Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #1 
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/08/17/256762/the-arab-monarchies-relics-of-barbarism/

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/08/06/254817/democracy-vanquish-brutality-saudi-arabia/

Basically presstv english hires any conspiracy theorists who disagrees with israel no matter what their background and allows them to spew nonsense on any topic. Not suprisingly, they write anti monarchist tirades. Thats not to say israel should not be criticized, but it should be done by sane, mentally fit people with legitimate criticism....
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #2 
Press TV is essentially a propaganda station. Barbarism is what aptly describes the Islamic Republic. The IRI's crimes include mass executions of political prisoners, chain murders of dissidents, jailing and torturing ayatollahs who dissent, and shooting a female arts student on the streets of Tehran in 2009. No Islamic monarchy in the modern age has ever attained the sort of savagery. Even though Saudi Arabia is the most repressive, it looks downright moderate, benign and humane compared to Iran, Syria, etc.

It just reinforces my view that the proxy war is one between Iran on one hand, and Qatar, Saudi Arabia, etc on the other. And that we must support Iran's resistance movements against this regime. In fact, the entire vilayet-e-faqih ideology is itself heretical and has nothing to do with Islam! The IRI not only disgraces the name of Iran, but also of Islam. The Old Order is reasserting itself here in Saudi Arabia and Qatar- which we as monarchists must support.

A monarchist friend of mine was actually cynical about me denouncing the IRI and said Israel was the bigger problem. I cannot agree at all.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #3 
Nine out of ten times, when a westerner supports iran, they say its because of israel, not because iran has a superior government or ideology. Sometimes they say iran also bans homosexuals and prostitution, so conservatives should support iran, unbeknownst to them, transsexual surgery is not only legal in iran but was sanctioned by Khomeini himself.. They force gays to turn into "women", and the practice of "temporary marriage" is sanctioned by the mullahs, which can be used as a form of prostitution.

It makes it really hard for people who really care about human rights and who criticize israel or its occupation of the west bank when they get associated with iran. If israel actually dissapears, the Iranian regime will have nothing to whine about, its propaganda and influence are profiting off palestinian deaths and every few years, they say they can destroy Israel, if they did do it, they'd have no more stories for their propaganda and no more excuses to extend their influence into the region.

It would seem Iran has a deeply vested interest in making sure israel is occupying the west bank and blockading gaza forever and that the conflict continues, so every time a palestinian dies, iran can boost its propaganda and influence, its actually very sick of them.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #4 
It's become vogue to bash Israel and those who do so are frankly useful idiots. The Left has tended to be the main bashers of Israel in the last decade or so (and calls it a "racist" and "oppressive" state despite its pluralism, tolerance of gays, etc), while the Right tends to promote a "back Israel to the hilt" policy, even though many on the far right still tend to be hostile to Israel. I support Israel's right to exist and defend itself but will NOT support any unilateral attack, nor do I believe Israel should be exempt from any criticism.

Frankly, it's a very complicated issue and one much too thorny to discuss on here. Too often we see the "Nazi" label used against anyone who dares to dissent from the PC Equality & Diversity agenda, yet now these same people are bashing Israel. How ironic. In fairness, leftist history education, and the ADL and their ilk have often made things more complicated.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #5 
Many pro Iran academics also abuse the first saudi King Abdulaziz and other arab monarchs for being "fat", "cowards", "stupid"' "pervert", or "illiterate".

abdulaziz personally led his soldiers into battle in his early twenties, and stormed riyadh himself with just a few dozen men, he achieved the conquest of the arabian peninsula be riding personally into battle, the Imam of Yemen also personally led his troops into battle, so did the hashemite King Abdullah ( he personally fought against Abdulaziz's brother in battle, when the hashemites and al sauds were battling over the hijaz during the ottoman empire)

khomeini never fired a gun at anyone in his life, while he ruled iran he ordered teenagers to suicide bomb iraqi tanks during the iran iraq war, Hassan Nasrallah has never picked up an ak-47 and fought the israelis himself, other people suicide bomb and kill for him.

whatever king abdulaziz's excesses were, no one can call him a coward or any of the others who personally fought hand to hand, its really rich when people make personal attacks on them while never saying a word of why Nasrallah is hiding in an undisclosed location or why khomeini and khameini never once left iran once they became supreme leader.

I blame Netanyahu and his likud party for behaving like obstinate idiots and they are giving the iranian regime a boost, since netanyahu has successfully hijacked the issue from negotiations with the palestinian authority to the iranian issue, if he gets less of a majority in the knesset next time hopefully kadima can force a withdrawl from parts of the west bank and stop the settlement building.

I agree that the state of israel should not be destroyed, but it really needs to start working on setting up a palestinian state in the west bank.. Under netanyahu its going nowhere.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #6 
No, all the overhyped "Arab Spring" is showing is how regimes that overthrew monarchies or are based on revolutionary ideals, like Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria, completely fail their people. And Iran is in the same boat. Give this a read again.

Iran has huge social and economic problems. Its government incompetence is staggering, its population are broken and despairing. The regime is internally divided, with the hardliners pushing out the moderates. Khamenei is disrespected and despised by the majority of clerics, as he is not even a real Ayatollah to begin with. There is a big underground resistance movement, the 2009 Green Movement was just like Solidarity in Poland, the resistance will eventually succeed.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #7 
Israel was backed by the west during the cold war because the soviet union backed the palestinian side and the republican arab states like syria and egypt, even some ardent opponents of israel on the far right loved the soviet union's humiliation, especially when some soviet mig planes were shot down during the war of attrition between israel and egypt and when soviet military equipment turned out to be useless crap.

Alot of leftist palestinians and other arab marxists are still unapologetic about the soviet support and some act as apologists for the soviets, saying that their invasion of afghanistan was a good thing, most "support" for either israel or palestine stemmed out of a desire to embarass the opposing side and gave them a license to do whatever they wanted, the Israel palestine issue was used by the west and the sofiet union as a chess piece during the cold war, and its still treated like that today vis a vis iran, palestine and israel need to be freed from this mentality and dettached from the machinations of other countries, this has what enabled other countries like the soviet union and iran to use palestine for propaganda purposes.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #8 
The Islamic Republic regime is delusional if it thinks it is exporting the revolution, in fact it's failing abysmally. The Sunni Islamic movements want nothing to do with the IRI, and know that the vilayet-e-faqih doctrine is heretical. It's heretical both in Sunni and Shia Islam. The attempts to make Khamenei as a figure with divine characteristics are downright blasphemy.

The argument in Sunni Islam about leadership of the ummah (people or community) as in khalifat (successorship to the Prophet), some take the argument the caliph should be elected, but most accept that khalifat is a hereditary and that God "gives the kingship to whomever he pleases". The Shia believe in 12 imams with the 12th in occultation, thus the development of a complex hierarchy of clerics to oversee religious affairs. Until the advent of Khomeini, Shia Islam was both quietist and practical with regards to form of government. Nizaris Ismailis, on the other hand, accepted seven imams and then a succession of Imams (Aga Khan) to the present day, descended from the Fatimid Caliphs.

A limited Guardianship of the Jurists in Shia Islam was traditionally espoused, leaving affairs of state to temporal rulers, while the mullahs were quietist, i.e. normally not intervening. However, the idea of "absolute guardianship" gained traction with Khomeini. Even the former Hezbollah chief Subhi al-Tufaili, who has now broken with them and is bitterly opposed to Hezbollah and IRI, said that it is heretical doctrine.

So there you have it. There is no basis in the Qu'ran, Sunnah or any Hadith to justify the barbarity of the Islamic Republic. Not only is monarchism perfectly compatible with Islamic political thought, but the the traditional Christian and Islamic view of monarchy are very similar.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #9 
Twelver shiism was made into a regional force by a monarchy, the safavids are really the only reason why iran is twelver shia today. If there had been no safavid monarchy, there would only be isolated pockets of twelver shia scattered throughout the region.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_statue
Twelver shiism was made into a regional force by a monarchy, the safavids are really the only reason why iran is twelver shia today. If there had been no safavid monarchy, there would only be isolated pockets of twelver shia scattered throughout the region.


Indeed. The Safavids also maintained good relations with Europe and competed with the Ottomans for regional supremacy. The weakening of the Ottoman Empire would only have helped the Arab, Balkan, etc regions.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #11 
Article on Empress Farah Pahlavi http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/iran’s-former-empress
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #12 
The replies on that are cringeworthy. Iranians were better off under the monarchy, whereas today they face shortages and are really a broken, miserable lot. Unlike elsewhere in the Middle East, it is absolutely certain that whatever replaces the IRI will be much better and not just for its people.

If Netanyahu is stupid enough to attack Iran, it would only give the regime more of an excuse to tighten the noose (literally and figuratively) around the resistance movement:
http://www.rezapahlavi.org/details_article.php?english&article=612
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #13 
Partly related, it's not going well for the IRI:
http://www.uskowioniran.com/2012/08/morsi-calls-on-assad-to-transfer-power.html

An uprising in Iran will follow that in Syria, surely, and unlike the reformist demands of the Green Movement, will demand replacement of the entire IRI system. The regime is also targeting Arabs and Kurds with executions, knowing the secessionist sentiments there.
head_statue

Registered:
Posts: 171
Reply with quote  #14 
President Mursi just humiliated the Iranian regime with his speech at the non aligned movement. The IRI media was getting excited with Mursi coming to iran as the first egyptian leader to visit there in thirty years, and instead of getting friendly with Iran, he opened his speech by praising the Four rightly guided caliphs, the first three of which are hated by shia, and attacking the Syrian regime.

mursi also rejected the label of islamic awakening, which is irans name for the arab spring.

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/08/31/235311.html

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/tehran_slapdown_r5KGQk7s2QGcRia26QYY9I?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Oped%20Columnists
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #15 
If the "Arab Spring" (which I think is overhyped since it is only republican dictatorships that are failing) results in weakening the IRI, that can only be a good thing. To me it represents a kind of counterrevolutionary process against the Nasserist, Baathist and certain Islamic fundamentalist ideals, and pathetic Marxist-inspired Third Worldism.

Thank you Morsy and Ban Ki Moon. You will set off the alarm of revolution in Iran!
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.