Is it any wonder a murderous government welcomes an assassin murderer and treats him like a hero? Of course not, so no need to say any more on that. Is it any wonder though that a Western democracy frees a killer and deals with a terrorist state?
Dr. Bakhtiar's killer, Ali Vakili Raad, was today freed and returned to Iran. Most Western media simply refer to Shapour Bakhtiar as the Shah's last Prime Minister, but Bakhtiar was a lot more than that. This mountain of a man fought in the Spanish Civil War as an International Brigadist against General Franco's Fascism. Later, he volunteered and fought in the Orleans battalion and in the French Resistance against Hitler. He spent a total of six years in Shah's prisons and was the only significant opposition figure to the Shah, who had the foresight to warn Iranians in 1979 that mixing religion and state will have tragic consequences. This mountain of man fought against despotism and tyranny all his life to the very end, and this is how a Western democracy betrayed him, time and time again.
Bakhtiar survived an earlier assassination which resulted in the death of two French citizens and the permanent paralysis of a French policeman. His assassin then, Enis Naqash, was also returned to Iran after some lucrative contract. Bakhtiar's murder and that of his secretary Soroush Katibeh was with the lucid collusion of the Mitterand government at the time with the Islamic Republic. France's betrayal and collusion with the terrorists is therefore not a one off event.
'Never underestimate the capacity of the French for moral relativism and plain double dealing, not to mention their ability to organise a swift coverup and to boldly tell blatant lies. That is the way of government in France and has long been so.'
What a sad day. I like to call the past thirty one years of world political history:ماتت تاریخ (Asshole of history) compares to the term ماقبل تاریخ (Pre-history)
Shapour Bakhtiar was the only chance for a civilized outcome to 1979. Release of the terrorist by France proves yet again the ethical standard of today's world leaders. I wonder how these people get elected. Do their constituents also think likewise? Once a frog always a frog.
jahanam ra gozarooundi? jakesh qatel vakili rad. agar jahanami hast jaat ounjast.
Vakili Rad a filthy hired murderer for the teh facist Islamic Government!
LONG LIVE THE MEMORY OF SHPOUR BAKHTIAR! IRAN WILL BE FREE.
Don't forget that one day after the brutal assassination of Dr. Bakhtiar (i.e. 8th August 1991), Islamic Jihad in Lebanon freed the British hostage, John McCarthy, as a gift to the British and French intelligence services, who turned a blind eye on Bakhtiar's murder in Paris a day before. Shame on the French, who are always acting as a political harlot.
This is truly tragic.
Some months ago I read about a possible deal in the pipeline over that murderer Vakili Rad's release in exchange for Reiss. It doesn't surprise me that the French have done this. Had it not been for the Swiss police Vakili Rad would have escaped - the French border police had let him exit the country despite there being a manhunt for the three assassins. Then the trial itself was a shambles - under pressure from the Rafsanjani regime - the French gov't tried in every way they could to prevent the trial from succeeding - finally the result being that the filthy motherfucker Vakili Rad received a jail sentence with parole eligibility after 18 years.
In my eyes, France have always been a nation of arrogant, spineless, double crossing tossers. Everything from their foreign policy to their stance on the Euro sucks. Makes me cringe to think that the French live their lives under a motto of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité - what a mockery of liberty and equality.
I'm still hopeful for real justice to be served and that the lives of Dr Abdolrahman Boroumand, Soroush Katibeh and Dr Shapour Bakhtiar were not taken in vain. Their contribution to Iran will never be forgotten.
Fuck the IRI and all those who support the regime.
again, you don't agree with the french, so they must be so horrible and spineless.
the truth is, nations do things in their own interest and not in your itnerest you fuck nut. SO according to you, the french foreign policy is wrong or spineless? why don't you tell us how you think that is? explain to us why you think that. I want to know how the mind of a demented traitor thinks.
Bakhtiar was a traitor to his people and deserved to die. I wish we could have gotten to the Shah as well, but cancer got him first.
In the end, the IRI got what it wanted, the man who killed Bakhtiar was and is a hero of Iran. We had to purge all former shah lackeys...and he was one. Sorry for your loss!
French..... What can you expect from these idiots? Spineless and morons. They surrender to the higher bidder.
Ultimately we live in this cynical world of political football. Iron curtain exchanges perhaps setting the precedent. Morally it's obnoxious: The freedom of the innocent secured by the freedom of the guilt ridden... I'm glad the French girl is free, but deplore the price of liberating a murderer! Therefore we can only hope that the cheers of the current regime soon become the jeers of the people where a proper justice of the Iranian people ultimately prevail!
Umm... Bakhtiar wasn't a "lackey" of that Shah's...
Shouldn't you know that SZ?
Turns out the only people that are "horrible and spineless" are the ones who have to capture a French girl to get back a "hero." LOL
They should have just let him be martyred so they can put his poster up somewhere and prey to him like the pagans they are.
1) On Bakhtiar: It was at the crucial moment of January 1979, when Bakhtiar was Prime Minister, that, following a much-publicized State Department briefing, Carter/Brzezinski sent former US Attorney General Ramsay Clark to Tehran, where he made it very clear, very publicly, that 'Khomeini will win,' and then to Paris, where the US government emphasized that he was speaking for it by having him picked up and driven in an embassy car to meet with Khomeini.
Both in the case of France and of the United States, I do not think these policies are spineless, that is, carried out because of weakness. I think they are criminal. It is the IR that is weak, while these powerful states do what they can to give the IR an appearance of power.
2) On comic relief, which we all need: I see that SZ-Barmakid Inc. have been exhumed.
Having been trashed in the discussion posted May 9, entitled "Five Iranians Executed This Morning," first as regards the dispute over the Iranian flag, and then, in that same discussion, being exposed as a team, with SZ and Barmakid using violent sexual language to silence opposition, and then barmakid praising SZ as "exponentially more educated and worthy" than the anti-IR people on the blog -- now IR ‘Team Stooge’ is attempting a makeover.
Makeover step 1: they have the SZ personna (whoever it is) play bad cop, calling for murdering all lackies of the Shah. Since SZ claims Bakhtiar, jailed for years by the Shah, was a lackey, and since SZ claims everyone on this blog is likewise pro-Shah, this statement is obviously another of the team’s would-be threats.
I suggest the team members peruse the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRrX0xGk1BE&NR=1 that shows what happened to some anti-riot police in Tehran in Dec. Maybe the team members are the ones who ought to be worried.
Makeover step 2: next the Barmakid persona chimes in, ‘disagreeing’ with SZ, and seeming to mock the IR. The idea is that, having been threatened by bad cop SZ, we will embrace this good cop, the supposedly now-'changed' Barmakid.
The point of this charade is to sell us the idea that France is not horrible for releasing the killer. According to the good cop side of the team, it was forced to do so because the IR had kidnapped a French woman.
Releasing the assassin was a POLICY statement. If governments made important policy decisions whenever minor citizens were kidnapped, there could be no coherent government, since enemies could kidnap tourists whenever they wanted to change a policy.
If France wanted to condemn the IR's murderous post-June repression, including the relatively minor incident of the jailing of the French woman -- if that were its policy -- it would have broken diplomatic relations with the IR gangsters, and thrown them out of the country, instead of first begging to be allowed to send them processed uranium, thus boosting the IR's status, and then releasing this murderer of the only legitimate Prime Minister of Iran since Mohammad Mosaddeq.
This would have sent shock waves around the world and throughout Iran, causing wavering elements to consider joining the people while they still could.
They have taken the opposite stance. The release of the assassin at the present time constitutes a strong message to the world, just a month before the anniversary of the June outbreak of rebellion.
This message from France: that the release of the assassin of Bakhtiar is no big deal, since it was paid for with the release of a French citizen who was both a minor figure and innocent. Therefore, the assassination of Bakhtiar – that is, of the legitimate head of state of Iran – is also no big deal. Therefore, the current terror by those who sent the assassin is also no big deal. IR terror is legitimate, and so is the IR.
That is the message the French government has delivered. Now the question is, what will the French people do about this crime, and when?
Digusting - that is all I can say otherwise I am speechless.
This is "engagement" and "dialogue" in practice.
again, here you are with your lavish conspiracy theories about me and other posters on this blog.
I also noticed you didn't respond to my post in the previous blog entry...since you didn't respond to my post, you must be guilty of what i accused you of. That is the logic you use, so i will go ahead and use it against you.
on to the point. You are claiming that me and barmakid are a "team" and that we are working in concert to disrupt somehow your presence on this blog, or other opinions on this blog. If that is the case, then provide some evidence, and prove what you are saying. If you can't prove it, then shut the hell up about it.
Obviously, conspiracy theories are your forte, and you are adept at coming up with detailed theories as to why people post, and what their ulterior motives are. The truth is that you are a joke, and a mockery of civil discourse. I read over your site, and it is filled with elaborate conspiracy theories that have no evidence whatsoever. but to each his own.
On to the point about France. France and any other country for that matter, will do whatever it wants and whatever is in its best interest. People like you, who are against Iran, will swear up and down that countries which don't do exactly what you think should be done, are criminal, and therefore are supporting a "terrorist regime" in Iran. The truth is that most of the world, including the NAM (non-aligned movement) and rising world powers such as Brazil and India...support Iran in its quest to gain nuclear technology and regional hegemony.
The only countries that don't support it, are the US, UK, and other European "powers."
Either way, the Iranian government is supported by a majority of Iranians, it has popular support and that is something that cannot be denied. The unrest in Iran after the elections were nothing but a blip, which the government dealt with appropriately and efficiently.
You can talk all you want about different reasons I post on this blog, or about why others think the way they do, but your elaborate conspiracy theories don't have anything to do with reality. You are a delusional person who is unfortunately, a waste of food and oxygen.
Your talent for discerning the truth is unprecedented. How did you know me and SZ were the same people?
Please put this nonsense to rest and let aghaye Israel know that I AM NOT SZ. And that my comments are not intended to win over his lot.
1) It is of course possible that my hypothesis that Barmakid and SZ are a good cop/bad cop comedy team (not necessarily one real person) is incorrect. However, given their remarkable synergy, this suggests that incoherent post modernism (Barmakid) and clerical fascism (SZ) attract spontaneously, which is scarier because the western middle class is littered with incoherent post modernists. What will become of us?
2) As for the issues.
SZ's claim that the Iranian mass movement is a blip is ludicrous.
Youtube swarms with visual evidence of mass action despite the cruelest repression; despite the green leadership’s attempt to reign in intensity and repress any political rejection of the IR system; and despite the spectacle of the key Western powers, the US, the EU and the Vatican, essentially coddling Ahmadinejad/Khamenei with a fervor that has grown with the repression, achieving the height of the release of the murderer of Dr. Bakhtiar.
Instead of politically isolating Ahmadinejad/Khamenei for their murderous abuses, from the start of the June protests Obama spoke of Khamanei as if he were a wise and neutral leader.
Thus at a June 16 press conference Obama said: "You've seen in Iran some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election." By calling him "the supreme leader" rather than "Mr. Khamenei," Obama was accepting Khamenei's status as the "hidden mahdi's" voice on earth. And Obama made this remark after Khamenei publicly stated twice that it was an attack on God to question let alone demonstrate against the election results, thus approving state terror!
At the same time, Obama and Clinton cast Ahmadinejad as the youthful rebel, understandably angry because of past Western missteps. Hence their repeated public declaration that they were "reaching out" to Ahmadinejad, a term used in the US when one tries to communicate with an unjustly treated and/or understandably angry person.
Obama and Clinton never once made the simple statement that the IR was guilty of murder -- instead, death was described as sometimes happening as a tragic consequence of clashes. Clashes! Basij shooting people from rooftops. Clashes!
At the end of June, Obama/Clinton dropped even their initial, cursory and understated criticism, and were subsequently almost entirely silent about the massive repression in the summer, fall and winter.
Instead they beseeched and cajoled the IR to negotiate.
This positioned Ahmadinejad in the delightful public relations position of the inheritor of the mantle of great power opponent of the US and EU -- Nikita Khrushchev reborn (one might phraphrase Marx and say, a tragedy reborn as a farce).
And it positioned him as the non-western leader defending the forgotten south of the world against the fierce imperialists who want nobody but them to have power. The easiest role to play, especially when you have scriptwriters in Tehran and Langley, Virginia.
That what these fierce imperialists were actually demanding -- that the IR let the West ship it tons of processed uranium -- was preposterous (a bit like telling a horse: 'I DEMAND that you eat sugar!') has made it abundantly clear to third world leaders, who are generally abusers of their own people, though rarely up to the standards of brutality and contempt for criticism of the IR –- this has made it clear to those leaders that by going with the IR they can pose as anti-imperialists even as they repress their populations in the interests of their own already deep pockets and of the massive international business interests with whom they are inextricably intertwined.
(Continued from above)
And in case some leaders might not grasp that the US really wants them to get into bed with Ahmadinejad and Khamenei, the US has made it perfectly clear. Case in point: this from the US State Department briefing of May 4th:
[State Dept Briefing starts here]
QUESTION: I was wondering if you had any more information about the Secretary’s meeting with the Brazilian foreign minister yesterday. Specifically, I'm wondering if they talked about this idea of Brazil and Turkey mediating with Iran. And is there any sense that you're getting closer to consensus, possible consensus, on the sanctions?
[Dep't spokesman] MR. CROWLEY: Well, I was in that bilateral with the Secretary yesterday and Foreign Minister Amorim. The conversation lasted about 20 minutes. Both – the foreign minister updated the Secretary on his recent trip to Tehran, what he told the Iranians, how he perceived their response. The Secretary went through where we are in the process within the Security Council. I think the foreign minister indicated that there will be a high-level trip to Tehran in the next couple of weeks – I’ll leave it to Brazil to announce – and that we would also – we’d be waiting to hear what the results of that trip were.
QUESTION: Does the Secretary feel that the Brazilian efforts at mediation or whatever you want to call it are bearing any fruit at all, or is this a useful process? Did she tell him that we are grateful for their efforts here, or what?
MR. CROWLEY: I mean, certainly, we are – we do recognize the value and importance of a variety of countries engaging Iran.
[State Dept Briefing ends here]
By the way, SZ keeps writing that "nations have interests," not morals. Nonsense. All nations have DIVIDED interests, based on class and other internal divisions, and in every nation there are many for whom justice is an 'interest.' If that were not the case all Iranians would support the clerical fascist Ahmadinejad, instead of most fighting him or supporting the fight.
A great deal has been done in the West by the ruling elite to stifle those who would otherwise dissent. Part of the process has been to make the only loud-voiced outlet for dissent the Right, with which most people have strong disagreements.
But I do not for a moment believe that most French people approve the release of the murderer of Dr. Bakhtiar. Indeed, in this case, France has played the not unfamiliar role of flunky of the greater powers in the 'international community,' debasing its name so that they may empower the IR terrorists.
Jared, I had not seen your comments on this blog before now... but truly I am impressed with your knowledge.
As one who is conservative and never been a socialist, I applaud your analysis.
I remember some of that period when Carter behaved in such a crass way as to invite Khomenei to go to Iran. It was sickening at the time... it remains sickening that it ever happened.
As for Obumbles... I agree with your analysis. He only spoke out because Angela Merkel made him say something after the death of Neda. Otherwise he was prepared to remain silent.. to act the hypocrite, especially when he was muttering about not interfering in another country as he then set forth to interfere in the internal affairs of the Honduras. (fyi I was in the USA and watching the clown from CNN with his fauxtography during that crisis and the attempt of the wannabe dictator to return to the Honduras... ack... CNN... horrible)
Post a Comment