Iranology: Iran 101 - Iran 110 (Courses on Real Iranian Culture!)
by Admzad
Part One
Part Two

Iranology
Part Two

Iran106- Khaa*eh Maali
Iran107- sex
Iran108- din, religion
Iran109- future of KIR
Iran110- tall poppy syndrome

Iran106- Khaa*eh Maali

IRAN 106 - Khaa*eh Maali , Chaaplusi , Bu

1- Another feature of Iranian culture IMO is Axx-kissing or Khaa*eh Maali(KM) or
chaaplusi. Of course this is Global & very common in the west too. In fact many
say you can't get far into management without it. But in Iran it has a different
flavor which is somehow different. Eg. The ones that I've seen in the west
don't usually turn back & sneer & call the guy names: jerk or bisharaf.

When I did my Sarbaazi/Military-service 30 years ago, there was this
little guy who was a real Baazaari. He constantly talked about money, his money
making deals & Mahhassti & Haayedeh. He always sang many of their songs, but
did his prayers & Fasted in Moharram. He didn't just sing, he did Eshveh/Qamzeh
with the eyes & the eyebrows & biting his lips: the works/LOT & going all the way!

He was put in a good position with paartibaazi, which he always bragged about.
So not only you cheat & Paartibaazi, but you show it off to others to make yourself
'superior' (Patriarchy complex?! Another Feature?).

He was extremely good in the art of KM, always jumping for the jennaab-sarhang
or the sargruhbaan. But in private he would sneer at them & joke about them.
Come to think of it he was always Sneering at everybody & bragging. Always trying
to find Haamiyaan: "you stick with me & I look after you", "I got connections"
(Godfather complex?! Another Feature?)

In the first 3 months of the service, when they tried to Break you, people
(Javaanaaneh Iruni) did 'everything' to get favors from the Sargruhbaan
(who also were doing their forced service) & to become Mobser (deputy)!
The Mobsers would walk around as if they owned the place & looked down at
others. And of course others would do KM for the Mobser & the Sargruhbaan &
the jenaab Sarvaan!

I've given some examples of KM in Sarbaazi, but I hope nobody blames Shah for this.
I'm sure it must be everywhere, otherwise there wouldn't be a word for it.
My points were not about Artesh/Army, but Iranian culture.

I remember many times people doing panbeh zir baqal & calling the paasebun
'jenaab sarvaan' & sneer & call them names after they left.

The other place I've sensed this KM or Chaaplusi is when people write
against somebody else's article to prove them wrong & themselves right or
superior.

So they read an article & decide it is rubbish, so write an article to
beat the enemy. They start with God's name & then Kh*-maali that I'm
just a rustaa'iyeh bisavaad & u r my ostaad & then gradually get to
the point that I think what u said is full of sh-t. This is done very
politely but it's like a game of chaaplusi, but it ends up stabbing the
the 'enemy' in the back with a traditional-knife & teaching him a lesson
& feeling triumphant. And of course to push the knife to the heart, they
use a few old & sho'aari poems from powerful poets that nobody could
say anything bad about, as if saying "there, take this! Check mate!".

I see some kind of bitchiness in it, some form of admirable "peder sukhtegi"
which was associated with many Esfahaani jokes: Be ware, don't mess with me,
I'm too kalak/zebel!

Too much emphasis on cosmetics & status & 'face'/aaberu/Qeyrat & laqab:
jenaabeh hazrateh aagaayeh doktor blah blah blah, which I think was far worst
in the old days.

Why all this beating around the bush?
Is it like showing off one's weapons?
Why not go right to the point?
Why all this pretense for being small/kuchak & then proving yourself
Superior at he end?
Domination is the name of the game, but at the same time they pretend
to be kuchak & humble?!

2- An Iranian friend returned from a visit to Iran & told me it was strange:
everywhere he went they knew he was from 'khaarej' & would ask him
"aaqaa shomaa khaarej zendegi mikonid?". So he asked them how they Could tell
& was told:
- Avvalan shomaa badanetun bu nemideh
- saaniyan shomaa mo'addab hastid (they meeant that he wouldn't shout or jump the
line/queue)

Years ago I went to an Azerbayjani music concert & ended up sitting next
To an Haji from turkey who had a very bad body odor. I discretely held
a tissue in front of my nose for more than 1.5 hours. He talked to me
& made things worst coz I could smell garlic too. I thought about the past
going to dahaats & thinking this must be like catching a crowded bus in
many small towns in Iran.

Actually I've experienced BO in the west too. Some French People don't
take showers in summer that often. Years a ago, one of the cleaners in
the office had such a bad BO, that some people left the toilet when he
came in. I used to feel sorry for his kids. An Indian friend, living in
west for 10 years, once told me how unhappy he was about BO being a
feature of India too.

I can understand it in Iran, where many don't have bath/shower at home,
but the French?! A British friend once told me "that's y they invented
strong perfumes"! So I don't think Iran has a monopoly on this.

Speaking of perfumes, my grand mother used to be crazy about strong,
I mean Xs-trong folks(!), cheap perfumes that u could buy in small towns
in small bottles & put some on her jaa namaaz (? Not sure about the name,
the cloth that u wrapped tasbih & mohr in). She also kept rose petals
in it, which she called goleh mohammadi, which she also made golaab from.

U could smell the guy who sold the stuff from 10 meters away! Most of his
customers were little old ladies & some old haajaaqaa.

Every time I bought her some, coz she had asked me to, she would smell it & say
bah bah & put some on & whisper salavaat quietly.

Gush, Iranian culture, like many other cultures, has a few stains in it, but
it's a GOLD mine too.

Anybody remember the old Dehkhodaa (I think?), who
had a show on the radio talking about traditions
& customs? What happened to all his works/research?

Back to top

Iran107- sex

IRAN 107 - SEX

1- Boys learned that sex was filthy & associated it with insult. I remember seeing
extremely filthy & imaginative Fohsh as graffiti in school toilets. Some boys
used to use extremely Filthy Fohsh. The filthier, the more laat & Macho they
thought they looked. All about sex organs doing insult to you & the females
in your family. Some would even duel with Fohsh.

They also learned to kiss-&-tell coz they didn't learn to form relationship with
girls. They often used the word for female genital to refer to beautiful
girls: ajab k*iyeh! Many slept with prostitutes, even when they were in their
30's & still single. Many did this even after they got married(this is very
common in the west too).

When they got married they turned their wives into a sacred fortress:
u don't go out, u don't talk to other men, u don't laugh in public.
Could a major factor for this be that they know how filthy other men
would be looking at their wives?

I don't remember seeing men going for walks with their wives in
small towns. Wife stayed home, while the king went out to do manly things
& do business to make money. Man was called aaqaa & woman was called
khaanum & before u it they were haajaaqa & haaj khaanum.

2- Early (years 10-xx) Muslim men raped any girls/women they fancied. So they
had to draw a line & mark their own women as off limit. Is this why Muslim
women have to have Islamic cover/hejaab & stay away from other men?

3- I remember hearing a lot about Hoseyn tuti in primary school. He was supposed to
be a bacheh baaz. Laat kids used to use him to scare others or mock them: Yeh I
saw u with Hoseyn tuti, hoseyn tuti was looking for u, etc.
What a culture !?

4- In Grade 7-8, the teacher who taught Arabic was a child molester
Bacheh baaz. I know, I know Iranians are too sharif, but we did
have one! I'm very grateful/lucky that he didn't get me, but he got
one of my friends. It was late in summer & I met my friend on the
street & he looked very sad. He told me that he had tajdidi in Arabic
& didn't pass & that the teacher had asked him to go to his house if
he wanted to pass. My friend was much older than me, so he must have
failed couple of years of school BEFORE 9'th grade! God knows how many
times I think about him, which used to fill me with savage ANGER!
Now I still get angry, but I think maybe he too was a victim in his
own childhood & this makes me SAD!

5- There was a hiq school next to American school in Tehran(Zhaaleh).
At close time, many kids would run out shouting & yelling.
I remember many of the young boys used to go & hang around the cars
so that they could watch the American girls getting into the cars
with their short skirts. Their body language was very loud.
Then they would leave & talk to teach other excitedly & exaggerate
"taa tosham didam!"

6- One of my male cousins was overweight (chaaq with Iranian std). His
breasts were big for a young boy, coz he was just overweight. Too many
times I saw a line formed on the beach in the north by young shomaali boys
just staring & pointing fingers & laughing hysterically. My poor cousin
often covered his breasts With his hands. It used to make me angry. Come
to think of it laughing at 'others' was a favorite pastime for many shomaali
people (specially the uneducated ones). Is this a feature in Iran? U must
fit the norm, or u'd be laughed at (& if u persist & u r too different, u'd
be beaten up(kotak) to teach u a lesson!).

7- I remember many young boys from small towns talking about maadiyun (mare) &
bragging about having sex with them & good it was. Their whole face would light
up when they talked about this & carried on & on. This I found absolutely
shocking, being a big-city boy & having had a sheltered life.

Considering that many books have been written by some of the major olamaayeh
dini about this subject, describing when & how it is OK to do it, this must
be an important source of 'entertainment' in small towns/villages.

8- In the first 3 months of my sarbaazi in Tehran, there was a small guy who looked
very young. He was very childish. Soon couple of bullies started showing special
attention to him & joke with him. I knew one of the bullies who looked at the
poor kid as it was customary to look at sexy girls in those days (hungry wolf
looking at the young lamb?). There were 100 of us sleeping in one part of the
khaabgaah. The kid always hang around one of the mobsers, or was it the mobser
who hang around the kid. This used to really piss me off. I did not spend any
time with the kid so I can't tell if he was gay or not.

9- In the second 3 months of Sarbaazi, I moved to an small town. Here a few of the
local boys started feeling superior/arrogant & went around bullying others. I was
very sad & withdrawn at that time & before u know it the head bully started picking
on me & joking with me. Before u know it he was calling me khoshgeleh. One of the
local guys, by the name of Sahloddin noticed this & was very sympathetic. He was
a very honest, kind & devout Muslim (hard as it may seem these days, but such people
did exist, but they were in minority IMO). He told me how bad things could get in
small towns with big bullies ruling & doing anything(he had sex in mind) they could
get away with). Finally I thought enough was enough & started talking to the big
bully, but he wasn't a talking man. So I had to have a fight with him in front of
everybody to prove that I was not weak. I was called into jenaab sarvaan's office,
who was a reasonable man & I told him what happened. The bully stayed away from me
after that, but the sarguruhbaan complained to me that "y didn't u come to me?".

10- I did some work in an office once in Iran. I remember hearing all about female
genitals & what the old guys in the office did to them in their younger days.
With the kolfat, with dokhtar dahaati, etc. But they never ever mentioned their
wives. Come moharram, they would fast & become spiritual & holy!

11- A female friend once cried for me coz her X-boyfriend, who slept with her for
years, had dumped her saying he would never marry a non-virgin. They were both
UNI students too.

12- Once somebody told me about how he had sex with this girl who was in love with him.
Then he forced her to have sex with his friends too. He had to beat her up to force
her, coz she didn't want to do it. He seemed proud of himself telling me all this.

One woman recently wrote a letter to Iranian.com saying she was raped at 2 (IIRC)!

13- God knows how many kolfats were raped by pesar-arbaab. I have personally heard
from people who said, in their sarbaazi (sepaahi) days, they used to chase after
dokhtar dehaati & grab them & have sex with them (the unnatural way coz they had
a heart).

14- Once a married Iranian man in his 40's told me about having embarrassing dreams
about young boys!

15- Years ago, Fereydun Farrokhzaad had a concert, where one of the Sharif men
angosht kard to FF & said something rakik. A friend, who knew FF, told me he went
to see FF back stage & found him crying his eyes out saying "amaan az in mardom".
He must have been proud to be singing to his dear ham mihanaan in qorbat up to
that moment?

16- And of course that abar mardeh va shaa'ere por gohar, whose name I forgot, who is
very popular when the time is right, who has a book of poetry like:
"gar khoshgelaki maraa begaa*ad , az Kar*n u maraa khosh aayad"

17- Many Iranian men marry after they are 38, when the ambition is the same as before,
but NOT the ability. When, finally, the brain at the top, if any(!), starts to run
the body & soul. But many marry very young girls under 22, so when they are 50 the
wife could be 30. This could lead to a lot of problems even in Iran.

I know a few cases in Khaarej where, the family pressures being less than Iran,
the woman was lead to finding young lovers in secret. It could lead to Dishonesty,
guilt, depression & regret/hasrat. Many could end up taking refuge in religion:
taarekeh donyaa. It can often lead to many young widows wearing black for the rest
of their lives.

It could be very hard on the man too & it could lead to anger, depression &
addiction to drugs/alcohol. Wife cheating on the husband could be devastating for
an Iranian man: it would break their back.

Last but not least, IMO this makes it very hard for a real partnership of minds &
close friendship.

18- Once I found out that one of my male friends was gay. This really shocked me
& I tried to encourage him to find a girlfriend, but it was too late. He was
very sensitive & emotional. He was raised by his mother & had no brothers or
sisters. I remember one or 2 evaa khaahar in small towns, who used to talk
& laugh all the times & were often laughed at.

I know 2 guys who went to mixed sex school (yes if u were rich enough, u
could do it) and turned out Gay. One used to tell dirty jokes in parties
& dance in very girly/female way.

The word for 'gay' was not 'happy/cheerful', but often used for insult.

19- There was a Haaji in a small town who had a small shop selling porcelain
dishes. He was about 50 & had 2 wives. Many of his customers were women
buying dishes for new brides to be. He never looked at the women when
talking to them & looked at the ground instead. He had a reputation for
being a lady's man & was once caught in a public women bath with a young
woman.

20- I remember many Laat men, in the shops or outside, who used to watch women
all day & say filthy matalak to them. They were often the leaders in the
sineh zani or dasteh in Ashuraa.

21- Many young boys used to do 'dare' & finger school girls on streets & run away.
The boys would then join their friends, laugh hysterically & brag about it.
The girls used to swear at them "gom sho khaak bar sareh hammaal". Then the
girls, who always walked in groups, would talk & giggle among each other.

22- Some of the older boys were into eshq & would often have a flower to give
to the girl, they had their eyes on, around the corner from the girl school.
They didn't have good grades & often sang songs by Gugush/Dariyush. They
paid a lot of attention to their hair cut & their clothes. Many boys used
to hang around Girl schools for dokhtar baazi.

23- Once in my childhood I was picked on by a bully kid in an small town. He
used the most filthy Fohsh & wanted to fight with me (a big city boy).
I got scared & went to my Dad crying. My dad had a talk with the father of
that kid.

24- In my childhood, many times me & my male cousins got special/dirty looks from
Laat men on streets. Come to think of it, I feel sorry for the girls growing
up in Iran being the target of so much insult/filth & dirty looks.

25- All the jokes about Qazvin!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a very fascinating window into the Goh culture of Miran:

http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2004/December/omar.html

Once u get over it being 'funny', try to THINK deeper into
what this represents.

Those who know about Miranian laat-baazi know exactly where
this is coming from.

It could be said that this is making fun of rozeh-khuni,
but 1 can learn a lot from this, like:

1- Lack of respect for their own religion, when the mood is right.
(same people who would do sineh-zani would drink & get drunk &
do absolutely any 'sin' imaginable)

All the laat gang members in Tehran used to be at the head of the
rozeh-khuni.

2- Total Lack of respect for women!

3- Women are there for men to have SEX with, in the most disrespectful
& insulting way imaginable.

4- Miranian men are supposed to be F*ing machines to F* anything that
moves or doesn't.

5- The bigger the dick, the better the man!

6- F*ing is the absolute way to insult & dominate others.

7- There is NO ROOM for women among men in Miran. Women r either
whores to be gang-raped in the most insulting way, or be hidden in
the back room to clean up after kids.

How else would u explain such rude/savage-insulting behavior among
men when they have fun?

Can u imagine such songs being done in a 'family party'?
Or among men who have their wives & girl friends in the party?

I can't.
Such things could happen only in bachelor drinking parties.

8- Real men r laat & bokon.
The best compliment to a real man is to call him khar-kon!

9- What kind of culture would regard 'mothers' as whores to be
insulted in the most filthy ways?

I could go on & on, but am not in the mood for it now ...

U may also want to read this:

http://www.iranian.com/Anyway/2005/January/maha2.html

I haven't read all of it, but it has some interesting points in it.

Is it any wonder that holy-clergy-men often tend to do K*Keshy by
legalizing Siqeh?

OK, even in the west u can find many filthy priests, but the SHIiT
Islam has been far worst in this regard.

Not only the SHIiT mullahs gave rise to prostitution, but they
actually made money out of it. They've also been extremely filthy
in their attitude & dealing with women, young girls, young boys &
even animals. In fact this is a feature of the culture, but holy
men r supposed to guide men to the right path, no? Not only they
failed, but r responsible for complete removal of any form of LOGIC
from the Goh culture of Miran.

Can such pee-pole have the-mock-rat-see over night?
No F*ing chance!

What the KKOL78 were thinking of?

v can't blame the old regime for this filth, coz not only it didn't
go away after 25 years of the holy KIR regime run by the most holy of
holies, it is now far worst than ever!

Back to top

Iran108- din, religion

IRAN 108 - Din, Religion

Kudakaaneh aziz qesseyeh emruzeh maa din ast.

Yeki bud hich kas nabud qeyr az Khodaa !

After 4000 years of sending many prophets to so many nations in so many languages, God
thought that he had made a mistake & that people were confused as to what religion they
should worship him with.

So he sent the last one, Mohammad, to clear things out. First he told M to be nice to
people of other religions, but after 10 years he got angry & told M to 'kill them all',
the very same people who had obeyed him by following his previous prophets!

This anger came from knowing subconsciously that it was a mistake to kill his previous
'children' who believed in him, but there was no choice & he had to be tough.

But God didn't say in Quran who should take over from M, or maybe he wasn't sure yet.
Also God realized that telling M to kill & rape all the non-Muslims was a mistake. So
he 'pushed' some Iranians to follow Ali & his sons one after each other & so Shi'eh
Islam was created. He tried telling these Imams to teach Muslims to be kinder to
non-Muslims if they behaved properly (no need to rape & kill all the times).

But this having all-knowing all-powerful Imams couldn't go on forever,
coz what's the point of M being the last prophet, if all these Imams would
come after him? So he decided to have Imam Zaman to be the last Imam & a messiah.
Messiah was used by him before, but God couldn't go & change Quran coz M was in heaven.

After all this, God became tired & took a nap. He woke up to find out that Shi'eh
had not taken over the whole world. God realized that it was taking too long, so he
looked for an action man who was full of hate & voila he found Khomeini. He wanted a
huge-jump-forward by being 'backward' to speed up the coming of Imam Zaman (see
Naapahlavi for Y this is forward). So he came up with KIR (Khomeini's Islamic Regime).

After a while Khomeini became so powerful that many worshiped him & turned him into
a Saint Imam. So he had to be sent to heaven.

But God realized that this KIR was another big mistake:
-Religion & politics don't mix
-People will get tired of hate & killing
-Educated westerners won't follow KIR
-KIR did too much damage & turned off manyy Iranians from Islam
-KIR can't be the ruling party (Governmentt) for long, coz Imam Zaman will come when
the ruler is corrupt, but the Government-of-God can't be corrupt, so KIR can't be on
top for long!

But Iranians are so divided that they can NOT unite to get rid of KIR. And even if
KIR is removed, Shi'eh is gona go underground saying that 'nazaashtand', blaming
the British paying the corrupt Akhunds to ruin KIR/Islam. They r gona bring up their
kids with hate & teach them to be suicide-bombers to sabotage & kill whoever comes
to replace KIR for ever to keep the fire of Islam burning forever!

But God's biggest mistake was that he rushed things! If he had taken the time to
look into future, as an all-mighty all-knowing God could, he'd have seen that
eventually some damned Scientists would find out that:

-the earth isn't flat

-Sun doesn't rotate around earth

-Earth was created 4000 Million years ago,, not 4000 years ago

-Dinosaurs & many other animals were creatted way before man was created

- "I cannot persuade myself that a beneficcent and omnipotent God would have
designedly created parasitic wasps with the express intention of their
feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars."

- "I do not think it is necessary to belieeve that the same God who has
given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon
their use, giving us by some other means the information that we
could gain through them."

- "Is man one of God's blunders? Or is Godd one of man's blunders?"

- "The most ridiculous concept ever perpettrated by H.Sapiens is
that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of the
Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of his creations, that
he can be persuaded by their prayers, and becomes petulant
if he does not receive this flattery."

- "Fix reason firmly in her seat, and calll to her tribunal every fact,
every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God;
because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of
reason, than that of blindfolded fear".

- "Scientific views end in awe and mysteryy, lost at the edge in uncertainty,
but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it is
all arranged as a stage for God to watch man's struggle for good and evil
seems inadequate."

- "[I believe in] more of a pantheistic good--a sense of wonder and mystery about
the universe--certainly not a meddling God who lets millions die of starvation
around the world, but moves my lost keys to the desk after I pray."

Also, people would find it strange that Quran doesn't mention a Messiah (Imam Zaman),
coz such a major feature of a any religion must be in the holy book!

God must have known that Communication/information is the KEY. So I don't understand
Y God didn't give a monitor/TV to each nation from day one to broadcast the book-of-God
(the N-commandments) in the original language that Adam/Eve spoke) & give a copy of
this book (written on metal pages to last for centuries) to each nation.

This would have saved so much trouble:
-Hundreds of different religions would nott have been invented, each causing
so much killing & blood shed
-Hundreds of different languages would nott have been invented & people all
over the world, speaking the same language, would have understood each other
better & wouldn't have gone to wars all the times to kill each other.
-No need for God to send so many Prophets to so many nations
-No need for some Prophets killing people of the previous Prophets

But this is not for us to question bachehaayeh aziz, coz GOD moves in mysterious ways!

Baalaa raftim aab bud,
paa'in umadim maast bud,
qesseyeh maa raast bud.

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?"
Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

=====================================================

The other things I don't understand are the issue of Language, race & Incest.

1- God spoke to Aadam & Havvaa, so they must've had a language, which must've been
the Original language or God's Language (GL1), and it must've been perfect, being
God's language. So their Children & grand children must've spoken GL1 for many
generations. But then Y are there hundreds of different languages today? I can
understand a few words being changed & new accents developed over time, but Y would
people let go of a perfect language & go invent so many languages from scratch?!!
And by doing this cause so many problems/wars due to language barriers &
miscommunication. Another mistake?

And to make things worst, God ended up sending so many Prophets to different nations,
all speaking different languages & causing so much confusions & Wars & bloodshed.

2- Y are there so many different types/Races of humans(black, white, red, yellow, short,
tall, round eye, almond eye, …)? I mean Adam & Eve must've been perfect in every details,
being created by God. So I can understand that over time, some could be more tanned than
others, but Y some should end up having dark black skins with totally different features
(Eyes, nose, hair, …)? Surely, this must've been caused by God, but then Y change something
that was perfect?

But how did this happen? God tried to experiment & a baby was born with dark-black skin from
white parents? Didn't this shock the hell out of them?

Also, Y should some animals have hundreds of totally different species? For example, Y should
there be hundreds of different types of frogs? Surely they were not created all at the same
time with Adam & Eve? I mean Noah could've never built a boat big enough to fit a pair of all
these species. Besides, all these species don't exist in the same place, so does this mean that
the big flood didn't happen in Australia/America? But then again all the land mass used to be
in one big chunk, but that was millions of years ago & not 4000 years ago at the time of Adam/Eve!

Surely God wouldn't allow 'evolution' to mess up his 'creation'! But then Y is it so then?

3- Almost all religions forbid sex between bothers & sisters, fathers & daughters, and mothers
& sons. But this is what must have happened, coz humans were created from Adam & Eve.
It has also been proven by science that incest is wrong & results in birth defects. Then Y
didn't God create 2 or more pairs of humans & forbid them to have incest from day one, rather
than forcing them to do it & then telling them later that it is a Sin?

=====================================================

On the issue of SEX in Heaven:

1- How come GOD would not offer sex as an incentive in his previous religions, preached by
his previous Prophets whom are also regarded as Prophets in Islam? I mean how come Jewish &
Christians men don’t get young virgins in heaven, but Muslims do?

2- Where do these young virgins come from?
a- Does God create them from nothing again, or he has to grab a rib/part from every man?
b- Are they the young virgins who died & now have gone to heaven?
c- If b, this is not fair, coz in heaven nobody is supposed to do any work, no? U just have to lie
down want/wish things & u’d get them.
d- Are they the dead old women who now appear as young virgins, like they used to be?
e- If d, do they still have all their memories? If so, then they r not real innocent ‘Virgins’, r they?
f- If d, this is not fair (see c above).
g- if d, then there is something for women: they all turn into Virgin sex-slaves for other men!
But this can be shucking for most women who got there by namaaz/ruzeh & had a sheltered life, no?
Surely they could not be sex-slaves in full view of all their brothers/fathers?!
Surely no fair/kind God would do this.
h- If b/d , then how come sex is bad (a sin) now, but OK in heaven?
i- If a, then how come it’s OK for the new generation (the ‘improved’ version?) of women to have free-sex?
j- Is there a minimum age? I mean what if some Mullahs, which I’m sure there r some , want 5 yo girls?

3- What age would the men appear in heaven?
I mean, when a 80 yo man dies, what age he would be when he goes to heaven, 80 or 20?

a- if 80, then what good would having a young virgin be to him?!
b- Do they get to choose what age they appear as?
c- If they appear young, then most of their family, who may get to heaven, may not even recognize them?!
d- I’m assuming that people don’t age in Heaven, coz otherwise it won't be that good!

4- what happens for Gay men?
Do they all go to hell, even if they were extremely kind & did nobody any harms?

5- do the Akhund/Mullahs get to choose the best looking ones & the youngest ones?

6- If anything u wish would happen, then what if some Mullahs would want young boys?
After all the deal was that u get anything u desire, right?

a- Where would these young boys come from then?
b- Or is it that those Mullahs would go to hell? How could God send his servants to hell?
c- But what if some Mullahs controlled themselves & went to heaven, but now they don’t have to control
themselves & can get anything they want? Having had so many Virgins, now they want a change.

7- What if some men would prefer their neighbors Virgins?

a- Do they have to fight for it then?
b- Wouldn’t this cause trouble in paradise? Specially if they are allowed to drink WINE!
Perhaps God have to create new rules for good/evil & create a new heaven/hell &
punishment/reward rules? And this could go on in the new heaven too, so it will have
to go on forever?!
c- But then they would not be Virgins any more, would they?! So they have to ask for
them to be made Virgins again. Gush these girls would forever be changed to virgins back & forth!

8- Wouldn’t men want new young Virgins every month?

a- They will sure get tired of the old Virgins soon, no?
b- Can they ask for more? After all, they can have anything they want, right?
c- Wouldn’t the old virgins get bored from not getting any ‘attention’?
Wouldn’t they get jealous & fight among each other?
How would God get them to behave? (new heaven/hell & new rules again?)
d- where would these new & improved Virgins come from?
Would God swap the Virgins around & change them back to virgins every time, or create new ones?
If create new ones, then what would happen to the old ones?

9- Wouldn’t some men feel uncomfortable having sex with their virgins all day in front
of their family (father/mother, Grand father/mother, brothers & sisters)? I take it
most people would want to be with their own family, right?

a- How far back can they go & recognize their family? I mean most people wouldn’t know
how their father(-2) looked like, but their father could. So u may get many generations
all hanging around each other: u see that guy over there, having sex with those young
virgins, he is my great(**9) grand father!
b- And all the great grand mothers would be hanging around too seeing all the orgies?!

10- What if some men/Mullahs want to have sex with young Virgin Animals for a change?!
Some maybe even used to it, after all some of their religious books, written by holy saints,
say it’s OK, no? Well the deal was to get anything they wanted right?

11- Do these girls get pregnant in heaven?
This opens a new big can of worms!

12- Not everybody would go to heaven, so when people can't find their relatives,
they'd assume they'd gone to hell. How could people enjoy having orgies with virgins when
they know their loved ones r suffering being burnt in Hell every minute of every day?!

13- What happens to people who died before knowing what sex was? If they appear as children,
then can't enjoy Sex in heaven. They wouldn't know how being adults would be like, so they
wouldn’t wish it. And even If they chose to be adults, they’d have mind of a child & body of
an adult, which would cause a lot problems.

14- What is there in heaven for women?
How come women don’t get young boys/men in heaven?

=====================================================

1 thing that absolutely amazes me is that having blindly accepted the
reasons/principles/supposed-history, mostly in their childhood,
people never question the details, like how the hell could anybody live
for 180 or 900 years (a few 'prophets' did way back).
Some pee-pole then do absolutely ANYTHING, I mean Kill/rape/steal/lie/...,
but then talk/pray to their "personal God" & make deals with him that:
- I'm sorry, Goh Khordam,
- pls forgive me, I do this for u, I do thhat for u to make up
- crying & groveling
- then feeling good from the crying & grovveling & feeling 'holy'
- even bragging for reaching such 'holinesss'

They somehow think that they were forgiven, as if they never did those
things & just go on living happily feeling "God" is behind them, coz they
got this 'deal' going on here, until they do another CRIME.
But then they just make another deal ....
This all happens in their little minds, forever living like little RATs on drugs ...

If they had any BRAIN, they would stand-back & THINK & would reject all
the SHIT they were fed in their childhood.

Of course, the clergy make sure their pee-pole never wake up & forever
try to drug them by rubbish & FEAR to keep them fully under CONTROL ...

Not to mention what idiots these clergy have to be.
But the worst part is that all tru history a lot of absolutely FILTHY
CRIMINALS mngd to become top clergies & ruled in filth & power in
God's own name. But God tru his inaction, has proved that there is no
GOD as we've been told.

The scary part is that humans R designed for SIN.
Take a young man, he can never sleep without having major erection.
Even if he is not forced to do something about it, his body will & 1 way or
another he's done major SIN. So he is forced into making deals with his
personal slave-God all the times & living a double life.
The degree of this double life depends on how much SHIT he gets fed in
his childhood.

Imagine a 3 yo kid playing with a doll & talking to it & making up
stories, living in his own fantasy, completely unaware of the real world
around him. But this would make him feel good.

Now imagine him getting old & giving lecture to other kids how to talk to
their dolls & how it would make them feel good & help them not to be
scared of dark.

Then feeling more power, he starts telling kids how they will suffer if they
didn't talk to the dolls & ...., but kids may laugh at him, so he has to scare
them & raise the Doll's profile that how HE will punish them & will burn
them in hell ...

Then he sees that the more powerful the Doll, the more power he'd
have on other kids & more powerful he'd be.

So gradually in their ceremonies things get out of hand & all sort of
hormones kick in & the next thing u know they make sacrifices in temples
& they have have all sort of holly powerful clergies & punishment ...

Now any kid who doesn't worship Dolls will have to be stoned.

But if a new kid comes to this city from another part of the planet, who
used to talk to pet fish, he'd find these kids very stupid & may end up
building another temple to talk to fish.

The more stupid the clergy, the more stupid his followers would become &
the more stupid his 'religion' would be.

===========================================================

As an example of "blindly accepted the reasons/principles/supposed-history"
consider this:

1- "Abraham doesn't appear as a 'messianic' leader who publicly preached
a new creed. It is even unlikely that monotheism was Abraham's original
idea. There is no reference to a time when Abraham isolated himself from
his clan or worldly responsibilities."
U can't find a religion unless u go out & preach it & Abraham didn't.

2- Abraham was 100, when isaac was borne;
Abraham died at 177;
isaac died aged 180;
jacob died at 147;
Methuselah died aged 969!

I bet most pee-pole don't even know this.
I sure never knew this.
U just must be kidding, over 900 years old?! Maybe he was a robot!

3- Abraham goes to Egypt, but fears that beauty of his wife sarah could be
a threat to his life, so he passes her off as his sister. Abraham left
Egypt well rewarded by Pharaoh, most likely for Sarah's services!
Abraham also sold Sarah to king Abimelech, passing her off as his sister
again.

People r saying "it is not inconceivable that Sarah produced a child for
Amenhotep I, so semitic genes entered the Amenhotep family line."

If this is not KKeshy, what is?!

4- Abraham meets a pagan king & both he & the king use the term 'El Elyon'
(god most high)! This phrase was very common in Egypt for the supreme deity.
Abraham didn't know God by the name or characteristics that were later
'revealed' to Moses.

This is shocking to me, y didn't God didn't tell Abraham that his name was
YHWH (YaHWeh)? Also EL was a 'pagan' God!

5- Moses was brought up as an Egyptian prince, brought up as the son of
pharaoh's daughter. He was not even circumcised & didn't speak hebrew.
circumcision was long practiced in Egypt, but was not mandatory.
The egyptian name given to Moses was 'tisithen' & this name preserves
the name of 'Aten', which was the name of Akhenaten God.

6- Moses couldn't speak hebrew, so God appoints Aaron, his biblical
'brother', to be his spokesman!

Then y select him as prophet?
Surely, God could've made him speak Hebrew in 1 second?!

7- Moses takes the jews out of Egypt & spends 40 days on the mountain receiving
10 commandments written on 2 tablet of stones. Meanwhile some of his followers
make a golden calf to worship. When moses goes down & sees it, he gets so
angry that he broke the 2 tablets, destroyed the idol & had 3000 offenders put
to the sword! Moses goes back to the mountain for another 40 days to get
another copy of the 2 tablets. Hebrew was not invented at that time! The
tablets must've been in egyptian hieroglyphs.

a- y didn't God use metal that would last for centuries?

b- how could believers in 1 God go & worship a statue of a Cow, while their
prophet was talking to God?! These people have had many prophets for
centuries!

c- u must be kidding, 3000 put to death?
He must've been 'biblical brother' of KK Khomeini!

d- y didn't God give the 10 Commands to the previous prophets?
I mean he only 'told' Abraham that Jews must cut their dudul as
their part of the deal with God. Surely God doesn't change in time,
so He should've set out all the rules in the beginning, no?!

e- Moses must've tried all sort of 'miracles' to convince the
Jews that he was holy, then how come they start worshiping
an Idol, the minute he goes up the mountain?!

8- Y should God's name change : EL, YAHWEH, ..., Allah?
I don't mean names that reflect his character, like karim.

I remember once somebody bragging to me that Allah had 99 names.
I bet many Jews in Arabia used to criticize Islam by saying
that u'r God didn't send Moses, coz 'our book' doesn't even
mention Allah! Could this be y the argument that Allah had 99
names was created?

If the God had clearly said that His name was YahWeH (YHWH), then since
time doesn't apply to God, then God would not change his name after a
few century. So Allah can't be the same God as YaHWeH.

8.a- Mohammad's father name was Abdollah, which means worshiper
or salve of Allah. This is proof that Allah was one of the Gods in Arabia
before Islam. So Mohammad must've just used the name Allah for his
God so it would be easier to convert people to his religion.

9- I always thought that the Jews invented circumcision, but doesn't look like it.

"to trace back to the roots of why circumcision was practiced at all
in egypt, we need to look at the ancient creation stories of egypt, to
the papyrus of Ani, written during the 18 dynasty, in the 14 century BCE.
In it we find the Re, the creator God, initiated the process of bringing
other beings into existence:
-It is the blood that descended from the pphallus of Re
-After he proceeded to circumcise himself,,
-And these gods are those who came into beeing after him.
This was the myth of how Re, or Ra, brought other gods into existence,
from the droplets of blood which came forth."

jallalkhaaleq!

So it seems there could be hope after the fall of KIR in Miran?!
Sure, it will be bloody, but the blood could create LIFE,
IFF the Masters give their 'blessing'.

===========================================================

The whole start of Christianity was a big MESS, which is NOT how
a perfect creator of the world would work!

The all knowing creator should've seen all this & made sure
everything went smoothly, but didn't.

Even Isaac Assimov knew this & in his book Foundation, he came
up with a design so that the 'system' would work for the benefit
of mankind, in spite of human stupidity.

How could the creator not see it coming & leave his religion to
'chance', guess work & future rejection?

Y should he change His mind & change the rules every time a different
'prophet' came along?

Y should each group of HIS followers end up hating other groups of HIS
followers, who follow a different ‘religion’ which HE sent?!

OK, God didn’t know any better & was experimenting, but surely HE must’ve
learned quickly & should’ve got it right after the first 200 years; but
the whole thing is still a big mess, after 4000 years!

Look at some of the mess:

1- There is too much controversy on Jesus death & y he should say
“y have u abandoned me?” if this was all a plan that he knew.

Some even believe he was GOD, then y should God say "y have u abandoned me"?

2- St Paul was originally a hard core Jew called Saul, who used to attack
the followers of Jesus, after Jesus was crucified. Then he was traveling
to organize more oppositions & saw a 'light' saying 'y r u prosecuting me'
& he thought this was Jesus (even though he'd never met Jesus). Then he
converts & follows/preaches Christianity.

But Christianity was NOT properly defined & its followers didn’t know
the rules & after J was crucified, there had to be a lot of guess works.

This doesn’t make sense to me at all.
Who was the prophet?
Y choose a prophet & have him killed, then choose many other people to
deliver the message (& have them being called ‘saints’)?
Y choose a hostile Jew & have him kill other Christians, then convert him?!
Y leave it to people, many of whom uneducated, to decide how they should pray?
Surely the Creator would make it very clear what rules people should follow.

3- Paul was educated & was a major factor in spread of Christianity. There
were debates that Christians should circumcise & eat kosher food,
but didn't happen.

Y not.
If God's only rule for Abraham was circumcision, which was followed for
centuries, y should it change all of a sudden(Christ), then change back
again(Islam)?!

u shall cut,
now u don't have,
now u have to?!

4- There were too many groups in the early days, each with its own Gospel &
rules & beliefs. Some were very mystic.

It was so bad that the original church had to declare others as heretic!

5- Irenaeus, one of the church fathers, declared that only the gospels of
Mathew, Mark, Luke & John constitute the whole gospel, which he called the
'four formed gospels'.

He declared "it is not possible that there can be either more or fewer
than four" for "just as there are 4 regions of the universe & 4 principal
winds", the church itself requires "only 4 pillars".

Irenaeus believed that John alone understood who Jesus really was - God
in human form! Other 3 Gospels didn't say so.

This is just shocking to me! How come the 3 original gospels supposedly
written by people who knew Jesus didn't say Jesus was God-in-human-form,
but a later gospel, whose writer is not known, said that He was?

6- Jesus was against Priests & Temples.
Many of his followers used to be mystics, yet the church called them
heretics & burnt them & in time became very powerful & corrupt.

So corrupt, that some of the early popes had their own personal whores
& started selling salvation.
Things got so bad that some monks (Martin Luther) turned against the church.

7- Even Mary Magdalene had a Gospel!
There is all sort of controversy that she was NOT a prostitute & that
Jesus loved her more that he loved other Apostles.
That the original corrupt church wanted the ‘women’ out of their power-domain.

8- Virgin birth.
Many argue that the new Bibles were written to match the old bible.
Hebrew translation of Isaiah's prophecy says "a young woman (almah)
shall conceive & bear a son .." ; but the greek translated it as
"a virgin (parthenos) shall conceive ..."

So it seems the original prophecy didn't mention 'virgin', but
somehow it got mis-translated. So new bible has to be written
to show how a virgin gave birth.

9- Gerd Ludemann:
>
First of all the original form of Christianity was replaced by a
form of Jacobite or James Christianity, the brother of Jesus, can
you imagine that, who didn’t believe in Jesus during his lifetime?
Took over, because he was a brother of Jesus, and nobody can really
explain his rise to power. At least he was more powerful than Peter,
the first disciple of Jesus and he was more powerful and more
influential than Paul, the real founder of Christianity, and that
now answers your question, Paul was the one who organised the
Gentile mission and a mixture of Gentile Christianity and Jewish
Christianity then developed into the early Catholic church. It’s
a complicated process, but I would say Paul, the founder of
Christianity who brought things together and who thought it through.
Paul, who didn’t know Jesus by the way.
>

So it seems everybody wanted a piece of the action.

10- Gerd Ludemann:
>
My opinion is, as a minority opinion but as a majority opinion
among international scholars, that Jesus expected a Kingdom of
God to happen during his own lifetime, and that he, well, he
deceived himself. And I think somebody who deceived himself and
deceived his disciples cannot be the basis of worship.
>

Things were bad/rough then & many expected the 'kingdom of God' to
replace the Romans.

11- Gerd Ludemann:
>
Well first of all please keep in mind he was unable to write,
he was unable to read, he was a boy from the village of Galilee,
a nature boy or something like that, OK? He was so much in touch
with people that he was even unable to see that there’s some other
intellects who would ask him some very embarrassing questions.
See he was totally in his religion, a very original person,
sympathetic, able to draw a great crowd, but who talked to God
as his father, which would be a very strange way, because I would
say whoever calls God his or her own father, cannot be taken
seriously.
>

12- >
From the very first, no doubt, people in his hometown of Nazareth
either shunned or attacked him as a bastard without a proper father.
Hence the taunt “son of Mary.” His later adoption by Joseph - long
before he rose to public notice - did not remove the stigma of being
regarded as the son of a prostitute. It is hardly unreasonable to
suppose that his later acceptance of those who were despised as
sinners and outcasts reflects his own bitter experience of blameless
rejection. Such a sense of alienation may also account for his
difficult relationship to his own biological family.
>

What's the point of creating a 'virgin birth', when people,
including family didn't believe in it? When it caused so much pain?
There r no stories about Jesus moving mountains in his childhood,
like superman did. God could've appeared in any form & anybody.
God could've chosen any adult & completely changed him to what He
wanted & have him be His prophet. Y create a child from 'virgin birth'
& make the mother suffer from all sort of hostilities?

13- >
Mary was Jewish, she lived in a Jewish country, a Jewish village,
she practiced the Jewish religion all her life
>

This means Jesus must've been circumcised, so Y did the early Christians
decided against circumcision?

Y didn't Mary convert during the 30 years of living with his son
who was a prophet-God?

Y didn't Jesus's family believe in him?

It doesn't look like Jesus did any preaching/miracles in his childhood.

So Y do 'virgin birth', then keep the guy 'dormant' for 30 years, then
wamo get him killed, without any rules being clear that what this
religion was supposed to do?!

14- >
There is proof that Augustine came up with the idea of original-sin
(fall in garden of Eden). he even conceded that his idea found no
scriptural support in the new testament, but his dark conclusion
became the official teaching of roman catholic church.
>

15- some people say:
>
According to the Jewish Bible, one of the requirements for
the messiah is that he must be a descendant of King David.
All of the major Messianic prophecies indicate this.

However, when the genealogical records, as recorded by
Matthew and Luke are examined, critical problems are
revealed.

Jesus failed to fulfill any of the major messianic prophecies;
he was never anointed as King, he never ruled Israel, and the
world was certainly not perfected in his time. In addition,
he was not preceded by the return of the prophet Elijah.
Finally, he was disqualified from ever being a messianic
candidate due to his lack of the necessary family background.

The Jewish people never rejected Jesus. He just never measured
up to the description that God gave to the Jewish people, of
who the messiah would be.
>

In fact people, in the early days kept on asking, when would we
see the kingdom-of-God. Then one of the Church fathers came up
with the answer that "when all the gentiles r converted to
Christianity". Close but no cigar! If the old Bible was God's
words, then 'Messiah' should've brought KoG.

16- Jesus said: "turn the other cheek" & "love thy enemy"
I've lived among Christians for over 20 years, yet I've
never ever heard/seen anybody turn-the-other-cheek.
In fact if u do, they would make fun of u & will call u names.
Not to mention centuries of killing & war & hatred.
What is the point of Christianity if its followers don't follow Jesus?!

17- If the creator could write on stone, y didn't he write the Bible on metal?
Just imagine how much headache he'd have prevented.
All these people arguing over 'who wrote the Bibles' for centuries.
People copying text for centuries & putting words in God's mouth!
Surely the Creator must've known this would happen.
Y select a prophet who can't read write, then have others write what
the prophet said, over 50 years after his death?!
Hell, I can't even remember what I said 2 days ago, let alone what was
said 50 years ago!
Not to mention alllllll the mistakes made in translations.

18- Not to mention so many branches of every one of his religions!
Each having their own rules & stories of what did really happen.

1 God, means 1 religion, 1 set of rules, 1 set of stories;
not 3 religions with 90 different sects/branches, all hating each other!

Actually 3 r the major ones (J/Ch/I), there has been far more than 3 religions.

19- Y should the Creator choose poor uneducated people as prophets?

Wouldn't it be much faster/better to choose a rich guy from the most
powerful nation?

There is a lot of proof that if Constantine, the roman emperor, hadn't
become Christian, things would've been very different today!

Which way would be faster today for God to change religion, choosing
a poor guy in some african desert, or some rich educated guy in USA,
to covert Bill Gate & the president & top church officials?
Or maybe somebody in the Vatican, who converts the Pope himself?

What about Michael Jordan? Have him win every major sport (Golf,
swimming, etc.) & then let me tell the whole world on a major TV
broadcast that "I'm the chosen ONE"!

Surely, anybody would be more efficient than a poor uneducated guy in desert.

20- Y should the Creator write rubbish, about what this man/woman said &
what they did? (this gets even worst in Quran)
Y didn't he just come out & name all the chemical elements & talk about
how earth was moving around the sun & atom & all the rules in science
& brag about them that "I made all this"?!
Specially if he wrote it on some un-destructible metal.

The all powerful, all knowing, all merciful creator would NOT work
in a messy way.

But when u add Islam to the picture, it all turns into a disaster, which
can NOT be a feature of any creator!

Y?
coz:
1- Many have rejected Judaism/Christianity as a true religion sent by the Creator.
Because Islam accepts J/Ch, then Islam is automatically rejected.
2- History of Islam gives the Creator a very ugly image that can't be true.
A merciful Creator could NOT have been behind all the killings & hate & rape ...

If u like to see more about Islam, read Ibn Warraq
- Why I Am Not A Muslim :

http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/not_muslim.htm

The excuse that God chose this group, but they went on the wrong path,
so God chose another group, who went on another wrong path, so God
chose another group is just NOT GOOD enough!

v r not talking about an angry old man, v r talking about the Creator,
who created LIFE & can do anything, which is beyond Man's understanding.

After 4000 years of hate & killings, we got nothing but hate & confusion.
We should not blame the creator for our faults & should not try to speak
for him/her!

Anything that can create LIFE & the whole world, would surely be able
to prove WHO did it, beyond any doubts what so ever, so that no pissy
little human can find faults with it!

===========================================================

More on J/Ch:

1- Y should God take 40 days to give 10 commands to Moses?
God should've seen that his followers were building the Cow,
so He should've sent Moses back to put stop to it. Not wait
for 40 days, then Moses going back & see the Cow & put 3000
to the sword!

2- Y not appear to Moses & give 10 COMD to him right in front of everybody?
Obviously many of his followers were still not true believers, so this
would've cured them for life.

3- God 'chose' prophets from humans for thousands of years, never being
concerned about the 'original SIN'. Y should He all of a sudden change
his method & decide to come down Himself in the form of Jesus in a virgin
birth & confuse the hell out of humans?! So that he can die on the cross
so that HE himself can pay for the 'original-SIN'!
It's as if God tried this & didn't work, then tried another method, surely
the Creator of the LIFE & the universe, who is all knowing & all powerful,
wouldn't work like this.

4- Y should God choose only 1 group of people & tell them that men should
cut their dudul, which HE designed, to show they follow him; but only
if their mothers were 'followers'. (i.e. u can only become a Jew/follower
if ur mother was a Jew/follower)

Then come up with Christianity, where anybody can become a follower,
without cutting his dudul.

Then come up with Islam & tell them to kill/burn all of His old followers,
but have to cut the dudul again?!

dudul OFF, dudul ON, OFF, ON, OFF, ON ....

===========================================================

Muslims & Christians believe in the same God & same story of creation as Jews do.
So according to Islam, God sent thousands of prophets to Jews over centuries with
Jesus being the last one. Jews considered themselves as the chosen-people, which makes
perfect sense, coz why else would God send them, & ONLY them, thousands of prophets
& ignore everybody else?!

But why should God, all of a sudden, after centuries, decide to turn against His own
chosen-people, all of whom spoke the same language & followed the same culture,
God’s culture, & choose a new prophet from savage Bedouin Arabs, who spoke a totally
different language & hated the Jews?

Why should the same God who had told his old chosen-people to “do to others what u’d
like done to u” & in the case of Jesus “love thy enemy”, have a complete change of mind
& heart & tell the new Arab prophet to kill his old chosen-people & rape their women &
children?! Then when u finish with the old chosen-people, go attack & invade all other
countries & kill & loot & rape anybody u find till the end of time & force everybody to
follow the new rules/regime?!

And, last but not least, why should the same God, who calls himself YaHWeH for
centuries, all of a sudden decide to change his name to Allah?!

This is simply NOT how the creator of the world & LIFE would work!

Christianity today is still full of confusion after 2000 years & cannot be the work of the
creator of the world & LIFE.

Take the following book:

Barbara Thiering ; Jesus the man, a new interpretation from the dead sea Scrolls .

BT is a Christian scholar & studied the scrolls for 20 years & believes that Gospels were
written in a form containing 2 levels of meaning : surface-level & concealed-level.

She says:

--[

Jesus was borne in 7 BC & was 70 in 64 AD. There is no record of
his final days. Jesus did not die on the cross, he was given poison
& thought dead. He was removed from the cross & placed in a cave.
He recovered & lived. He was married to Mary Magdalene, who was 3
month pregnant when he was crucified. They had 2 sons & 1 daughter
(Tamar). Paul married Jesus’ daughter. Jesus’ first son was called
Jesus Justus.

In march 44, Mary Magdalene decided to leave her husband Jesus.

Jesus father, Joseph was an Essene, who had high regards for celibacy
& thought sex was unholy. Essenes had long betrothal period of several
years, then a marriage ceremony which permitted them to have sex. It was
a trial marriage, lasting up to 3 years. When the woman became pregnant,
they waited till she had advanced to 3 months, then had a second marriage
ceremony. There was no sex after this wedding, the husband would separate
to go back to his celibate life for a few years.

If it happened that the during the betrothal period & before the first
wedding, the passions became too strong, & a child was conceived, then
it could be said by the play of words that “a virgin had conceived”.
The woman was still a virgin legally, but not physically.
Mary was a “virgin”, meaning a nun, betrothed to Joseph.

The method of excommunication was to act as if the man were literally dead,
dressed him in a grave cloths, & put him in his own grave for several days,
after which he would be sent away outside the community, spiritually “dead”.
Simon, also called Lazarus, was put in the burial cave to be excommunicated,
but Jesus went to him & ordered the stone to be lifted, then he shouted
“Lazarus, come forth!”

]--

Creator of the world doesn’t change mind & rules over time & would not create
confusion. He will not tell people to be kind & honest for centuries & then change his
mind & tell savages to go & “kill them all, burn them all”.

===========================================================

If the Creator wanted to have humans follow its religion, it should’ve been done in one
generation. This should’ve been very easy for the all-powerful all-knowing creator to do.

All throughout history many rulers converted to a new religion & forced their entire
nation to convert too. Safavi King simply forced Shiit Islam on Miranians & imported
Shiit mullahs from Arab countries. Nobody objected & today millions of gaav/olaaq
in Miran still follow the rubbish religion. Simply because kids follow their parents’
religion, accepting what they are told as facts, not being able to use logic to question it.

It should’ve been very easy for the creator to convert all rulers on this planet to its
religion. This could’ve been done by dreams or creator ‘appearing’ to them or simply
‘flying’ its prophet all over the planet to convert all the rulers.

This religion would’ve been so logical & the fact revealed so ‘scientific’ that nobody
would’ve been able to find anything wrong with it. If any idiot invented his own religion,
Creator could’ve simply eliminated him or would’ve send him dreams to change his
minds.

There should’ve never been prophets who were poor or beggars or sheep-herders trying
to preach the poor, all the times trying to prove they were sent by a real God.

This means that by 2000 BC, all humans on this plant would’ve followed the same
religion & today we’d have only ONE religion on earth. The fact that this is not the case
proves that creator had never wanted humans to follow its religion.

Therefore, all religions today were made by man, & most of them are very different
to what they were originally, because they’ve all been gradually changed by man over
& over & over.

Man has created God in his own image.

Back to top

Iran109- future of KIR

IRAN 109 - Future of KIRi

The Masters put Khomeini's Islamic Repluclic (KIR) there &
they can't afford to remove it yet coz:

a-It's too good for them
a1-totally in their hands
b2-they have made a fortune so far & there is still money to be made

b-The whole country would be blown to pieces with the hate/division that exists among Iranians

c-with all the money IRI has given to many terrorist orgs & all the 'hate' they have shown towards
the 'west' in the last 23 years, with the thousands of their own people being butchered & tortured,
how come all of a sudden they r part of the 'good-guys' team? It must all have been part of the
scenario/game, & still is, right?

It could happen if:

1-75% of Iranians unite & come-UP with a civil system, before taking over(!), that could do a
win-win deal with the Masters. But for Masters to do this, some pressure must be placed on them
so that it won't look good to have KIRI there no more.

But if they haven't done this in 23 nightmarish years, y now?
I mean u name it & they have had:
-War
-Torture/killing by the thousands
-Drugs & Prostitution
-Massive corruption
-Massive unemployment
-Massive poverty
-Savage laws of stoning/hanging/butcheringg
-Massive damage to 'religion'

This is one reason I think a constitutional-Monarchy would be an easier/faster way of getting
out of this mess in the short run:
-It's been proven before & the foundation is there
-The constitution is there & only needs soome modification(if any?)
-it could unite people if freedom is givenn to many parties to get into Majles
(but still there would be problems with EGO & urge-to-dominate others (from all involved or not) )
-Masters have seen it before

Any other system would need more work & too much inner fighting/debates, unless the Masters come up with something different, bless their kind hearts.

2-Oil runs out & not much money left to be made, so the Masters would just back-off?

On second thought, I don't think so coz if they let go, the mess in Iran (due to internal
fighting) would mess up the neighbors & cause problems for the Masters' interests in the region.

3- What if the good-Mullahs decide to save Islam & turn against the bad-Mullahs?

But the good Mullahs know they can't 'govern' & would need politicians/experts to run the show.
So they have to team up with another group. But this has to have the blessing of the Masters, or
it won't happen.

Since even KhoSHEMRi used to believe in Monarchy, it's very likely that most of the good Mullahs be pro-Monarchy, specially having seen the divisions & inner-fighting of Iranians in the last 23 years.

If the good Mullahs don't rise against the bad-Mullahs/IRI, they would pay a very heavy price when
IRI goes, which will have to happen sooner or later. But Shi'eh Islam in Iran will never recover from
this, unless the Masters force most Iranians to be illiterate & ignorant by forcing another form of
corrupt dictatorship into power, which is not too Islamic & forces Islam to go underground.

Are countries very different to companies?
I mean if a company is not managed well, it will go bust or will be taken over by another Co, no?

I doubt very much if there would be as many countries in 2300, than there r now.

But people do deserve their Governments.

Damet Garm, sakht nagir baabaa, Bi Khiyaal ...

--------------------------------------------------------

The 1st thing KhoSHEMRI did was to order the execution of the officer who arrested him many years ago. The officer was seen hung with his balls stuck in his mouth. To me this said it all WHAT(not who!) this jerk was.

Yet when u read Shah's book, he doesn't even use one swear word against the holy-Jerk & calls him the old-man/piremard. This too tells me who Shah was/IS. He was one of the very few(if not the only one), who knew WHO was behind the 78-79 events: THE MASTERS. I don't think a cruel dictator would've left quietly without a major bloodshed.

Interesting that in this:

http://cmes.hmdc.harvard.edu/

Shah is shown as a caring/reasonable leader, yet one of the ministers was a power hungry dictator.

In a culture as messy & as EGO/Bully/Qoldor parast as Iran, u can't put somebody on top & expect him to fix everything & run everything.

Shah was an "Iranian" & like most Iranians was not perfect. He didn't ask to be a king, it just happened that way & he was very young when he was pushed into it.

Many Iranians were against him (many were paid to do so) Some tried to kill him. Few enemies paid a lot of money to get few parties going in Iran against him. So there was a need for a Secret/intelligence-service. Many blame Shah for Savak being too cruel, but I think CIA/KGB have done far worst things. Even Mullahs have been worst. Many Zhaandarm/Paasebun were very cruel too. But some people r still stuck on Shah, Y? Coz they feel guilty, that's y. They want an escape goat. Also, they feel 'important' bashing the 'Palang'. Well y don't they bash the Monster that has been killing Iranians by the thousands & has been destroying Iran instead? Coz they don't have the guts, they've bent over for the Monsters for 23 God damned years & have done nothing but bash the Shah!

They say he was a playboy. I've known many young Iranian men who didn't have even half the resources Shah had, yet they were far worst than Shah was in being a playboy.

So much chaos & ignorance & corruption & savage-brutality in the culture, yet many expect Shah not only to have been perfect, but be responsible for the bad behavior of others & the whole country running perfectly as if nobody else had any responsibility at all?!

No, I think some people are blaming Shah to justify what they did in the BIG-Revulsion. Yes they had to do it, coz Shah was bad! What an X-cuse! U r all responsible for this tragedy!

Parts of zarqamee's interview:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, Abdol Hossein Samii had become Minister of Higher Education, and he was under the impression that there should be a kingdom called Higher Education. And he the king, the throned king of the Higher Education system.

The student who is shouting and screaming, when you really sat down and talked to him, it wasn't political. He even hadn't matured to have political opposition at the time. The government really didn't have any avenue open at the time for some sort of .... If a problem existed, through those avenues it would be resolved.

Q. Right. OK. Now, were decisions made in your presence by the Shah? This is what I was going to ask you.
You said later on some of the ideas you had never got .... I mean, he would say, "All right ...."

A. No. No decision was made. What I saw was a very democratic Shah. He never made a decision for the government; he always said, "I will recommend ...." -- "Man tosriyeh mikonam" -- I will recommend to the government to provide the necessary funds." Or: "Go and talk to the Prime Minister." If he had to make a decision himself, he would definitely say, "Write me." So I would have written him. And then the government was given an opportunity to respond. I had one audience with him after I became the Managing Director of Copper, at which time I talked about the railroad, and I talked about molybdenum and copper, and the schedule, and this sort of thing. But that was no argument even, it was just factual -- reporting of the progress. But at the university, every time our argument was factual -- I mean, was non-factual.

Q. You said that you found a "democratic Shah," yet when you would write him and he would send your recommendations to the Prime Minister or other officials ....

A. They ignored it, apparently. It wasn't ....

Q. Why didn't they follow the Shah's orders?

A. I don't think that they felt that they had to. There was .... I never saw a Shah that was ....
This is .... What I am talking about is limited exposure. A Shah that was portrayed, especially
after the revolution -- or even in the media before the revolution. He could have told me: "No! You
have build that university such and such! You have to do this! You have to get those students this or that!" He was always arguing. I remember this argument that we had about the existence of guards in the university. He said, "You are coming .... I mean, you did most of your education in America. Haven't you seen in America the University Police is walking with a gun that big? We are even not letting these people carry guns!" I said, "Well, this is the society. I mean, the environment is different." But we had that argument with him. And he finally said, "OK. You go ahead and do what you want to do."

... And somehow, somebody went to His Majesty and said that this center should become independent. And the Shah sent a letter with a recommendation: see what you have to do.

And I wrote back, and I gave the explanation that this is not wise. I said in a university that research ... if research is cut away from teaching, it loses .... in a developing country, it loses its meaningful existence. ... It's the future implication of them. And the Shah immediately bought it. He sent a letter to the minister and said, "This is the right way of doing things."

Q. The way that you had suggested?

A. Yes.

Q. And was it followed?

A. Yes. The whole idea was dropped.

Q. Would you say that the students from the provinces were more politically active than students from Tehran?

A. Yes. Yes. It was the activism .... The students .... If I categorize the students into four categories, and the four categories are in accordance to whether they are socially or psychologically alienated or not.... So, there would be one group that's neither psychologically nor socially alienated. And one group that would be either psychologically or socially, and one group that would be neither/nor {rather, "both" -- ed.}.
Anyway, you see what I am talking about.

Most of the students from Tehran fitted in a category that I would consider rarely psychologically alienated. They may have social alienation, but they were of the type that would come and sit with you and talk, and say, "Hey, this country is worthless!" And I would say, "Why?" And he would say, "There's suppression, this...." He would not hesitate to talk to you, and to express his opinion. He would have a leadership. The people who were coming from the villages, they had psychological alienation. The source of the psychological alienation was, I think, a value-system problem, or whatever. And the psychological alienation either resulted in somebody who
was also socially alienated, and sort of he would be a withdrawn person. Otherwise, they would be people who would become terrorists.

And these people, who were psychologically alienated and socially alienated, they became .... they coalesced with those who were just socially alienated, which expanded rapidly in 1979, and sort of comprised the entire country. But after the revolution, those who were psychologically alienated actually destroyed the socially alienated and psychologically OK people. It's amazing, but at that time, my interest was really to find these psychologically alienated people and try to do something for them. It wasn't the socially alienated. I mean, most of my students were socially alienated. And also the faculty was socially alienated. That was ... Social alienation was not a problem in Iran.

Q. As of when did you sense that anti-regime sentiments were developing among the students?

A. Anti-regime sentiments were always there. It was a part of .... The same guy who would oppose the Shah on religious grounds, I know that on graduation he would have a glass of whiskey in his hand, and a blond or brunette or something next to him. I mean, come on, it was a way of life. In Iran, everybody was anti-regime. Including the Prime Minister himself. They would sit down and criticize -- whenever they had a whiskey in their hand, they would criticize.

Q. Were you ever in any of their sessions?

A. Oh, many people used to criticize. Come on! Half of the guys here, who are now against Khomeini, they were -- at one time, they said, "Oh, that's nicce, to have the revolution." I'll never forget, I was once sitting somewhere, relatively recently, and I asked -- this was right immediately after the revolution -- and many people were glad. And when I asked, "What do you think was the cause of the revolution?" And they came out with such stupid remarks. I mean, I can't imagine. The guy who was, for example, in a department of Tehran University, and another fellow in the same department happened to become a minister. Now, that was the cause of the revolution. Because they didn't come and give a position to this guy also. I mean, that was .... Come
on, .... There was a study made in 1970 -- I've got this paper. Somebody from here came and actually measured an index of cynicism. And that was so high. I mean, you ... the people who were really the foundations of the regime were criticizing. Not because they were opposed to the government. They had ... everything they had was from the government -- that's why when the revolution came, everybody was in the boat. You didn't have anybody standing on the other side, next to the Shah. The Shah was left alone. All these people who really fed up to here from the Shah's regime, they became opposed. "Oh yes, we opposed these sons of bitches for a long
time. We have been criticizing."

Q. So, ever since you remember, the students were anti-regime?

A. They were anti-regime in a sense, but it would fade out. The same guy who was anti-regime, .... In 1950 <1350>, there was a guy called Ashja', a student. He -- now, I'm not sure, either 1950 <1350> or 1949 <1349> -- was condemned to life imprisonment. Andd he had friends who later on either were killed or were something, or they became terrorists. The Shah came to the university. They were killing themselves to go next to the Shah and take a picture! The Shah went right in the middle of the graduating class. That's .... The opposition to the Shah was symbolic of an age, and we accepted that in the university. The same guys would find employment, and.... Come on, look at the ministers! The ministers of Iran were all student leaders.

Q. That's right. {unclear} you were saying that they didn't change their minds so much about being opposed to the Shah's policies. I get the impression...

A. Oh, it was ... you are saying that whether it was founded, the opposition to the Shah ...?

Q. Well ....

---I find the following very interesting: Palang-factor! ADMZAD---

A. The opposition to the Shah primarily had one or two roots, always. One was just suppression, political suppression. I mean, this was a guy to ..... If you wanted to shout -- and sometimes you want to shout in the middle of -- I mean, I want to shout in the middle of the street. So, the only one you could curse was the Shah. That was the highest authority you could curse, anyway. So the students were opposed to the Shah because of the political structure of the country and because of corruption. These were the two main themes. Beyond that, the criticism that they were saying, really, they didn't have enough information, for example, to criticize the educational system. You never had ... exposed the masses to the intricacies and problems of the educational system.

---a Dictator wouldn't remove censorship?!! ADMZAD ---

A. Sorry -- that would be 1970. They said, "We want to publish a journal." A few months before that, we were at <a Court ceremony>, and the Shah said, "I have come to believe that one of the things that is holding back this country is censorship. And now that we are embarking on a path of industrialization, etc., we have to develop the people. And we have to stop censoring." And he came to the university the same year, Aban Azar Day. He said, "Isn't that funny, that this university a few days ago had unrest, and the subject was opposition to the increase in the price of busses. And a few panes of glass were broken. Now, do you really expect that if you put a few thousand students in a university, and you suffocate them, and don't let them express their
opposition to an increase in the price of the busses?" I mean, he accepted in that statement ....

That statement is classical. In the same discussion that the Shah had with the students, he spoke for an hour and a half, without even knowing that he was going to talk. Of course, he said, "We are negotiating to establish OPEC and increase .... get our share of the oil." But at that time he said that there is nothing wrong with student activism, and the doors of censorship should open. So the kids came to me and said that they want to open the doors. I said, "Yes, go ahead." So I went to the chancellor. I was at that time <Ma'aven-e Daneshkadeh-e Riyazi>, vice-chairman of the Math Department. So I went to the chancellor, and I said, "The students want to write." He said, "Let them write. But tell them ...." That was the impression he got from the Shah. "But tell them they
have to find a faculty {member?}, and work under that faculty {member?}. So I told the students. They said, "What about you?" I said, "No, no, no, I am busy up to here.

A. ... a number of occasions in which the oppositions fought, and fought harshly. In fact, I remember that Sharif was a student who -- of Aryamehr University -- and he was a member of Mojahedin, he was very much religious, and he opposed the creeping ... communist idea in the Mojahedin organization, and he was eventually murdered by Mojahedin.

Q. Really?

A. Another student was pushed from the fourth floor of the dormitory of Aryamehr University. He smashed his head on the asphalt and was killed.

Q. Who pushed him?

A. It was never known, although there were students around. They even never cooperated to the extent of finding who did it. But it was definitely -- this incident, like the killing of Sharif -- was politically motivated.

Q. When you say Mojahedin murdered him -- how did they do that? How did they murder him?

A. Well, they took him .... Sharif was taken ... well, there was a guy, another student, called Shahram ... He wasn't ... I don't believe he was a student of ... Shahram was his last name. Shahram was not a student of Aryamehr University, and he was pushing for Marxist ideology.

And Sharif was a student of Aryamehr University, and he opposed the creeping Marxism, because .... and also the decision that was being made at that time by Mojaheddin to abandon the Islamic foundation part and go...more and more lean toward Marxism because they somehow felt the danger of leaning too much toward Islam -- the danger that finally happened to them. I mean, the thing would fall ultimately in the hands of mullahs -- or extremists, Islamic extremists.

Q. Could you describe some of these individuals? I mean, {unclear}

A. By and large they were not outspoken. The ones that .... I am specifically referring to the terrorist members of the Mojahedin or Fada'iyan.

First of all, Aryamehr University didn't have ... I don't think that they had a lot of members of the Fada'iyan organization. Whatever ... Whoever I knew there were belonging to the Mojahedin organization. By and large, ... they were ... introvert ... they did not mingle well with other students, even. They rarely attended class, at least toward the end of the time of their capture. I mean, Oloumi's first year maybe he was a OK student, but later on he became ... you felt a depression in their ..., or a depression feeling in their attitudes.

They were very much eager to pass the courses, so they came toward the end of the course, and they wanted to get a grade, and take the exams, and this sort of thing. And I had the policy that I wanted to see the student all throuq the year, and usually I ended up talking to these people: "Where were you? Why didn't you take the interim exams? Where are your homeworks?" And this sort of thing. And he would answer in a confused, lost way that you would know that here we go again.

And ... Somebody from Berkeley made a -- this was be during the late 1960s-early 1970s -- made a distinction between two groups of ... between various students by dividing them according to whether they had psychological or social alienation. By psychological alienation, he means somebody who is not ... who has feelings of loneliness, of inability, powerlessness, etc, etc. By social alienation, he means somebody who doesn't agree with the trends, pace, or direction that the society is developing.

A number of students were socially alienated, and they used to sit down and talk and discuss, and they wanted to actively participate in everything, and they wanted to improve the society. You would see them as they spoke. They were against the government, or against the direction that the country was going. But at their heart there was an idea for development.

There were other students who were psychologically alienated. They were either withdrawn from the society, or they were terrorists when they became extremely socially alienated as well. It was probably a result of their upbringing, or because of the shattering of their value-system in the rapidly-developing society of Iran.

What was happening in Iran was this: that the entire value-systems of the students, especially those that came from the more remote places, were being changed.... And a kid who had come from a small town, and had sort of a religious upbringing ... and came necessarily from a poor family, he saw the lavish {\sic\} of the Tehran, and he saw all the corruption. And he saw even girls and boys going out on dates. He couldn't digest that. And he definitely felt there was something wrong with him. He couldn't possibly mix with this society. Where are the principles? And he was ....
He -- at the same time he was being attracted to these, and he had to resist. And there was this tremendous fight within his inner system.

Now, add to that some social alienation -- a lot of social alienation -- and you would have your terrorist. And they were very withdrawn. They did not talk even to their fellow students, etc, etc. At the same time I can also see that they had much higher things in mind .... They knew that they were going to lose their lives on that. I mean, that's a big decision, and I can see why you would get depressed, or....

Now which one came first? Was there social and psychological alienation that led into terrorists, or was it really getting into terrorism, and then by nature you become psychologically and socially alienated, I don't know. But what I saw was a manifestation, that was clear to me, of social and psychological alienation simultaneously.

But, by and large, the students who had social alienation, they developed into ordinary ... people in Iran. I mean, they would criticise, etc, and then they graduate and find a job in Plan Organization, this place, this company, that company.... And they would lead a normal life. The people who had extreme psychological alienation, you would know something is going to go wrong.

A. 1974. The population of engineers in Iran underwent a significant change. In 1968 -- or 66 actually -- there were only 11,000 engineers in the entire country. This is all areas. If the revolution had not taken place, and all the engineers that we had generated would remain in the country with the same pace, we would have close to 70,000 to 100,000 engineers now. But even in 1974, it had increased to around 20,000, or something like that. The engineers were not that many.

---But now we have more Mullahs that we'vee ever had ?! ADMZAD---

Q. What, if anything, did you and your friends try to do to prevent the collapse of the regime?

A. First you have to recognize that we didn't know the regime was collapsing.

If you look at it from two points of view .... From the point of view of ... that whatever was happening -- revolution, as the Shah called it even -- was going to create an environment of democratization in Iran, we weren't opposed to that. I mean, we liked it. And if the revolution was supposed to be a mechanism for realization of this level of democratization, fine -- there was nothing wrong with it.

If the revolution was the collapse of the regime, well, we didn't really recognize that the regime was collapsing until very late. And ... well, not much could have been done at that time. We were trying to only make a ... the transition from ... transition smoothly. That's I think what concerned most people. And the transition was really ....

I was primarily concerned about the lives and safety of so many expatriates that we had. Not only regular expatriates from, say, South Africa or America. One of them, an American, was killed in Kerman during the revolution, who was an agent of the construction firm for local purchases in Kerman. He was murdered by the revolutionaries. His throat was cut by glass -- rubbing against glass. He was one of the two Americans who died in the revolution in Iran.

The revolution was ... took place with a lot of order. And I knew that .... I mean, I wasn't feeling concerned about myself at all. In fact, I was shocked when I was ... when I went back to the university, and one of the students said that "We want to take you to jail!" I went to the jail, and I talked to the person, and I wanted to leave. Because they took me to ... so that they examine the papers and see whether they need me or not, they want me to stay or not. But I told the guy, "I have a four o'clock appointment, and I have to leave."

I never considered that I would be of the kind that would be kept there. For four and a half months. But they had ... well, I didn't have all the information.

Q. The next questions have to do with the period when you were in jail. If you would like, this is ...
please describe the circumstances under which you were arrested and imprisoned.

A. I went to the university. One of the students came to me -- probably he was intrigued by one of the faculty members from that union I was talking about -- and, very politely, asked me to follow him. I went to the guards' building -- the university guards' building. He had a machine-gun with him, but it was under his .... Many students were carrying a machine-gun at that time, because they ..... I mean, all these machine-guns were released, and many of these students participated in the orgy.

---Yes the orgy of POWER in the name of frreedom/aazaadi ?!
All got sucked-in to destroy their own country! ADMZAD---

And then they asked me about specific documents. They didn't know much about the organization set-up in Iran, because they were asking a lot of dumb questions. Anyway, and then I ...

Finally I told them that:"Hey! I have devoted all my life in education, and I believe in education. I have built a university. And ... I believe that the only way to the prosperity of the future of Iran is in educating the youth of the country." And he said that, "Well, you're a reformist, and we are a revolutionary, and our two paths are different."

He said, he turned around and asked the guy, "Is there any complaint?" He said, "No." I said, "Well, I have been at the university, if there is any complaint, you can ask the students." Because there were a number of students who were working, especially the Mojahedin group, who were working in the prison. Apparently the prison was held in the hands of Mojahedin, at least the administration part. Or people who were pro-Mojahedin, maybe because of more religious inclinations that they had.

---And now the real heroes come in: mardomme sharif va baa Khoda va mehmaan-navaazeh Iran! ADMZAD ---

Q. How was life in prison? {unclear}

A. Well, life in prison started .... At the beginning it was very hard. There were about 40 students of Tehran University who were pro-Shah, and they were all arrested for gathering and ... under the title of "Mashrouteh", "Constitutionalists".

Anyway, they were in prison, and as soon as I came in, they received me. They had created a very lively atmosphere inside the prison. The prison was horrible! I mean, it was a hole essentially, and .... a lot of restrictions.

At the beginning there was a lot of danger to one's life, because they were randomly taking people and killing, also. Executions were conducted at niqt, and this sort of thing. Probably you have heard that, because you must have interviewed others from prison. Anyway, the ... we soon started ... there were no reading materials, nothing. After a month or so, there were ... the situation relaxed a little bit, after ...

And then the executions picked up again. Until executions somewhere toward the late summer -- sort of middle of the summer -- stopped altogether, except for sporadic executions. But massive killings were going on. People were getting released at that time, or executed. But it was quick. By the time I was imprisoned, which was ... I was arrested on the 20th of Esfand. Then ... executions went on for a few days, it sort of stopped, it picked up again. But it stopped in mid-summer altogether -- with some sporadic, here and there.

At the beginning we were very restricted -- about 400 people in sort of cold, prison environment, awfully bad weather. And essentially the food was lousy. We were given .... Sixteen of us, I remember, we slept in a room which was about 16 x 12 feet - square feet, I mean. 16 x 12, which is 4 meters by 5 meters, something like that. And ... the prisoners who comprised a bunch of military people, a bunch of SAVAKIs, and sort of a third group of civilians.

The SAVAKIs were relatively safe, although what was on the outside was really that the SAVAKIs were getting into prison and executed. The SAVAKIs were safe; nothing was happening to them. The civilians, some of them that had cooperated at certain places with the previous regime in the sense of demolishing the revolution, or preventing the revolution, they were executed very rapidly. But the rest of them were safe. By and large, the civilians were safe.

The military people were not safe at all. They were killing military. And this is really .... I mean, this sort of convinces me more that Mojahedin were in power, and they wanted to dismantle the military, as it were.

I was amazed by pictures of ... Fada'iyan-e Eslam on the wall. Pictures of PLO chief Yasser Arafat on the wall -- kissing Khomeini. A lot of pictures of Khomeini, of course -- I wasn't amazed by that.

And I understand some of the SAVAKIs were badly beaten at the time of arrest and afterwards, or.... Q. So. Were you actually charged with any particular crime?

A. No.

---who were some the heroes? ADMZAD---

Q. Did you try to get any of your jailers involved?

A. No, they were dumb. They were dumb. They were kids, dumb.

Q. Shah Mohammad Reza.

A. I think he was ... he was a well-wishing person. I saw a lot of patriotism in him. I saw a lot of ...
sort of ... I didn't see a villain, I saw always a democratic person. I ... don't think that if the
situation was somewhat different, and ... he would end up like this. I think that a lot of judgment that we pass on him is a matter of several incidents that took place, including the revolution -- important incidents. I think, by and large, he wasn't a powerful dictator.

He wasn't an oppressor. When you talked to him, you would feel it. I was in prison, and I saw people who were in SAVAK, who had this attitude -- especially people in SAVAK -- that ... I mean, ... of ... they had a sort of natural riqt to anything. He wasn't that kind. At least, during the several times that I met him, he didn't demonstrate himself to be that kind.

But nevertheless, the country was run as such that he was that kind of person. I don't know what happened. I don't know what was really ... what were the historical events that led to the country being run although the person is not really that kind of person. I suppose whatever happened in Iran is the consequence of a number of historical events, including the assassination attempt on him at the University of Tehran, the incidents at the time of Mossadeq, even getting kicked out and coming back.

And then, later on, the role of the mullahs, the role of Fada'iyan, or whatever is the history of Iran,
created a role that, if any other person was in his shoes, probably would end up in the same position.

---I totally disagree with this comment, MMASTERS 'write' the history! ADMZAD ---

Many of these people -- I am not talking about him, I'm talking about myself and other people --
we were out-promoted. The reason is this: that Iran lacked a high administration, and a lot of people were over-promoted, beyond their range of normal capabilities. But that's the characteristic of a developing country, rapidly developing country.

---Yes, Iran doesn't need Roaring Lion Revvolutionaries no more. Iran needs caring hardworking
united-people to build it UP again into a modern developing country. ADMZAD---

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

when one reads about Ariyaamehr Uni students being enqelaabi & remembers the pictures of many going around & killing people in 79, one may forget that not all students were like that.
As I said in IRAN104 there were also social reasons for the 'anger' of some of the students.
Zarqamee sheds some light on it too.

See these students from Ariyaamehr:

http://www.iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/July/ahvaz.html
http://www.iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/July/1352.html
http://www.iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/July/exam.html
http://www.iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/August/football.html

I wasn't in Aryamehr, but had friends there & in many other Universities too.
There was too much oqdeh/complex. It took me years to be comfortable around 'girls', yet
I wasn't from a small town. And it's wrong to blame Shah/one-person for all the problems.

Also I love the bit when Zarqamee says:
"If you wanted to shout ... the only one you could curse was the Shah.
That was the hiqest authority you could curse, anyway."
When u consider qoldory/domination being one of the main features of the culture, then it's
easier to understand the Palang-factor & y some would be anti-Shah.

Just look at this:

http://www.iranian.com/Nostalgia/2001/April/mozaffar.html

Having a big sibil was/is sign of mardaanegi/manliness, also calling people with so
many titles:
jenaabeh hazrateh aaqaayeh doktor ...

Every zhaandarm/paasebun had to have a big sibil & they walked as if they owned the place.
The whole culture was/is obsessed with domination/mardaanegi/qeyrat/EGO. U can't blame
one person on the top for all this.

Look at the Jerk KhoSHEMRi, he comes in with the promise of freedom & ends up killing by the thousands. And every man & woman & their dogs, who were remotely related to him or to his aaftaabeh, end up in high places & rise to the TOP.

Yet some people are still saying shah was 'bad' after 23 years of bending over for a corrupt/criminal
KIRI Mullahs?! Could it be FILO: Faith in, Logic out? But how could faith be blind to so much crime? So maybe it's GILO: Guilt in Logic out?!

Back to top

Iran110- tall poppy syndrome

IRAN 110 - Tall Poppy Syndrome, Morid/Ostaad

The whole country has gone down the drain, thousands have been butchered/raped/hanged/killed, the whole country reportedly went crazy asking for freedom & yet ends up in one of the most inhumane & brutal dictatorships ever.

Our holy-Imam have farmudand:
"mardom jaahel va naaqesand va naakaameland va niyaazmandeh kamaalan va shar'an ehtiyaaj beh qayyem daarand."

Ali shari'ati farmudand (I think it was him, or maybe it was holy Imam?!):
"jahleh tudehaayeh avaameh moqalled ...bandehvaari keh ra'yeshaan raa beh yek shekameh aabgusht beh har keh baani shavad ehdaa mikonand va in ra'yeh aanaan dar radifeh OLAAQHAA va GAAVHAA ast, nemitavaanad malaakeh gozinesheh rahbari baashad."

Not only the holy leaders/Imam call Iranians GAAV va OLAAQ, they even take the constitution, which many Iranians (including some Akhunds) fought to create, & change it into an absolute dictatorship & totally suppress the whole country & Billions of $ r lost to bad contracts to the masters or to the pocket of their holy criminal puppets.

1- Is this true or false?
if false, pls prove y it's false.

2- If true, then Y people still talk on BB's about SAVAK, who was a sweetheart compared to KIR's version?

3- Y people attack each other on BB's. Most of them claim to be pro-democracy & yet they attack each other?!
Shouldn't they attack KIRI instead who has butchered them for 23 years & is totally against any form of democracy?

4- OK some KIR-parast(K's IR) would attack pro-democracy, which would mean anti-KIRI, but how about others?
Could the urge to DOMINATE others be a factor?

I'm sure this was a factor in she'reh-no being attacked as being rubbish originally:
this is not she'r it is K*-She'r.

Could this be a factor that some may say: x/y say all these things & claim to be genius, but don't know sh*t.

We DOMINATE by proving others to be wrong/small/bisavaad/ahmaq?

5- Could the morid-factor play a role here?
I mean many have a tendency to find somebody to worship & be morid of & raising him to GOD level (specially after he dies). u said this & it is WRONG; therefore, u'r no good & must be shot & we'd never listen to u again!?

OK I look at what people say to read btwn the lines & find their hidden agenda & once I know they r evil or full of shit or dishonest, I switch-off from them. But if somebody's heart is in the right place & he makes a mistake, I wouldn't judge him harshly & attack him for posting a wrong number.

Is this a from of tall-Poppy syndrome: when somebody rises above others, people try to cut them down over & over; but when they fail at the end, they worship him as Gods/Ostaad/Imam/Arbaab/King/Rostam?

(David called this 'lobster' syndrome, others have called it Indian-Crab syndrome)

Could this be a MAJOR factor for lack-of-unity among Iranians?
When somebody wants to lead, people attack him & cut him down.

6- Isn't this(5) a factor Y leaders end up being dictators?
I mean those who can survive the constant attacks must have strong characters to begin with.
But after they come to power, they know how much opposition they had to fight with & try to suppress people to stop any further problems.

7- Isn't this(5) a factor Y any form of criticism of the 'leader' even in the shape of humor will NOT be allowed? Coz once they win all the fights for the leadership, they know that it all starts from small funny criticism & gets bigger & more serious, so they will NOT allow it.

This 'knocking' is very common in Australia, where tall-poppy-syndrome is a major feature. But in Australia, people make fun of anything: their PM or Queen & they do NOT like 'authority' !

But even though Australian may sometimes make fun of their leaders, but when it matters they would unite behind them & will fight for their country.

Or take Americans, many of whom used to laugh at GW Bush, but they united behind him after Set 11 2001.

GW Bush is NOT a GOD/rostam/hero/ostaad/khodaa for the American, but just the president. They may criticize him or like him & support him or not. They would just shake his hand while looking at his eyes & may respect him as Mr President, but they will NOT throw themselves at his feet or bend over to kiss his 'holy' hands.

8- Isn't this(7) a factor Y people often hide behind so many 'important' title/laqab?
jenaabeh hazrateh aaqaayeh doktor ...

To raise their profile so others don't dare to make fun of them & belittle them in order to establish their own superiority.

9- Apart from the followings being factors for lack-of-unity among Iranians,
-the urge to DOMINATE others
-division/debates/lies caused by KIRI agennts

could this be another factor too:

Many people have been shouting & roaring in opposition for so many years that not only they feel some form of ownership over Iran (it has be the way THEY say), but they also have some form of LION-den/castle which they r in charge of, which makes them feel important. So if somebody else starts to lead, whom they don't like, they would get angry & shout/roar against that he-is-no-good! The only way they would support him would be if he was absolutely PERFECT in any way imaginable, so that they couldn't say anything against him, but such a person can't exist.

10- The factor 9 above could only lead to more dictatorship, no?
I mean eventually KIRI has to go, either it would be softened by the Masters (which has already happened to some extent), or they would have to replace it with somebody else, who has to fight with many groups opposing him. But when he gets to the TOP, many would throw themselves at his feet & make him a GOD with 50 titles, like they always have. Then he has to crush the roaring lions, like it has always been done, no?

11- The whole humanity is full of he-pock-RATs (hypocrites) & the whole world is RUN by them & always will be! The MASTERS own the world & run it, no matter how many idealists shout/sing/dance about it.

Folks,
Lift u'r hands in the air & Sing it loud:
They got the whollllllllllllle worlddddddddd ... in their hands
They got the whollllllllllllle worlddddddddd ... in their hands
They got the whollllllllllllle worlddddddddd ... in their hands
They got the whole world in their hands

Politics is a very dirty business & that's just how it is & always will be.
Iranians need to accept this fact & UNITE & show the Masters they will not put up with KIR anymore & make a WIN-WIN deal with the Masters to remove it. That's the best way & quickest way to get rid of KIR.

But the real work starts after KIR goes:
-working hard & smart to build up the counntry & improve the culture.
-to build a 'system' to prevent corruptionn (at all levels) & abuse of power.
-EEE : Education, Education, Education to teach people to THINK for themselves!

Part One
Back to top