From: javad@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Agha Javad)
Subject: Re: To Agha Javad , PART II
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:32:46 GMT
Organization: LabaniyyAtee-e-Sar-e-Koocheh

In article <BxzJx6.5Kt@ccu.umanitoba.ca> ebrahim@ee.umanitoba.ca (Mohamad Ebrahimi) writes:
>
>In article: <1992Nov16.200448.5791@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com>
>javad@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Agha Javad) writes:
>
>>In article <BxqK7p.EIp@ccu.umanitoba.ca> ebrahim@ee.umanitoba.ca
>>(Mohamad Ebrahimi) writes:
>>>In article: <1992Nov14.020002.27006@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com>
>> javad@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Agha Javad)  writes:
>>>                               
>>>>In article <BxoFp0.Jwn@ccu.umanitoba.ca> ebrahim@ee.umanitoba.ca
>>>> (Mohamad Ebrahimi) writes:
>>>>>                                       
>>>>>In article: <1992Nov13.184956.18043@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com>
>>>>>javad@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Agha Javad)  writes:
>>>>> 
>
>>> -No I can't tell you what was the process of determining whether or
>>>not an officer was  guilty, because I didn't attend a single trial.
>>>But can you show any evidence that they were executed inocent?
>>
>>In these trials, if you remember, the officers did not have right to an 
>>attorney.  Also, many times trials were held for several officers at 
>>once.  As far as evidence that they were executed innocent, the IRI has
>>set up an environemnt where even questioning such things is reason enough
>>to get executed.
>>With regard to 28 mordad, many of the executed officers were still kids, and 
>>some were not even born at the time of 28 mordad.
>
>
>   -Yes I remember that those generals and high ranking officers were tried
>    by revolutionary courts, because of the special conditions of Iran in
>    those days, and the great threates of coupe from generals like Rahimi
>    and Khosrodad, and the plans of US dictated by Gen. Hoizer (sp?). But if
>    you could show us evidence about a single one of those generals and 
>    officers who was executed innocent I'll yield to your oppinions.
>
>   -Yes, you are right about 28 Mordad, but don't forget that the dictatorship
>    was not limmited to the day of 28 Mordad, it was implimented during 25
>    years by generations of generals and officers. Also, there were people
>    like Gen. Nasiri who were working from before 28 Mordad until the very
>    day of 22 Bahman. In fact Nasiri was a Colonel when he arrested Mosadeq
>    from his home in 1332.

Not everyone was like Nasiri, and even if they were, why weren't they 
entitled to an attorney and a legal defence?  Their trials were more of
a witch hunt, and executing so many people and prolonging the violence
of the revolution as long as they did could not help the country get back
on its feet.  Furthermore, I have written in response to part I of your post
that what about the pilots freed from prison as the war started?  Did they
suddenly become innocent, or did the IRI just need them badly?

I am not here to defend the actions of the shah's army or that of its generals
and officers.  I'm just saying that the IRI took all the heads, effectively
halted the operation of the armed forces, and at the same time took a hostile
stance towards its neighbors and the international community (remember Kurt
Waldheim's visit to Iran?), and this is just reckless, as I mentioned in part I.


>
>
>>Banisadr was behind the release of those pilots I told you about.  Also, 
>>him and Fallahi had managed to gather enough military might up to the time
>>of his removal to start the first major counterattack- the break of the 
>>siege of Abadan, which was completely planned and carried out by Fallahi,
>>who along with Colonel Fakouri and Colonel Namjoo and one Pasdar commander
>>(I think Kolahdooz?) were killed in a C130 crash caused by a saboteur's bomb,
>>whose story we still don't know completely.  The IRI is the only one to have
>>access to all the facts behind it, why haven't they announced who was behind
>>it?  While Banisadr was in power, the fighting forces had simply not gained
>>the power it required to carry out the liberations.  Also, maybe he was against
>>human wave attacks which were a key element in subsequent battles, but I can
>>only speculate on this, and I don't seek to defend Banisadr either, but I do
>>know he was overthrown in a terror campaign where the hezbollah would attack
>>rallies of his supporters with clubs, his newspaper "Enghelab-e-Eslami" was
>>closed down, and of course, his allies retaliated with a wave of terror just
>>creating an endless cycle.
>>
>
>   -And perhaps one of those pilots was Colonel Moezi, the special pilot
>    of Shah, to rescue him and Rajavi later to France, and let them
>    orchestrate the wave of terrors and bombings from France and later
>    from headquarters of Iraqi army.

For every allegation of terror you say about these guys, I can give you an
allegation of terror on the part of IRI, and it will just get nowhere.  The
fact is, that 8 people who helped some people escape were executed, not 
imprisoned, not demoted, not fired, but executed.  This is an example of IRI
justice which shows how they treat someone who even just helps an opponent,
let alone be an opponent. True, one of the opponents (Rajavi) had taken a 
violent course, but those 8 guys hadn't.

>
>   -You know and I know that it didn't need one full year for a country
>    like Iran to: "gather enough military might up to the time
>    of his removal to start the first major counterattack- the break of 
>    the siege of Abadan ". The manpower was there, the arms and ammunition
>    was in storages, and more important, there were brave combatants, both
>    in army and in sepah, who were starving for arms to defend their

Oh yes it does, because there were all the organs, but there was no skeleton.
There was no structure, no competent chain of command, There has to be a
chain of command and communication, all the way from setad-e-moshtarak in
Tehran to the sarjookheh Javad Baghal in the war front.  There had to 
be supply routes and plans, there had to be intelligence, there had to
be startegy and tactics.  By the time all this could reach critical mass,
a year could easily pass by.  Of course, there is always the possibility
that a c-in-c like Banisadr was not willing to authorize human wave attacks,
whereas the subsequent c-in-c was.  Either of the above, or both could be true,
but just blaming it on Banisadr is the easy way, especially after he was denied
the right to defend himself.  This brings up the question, why did Banisadr
escape?  Why couldn't he stay?  Because you and I both know that he would
be executed, and he couldn't even defend himself.  He said he is willing
to surrender himself if they televise his trial, but the regime refused. I
am not supporting him, I am just pointing out the way the regime deals with
opposition.

>    country. I'll give you a classic example from a book named "Two years
>    of war" published by the public relations og IRGC in 1362. In the
>    first days of Iraqi invasion and the siege of Khoramshahr, a batalion
>    of sepah forces who had good military trainings and exprience from the
>    war in Kurdistan, were dispatched to Mahshahr to be transfered to
>    Khoramshahr and don't let the city fall in the hands of Iraqis. They
>    waited for weeks there and the army helicopters, which in a daily basis
>    were evacuating their personel or fascilities or their families from
>    Khoramshahr, refused to transfer them to Khoramshahr because of an: 
>    "Order from the commander in chief banning the transportation of 
>    non-military (!!!) persons with army helicopters", until the Khoramshahr
>    was captured by Iraqis. One can imagine when a handfull of people and
>    pasdars and navy soldiers were able to keep Khoramshahr for 24 ( or 29)
>    days, what difference could be made by sending a batalion of trained
>    combatants to Khoramshahr. It didn't need months to send two trucks of
>    RPG-7 and light  ammunition for the besieged combatants. And then, there
>    was Banisadr's famous decree to different levels of the army, banning
>    the giving of a single cartridge to sepah and volunteer forces. And
>    don't forget high potentials like Dr. Chamran, who actively and lonely
>    and manly was fighting in the fronts while he could organize big and
>    effective offences against Ba'athis, but was neglected by Banisadr, until
>    he was martyred near the Sousan-gerd.

I thought Chamran was allies was with BaniSadr, and he was mysteriously killed
right after Banisadr was overthorwn.  I thought that was too much of a 
coincidence.

Regarding that book, I've seen it too.  It's funny how they decided to write 
that book right after Banisadr's overthrow.  Funny how they had waited two
years to explain this episode.  Why didn't  they wait one year, or three 
years?  I never heard about the decrees you are talking about, nor your sources,
so I'll take your word for it.  If it is true, then yes, Banisadr didn't 
take the right steps.  But let me say this- getting two trucks to Khorramshahr
wouldn't have solved the problem.  Difficult strategy decisions have to be 
made on the whole in a war. If you remember, there were many other places under
attack, the most important threat was the push towards Ahvaz, which would have
virtually meant the fall of Khuzestan.  It could be (just speculation) that
the decision was made to shift resources from defending Khorramshahr or 
Abadan to defending places further north, and that these cities were judged
as good as gone because they were right on the border.  I don't know, and 
neither do you, this is just a quesition of strategy, and there was 1000 km
of border to defend, and a matter of priorities.  The country just wasn't 
strong enough to stop the Iraqi onslaught at the border, and it's miraculous
that we even did what we did. The country needed time to regroup the whole
military, reset the command structure, and get resources together to defend
against and push out the Iraqis.

Once again, my point is that if a country is in such a week situation, it
shouldn't go off offending everybody and alienating itself, it is wreckless.
I'm not trying to support banisadr or shah or anybody, but I just meant to
point out the irresponsible policies of IRI wrt this war, resulting in a huge
price for our nation to pay.

>
>   -banisadr was not owerthrown in a campaign of terror, in contrary, he
>    was impitched according to the same constitution in writing of which
>    he himself was present. He was impitched for his shortcomings in dealing
>    with vital problem of the country, war, while he was conducting speeches
>    against the whole system in 17 Shahrivar, Ashoura, Arbaeen, and the final
>    masterpiece, 14 Esfand. While he was writing political diaries from a
>    palace in Dezfull. While he had the whole natiom hostage to gain more
>    power and authority than what was given to him by constitution, and even
>    more than the post of the commander in chief, which was given to him
>    to make him more powerful and open-handed to deal with countries
>    problems and as asign of confidence in him and support for him. And
>    so on.
>
>
>>And you cannot say he "let the enemy occupy Iran", and throw all the 
>>blame on the regime's current opponents such as him.  If you remember,
>>he was elected president in what we were told was a landslide victory,
>>and had the blessings of Khomeini himself, and was appointed commander
>>of chief by Khomeini himself.
>>
>
>   -I think I can. It was him who anounced that we have addopted the
>    Sasanids strategy to give land and take time! A ridiculous startegy( in
>    that special conditions) which was even recognized to be silly and
>    suspiciopus by ordinary people, and later, when Iran's combatants
>    freed our lands in such a short time, it was proved how wrong, or
>    intentious he was.

It was the IRI which isolated Iran and caused an embargo against Iran,
tying the army's hands behind its back in the first place.  Not to mention
announcing it wants to export the revolution, scaring the hell out of its
Gulf neighbors.  So you cannot blame it solely on Banisadr.  This tactic is 
used by people like Saddam and Stalin and Reagan in Iran-Contra- find an 
internal scapegoat in your own gov't, and get rid of him so people think 
it was his fault.

>
>>>  call him a traitor who must be tried in martial court  for letting
>>>enemy occupy Iran. Second: banisadr was not alone on that flight. With
>>>  him, there was a criminal named Rajavi whose hands were bloody with
>>>the blood of tens of authorities, as well as inocent civilians, up
>>>to that day. Those officers  ( I assume that you can prove there has
>>>been such 8 pilots) let that criminal flee   the country to organize
>>.>next explosions and terrors in the streets( the complete  information
>>>about more than 2500 civilian victims of those blind terrors have been
>>>  given to the representative of UN) and later go to Iraq and become
>>>an integral part   of Iraqi army to stab their fellow Iranian soldiers
>>>in the fronts of war. You can   easily ignore this crime and call them
>>>8 inocent officers(if any) but I call them  a bounch of traitors who
>>>were equally responsible for all those blind terrors and   stabs in
>>>the back of Iran's armed forces. As for the Ieranian nation, they have
>>>made   their own judgment about MKO 11 years ago.
>
>
>>I never called those 8 officers innocent.  I just highlighted an example of
>>how the ruthless the regime is in dealing with someone who even takes part
>>>in the slightest action which reveals that person's opposition (even nonviolent)
>>to the regime.  Those officers could not possibly know that such terror would
>>follow, and they were executed way before the MKO's bomb campaign against the
>>regime leaders took off.  And as far as I am concerned, the IRI regime has
>>no place calling the MKO terrorist, because a) the MKO helped tremendously
>>in establishing IRI by the same tactics, and b) the IRI does everything the 
>>MKO does and worse.
>
>  -This is what you wrote:
>
>                                 " ... In 1982, 8 junior air force officers
>   were executed just because they were suspected of helping BaniSadr escape.
>   They wern't planning a coup, or threatening anyone, they just allowed their
>   recently overthrown commander in chief to fly out on a 707."
>
>   If your claim is true that they were executed for helping Banisadr( and
>   of course Rajavi) flee the country, then you should remember that it was
>   some time in Mordad of 1360, while MKO's armed strugle, killing the
>   civilian people in streets, bombings, inclidung the bombing of Islamic
>   republic Party, which killed 72 authorities and MP's and Ministers, was
>   started around two months before their action, i.e., in 30 Khordad and
>   7 Tir 1360. So I let the netters judge about your statement:
>
>        "...Those officers could not possibly know that such terror would
>follow, and they were executed way before the MKO's bomb campaign against
>            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>the regime leaders took off."  
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I stand corrected, you are right.  Many of those bombings took place before
banisadr left. Sorry, I had forgot about that.

But that doesn't make those 8 officers guilty of the bombings!  As I mentioned
before, they executed these guys just because they helped the regime's 
opponents escape.

>
>  -You are entitled to your oppinion. But I don't think you can convince
>   the families of hundreds of civilian people who were assasinated in the
>   streets because of having beard or riding Honda 125 , or were killed
>   in masive bombings in streets, just because they were passing the 
>   wrong place in wrong time. Also IRI never gave information to Iraqis
>   to bombard Iranian cities, they never met with a Zionist like All Gore
>   to give him false informations about Iran's nuclear plans in order to
>   provocke new US confrontations against Iran, etc.
>

Nor can you convince the families of those young men and women who were
executed and raped in Evin prison and were billed for the bullets. You
cannot convince our country which has gone through war and hundreds of 
thousands of casualties, and is loaded with war disabled, victims of 
chemical attacks, joblessness, lack of education, drugs, widows, mothers
and fathers of the young dead, depression, and last but not least,
lots of color pictures of gov't officials at cheap prices, that this
war was worth it, and it was right to send your kids to liberate
Ghods and Karbala while we were buying weapons from Israel. Not to mention
those whose houses were bulldozed right after a bombing raid while they were
still under the rubble, just so the regime could make it look like everything
was normal.  It is clear who this war benefitted (hint-it WASN'T the Iranian
people), and IRI had 6 years to end it peacefully, yet it chose to sacrifice 
the country to keep its own power and let its ideology thrive.  Now that's
what I call holding the country hostage.


Thank you for your discussion, I hope you have learned as much from me
as I have from you.  It was quite a time for all of us.


>
>Mohammad

Agha Javad