When I was working with Shirin NESHAT, I told her it would be a good idea to do a book review, and picked the below book. She finished a cooking school, and does not have social science knowledge. She also developed skills of manipulation. I spit on that filty whore woman's face with name of Shirin NESHAT and rest of it.
January 01st, 2009
Book Review
Book title: Confronting Iran : The Failure of American Foreign Policy and the Next Great Conflict in the Middle East
Published: 2006
Publisher: Basic Books. A member of of the Perseus Books Group, New York
Author: Ali M. Ansari
This author lacked writing skill:
1. On page 17, this author said “Edward [Granville] Browne had been an enthusiastic lobbyist in Britain-sympathetic as she was to the idea of Constitutional government.” Actually, Mr. Edward Granville Browne was a male person, and was not a female person.
2. On page 18, this author made following quote“the Persians were anxious to adopt wholesale...in the path of darkness” but did not provide any source. This book has countless quotes without sources.
3. It was very difficult to follow historical events, as this author was discussing one period, and all of sudden this author without finishing that period would jump to another historical event which made it very difficult to follow historical events in sequences.
This author lacked proper understanding of Iran in general term:
1. On page 13, this author claimed that Amir Kabir who was Prime Minister of Nasirn-o-l-Din Shah. Amir Kabir “was forced to take his own life.” According to historical event of Iran , one executioner with decree of Nasirn-o-l-Din Shah slighted Amir Kabir's both wrists blood vessels in Kashan's Fin Bath. As a result, Amir Kabir did not take his own life. Amir Kabir was assassinated with King’s approval that was coming through his mother, who she had connection with British elements as well as Russians. There is a big difference between committing suicide and killing someone.
2. On page 59, this author said; “more important for the Shah was the association such a celebration {2500 years of monarchy at Persepolis } would provide between himself and Cyrus the Great. The focus on Cyrus, among other great kings of the past.” This author wrote all his phrases based on hatred, and did not understand why His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was associating Himself to founder of Iran Cyrus the Great. Obviously, this author did not have proper education in Iran 's history, and lacked proper understanding Iran 's identity.
3. On page 109, this author claimed, during Iran-Iraq War, when Saddam Hussein initiated War of Cities in order to demoralize Iranian, Saddam Hussein failed to do so. Obviously, this author was not in Iran during Iran-Iraq War. Actually, during War of Cities Iranian wanted to end the war, after Saddam Hussein was repelled from Iranian territory. However, merchant class in emporium area did not want the war to end due to high inflation rate, and were saying that martyrs blood would be wasted. So, this war must continued all the way to liberation of Palestinian.
4. On page 116, this author was discussing Iran-Iraq War and claimed that “this was the first Iranian state not to lose territory in nearly two hundred years.” However, during reign of Pahlavi , Iran had Oman military operation with zero casualty. Iran did not annex territory either, but brought peace and stability in Oman and the region.
This author was manipulating historical facts of Iran :
1. Chapter one, this author began to take readers on historical journey of Iran by touching most significant historical event that how Tsar/Czar of Russian Empire launched military strike on Iran, and Tsar Empire annexed northern Iranian territory. Subsequently, on October 24th, 1813 Iran was forces to signed Treaty of Gulistan with Tsar Empire. Moreover, Tsar Empire launched another assault on Iranian territory, and annexed more northern territory of Iran . Thus, in 1828, Iran was compelled to sign Treaty of Turkmenchai as Iran lost more land to Russia . All of a sudden this author took one long jump on page of history of Iran , and started chapter two of the book on the event of 1953 conspiracy theory of calling it a “coup” that how American staged 1953 coup in Iran . In fact, author purposely omitted historical fact that, before Mossadegh was fired by Shah, dissolved the Parliament (Majles) and on time of delivering the letter of removal of him from office of Prime Minister he did not have legal rights of calling himself a Prime Minister, due to the fact that according to the Iranian Constitution, PM appointed to the post, following approval of the Parliament. If Parliament dissolved then there is no legitimacy to the PM position. On the other account in 1941 United Kingdom , and Russia invaded Iran under false allegation that His Imperial Majesty, King of Kings Reza Pahlavi the Great has been assisting Nazi Germany. The author downplays every event in our history; ignores the historical facts in his book.
2. On page 23 to 24, this author claimed “in 1943 the Minister of the Interior, a jurist and former prosecuting attorney, conducted an investigation which demonstrated that many cases of juvenile crime on record in Iran, and many of delinquency, had been inspired by American gangster films.” This author did not mention name of this minister who s/he was making the above comment. Verifying this author's source, and it showed, it was extracted from 1949 journal, whereas, this minister made above comment in 1943. Thus, journal published every year which was reflecting on that particular year. How come there is a huge time gap for this journal? Also, this organization had a judge and consulted the above claim of this author. This judge rejected the above comment of this author.
This author was endorsing federalism, and Islamic state for Iran :
1. This author was in favor of federalism as this author on page 20 was discussing World War I and began to claim that “ Iran emerged from war less battered than one might have imagined-a reflection perhaps that just because central government had collapsed, government as a whole had not disappeared. Iranian society enjoyed resilience and an autonomous existence beyond the reach of any central authority.” Not knowing that most Federalism around the world formed on ground of formation of some kind of coalition running stronger power out of their territory, following joining to form one nation, but support of any form of federalism in Iran is requested of a bunch of handful separatists, supported and bribed by the Stronger Powers, that would lead to an integration of Iran.
2. This author clearly demonstrated his support for Mohammad Khatami who was leader of reformist in Iran and key solution to international and internal problems of Iran because Mohammad Khatami was a religious man with touch of western philosophy with blue print for dialogue of civilization. In reality Empress Farah Pahlavi was pioneer of dialogue of civilization in order to connect eastern hemisphere to western hemisphere.
Theoretical frame and contradiction of this author.
1. This author began to claim that His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was modernizing Imperial Iranian Armed Forces by manipulating the US fear of communism that Russia was about to encroach Iranian territory. However, this author stated in his book that Russia invaded Iran , and Iran was forced to sign two treaties with Russia . Henceforth, how was His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi manipulating the US over modernization of Imperial Iranian Armed Forces? Thus, modernization of any element in any form of government was a natural National accepted wisdom. Most importantly, this author withheld information back from readers that how cunning fox of England with their clergies assistances trigger the wars.
2. On page 27, this author alleged “in 1953 with the coup orchestrated by the CIA for the overthrow of democratically elected Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammad Mosaddeq.” This author contradicted the above statement of him, when this author said, on page 34 mentioned; “the plan was based on the simple principle that the Shah had the constitutional authority to dismiss a government and appoint a new prime minister.” As a result, His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi appointed Dr. Muhammad Mossadiq to Prime Minister's Office, and Dr. Mussadiq was not elected by people to Prime Minister's Office. There was no such clause ever existed in Iran’s constitution electing PM to the office, only members of Parliaments are elected by the people, the Prime Minister appointed by the King, becomes PM when his letter of credentials approved by the Parliament (Majles) in absence of Majles his position become obsolete. Also, Mossadegh dissolved the parliament a few days prior to his official removal from the post, on the ground that he was unable answering the critic about his behavior torturing a few under his government in the prison.
3. Also, according to this author White Revolution was orchestrated by the US . However, His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in his book “Mission for My Country” years before 1963 White Revolution, His Imperial Majesty discussed a form of government as a machine to manage affairs of Iran. Obviously, White Revolution was a complex bureaucracy system, and required advance planning prior of executing it.
4. This author was capitalizing on 1953 event as a root cause of 1979 event in Iran , and sole factor for students to seize the US embassy. This author contradicted his above theory when he wrote about psychological framework of students took over the US embassy and “among the most prominent revisionists were Asgharzadeh, the leader of the seizure, and Abbas Abdi, a leading Reformist journalist. Asgharzadeh made it clear that they had not intended to seize the embassy for more than a few days, that the initiative had been their own, and that they had been overwhelmed by the political response and its ramifications. In short, he and his colleagues had been caught up in a revolutionary whirlwind of youthful zeal and idealism.” Therefore, this author failed to secure his conspiracy theory that 1953 uprising lead to 1979 event and US embassy seizure. He lost the trend proving it.
5. On page 73, this author stated that “as early as 1961, a State Department assessment noted that, “Persians tend to follow blindly a man who has convinced them that he is on the side of right, without examining political issues critically. Since members of the urban middle class have deep aggressive drives against traditional ruling classes and the Westerner, it is natural to associate a saintly leader with opposition to these two forces. All the ingredients are present for what we would call demagogic politics directed against them as a scapegoats and as evil force.” Therefore, His Imperial Majesty, Light of Aryan, King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was right, when in His book “Answer to History” claimed that the US, and Britain worked for many years to topple Pahlavi dynasty. In fact, 1953 event has nothing to do with 1979 event since the US was contemplating to topple the Pahlavi dynasty by planting a saintly man in Iran as a force of good against evil force in Iran .
6. This author began to work on theory of reform movement of Mohammad Khatami in Iran , but timing of reform was not right in Iran . In addition, on page 161, this author began to claim that the regime made an error of judgment by deploying terror squad in Europe to eliminate element of threat to ensure its stability. Particularly, Mykonos Cafe in Berlin sent shock wave through European nations, “meanwhile, the date of the verdict coincident with the election of Mohammad Khatami and the promise of better relations. This coincidence softened the practical impact of the severe verdict.” Therefore, this reform movement was orchestrated to deceive European nations that the regime was changing itself in order to avoid legal percussion.
This author was bias toward monarchist, and Iran 's identity:
1. On page 98, this author claimed that Saddam Hussein invaded Iran when he “received encouragement from Iranian exiles convinced that a military attack would precipitate the collapse of th regime.” This author refrained from naming this Iranian exiles, and how and what kind of ability and influence they had to convince Saddam Hussein attacking Iran . He failed to mention how many times Islamic Regimes ground and air forces invaded Iraq ’s territory following Khomeini’s claim for “export of Islamic Revolution” to other nations.
2. On page 125, this author claimed that “Rafsanjani's presidency, rogue elements in the intelligence and security forces settled old scores. A number of these operations occurred in Europe, principally Italy , Austria , France , and Germany , and included monarchists who had allegedly sided with Saddam Hussein.” This author was trying to justify human rights violation of Rafsanjani against monarchists that these monarchists were aiding Saddam Hussein to attack Iran . This author did not give any name of monarchists whom were aiding Saddam Hussein to invade Iran . Thus, there were issues of merit and credibility of this author at stake that to what extend this author was truthful with his readers? Quite frankly, this author was not acting in a good faith with readers.
3. On page 130, this author claimed that “despite official Iranian attempts to ameliorate any inferiority complex on behalf of the Arabs, unofficial comments left no one in doubt that imperial hubris was never far from the surface and that the Iranians considered the Gulf to be Persian.” There were two key issues here which needed to be said. First this author was bias toward Iran 's history by referring to Iran 's imperial history with a derogatory remark as hubris. Obviously, this author had some kind of hostile feelings against Iran and Iranian. Last, this author needed to understand that this body of water has been called Persian Gulf from dawn of history, and it was not some kind of recent phenomena
Final Thought:
This author did not explain how the US failed to develop foreign relation with the regime in Iran , and how the US and the regime in Iran would clash at each other. The book alleged that the US administration from Democrat party, as well as, Republican party did not know how to approach the regime in Iran , and always made poor judgment call on Iran . For example, President George Bush illustrated sympathy toward mullah Tahri which caused mullah Tahri to fall off the grace. The above event would not be constitute as a foreign relation policy.
This author did not secure and did not prove his theory. Consequently, this book has no academic merit. It is just a boo
No comments:
Post a Comment