough in Iran to drive these. Especially since the Bugatti 57c has a top speed of nearly 130mph with a supercharged engine nearly 80yrs ago !! Either way some awesome cars. Doubt anyone cares, but yh just in case you wanted to know

Also Ive lived in Iran for a couple of years myself for those saying I aint lived there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jaane Rabb said:

My experience was different when I was there few years back. There was me, a couple of my family members and my relative who was living in Iran at the time. He (the relative) was giving us a tour of Bibi Masooma Qom's haram. When we got to the scholars section, this guy came and stood beside us. He

Salam your experience is unique but real security persons don’t expose themselves so easy as you said ,it maybe he was a low ranking security person from shrine that  became curious of your English speaking because,English or other foreigner language speakers usually don’t visit shrines & it’s rare that a foreigner speaker comes for Ziarat because most of them are Christians & they avoid from religious city but in recent years ratio their visit is increasing that sometimes make people there curious about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jaane Rabb said:

What's your opinion on this below? Do you believe Khamenai is the most qualified for his role presently?

One outcome of the revolution was that it brought Islam to the forefront of social events, and with it, fitnas, conspiracies and evolving social crisis. Unlike in the past, this has given up a new metric to measure the basirat (spiritual awareness, separating truth from falshood) of the religious leaders and marajs. A scholar or marja can be the highest rank in figh and Islamic knowledge, but when it applying their knowledge and knowing whats true and whats false, they can be a lower than an average person. Basirat, is what matters when it comes to leadership and its the output of years of training scholars receive. It is what's expected from a marja as a leader of Shia.

The revolution and the ensuing fitna's exposed alot of the marja's and scholars as just been educated in figh and not much beyond that. Imam Khomeini saw through that, and hence dismissed most maraj's as unfit for leadership. A good example is Ayatollah Montazeri (who was thought to succeed Imam Khomeini). This is also why, in decades leading up to the revolution, extensive effort was made to train new era of scholars for that very purpose. Imam Khamenei was the outcome of that.

In the last 40 years of the revolution, with ever increasing complexity of the fitna's occurring, there hasn't been any scholar who has demonstrated basirat even close to the level of Wali Fagih. Knowing what to say, when to say, how to act, when to act and when not to act is all part of it. 

 

13 hours ago, Jaane Rabb said:

Is it true that he cannot act as a marja for anyone inside Iran?

As far as I know, thats no the case anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2019 at 11:36 PM, Revert1963 said:

Burlesque theaters and drink alcohol in public!

Yes! Just alcohol-minded people would prefer a weak, backward and dependent regime run by a dictator, tosarikhor puppet and corrupt person who doesn't care for people and their opinions over an advanced, independent, progressive, powerful establishment led by a divine, sophisticated, pious person who cares for everything needed to be cared about.

Can we even compare these two?!

Edited by kamyar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Klanky said:

That was a very interesting article. 

Because I don't speak Farsi, obviously I was not aware of many of those channels. Since I was born and raised in Los Angeles, and in the community there, obviously I was aware of those channels but never actually watched them (the language issue). 

The Iranian brothers and sisters who are aware and awake (spiritually) realize that those channels are nothing but pre-packaged, sliced up propaganda in the form of 'entertainment'. But since a large number of Iranian brothers and sisters are not awake, spiritually, and since The U.S., in particular is very effective and efficient in creating this sort of propaganda (it's their specialty and the main way they influence global politics) hence the effects of this on the Iranian community, both inside and outside Iran is very large. 

None of this propaganda is that effective by itself, but it is created in such variety, and in such large amounts, that it is really hard to ignore, even for the 'religious' people. The other side is that those brothers and sisters who are 'religious' or I like to say who are spiritually awake and in touch with their inner nature have no interest in doing or creating media and these types of things and see it as either corrupt or superfluous. Like was stated in the article, the only sort of media that is created on the other side, is dry and boring. This has to change as the media is now the main battlefront in the war between Haqq and Batil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an outsider, I can only offer my general impressions on this

I don't see anything wrong with the structure, or design of the Iranian government/state. Some westerners might object to the theocratic elements, but if this is what the Iranian people want, they should have it. We do hear about "human rights abuses" and other problems, but how much of this is propaganda vs. reality is difficult to say.

When I lived in Germany when I was younger, I went to a boarding school that had some Iranian students. They had fled the revolution and were very pro-Shah. They frequently claimed that the US engineered the overthrow of the Shah because Iran was becoming too powerful, and was beginning to look like a western super-power in the Middle-East. 

There is probably some truth to this

But the Shah was heavy-handed and at times brutal, that much we know 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Silas said:

There is probably some truth to this

But the Shah was heavy-handed and at times brutal, that much we know 

One of major things that America didn’t stand with Shah was that he somehow was criticizing Israel at his end years & they were thinking if they do nothing & remain neutral during revolution next regime will be very week & even can’t criticizes Israel but they made a great mistake because America was thinking a religious leader like as Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) can’t form a strong regime against Israel that in recent years anti regime groups promoted this Idead that Imam (رضي الله عنه) made a deal with CIA to overthrown the Shah but it was in reality some people around Imam (رضي الله عنه) had talks with some CIAagents but after revolution & taking hostage from  the American  embassy their plans foiled 

1 hour ago, Abu Hadi said:

None of this propaganda is that effective by itself, but it is created in such variety, and in such large amounts, that it is really hard to ignore, even for the 'religious' people. The other side is that those brothers and sisters who are 'religious' or I like to say who are spiritually awake and in touch wit

Salam nowadays in addition to ‘Manoto’ they added a new channel in name of ‘ Iran international ‘ that produces professional content & news by Saudi petrodollar that intensifies pressure as source of news that many that don’t watch ‘ Manoto’ watch it as source of news (fake news) & trust to it for source of their information althought this channel supported Ahvaz terrorist but still is more popular than “Manoto’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The revolution is in its infancy. 40 years is nothing compared to centuries of monarchy, colonial projects, soft war campaigns, feudalism, capitalism, and every deviant spiritual or material movement under the sun, and which all still exist today.

All things considered, the progress thus far has been quite impressive. With that said, all revolutions live by its resilience or die by its complacency or spiritual bankruptcy. The latter happened to the Marxist movements in the 20th century. Does anybody have reason to believe the Islamic movement would follow a similar path? I haven’t heard anything beyond wishful conjecture from ill wishers, but I’m open to reasoned arguments.

Any non-Iranian (or non-Muslim) who is sincere can figure this out. The fact that there are Iranians who don’t is proof of the strength of propaganda or the failures of the education system.

Finally, making progress and getting credit for making progress do not always align. Most good in the world is never given a thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ejaz said:

How come so many Iranians I meet in the west are opposed to the “mullahs” & so many are westernised?

Most countries that have significant revolutions tend to have its most ardent opponents (usually of wealthier, liberal type) leave and settle in Western nations. So the Iranians in the West tend to be skewed this way. The same thing for Cubans and Venezuelans. 

Countries with revolutions tend to release their wealthy, while those that haven’t tend to release their poor. Any exceptions to this?

Go to New York, Toronto, or any major Western city and you’ll see some diaspora communities with affection for Shah era flags. I even saw a rally of Vietnamese using the old South Vietnam flag from decades ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ejaz said:

How come so many Iranians I meet in the west are opposed to the “mullahs” & so many are westernised?

Theres a reason they are in the west to begin with.

Its like saying: How come I see so many people in a resturant and they are all hungry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...