Constitutional Monarchy for Iran

 

Federalism as a Dysfunctional Political System for Iran

 

Federalism as a Dysfunctional Political System for Iran

This paper responds to individuals who appear at the Manoto Television program and Iran International Television; they advocate for Iran's federal political autonomy.

There is a form of the political system known as federalism, which is naturally a dysfunctional form of a political system. It is a "political system in which the power of the state divided between central and regional governments by a written constitution, but these governments linked in an interdependent political relationship."¹ It means creating a multilayer of governments' complex bureaucracy system. Most importantly, there is an absence of patriotic attachment toward a nation. People of a region are interested in their well-being and disregard other regions. Consequently, each part inspired to have its self-autonomy and leads a country into a civil war. This paper aims to discuss the political system of federalism as a root cause of regionalism in Iran. It would be costly to have a federalist system in Iran and threaten democracy in Iran. 

This portion of the paper discusses the federalist political system as a threat to divide Iran among different ethnic groups by using Canada to illustrate the above point. Canada is a federalist system; it promotes regionalism, it refers to the Canadian community's territorial dimension, according to which particular areas or regions of the country are distinguished from other parts of Canada by political, economic, historical, cultural, and linguistic characteristics. ²

Since the inception of Canada, it has a rocky political climate to galvanize all the provinces together. The Province of Quebec has been contemplating separating from Canada since French people met English people in Canada. Eventually, the legacy of hatred between French and English in Canada escalated to the "Quiet Revolution" since 1944 to separate from Canada.³ In 1963, a left-wing faction formed Front de liberation du Quebec and engaged in a terrorist act against Quebec's English residence. In 1970, the above entity kidnapped James Cross, a British Trade Commissioner to Canada, and the above entity killed James Cross. Subsequently, former prime minister of Canada Pierre Trudeau called for War Measure Act to crack down on the above entity, which ended a decade of terrorism in the Province of Quebec.4 Residences of Quebec never see themselves as a Canadian, but as a French person and a "distinct society" due to their linguistic and cultural background, making French residences in Canada a distinct society. Moreover, the Province of British Columbia, Province of Alberta, Province of Saskatchewan, and Manitoba always feel that they are left outside of Canada and have been trying to separate from the rest of Canada; the above provinces developed a political terminology of "Western Alienation."⁴ The above regions feel left outside of Canada because the federal government development funds in the Province of Quebec to keep Quebec happy and keep the unemployment rate low and not separate from Canada. Other provinces feel financial pressure on their shoulders.⁵

Let's examining Iran as a federal system. Iran is composed of diverse ethnic backgrounds. The nation-state's concept would dissipate during a national crisis because everyone is attached to its region and should not be concerned with other regional issues since these regions do not share a common background. 

Iran is a developing nation; it is not an industrialized nation. All regions are relying on Iran's fossil fuel for economic prosperity. Let's assume to apply the federal political system in Iran. All parts want to have petro-dollar to move their citizens out of poverty and creating jobs for their citizens. The Province of Khuzestan and the Province of Azerbaijan would be reluctant to share its oil revenue with other Iran provinces. For example, today, Alberta's Province is assertive not to share its oil revenue with other regions and become another star on the US flag. 

Therefore, using the theory of the federal system and applying the theory in Canada's real politics. The federal political autonomy would lead to the disintegration of Iran. 

There is another dimension in the federal system. It is not cost-effective. It would be costly to have a federalist system in Iran. It uses Canada as a federal system model to illustrate the cost of having a federal system. Currently, a federal political system requires having two parliaments to deal with governments' affairs. One would be the provincial parliament of each province; the last one would be the federal government. Each province would have intergovernmental relation departments "the network of intergovernmental structure includes separate departments or other administrative units within governments, administrative units within individual departments, intergovernmental secretariats, and a large number of intergovernmental committees."⁶ Most importantly, "federalism has been cited as a major reason for the weak policy capacity of governments in many policy sectors in Australia, Canada, and the United States. It has constrained these states' capacity to develop consistent and coherent sectoral policies. In these countries, national policies in most areas require intergovernmental agreement, which involves the federal and provincial or state governments in complex, extensive, and time-consuming time actions with no guarantee that these negotiations will conclude in the manner envisioned by the initiating government."⁷

Therefore, the federal system has a perplex bureaucracy system that prevents political actors from participating in a healthy and vibrant political life. The federal system opens the door for the elite of society and a technocrat to engage in politics. James Burnham mentioned that the elite of society and technocrats are the "ruler of society."⁸ The ruler of the society would act for their self-interest and undermined the welfare of a nation. Thus, the ruler of society will pose a threat to democracy. Let's apply the above theory in Canadian politics. The Meech Lake and Charlottetown failed; on October 30^th, 1995, Jacques Parizeau and Lucien Bouchard called a referendum to determine Quebec's future as a nation. The referendum did not blossom a fruit in favor of separatists. Parizeau blamed the defeat on money from the opposition to prevent Quebec from becoming a nation and ethnic groups who voted in favor of Canada and not Quebec. Parizeau's ambitious plan to separate Quebec from Canada had economic consequences. It causes Canada's currency to collapse. 

In reality, the federalist political system would threaten democracy; the provincial party systems are not necessarily identical to their federal counterparts. Provincially, as federally, the classic two-party design is found consistently only in the Atlantic provinces, where third parties rarely win more than 5 percent of the vote. Federal and provincial parties of the same name generally have separate elites, organizations, and financial support. Only in the Atlantic provinces are national/regional party ties somewhat integrated. For this s reason, a federal party cannot assume ideological congruence or policy support from its provincial counterparts.⁹ Therefore, an elected member of a parliament is not truly reflecting the conventional wisdom of society and would allow the elite of the community to dominate public policy, which would lead to a lack of representation of minority groups in a democrat nation. 

Iran would not be immune from the above scenario. The federal political system is a dysfunctional political system that does not allow a country to be united. Particularly during the financial crisis or when a nation is going through the economic cycle, each province focus on its regional issues and would not share their wealth with other provinces. 

Iran needs to have a strong central government implementing the "guardian rule" on treasury issues, which means it would save money, pay the deficit, create jobs to reduce the unemployment rate, and lower the inflation rate. Having a complex bureaucratic system would exhaust all of Iran's national revenue, and this federal system would be too costly to manage all affairs of a nation. Eventually, the public would demand a downsizing government, which was the case in 1995 in the Province of Ontario.

Let's explore other aspects of how the federal system is a threat to democracy. It would further marginalize minority groups in a province and not allow minority groups to become political actors and participate in political life. On November 22^nd, 2008, Crown Reza Pahlavi Heir to Throne of Iran, mentioned during an interview that when His Imperial Majesty Mohammad Reza Pahlavi governed Iran, there was no issue of ethnicity or religious issues. It was the current regime has begun to label citizen of Iran with ethnicity and religious background. 

Finalizing all the above thoughts in a few sentences, the current regime in Iran uses ethnicity and religious background as an instrument to divide and conquer Iranians and not allow them to become one united force against the theocratic regime in Iran. Henceforth, it would be in the best interest of all Iranians not to let the enemy's deceptive public policy of divide and conquer to separate them. Let's become unified against the Ahriman in Tehran. 

Copyright © 2020 Peyman ADL DOUSTI HAGH

All Rights Reserved

1Kenneth Kernaghan, David Siegel. Public Administration. Fourth Edition. Toronto: International Thomson Publishing. 1999. PG 462

2Kenneth Kernaghan, David Siegel. Public Administration. Fourth Edition. Toronto: International Thomson Publishing. 1999. PG 464

3Brooks, Stephen. Canadian Democracy: An Introduction. 2nd Edition. TO, ON: Oxford University Press. 1994. PG 135

4Brooks, Stephen. Canadian Democracy: An Introduction. 2nd Edition. TO, ON: Oxford University Press. 1994. PG 135

5Brooks, Stephen. Canadian Democracy: An Introduction. 2nd Edition. TO, ON: Oxford University Press. 1994. PG 135

6Kenneth Kernaghan, David Siegel. Public Administration. Fourth Edition. Toronto: International Thomson Publishing. 1999. PG 470

7Howlett, Michael, M.Ramesh. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. Second Edition. Canada: Oxford University Press 2003. PG 62

8Kenneth Kernaghan, David Siegel. Public Administration. Fourth Edition. Toronto: International Thomson Publishing. 1999. PG 31

9Jackson J. Robert & Doreen Jackson. Politics in Canada. 4th Edition. TO, ON: Prentice-Hall Canada. PG 381

Iranians to Boycott the Upcoming Olympic Games

 

Income Disparity in Iran

 

Income Disparity in Iran

Khomeini Hendi was obsessed with political power, and Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was an obstacle for him to have political power. Khomeini used British Broadcasting Corporation with the help of the US Democrat President Jimmy Carter to foment revolution in Iran. 

Khomeini besmirched Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi for plundering Iran's wealth. Once King unseated, he promised Iranians that he would transform Iran's economy into a free ride society. Most importantly, he would lead Iranians to everlasting salvation.

In 2006, the Export Development Canada released a report about the economic disparity in Iran.  The report stated that 75% of Iran's wealth owned by 10% of Iran's population. Consequently, 25% of Iran's wealth owned by 90% of the population. It means the purchasing power of Iranians is not in good standing.

The theocratic regime in Iran has an oligarchy economic system. The system designed to help Iran's power elite enrich themselves and decorate themselves with a luxury lifestyle and deprive the rest of the society of economic prosperity. The system does not have a foundation of a merit system. The strategy focused on those individuals that they wholeheartedly support the theocratic system in Iran.

Mr. Trump did not like the nuclear treaty the theocratic regime had in Iran. Mr. Trump nullified the treaty and imposed economic sanctions against Iran's regime to dismantle the cleric's financial foundation from four corners. The economic system in Iran is bankrupt.  

In conclusion, since its inception, Iran's regime did not develop economic policies to move Iranians toward economic prosperity. The clerics in Iran plunder Iran's wealth as Ali Khameini has $95 billion in foreign banks. In 2006, the income disparity defined in this light that 90% of Iranians owned 25% of Iran's wealth. It may have a small portion of a middle class. Now, the US economic sanctions vaporized the middle class. It can be said in total confidence that 90% of Iranians are living in abject poverty. 

Iranians to Boycott the Upcoming Olympic Games

Recently, Ms.Masih Alinejad launched a campaign to boycott the upcoming Olympics in light of Navid Afkari's death in the hands of the theocratic regime in Iran. Ms. Masih Alinejad's vision for a united front against the Islamic Republic of Iran requires understanding about Iran's free future. One group of athletics felt the campaign did not support their dreams of attending an international event. The last group thought it was the right way to confront the brutality of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The athletics should take a lesson from the Government of Canada for boycotting the 2022 Winter Olympics

One group of athletics did not support Ms. Alinjad's cause because they invested time and money to reach the pinnacle point of physical fitness. Now, in a moment to drop everything, walk away from their dreams and aspirations. This group did not find Ms. Alinjad's campaign fair to them and wanted to attend the upcoming Olympics.

The last group came with solidarity with Navid Afkari, who was killed and tortured in the clerics' hands under flagrant and unfounded criminal charges. This group did not want to ignore the regime's systemic use of brute forces against Iranians so that the cleric could remain in power.

On Tuesday, October 22nd, 2020, The Globe and Mail published an article about Uyghurs' predicament under the Ironclad of the Communist Party of China. Canada's Government has no tie with Uyghurs and is planning to boycott the 2022 Winter Olympic Games.¹ Canadian athletics do not receive any funds to prepare themselves for the Olympic Games. They invest their hard-earned money and time away from the enjoyment of life to prepare themselves for the Olympic Games.

In conclusion, the first group is right when it says time and money invested to reach the optimal fitness point. It is hard to walk away from an opportunity that may never come back. However, their action will cause Iran's regime to remain in power and kill more innocent individuals like Navid Afkari, Pouya Bakhtiari, Nader Mokhtari, and many other individuals whose life curtails in cold blood. Does anyone want to hold the flag of the Islamic Republic of Iran during the Olympic Games, which tainted in the blood of innocent peoples? It is a rhetoric question, and the answer is no.

The only time peace will come to Iran is when Iranians become selfless and understand more meaningful goals and honor. It is about becoming one voice. One united voice against Iran's theocratic regime, which is holding a sword and murdering people in cold blood without faith or mercy so that individual's like Navid Afkari can fulfill their dreams and not taking their dreams to grave.

For once, we can see Canada as a leading example for boycotting the 2022 Winter Olympic Games for Uyghurs that they have no connection with Canadians.

The case of boycotting the Olympic Games is about justice, and let justice prevail.

Endnote:

1https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-parliamentary-committee-calls-chinas-mistreatment-of-uyghurs/

Book Review Sasanian Empire The Rise and Fall of An Empire by Touraj Daryaee

 

Book Review Tom Holland published Rubicon The Last Year of the Roman Republic

 

Sasanian Empire: The Rise and Fall of An Empire by Touraj Daryaee

 Rise of the Sasanian Empire:

The Sasanian Empire, officially known as the Empire of Iranians Eranshahr and called the Neo-Persian Empire by historians, was the last Persian imperial dynasty before Islam arrived in the mid-seventh century AD. Named after the House of Sasan, it endured for over four centuries, from 224 to 651 AD, making it the longest-lived Persian dynasty. The Sasanian Empire succeeded the Parthian Empire and reestablished the Iranians as a superpower in late antiquity, alongside its neighboring archrival, the Roman-Byzantine Empire.

Ardashir I founded the Sasanian Empire, a local Iranian ruler who rose to power as Parthia weakened from internal strife and wars with Rome. After defeating the last Parthian shahanshah, Artabanus IV, in the battle of Hormozdgan in 224, he established the Sasanian dynasty and set out to restore the legacy of the Achaemenid Empire by expanding Iran's dominions. At its greatest extent, the Sasanian Empire encompassed all of present-day Iran and Iraq. It stretched from the eastern Mediterranean (including Anatolia and Egypt) to Pakistan and from southern Arabia to the Caucasus and Central Asia. According to legend, the vexilloid of the Empire was the Derafsh Kaviani.

The period of Sasanian rule is considered a high point in Iranian history. In many ways, it was the peak of ancient Iranian culture before the Muslim conquest and subsequent Islamisation. The Sasanians tolerated their subjects' varied faiths and cultures; developed a complex, centralized government bureaucracy; revitalized Zoroastrianism as a legitimizing and unifying force of their rule; built grand monuments public works; and patronized cultural and educational institutions. The Empire's cultural influence extended far beyond its territorial borders—including Western Europe, Africa, China, and India—and helped shape European and Asian medieval art. Persian culture became the basis for much of Islamic culture, influencing art, architecture, music, literature, and philosophy throughout the Muslim world.

The Perpetual Peace, signed in 532 between the East Roman (Byzantine) Empire and Sassanid Persia, was a peace treaty of indefinite duration, which concluded the Iberian War (527–531) between the two powers. It heralded a period of relatively cordial relations but lasted only until 540 when hostilities resumed over the control of Lazica.

When Persian King Kavadh I passed away (r. 488–531) in late 531, his third son Khosrau I (r. 531–579) ascended to the throne. The dynamic of the situation changed: Khosrau began to face domestic insecurity. The Byzantine Ruler, Emperor Justinian I (r. 527–565), was contemplating recovering the lost western half of the Roman Empire than pursuing a war against Persia. The Byzantine envoys Rufinus found Khosrau more conciliatory than his father. The Byzantine Ruler Justinian and an agreed to pay 11,000 pounds or 5000 Kilograms of gold, ostensibly contributing to the Caucasus's defense, passes against the barbarians living beyond. The base of the Mesopotamia would be withdrawn from the fortress of Dara to the city of Constantina. The two rulers would recognize once again each other as equal and pledged mutual assistance. Khosrau initially refused to hand back the two Lazic forts while demanding the return of the two other forts the Byzantines had captured in Persian Armenia. Justinian at first agreed but soon changed his mind, causing the agreement to be broken off. In summer 532, however, Hermogenes and Rufinus's new embassy managed to persuade Khosrau for a full exchange of the occupied forts and allow the exiled Iberian rebels to either remain in the Byzantine Empire or return unmolested to their homes.

Fall of the Sasanian Empire:

Khosrau, in coordination with Avar and Slavic forces, launched a siege on the Byzantine capital of Constantinople in 626. The Sassanids, led by Shahrbaraz, attacked the city on the Bosphorus's eastern side, while his Avar and Slavic allies invaded from the western side. The Byzantine fleet blocked attempts to ferry the Persian forces across the Bosphorus to aid their allies, the Slavic troops being by far the most capable in siege warfare, the siege failed. In 627–628, Heraclius mounted a winter invasion of Mesopotamia, and, despite the departure of his Khazar allies, defeated a Persian army commanded by Rhahzadh in the Battle of Nineveh. He then marched down the Tigris, devastating the country and sacking Khosrau's palace at Dastagerd. He prevented attacking Ctesiphon by destroying the Nahrawan Canal bridges and conducted further raids before withdrawing up the Diyala into north-western Iran.

Queen Boran, daughter of Khosrau II, the first woman and one of the last rulers on the throne of the Sasanian Empire, reigned from 17 June 629 to 16 June 630. 

The impact of Heraclius's victories, the devastation of the richest territories of the Sassanid Empire, and the humiliating destruction of high-profile targets such as Ganzak and Dastagerd fatally undermined Khosrau's prestige and his support among the Persian aristocracy. In early 628, he was overthrown and murdered by his son Kavadh II (628), who immediately brought an end to the war, agreeing to withdraw from all occupied territories.

 In 629, Heraclius restored the True Cross to Jerusalem in a majestic ceremony. Kavadh died within months, and chaos and civil war followed. Over four years and five successive kings, the Sassanid Empire weakened considerably. The power of the central authority passed into the hands of the generals. It would take several years for a strong king to emerge from a series of coups, and the Sassanids never had time to recover fully.

In early 632, a grandson of Khosrau I, who had lived in hiding in Estakhr, Yazdegerd III, acceded to the throne. The same year, the first raiders from the Arab tribes, newly united by Islam, arrived in Persian territory. Years of warfare had exhausted both the Byzantines and the Persians. The Sassanids were further weakened by economic decline, heavy taxation, religious unrest, rigid social stratification, the increasing power of the provincial landholders, and a rapid turnover of rulers, facilitating Persia's Islamic conquest.

Book Review: Tom Holland published "Rubicon: The Last Year of the Roman Republic."

In 2003, Tom Holland published "Rubicon: The Last Year of the Roman Republic." This book has eleven chapters. 

What does Rubicon mean? An act of winning a game against an opponent whose total score is less than 100, in which case the loser's score is added to rather than subtracted from the winner's.

What does it mean crossing Rubicon? Irrevocably commit to a course of action, make a fateful and final decision. For example, Once he submitted his resignation, he had crossed the Rubicon. This phrase alludes to Julius Caesar's crossing the Rubicon River (between Italy and Gaul) in 49 b.c., thereby starting a war against Pompey and the Roman Senate.

Is there a body of water Rubicon? The Latin word Rubico comes from the adjective rubeus, meaning "red." The river was so named because its waters are colored red by mud deposits.

During the Roman Republic, the river Rubicon marked the boundary between the Roman province of Cisalpine Gaul to the northeast and Italy proper, controlled directly by Rome and its socii (allies), to the south. On the northwestern side, the river Arno border, a much broader and more critical waterway, flows westward from the Apennine Mountains (it and the Rubicon rise not far from each other) Tyrrhenian Sea.

Julius Caesar paused on the banks of the Rubicon. In 49 BC, perhaps on January 10, Julius Caesar led a single legion XIII Gemina, south over the Rubicon from Cisalpine Gaul to Italy to make his way to Rome. In doing so, he deliberately broke the law limiting his imperium, making armed conflict inevitable. Suetonius depicts Caesar as undecided as he approached the river and attributes the crossing to a supernatural apparition. It was reported that Caesar dined with Sallust, Hirtius, Gaius Oppius, Lucius Cornelius Balbus, and Servius Sulpicius Rufus on the night after his crossing.

What is a triumvirate? A triumvirate is a political regime ruled or dominated by three powerful individuals known as triumvirs. The arrangement can be formal or informal. Though the three are notionally equal, this is rarely the case in reality. The term can also be used to describe a state with three different military leaders who all claim to be the sole leader.

Originally, triumviri were special commissions of three men appointed for specific administrative tasks apart from Roman magistrates' regular duties. For instance, the triumviri capitals oversaw prisons and executions, along with other functions that, as Andrew Lintott notes, show them to have been "a mixture of police superintendents and justices of the peace." The capitals were first established around 290 to 287 BC. The praetor Urbanus supervised them. These triumviri, or the tresviri nocturni, may also have taken some responsibility for fire control. The triumviri mentalis ("triumviri of the temple of Juno the Advisor" or "monetary triumvirs") supervised the issuing of Roman coins.

Three-person commissions were also appointed to establish colonies (triumviri coloniae deducendae) or distribute land. Triumviri mensarii served as public bankers; the full range of their financial functions in 216 BC, when the commission included two men of consular rank, has been debated. Another form of three-person commission was the tresviri epulones, who were in charge of organizing public feasts on holidays. This commission was created in 196 BC by a tribunician law on behalf of the people, and their number was later increased to seven (septemviri epulones). 

The term is most commonly used by historians to refer to the First Triumvirate of Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus, and Pompey the Great. The Second Triumvirate of Octavians later Caesar Augustus, Mark Antoney, and Marcus Aemilius Lepidus.

Caesar had served the Republic for eight years in the Gallic Wars, fully conquering Gaul's region (roughly equivalent to modern-day France). After the Roman Senate demanded Caesar disband his army and return home as a civilian, he refused. He crossed the Rubicon River with his army and plunging Rome into Caesar's Civil War in 49 BC. After defeating the last of the opposition, Caesar was appointed "dictator in perpetuity" in early 44 BC.

Julius Caesar, the Roman dictator, was assassinated by a group of senators on the Ides of March (15 March) of 44 BC during a Senate meeting at Pompey's Theatre in Rome. The senators stabbed Caesar 23 times. The senators claimed to be acting over fears that Caesar's unprecedented concentration of power during his dictatorship undermined the Roman Republic and presented the deed as an act of tyrannicide. At least 60 senators were party to the conspiracy, led by Marcus Brutus, Gaius Cassius, and Decimus Brutus. Despite the death of Caesar, the conspirators were unable to restore the institutions of the Republic. The assassination's ramifications led to the Liberators' civil war and ultimately to the Principate period of the Roman Empire.

Why Khomeini selected Khalkhali for killing of Iranians چرا خمینی خلخالی را برای قتل ایرانیان انتخاب

 

Wake-Up Iranians

Recently, Ph.D., medical doctor Rahim Rahmanzadeh wrote a letter to Ayatollah (Sign of God) Ali Khameini because Dr. Rahmanzedeh predicts the theocratic regime Iran will collapse in some near future. He is asking the head of Iran, Ali Khameini, to relinquish power and retire from the world of politics. Dr. Rahmanzedeh invites other Iranians in high society to join in his cause to convince cleric Khameini to step down from power. Let's examine how Iran's regime will collapse and why Iranians need to rely on themselves and not anyone else.

There are two reasons for the regime in Iran to collapse. The primary reason is the collapse of Iran's economy. The economic nature of the regime in Iran is an oligarchy system. The power elite in plunder Iran's wealth. Therefore, Iran's national economy is empty. Currently, poverty is on the rise in Iran.  There is nothing that can stop the train derailment of the regime in Iran.  It is a foregone conclusion. Iran's society is composed of two classes. There is no middle class. A class that has nothing, a class has everything. The class has nothing, and more members of society join the class. The rest of society has everything made of a handful of loyal servants of the 1979 Revolution in Iran.  These individuals in Iran are living a luxury life style. This deluxe segment of society comprises the cleric class, the Revolutionary Guards class, the Paramilitary factions like Basij, and the plainclothes individuals. 

The ancillary reason for Iran's regime will collapse because of Mr. Trump's economic sanctions against Iran's system are causing financial hardship on Iranians. 

The US Presidential Election of 2020 caused hope and dreams for Iranians in exile to have a lifetime chance to bring the regime in Iran down. 

 In this presidential election, it has two front runners—Mr. Joe Bidden and incumbent President Mr. Trump.  Mr. Bidden promises that if he gets elected to the president's office, he will lift the economic sanctions against Iran's cleric regime. Mr. Trump's action plan against Iran's regime is clear, more economic sanctions against Iran's ruler until the regime in Iran collapses in the hands of Iranians. 

Iranians in exile do not want to see Mr. Bidden during the upcoming election will be elected to the president's office because Iran's cleric regime will remain in power.  Iranians in exile want to see Mr. Trump will be elected to the president's office for the second time. Iranians are going through old news and are gathering information about Mr. Bidden's relation with Ms. Hillary that how they knew about the cleric's involvement in the Middle East to form terrorist entities or Mr. Bidden's son had a connection with a Ukrainian corporation. 

Iranians are also hoping for a high society like Pheroz Naderi to cast their votes during this upcoming election to Mr. Trump. However, he said he would be voting for Mr. Bidden. Iranians are also hoping Anousheh Ansari or others will vote for Mr. Trump. 

Iranians need to wake-up. They do not need to hope and dream that someone will come and save the day by the bell. Iran will be saved because of Navid Afkari. Iran will be saved because of Pouya Bakhtiari. Iranians need to understand when Jimmy Carter brought Mohammad Reza Shah's Pahlavi down; the economic system was performing optimally. Today's the economy of Iran collapsed because the cleric in Iran plundered Iran's wealth. 

In conclusion, let's not hope someone can move their magic wand for a miracle to happen in Iran. Iranians must determine Iran's future. The theocratic regime in Iran will collapse because it is Iranians wills. We do not need high society or a US president to help us to bring peace to Iran. We must hold each other's hands to bring peace to Iran.  

Wise Political Leader

 During the Cold War, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was the head of state of Iran. It was a complicated time to govern a nation. Iran's security threatens from two sides. One, Russia, located in the northern part of Iran, the Russian Red Army did not contemplate to capture Iranian territory anymore. The Red Army remained behind its national border. Last, Iraq was located on the west of Iran; Iraq received military support and political ideology support from Russia to attack Iran. Iran welcomed Iraq's military confrontation. However, Iraq stepped down from its ambitious plan to conquer Iran.

In 1979, Jimmy Carter installed Khomeini in power in Iran with the British Broadcasting Corporation's assistance. Khomeini began to wage holy war against Iraq and the neighboring nations. His foreign policy failed after every step. 

In conclusion, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was a wise king who governed Iran without causing a single bullet to be fired from a soldier's assault rifle.  Plus, Iran's economy, science, and environment were making progress. However, the theocratic regime that inherited Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi's modern nation turned into stone age. Thus, this is the reason Iranians are chanting Long Live the King and not because of nostalgia. 

The Price Tag of Being Silent

There is no such thing as a free lunch. However, Khomeini promised free lunch for Iranians because Khomeini wanted to topple Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as the head of Iran's leader and make himself the absolute ruler of Iran. The large portion of the Iranians' population believed what Khomeini promised them because he wore a black turban on his head. The black turban on his head signified that he had family lineage to Prophet Muhammad. It was customary in Iran that a person who had family lineage to Prophet Muhammad was trustworthy. 

At this particular moment, Khomeini lived outside of Iran and used the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) to shape Iranians' public opinion. Khomeini propagated the Machiavellian doctrine of free ride society such as free housing, water, electricity, public transportation to Iranians; people became blinded with Khomeini's free lunch. Khomeini also promised salvation to Iranians. As a religious figure, Khomeini accused the King of plundering Iran's wealth, and the King was an infidel. Khomeini also accused the King of the puppet of the US. The public became enraged about the King, who did not adhere to Islamic values.  

Khomeini's foot soldiers began to claim Khomeini's facial hair was discovered in the middle of the Korans. People were looking inside of their Korans to find Khomeini's facial hair. To this very day, no one discovered Khomeini's hair in the middle of Korans. Khomeini's foot soldiers began to claim Khomeini's image appeared on the moon. People looked at the moon at night to see Khomeini on the moon. They could not see him on the moon. Superstition in this nature began to spread in Iran like cancer rapidly. 

Khomeini and his followers were not short of ideas to deteriorate the relationship between the House of Pahlavi and the People of Iran. Khomeini and his followers accused Her Majesty, Queen Farah Pahlavi, of having an intimate relationship with a German shepherd. Khomeini and his followers claimed that Her Majesty took a bath with milk. 

Some of the accusations stemmed from western history. At that moment, Khomeini and his followers illustrated Her Majesty Farah Pahlavi in light of French Queen Marie Antoinette, consort of Louis XVI of France, that she was profligate, oblivion of the current time, and promiscuous. The western history had Countess Elizabeth Báthory de Ecsed, who accused of taking bloodbath. The cleric charged Queen Pahlavi, who took a milk bath. 

Her Majesty never took a milk bath, and when His Majesty closed his eyes. Her Majesty dedicated her life to her family and philanthropy works. 

On January 17th, 1979, the King left Iran; it caused a power vacuum in Iran's leadership. On February 01st, 1979, Khomeini returned to Iran after fifteen years of exile. When an American journalist asked Khomeini, how do you feel returning to Iran after fifteen years of exile? Khomeini said, "nothing."  

Khomeini depicted himself as a man of God to Iranians. He had no interest in politics and had no hidden agenda. Khomeini pretended that upon arrival in Iran, Khomeini wanted to go to Qom to study Islamic theology. There was a different story when he returned to Iran; he asked his henchman Ebhrahim Yezdi, a CIA agent, to implement the CIA's instructions. Mr. Yezdi had the names of the military staff to be executed. Khomeini appointed Mohammed Sadeq Givi Khalkhali as a judge, who did not have legal training. However, he was a judge not to restore justice, fairness, and equality, but to cause fear, fraud, and force in Iran. People gave him the title of the hanging judge. He wanted to relive the French Revolution in his time with his formula. Mr. Khalkhali formed kangaroo courts in Iran that only carried the death sentence. He also watched those death sentences. He needed to see blood was coming out of people's bodies.

In February 1979, the revolutionary forces spotted General Rahimi in the street. He was detained and imprisoned. Mr. Yezdi did not have any legal training; he began to act as a Crown Attorney. He accused the general of killing people. Mr. Rahimi did not have a lawyer to defend himself. The legal trial lack due-process. General Rahimi said that he did not order his soldiers to open fire at people (according to the cartel western media, which supported Iran's revolutionary forces. Iranian soldiers were killing people every day). During the mock trial, Mr. Yezdi, several times, pressed hard general Rahimi to turn his back to the King. General Rahimi refused to do so. General Rahimi knew Mr. Yezdi wanted his blood; why should general Rahimi bow to Mr. Yezdi? 

Mr. Yezdi cut general Rahimi's hand while he was alive, used torture, and many inhumane methods to harm general Rahimi. Later on, cleric Khalkhali convicted general Rahimi for Waging War Against Allah and Spreading Corruption on Earth. On February 17th, 1979, the Revolutionary Forces executed the general on the Refa School's rooftop. Aftermath, Khomeini did not waste general Rahimi's blood. He performed ablution from the blood of general Rahimi.   

Amir Abbas Hoveyda was Prime Minister of Iran from January 27th, 1965 to August 7th, 1977. During his time as a Prime Minister of Iran, he transformed Iran's economy. Iran's economy was not moving downward; Iran's economy was moving upward; Iran's currency gained international recognition. Between the fiscal year 1964 and 1978, Iran's gross national product grew at an annual rate of 13.2 percent at constant prices. The oil, gas, and construction industries expanded by almost 500 percent during this period, while the share of value-added manufacturing increased by 4 percent. Women's participation in the labor force in urban areas increased—Iranian women from different social stratification gained employment in the semiskilled and skilled labor forces. Also, the number of women enrolling in higher education increased from 5,000 in 1967 to more than 74,000 in 1978.1 He envisioned an Iran for Iranians that every household should own a Peykan or Hillman Hunter. When he was in the Prime Minister's Officer, the price of one pen remained the same. He made sure that inflation would not deter foreign and domestic investors from investing in Iran. Iran made several economic bridges with neighboring nations like India. He never stole anything from Iran or Iranians. Hoveyda respected the faith of Islam. He allocated $11 million toward Islamic institutions from the public funds. 

The revolutionary forces sought Hoveyda to bring him to justice. His friends and family asked him to leave Iran. However, he remained confident that he was an honest man who did not do anything wrong. He turned himself to the revolutionary forces. The revolutionary forces took him to the Qasr Prison, and on March 15th, 1979, Christine Ockren began to do yellow journalism with Hoveyda. She event so far from accusing Hoveyda of putting people in prison. Someone allowed her to interview Hoveyda so that this interviewed break Hoveyda's spirit. 

On April 17th, 1979, Khalkhali summoned Hoveyda to his court. Khalkhali accused everyone of a criminal offense of spreading corruption on earth and one count of a criminal violation of waging war against Allah. The above crimes carried the death sentence. Hoveyda did not have a lawyer to defend himself against the charges. Khalkhali believed due-process was a waste of time. Khalkhali thought if there were an error of judgment in his decision, people would be going to heaven in the next life. Khalkhali sentenced Hoveyda to a death sentence.

Hoveyda was taken from the mock trial to the Qasr Prison as cleric Hadi Ghafari used his gun and shot him twice in the neck. His idea was to inflict pain in Hoveyda and give him a quick and clean death. 

Farrokhroo Parsa was born in a liberal-minded family whose mother was a feminist. She earned her medical degree and began to teach biology. In 1963, Parsa elected to the parliament. She introduced a private Bill for women's equality. In 1965, she was appointed as the Deputy of the Minister of Education. On August 27th, 1968, she became the Minister of Education. 

Parsa did not stand against Islam. She had cleric like Mohammad Hossein Beheshti, Mohammad-Javad Bahonar, on the Ministery's payroll to contribute to Islam. Parsa helped the Islamic figures like Mohammad Hossein Beheshti with financial resources to The Islamic Centre Hamburg. She provided public funds for Mohammad-Javad Bahonar to build Islamic Public Schools around the city of Tehran. However, the Islamic Revolutionary Courts found her guilty of waging war against Allah, and on May 8th, 1980, the Revolutionary Court executed her.

The cleric regime accused anyone of anything. By November 1979, the death toll was 550, and by January 1980, the number had reached at least 582. Between January 1980 and June 1981, the regime executed 906 persons. 

In 1980, Khomeini asked the Iraqi people to revolt against Saddam Hussein's establishment and overthrew Iraq's system. Mr. Huseein did not like what Khomeini advocated and declared war against Iran. Iran and Iraq war lasted from 1980 to 1988. During this timeframe, close to one million people died from both sides. Many times, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait offered peace to Khomeini to stop the madness in the region. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait offered compensation packages for Iraq and Iran. However, Khomeini said that he would liberate the Iraqi people from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, he would librate Palestinian people from the Israel occupation. He uttered the above slogans every year during the month of Ramadan. 

In July 1988, Khomeini signed a truce with Iraq and could not continue the war with Iraq. He issued a religious decree to erase the left-wing factions because they were infidels. He knew that by allowing the left-wing factions released from the prisons, they would topple the regime. Thus, Khomeini did not want anyone or anything to pose a threat to his theocratic regime. He executed the Tudeh, Majority Fedayi, Minority Fedayi, other Fedayi, Kumaleh, Rah-e Kargar, Peykar, and MEK. He even killed pregnant women, too. There is a guess estimate that Khomeini tainted his hands in the blood of 33 000 persons. 

The story of the killing did not end here. The cleric began to kill the intellectuals. This series of killing is known as the Chain Murder. The killing ground was not inside of Iran. The regime's death scout traveled outside of Iran's comfort zone and assassinated Iranian intellectuals in foreign lands. 

Since the post-revolution of 1979 in Iran, the price tag of being silent as we remained silent due to secure personal safety, but we compromised our freedom.  

In the First wave of killing, the cleric came after the monarchist; the cleric killed them because they Waged War Against Allah. Everyone remained silent. 

In the second wave of killing, the cleric went after the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces because the Armed Forces wanted to do a Coup. Everyone remained silent. 

In the third wave of killing, the cleric had an ambitious plan to attack Iraq, conquer the neighboring nations, and convert everyone in the region to the Shia-sect under the pretense of liberating Palestinians from the occupation of Israel. Everyone remained silent. 

In the fourth wave of killing, the cleric went after the left-wing factions because they did not believe in Allah. Everyone remained silent. 

In the fifth wave of killing, the cleric went after the intellectuals because they posed a threat to Allah, Islam, and Muhammad. Everyone remained silent. 

In the sixth wave of killing, the cleric went after student activists wanted freedom of speech and killed them. Everyone remained silent. 

In the seventh wave of killing, the cleric went after the green movement activist and killed them because they pose a threat to selected president Mahmoud Ahmadi Nezhad. Everyone remained silent. 

Everyone poses a threat to the theocratic regime's security; someone like Neda Agha Sultan was walking peacefully in the crowd. The security forces shot her on her chest, and died. Everyone remained silent. 

In the eighth wave of killing, the cleric brought down the PS 752 airplane and killed innocent individuals. We remained passive-aggressive. 

The cleric went after innocent individuals who only question why are the price of the goods skyrocketing and cannot afford the basic necessity of life like Navid Akari? The system brought forward flagrant criminal charges against Afkari of committing murder. The system tortures Afkar to the point of death, and in the middle of the night, he was buried.  Everyone kind of remained silent. 

When Iranians are silent, the cleric regime kills us and plundering Iran's wealth like Hashemi Rafsanjani. The latter funnel funds in Canada and built HWY 407 in the Province of Ontario and Center Point Mall in Toronto, ON. Ali Khameini claims to be Ayatollah or Sign of God, has over $95 billion in foreign banks. It is time to come together, sons and daughters of Iran Zamin, to put aside the difference and hold each other's hands to push the Ahrimans out of Iran Zamin. So Iran and Iranians can live in peace and prosperity. Otherwise, the mullahs are going to kill us one by one. We have no one but ourselves to defend ourselves against the authoritarian and oppressive regime in Iran.

Copyright © 2020 Peyman ADL DOUSTI HAGH

All Rights Reserved

Endnote:

1. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data