Farda Audience Picks Late Shah’s Son As Iran’s Person Of The Year Friday, March 23, 2012 – By RFE/RL
U.S. – Iran’s former Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, leading advocate for the campaign of “civil disobedience against the clerical regime,” at a press conference in Washington, DC, 22Jun2009
RFE/RL Radio Farda’s audience has chosen exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the late deposed Shah of Iran, as the most important and most influential person of the Iranian year.
The selection is the result of an online poll that was timed to coincide with the Persian New Year and included thousands of respondents.
The 51-year-old Pahlavi has called for the prosecution of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on charges of crimes against humanity. He has also said he wants to unite diverse Iranian opposition groups and forces to eliminate the regime in Tehran.
Iranian director Asghar Farhadi, who was awarded an Oscar for best foreign-language film, finished second by just a few votes.
In February, Farhadi became the first Iranian filmmaker to win the prestigious Academy Award for his movie, “A Separation.” He dedicated his award to the Iranian people, whom he described as peace-loving.
His success sparked jubilation among Iranians, but the Iranian government canceled a ceremony that was due to be held in his honor in Tehran, without explanation.
The number three newsmaker of the year, according to those who voted in Radio Farda’s poll, are Iran’s political prisoners. Human rights activists believes several hundred Iranians are jailed in the country over their political activism and dissenting views.
Pahlavi received around 33 percent (4,028 votes) of the vote, while Farhadi followed with 31 percent (3,717 votes) and Iran’s political prisoners received nearly 10 percent of the vote (1,198 votes).
The poll was conducted online on Radio Farda’s website and its Facebook page. Some took part in the poll by sending e-mails and text messages to Radio Farda. In total, Radio Farda received 12,024 votes from Iranians inside and outside the country.
People were asked to vote on a list of 25 Iranian and international personalities chosen by experts, journalists, and intellectuals as the most influential figures of the Iranian year.
Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Musavi, Syrian protesters, jailed human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, and dissident writer and filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad were all in the top 10.
The poll was not intended to be representative of the views of the entire Iranian population.
“The poll was not intended to be representative of the views of the entire Iranian population.” – March 22, 2012 16:07 by: Sey from: World
I love this final line. Of course it’s not meant to represent the entire Iranian population, not even 1/3 of it.
The ones who voted on this poll are the Islamophobic expats and their Westernized counterparts in Tehran and other major cities, where the Westernization of Iran between the 1950s and 1970s is missed by the “modern” Iranians.
Things are not so “modern” in the provinces or pretty much anywhere outside Tehran, where religion and traditions still matter. But everybody always takes 8 million Tehranis as the sole representative for the entire 75 million Iranians.
I simply cannot understand those who want the Islamic regime to be replaced by a Western-friendly regime. Have you got not self-respect at all? I’m not protecting the lunatics who rule Iran today, but does your short memory does not allow you to see how the West treated your country as their game zone, how the Shah you love to protect so much was as oppressive and murderous as the mullahs?
With or without the mullahs and the Islamic republic, Iran would be in the same position it is today if it was ruled by a pro-Iranian nationalist regime, like the one of Mossadegh, whom by the way the West overthrew in most probably the first Iraq-like intervention in history. The West does not like countries that stand up to it and say “No, thank you”. They want silent and condescending slaves upon which they can rule.
Is that what you want for Iran?
A number of observers have written of rumours and allegations that the government of the United Kingdom has secretly supported “mullahs” (Shia clerics) in recent Iranian history, and in particular the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in his successful overthrow of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in the Iranian Revolution of 1979. However, Khomeini rejected the charges.
Beliefs of Iranian public, Nishan Sahib, flag of the Sikhs – “Stylized Allah” used in Iranian flag
BBC Persian journalist Hossein Shahidi has talked about “the deep-rooted belief” among Iranians “that Britain is behind every move in Iran,” and in particular that the BBC radio is “credited with, or accused of, having brought about the downfall of” both Pahlavi kings, Mohammad Reza Shah and his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi whose thirty-seven-year rule was brought to an end by the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79.
A survey of Iranian expatriates in Southern California found the leading explanation for the 1979 revolution to be foreign plots, as did a recent survey in Isfahan. It has been suggested by some Iranian observers (living outside Iran) that Iranians hostile to the revolution appear to feel more comfortable blaming outside forces than their own compatriots.
A sinister connection between British India, the Iranian flag created after Iranian Islamic revolution, and Khomeini’s ancestry, has been put forth by some secular Iranians (generally expatriates) who opposed the revolution, according to Iranian author Hooman Majd. Khomeini’s paternal grandfather was an Indian who immigrated to Iran (to the town of Khomeini) in the early nineteenth century when India was a British colony. The stylized `Allah` (الله) on the post-Revolutionary Iranian flag, bears (according to the conspiracy theorists) “a remarkable similarity to the symbol of the Sikhs,” who’s historic homeland is the Indian province of Punjab. Majd himself is unconvinced by the resemblance, seeing the issue instead as reflective of “my compatriot’s love of and insatiable appetite for conspiracy theories.”  Khomeini has also been accused of having had a British father. According to an article in Persian Journal mentioned in Forbes.com and elsewhere, Khomeini may have been the son of British adventurer William Richard Williamson, a convert to Islam known to Arab Muslims as Haji Abdullah al-Zobair.
According to a book by F. William Engdahl, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, a conspiracy to overthrow the Shah was hatched by the British and Americans in 1978 coinciding with the Iranian Revolution.
When “negotiations … under way between the Shah’s government and British Petroleum for renewal of the 25-year old extraction agreement … collapsed”. According to Engdahl, the end of the agreement meant “Iran appeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy for the first time since 1953.” To prevent this independence, Engdahl claims “American ‘security’ advisers to the Shah’s SAVAK secret police implemented a policy of ever more brutal repression” against anti-Shah demonstrators, while American President Carter “cynically began protesting abuses of ‘human rights'” caused by the American advisers policy. The British Petroleum company “reportedly” organized a “capital flight” from Iran,” and so on.
 Claims by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi himself asserted that, “If you lift up Khomeini’s beard, you will find MADE IN ENGLAND written under his chin,” in the later days of his reign as monarch. This statement by Pahlavi was an adaptation of another saying, “If you lift a mullah’s beard, you will find ‘Made in Britain’ stamped on his chin.”
 1978 Ettela’at article
On 7 January 1978, the state news agency Ettela’at also published an article accusing Khomeini of being a British agent and a “mad Indian poet.”
According to the article
These days thoughts turn once again to the colonialism of the black and the red, that is to say, to old and new colonialism.
Black referring to feudal forces and red to communist ones. The two groups allegedly had formed an alliance to sabotage the monarchy’s modernization project. The article went on to say that when this alliance went looking for a clerical mouthpiece two decades ago to dupe the devout.
Ruhollah Khomeini was an appropriate agent for this purpose. It was said that he had spent time in India and was in contact there with institutions of English colonialism, and this is how he become known by the name `Seyyed Hindi`
The article further suggested that Khomeini’s opposition to the shah was prompted and paid for by British oil interests.
Supporters of the Khomeini, outraged by the article, organized violent demonstrations in response, which eventually snowballed into the Iranian Revolution and led to the flight of the Shah about a year later.
Engdahl quotes Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as blaming not the British but the Americans for his overthrow.
I did not know it then – perhaps I did not want to know – but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out. Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted … What was I to make of the Administration’s sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? … Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.
Unrest in Iran Inspires Pro-Democracy Activists in the Arab World – June 27, 2009 by TMO
New America Media, Commentary, NAM Correspondent
NAM Editor’s Note: Arab regimes haven’t publicly criticized or even mentioned what is happening in neighboring Iran, triggering much speculation among Arab bloggers as to why that is. The author of this piece wished to remain anonymous due to safety concerns.
Former Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi (the would be Padishah Emperor) speaks about Iran at the National Press Club in Washington June 22, 2009. REUTERS/Larry Downing
DAMASCUS — Images of bloody protesters and crowds numbering in the hundreds of thousands in the streets of Tehran have been broadcast into living rooms across the Arab world for five consecutive days, enchanting and inspiring pro-democracy activists in a region where pushes for democratic reforms tend to be met with an iron fist.
Meanwhile, Arab regimes have largely remained silent over the contested election. Leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan—the major Sunni powers in the region—haven’t mentioned the elections or allegations of fraud. In normal circumstances, this would be strange — these countries are the regional archenemies of President Ahmedinejad’s Iran.
Some say the reason behind their silence lies in their fear of bolstering pro-democracy movements in their own countries. “The unrest in Iran frightens dictators in the region because it makes it harder for them to justify their own absolute authority,” says Syrian blogger Yasir Sadiq. “If they see tyrannies come down around them, they’ll be afraid.”
Whether or not the Iranian elections were “stolen,” Iran is a long way ahead of most Arab countries when it comes to democracy — the country has a functioning electoral system. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the Gulf states don’t hold elections, and in Egypt and Syria, “elections” are so tightly controlled that the results are always known in advance.
The state controlled media in authoritarian Arab countries have mostly downplayed the events in Iran. Government controlled newspapers like Al-Thawra in Syria, Iran’s strongest regional ally, have kept Iran off the front pages and run headlines like, “The West needs to stop intervening in Iranian elections,” using age-old claims of conspiracies to deflect attention from actual popular desire for democratic reform.
“Governments all over the Arab world accuse pro-democracy movements of serving the west, or of being tools of the CIA or Mosad (Israeli intelligence),” says Syrian freelance journalist Khaled Al-Khetyari. “They are just trying to manipulate people by using this language because the people in power don’t want their populations to analyze what is actually happening in Iran.”
The Obama administration has been relatively silent on the unrest in Iran. On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton said it was up to Iranians to “resolve this internal protest.”
Al-Khatyari says the U.S. administration’s measured distance is a strategy the U.S. should stick to. “The last American administration latched onto any internal opposition to regimes it didn’t like. This always hurts local movements because it connects them to a country that most people here see as harmful to the region and it justifies repression by our governments.”
Syrian blogger Yasir Sadiq says he is encouraged by the Iranian opposition’s seven-point manifesto being circulated on the internet, which calls for the “Dissolution of all organizations — both secret and public — designed for the oppression of the Iranian people.”
“It’s inspiring to see people in the Middle East call for the end of secret services,” Sadiq says. “Organizations like this have oppressed people in the Arab world so much.”
Sadiq is reticent to believe that what he calls Iran’s pro-democracy “intifada” could be exported to Arab countries any time soon. “It’s difficult to hope for this kind of movement in the Arab world. We have a long way to go, but we hope that eventually, something like that will happen here.”
For now, he says, Arab activists will attempt to learn what they can from their counterparts in Iran. For days, Sadiq has been pegged to Twitter, the social networking tool that has allowed Iranians to organize demonstrations while the Iranian government institutes a near blackout of internet services.
“Arab bloggers’ main interest in what is happening in Iran is in figuring out how Twitter can be used to organize and bring our voices forward in our own countries,” he says.
The government in Syria may eventually try to ban it, like they have with other networking sites like Facebook, but Sadiq says he is not deterred. “The more they ban, the more ways we will find to get around their restrictions.”
Filed Under: *The Muslim Observer, 11-27, International, Volume 11
Tagged: Administration, Al-Khatyari, Al-Khetyari, Al-Thawra, Damascus, democracy activists, democracy movements, Egypt, Government, Hillary Clinton, Iran, iranian elections, Jordan, Larry Downing, Middle East, NAM, new america media, President Ahmedinejad, Region, reza pahlavi, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tehran, the Gulf, U.S., Washington, World, Yasir Sadiq
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Hopefully Ahmadinejad is able to digest all of this response to this post. Given the above element of control in the Mullah establishment and link to Orwellian England, and the possibility by the above articles that Ayatollah Khomeni IS indeed a English plant somehow, (see how close the English are to the Saudis in some ways and the selective attacks on certain nations but complete bypass of Sunni nations in general), the autonomy of the Middle East could in fact lie upon Ahmadinejad’s ability to take control of Iran, reinstate the Crown Prince and civil society THEN also not be influenced by NATO and the ‘West’ as well to maintain autonomy while keeping the nation in one piece AND separate in the occult area as well, the greatest danger from a certain clique within UN, influence on behalf of a certain occult group to a degree.
Iran is actually part of the PERSIAN empire which esconced Zoroastrian faith which used Old Persian, but was conquered and converted to Shia Islam AND the Persian language replaced by Arabic language. The autonomy of the unascended Crown Prince Pahlavi must be confirmed, though the linguistic and cultural also religious state of the Persian revival very likely now depends on Ahmadinejad and the general knowledge of the citizentry in who they were before the violent conversions. Granted the old regime had abuses, but Iran as standing now a Theocracy does not look much different. If the proper education is given to those in the region to remember their Persiatic roots, Zoroastrian faith and immensly wealthy Persiatic culture also the Persian language and script, the inevitable freedom of an entirely subsumed people’s faith, language and culture will be effected. Ahmadinejad looks critical in this juncture for the fate of the Middle East. In fact Shia Islam could function alongside the non-theocratic and democratized state as well as per the Article 18 of the UNHCR, giving an opt out option for Iranians who prefer to seek religious refuge in Persia’s original faith of Zoroastrianism instead.
See original Persian script in below link :
Is Ahmadinejad able to do all this then cement the entire action with an immediate withdrawal from politics to let a second liner follower take over in an exceptional gesture unseen before in the power mad Middle East? Great events were never possible by men faint of heart, that refused to use the resources at their hands, and by these actions (if Ahmadinejad is able or daring enough to) from an enemy, Iran’s new Persian Empire constitutionally headed by the reinstated Crown Prince (with ceremonial powers and a reasonable stipend determined by the people of Iran hereon) could well be the reset button than Iran needs that could revive civil society in place of theocracy and potentially dominate the Middle East . . . remember Zarathustra and with the lessons learnt after the fall of the Old Shah, may the spirit of the great Persian philosopher guide Ahmadinejad and Persia’s Crown Prince and perhaps new Padishah Emperor . . . by these actions also Ahmadinejad would have firmly made a mark on the history of mankind as the reviver and protector of the True Persia
If this post offends please inform I will remove if asked.