AP Interview: Shah's son wants UN probe in Iran

Yahoo/AP ^

[nuconvert]

PARIS – The son of the deposed shah of Iran urged nations worldwide on Thursday to withdraw their ambassadors from Tehran to protest a relentless government crackdown on opposition demonstrators that resulted in at least eight deaths this week alone.

[pnh102]

The son of the Shah is only fooling himself if he thinks the UN will do anything of substance.

My guess is they will just blame Israel.

[mainepatsfan]

My guess is they will just blame Israel.

It's what they do best.

[Vaquero]

Jimmah ‘Malaise Forever’ Carter....deposed the legal head of Iran...in a frenzy of anti Americanism which also lost us the Panama Canal and caused our Iranian delegation to spend 444 days in stir. Not to mention stagflation and lines at the gas pumps...

time to restore the Pahlavi Dynasty to Iran.....

[MissDairyGoodnessVT]

he’s been sitting on his assk for 25-30 odd years and he has to go the UN??
has Pahlavi learned anything?

[fatnotlazy]

The Shah’s son has a stake in this rebellion since he presumably wants to take over the country...restore control to himself and his family. His father was a ruthless dictator, and if he did come to power, the country would be just as bad off, if not worse, than before.

However, I wish him luck with the United Nations. I’m sure they will send the current regime a strongly worded letter on his behalf.

[MissDairyGoodnessVT]

Have you read his Mission Statement on his website?

[mkjessup]

The Shah’s son has a stake in this rebellion since he presumably wants to take over the country...restore control to himself and his family. His father was a ruthless dictator, and if he did come to power, the country would be just as bad off, if not worse, than before.

What parallel universe did YOU come from?

The Shah WAS an authoritarian ruler, that is true however under the Shah, Iran was a force for stability in the Middle East, had no hostile intentions against Israel (in fact, Iran was Israel's best trading partner when it came to oil and other commodities), and Iran was a trusted ally and friend, not to mention that Iran was a secular (if Islamic) society in which women were considered equal to men, and not chattel or property to be hidden behind veils and burqas.

To suggest that the rule of the Shah was worse than the mullahs and their thugs clearly demonstrates that you are NOT in touch with reality. The Assahollah and his successors make the Shah look like the greatest humanitarian the world has ever seen.

Give your head a shake fer gawdsakes.

[fatnotlazy]

I don’t support dictators in any form.

[nuconvert]

Thank you for your post.
Fortunately, the ignorant and ill-informed on this subject are fewer than several yrs ago.

[mkjessup]

I don’t support dictators in any form.

If you can't see the difference between Iranian society as it existed prior to the stabbing in the back of the Shah by Jimmy Carter, and the degradation and de-evolution of that society back to the 9th century by the Assahollah and his thugs, you should think about sticking with coloring books and learning not to let the cat cover you up in the sandbox.

[fatnotlazy]

You and I disagree...that’s fine, but you don’t have to be nasty about it.

Chill, man!

[mkjessup]

Thank you for your post.

You're welcome. I knew more than a few Iranian military officers who were trained here in the United States during the Shah's rule, and to the best of my knowledge they all ended up being murdered when Khomeini solidified his grip on power. I've been waiting 30 years to see some payback.

Fortunately, the ignorant and ill-informed on this subject are fewer than several yrs ago.

That's probably Darwin at work, and he's still on the job.

Happy New Year to you FRiend.

[mkjessup]

Chill, man!

Tell those Iranians dying in the streets to chill. There isn't a one of them who wouldn't trade the last 30 years for a return to power of the Shah's family.

It's easy to pronounce that you don't support any dictators but put yourself in the shoes of those Iranians who have been oppressed by the mullahs for over 3 decades, as compared to the relatively free society they lived in during the Shah's rule.

That's right, I said "relatively free society". And it was.

[Yardstick]

The Shah was hard on communists and Islamic radicals, both of whom where trying to undermine his government (and ultimately succeeded). For everyone else, life was good. Under the Shah, Iran had an open, westernized culture.

[fatnotlazy]

Relatively free? Maybe marginally, but not truly free.

If you’re going to replace the mullahs, don’t replace them with another dictator. That is NOT an improvement. Put in power a free and democratic republic, something like what the US used to be.

[mkjessup]

The Shah’s son has stated that he is seeking not the establishment of another ruling monarchy, but to serve as essentially a figurehead, no different than Queen Elizabeth II of England, and he supports democracy for Iran.

After seeing how everything ended for his father, that is the wisest decision he could make.

As for Iranian society not being ‘truly free’, riddle me this Batman: was Iranian society more free or less free before the Ayatollah Khomeini came prancing back to Iran?

[mkjessup]

The Shah was hard on communists and Islamic radicals, both of whom where trying to undermine his government (and ultimately succeeded). For everyone else, life was good. Under the Shah, Iran had an open, westernized culture.

**** BUMP ****

Ditto and well said!

[nuconvert]

Happy New Year to you!

[Yardstick]

Hey, I'm just backing you up. Dittos to what you said.