Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Iran=Aryan=Nazi?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Iran=Aryan=Nazi?
    Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 09:48
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Xolotl

Originally posted by gcle2003

Iran of course is not the only Aryan country, just the only one to use the name.


Which are the other Aryan countries gcle2003.
    
 
Anywhere where the native languages are Indo-European. Aryan is a linguistic grouping. It may or may not also be a racial one.
i suppose it was a racial grouping originally, but ceased to be one with expansion. Sort of like English is today in the carribian.
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 15:19

quote: "Its always been Iran. In Cyrus the Great time all the way to the Ayatollahs. It was never persia."

But WHEN was it changed back from Persia to Iran? That's the key to the anti-semitism part.  Did it happen during the 30's?  - the time when Aryan- as opposed to any other time- meant association with cruel monsters.  A country named from being inspired by sh*tler is bound to take a crap on Jews- at some point.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 15:39

It has never changed... It has always been called Iran by Iranians, always.  Reza Shah requested that the name Iran be recognised internationally in 1936, as Persia was not representative of Iran's ethnic groups.

Iran was a neutral country during WW2, PM Chamberlain of the UK PRAISED Hitler and the Nazis in the 30s... Now, there is a much better case for "anti-semitism" there, considering Britain too has a dark murderous "anti-semitic" history. 
 
There is no key to the "anti-semitism" part, Reza shah was a nationalist and wanted the nation to be called by its correct name.  If Iran was "anti-semitic" at any point, during its LONG history, it would have killed its Jews like the Europeans (most notably Germans and Spanish) did (OVER AND OVER AGAIN) - Iran was a haven for Polish Jews during the second world war and has one of the oldest Jewish communities of the world, about 2450 years older than that of Israel.  Never once, in recorded history, have Jews been killed for being Jews in Iran.
 
There is no correlation between anti-semitism and Iran's name.... How did you ever summise such a ridiculous notion?
 
----
 
Aryan is a specific  branch of the IE linguistic tree...


Edited by Zagros - 28-Oct-2006 at 15:41
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 16:19
 
 
 
Under Reza Shah's watch, the country changed its name as well. According to The New York Times, "At the suggestion of the Persian Legation in Berlin, the Teheran government, on the Persian New Year, March 21, 1935, substituted Iran for Persia as the official name of the country. In its decision it was influenced by the Nazi revival of interest in the so-called Aryan races, cradled in ancient Persia. As the Ministry of Foreign Affairs set forth in its memorandum on the subject, 'Perse,' the French designation of Persia, connoted the weakness and tottering independence of the country in the nineteenth century, when it was the chessboard of European imperialistic rivalry. 'Iran,' by contrast, conjured up memories of the vigor and splendor of its historic past."[7]
 
 
And here from reference.com
 
Under Reza Shah's watch, the country changed its name as well. According to The New York Times, "At the suggestion of the Persian Legation in Berlin, the Teheran government, on the Persian New Year, March 21, 1935, substituted Iran for Persia as the official name of the country.(It should be noted that the country has already been called Iran by its natives at least since the 3rd century. However, in west it was referred to as Persia.) It has been suggested that this decision was the result of the Nazi revival of interest in the so-called Aryan races, cradled in ancient Persia. As the Ministry of Foreign Affairs set forth in its memorandum on the subject, 'Perse,' the French designation of Persia, connoted the weakness and tottering independence of the country in the nineteenth century, when it was the chessboard of European imperialistic rivalry. 'Iran,' by contrast, conjured up memories of the vigor and splendor of its historic past. The very name Iran means Aryan.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 18:06

That is not the rationale put forth in Iran at the time, although Iran, like the USA and many other countries did have links with the Germans  -

Furthermore, the regime of 1930s could not be much farther removed from today's so the linkage is null.
 
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 18:19
Originally posted by Komnenos

Originally posted by Sparten

When everybody is done with the pious chest thumping about the evils of Nazisim, we can at least discuss zagros statment in a detached unemotional manner, as the mature adults we are supposed to be. I don't necessarily agree with him, but he has got a point, certainly without Nazism, it is very difficult to see a state fo Israel, which was zionism's true aim. So you can say that Nazism was perhaps a help for Zionism (certainly not an apprceiated one I imagine) in achieving its aims.

 
Then again without the effects of the Second world war, lots of countries would not be on the map today, Pakistan for instance.
 
 
 
As the Shoa was only the latest episode in the century long persecution  that necessitated the creation of a safe haven for the Jewish people, can we then argue that all Anti-Semtism was a "blessing" for the Jews ? The instances of pogroms in the Middle Ages for example, might not be the "biggest", but only a 'smaller" blessing?
Was thus the whole history of Anti-Semitism somewhat of a "blessing" for the Jewish people? History's compensation for their dispersion into diaspora or even a cunning plan to move them all back to Palestine?
The whole argument is as absurd as it is obscene.
 
 
 
How do u know that these jews were semites?


Edited by malizai_ - 29-Oct-2006 at 07:42
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 19:08

No connection between Iran and Nazis?

9. In order to help the listener to better understand the historical relationship between Iran and Nazi Germany, Mr. Emory presents an article by Edwin Black, the author of The War Against the Weak, IBM and the Holocaust, and The Transfer Agreement. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has shot to the forefront of Holocaust denial with his rabble-rousing remarks last month. But it's more like self-denial. The president of Iran need only look to his country's Hitler-era past to discover that Iran and Iranians were strongly connected to the Holocaust and the Hitler regime, as was the entire Islamic world under the leadership of the mufti of Jerusalem. Iran's axis with the Third Reich began during the prewar years, when it welcomed Nazi Gestapo agents and other operatives to Tehran, allowing them to use the city as a base for Middle East agitation against the British and the region's Jews. Key among these German agents was Fritz Grobba, Berlin's envoy to the Middle East, who was often called the German Lawrence, because he promised a Pan-Islamic state stretching from Casablanca to Tehran. Relations between Berlin and Tehran were strong from the moment Hitler came to power in 1933. At that time, Reza Shah Pahlavi's nation was known as Persia. The shah became a stalwart admirer of Hitler, Nazism and the concept of the Aryan master race. He also sought the Reich's help in reducing British petro-political domination. (Denial of Holocaust Nothing New in Iran Ties to Hitler Led to Plots Against British and Jews by Edwin Black; San Francisco Chronicle; 1/8/2006; accessed at: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/01/08/INGODGH99Q1.DTL.)

10. So intense was the shah's identification with the Third Reich that in 1935 he renamed his ancient country Iran, which in Farsi means Aryan and refers to the Proto-Indo-European lineage that Nazi racial theorists and Persian ethnologists cherished. The idea for the name change was suggested by the Iranian ambassador to Germany, who came under the influence of Hitler's trusted banker, Hjalmar Schacht. From that point, all Iranians were constantly reminded that their country shared a common bond with the Nazi regime. (Idem.)

11. Note the presence in this sequence of events of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. The Grand Mufti was the first leader of the Palestinian movement and an individual whose presence figures prominently in the history of World War II, the Middle East, international fascism and the events in and around 9/11. (For more about the Grand Mufti, seeamong other programsFTR#s 354, 414, 416, 456.) Shortly after World War II broke out in 1939, the Mufti of Jerusalem crafted a strategic alliance with Hitler to exchange Iraqi oil for active Arab and Islamic participation in the murder of Jews in the Mideast and Eastern Europe. This was predicated on support for a pan-Arab state and Arab control over Palestine. During the war years, Iran became a haven for Gestapo agents. It was from Iran that the seeds of the abortive 1941 pro-Nazi coup in Baghdad were planted. After Churchill's forces booted the Nazis out of Iraq in June 1941, German aircrews supporting Nazi bombers escaped across Iraq's northern border back into Iran. Likewise, the mufti of Jerusalem was spirited across the border to Tehran, where he continued to call for the destruction of the Jews and the defeat of the British. (Idem.)

12. His venomous rhetoric filled the newspapers and radio broadcasts in Tehran. The mufti was a vocal opponent of allowing Jewish refugees to be transported or ransomed into Jewish Palestine. Instead, he wanted them shipped to the gas chambers of Poland. In the summer of 1941, the mufti, with the support of key Iranian military and government leaders, advocated implementing in Iran what had failed months earlier in Iraq. The plan once again was for a total diversion of oil from the Allies to the Nazis, in exchange for the accelerated destruction of the Jews in Eastern Europe and the Nazis' support for an Arab state. Through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Co., Iran had already been supplying Hitler's forces in occupied Czechoslovakia and Austria. Now, the mufti agitated to cut off the British and the Allies completely and supply Germany in its push against Russia. (Idem.)

13. In October 1941, British, USSR other allied forces invaded Iran to break up the Iran-Nazi alliance. Pro-Nazi generals and ministers were arrested, and the shah's son was installed in power. The mufti scampered into the Italian embassy, where he shaved his beard and dyed his hair. In this disguise, he was allowed to leave the country along with the rest of the Italian delegation. Once the mufti relocated permanently to Berlin, where he established his own Reich-supported bureau, he was given airtime on Radio Berlin. From Berlin and other fascist capitals in Europe, the mufti continued to agitate for international Jewish destruction, as well as a pan-Islamic alliance with the Nazi regime. (Idem.)

14. He called upon all Muslims to kill the Jews wherever you see them. In Tehran's marketplace, it was common to see placards that declared, In heaven, Allah is your master. On Earth, it is Adolf Hitler. When the mufti raised three divisions of Islamic Waffen SS to undertake cruel operations in Bosnia, among the 30,000 killers were some volunteer contingents from Iran. Iranian Nazis, along with the other Muslim Waffen SS, operated under the direct supervision of Heinrich Himmler and were responsible for barbarous actions against Jews and others in Bosnia. Recruitment for the murderous Handschar Divisions was done openly in Iran. Iran and its leaders were not only aware of the Holocaust, they played both sides. The country offered overland escape routes for refugee Jews fleeing Nazi persecution to Israel -- and later fleeing postwar Iraqi fascist persecution -- but only in exchange for extortionate passage fees. (Idem.)


From:  http://ftrsummary.blogspot.com/2006/09/ftr-565-middle-east-matrix.html

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 20:19
I am sorry that you rely on such poor sources for your information... It is little wonder, given the title of this thread.  The source on which that anti-Iranian diatribe is based on Edwin Black's insubstantiable defamation of Iran's history... It is evident from teh fact that the article CITES NO sources as to its fantastic claims such as there being Iranian Waffen... Or that an order was issued to kill all Jews, or that there was even an Iran-Germany alliance.
 
So An order was issued byt eh Padishah to kill all Jews? WELL HOWCOME NONE WERE KILLED? Why did Iran take refugees from Europe's war?
 
Here is a well written with extracts from credible sources, would you believe!
 
 
A Reply to Jewish Telegraph Agency

An ill researched article appeared in the Jewish Telegraph Agency by Edwin Black: http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16133&intcategoryid=2

The article also appeared in the Jewish Times but thankfully it appears it has been withdrawn. (I hope I am correct in assuming this) Nevertheless the article still appears on the Jewish Telegraph Agency website. [The article also appeared in The San Francisco Chronicle.]

The article carries ignorant statements such as :

"....
So intense was the shah's identification with the Third Reich that in 1935 he renamed his ancient country "Iran," which in Farsi means Aryan and refers to the Proto-Indo-European lineage that Nazi racial theorists and Persian ethnologists cherished..."

Perhaps, Edwin Black, who should be writing children's book instead, should have bothered to read some of Iran's rich literature and relaised that Iran has always been called Iran by Iranians. The Book of Kings written by Ferdowsi 1000 years ago, is just one example from thousands, that refers to our country as Iran. Was Ferdowsi, therefore, a Third Reich supporter according to Mr. Black?
 
Here is another article debunking the myths you posted.
 
 
Mr. Black goes on to claim that Iran and its leaders were not only aware of the Holocaust, they played both parts ... the country offered escape routes for refugee Jews ... but only in exchange for extortionate passage fees. The man responsible for the transfer of Jewish refugees in Iran -- who went on to become Israels ambassador to Iran--has an entirely different story to tell. He writes, As the Shah of Iran had particular affinity for the Jews, the military and bureaucratic institutions of the country spared no effort in helping refugees reach Israel. (Moir Ezrys Yadnameh, vol. 1. p. 52). He goes on to say, countries like Bulgaria, and Rumania asked for great sums of money from Israel in order to set their Jewish population free. But the Iranian government never asked for any money.(p. 60)
 
Mr Black should be tried for crimes against history.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2006 at 20:22
Might I suggest that you stick to credible academic sources in the future?  Edwin Black would sure have felt at home serving in Himmler's cultural propaganda team, the ones who demonised Jews and attempted to rewrite history, he is very apt at the art, Himmler would have been very proud.


Edited by Zagros - 28-Oct-2006 at 20:26
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 01:36
Okay, LAGoff, gandhi also supporeted the Nazis, or more specifically told the Germans that India had no quarrel with them. Next you are going to call Gandhi an anti-semite?
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 05:23
Originally posted by Sparten

[
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Xolotl

Originally posted by gcle2003

Iran of course is not the only Aryan country, just the only one to use the name.


Which are the other Aryan countries gcle2003.
    
 
Anywhere where the native languages are Indo-European. Aryan is a linguistic grouping. It may or may not also be a racial one.
i suppose it was a racial grouping originally, but ceased to be one with expansion. Sort of like English is today in the carribian.
 
Rather like that. However which of the groups that now speak aryan languages is the 'original' one is lost in the mists of prehistory. For all we know the original - racial - aryans all died out.
Back to Top
Komnenos View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
  Quote Komnenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 06:24
As mentioned above, to draw any conclusions from the name of the factual Indo-Aryan linguistic group and the name of the totally fictional "Aryan" master-race fantasy of the Nazis, and therefore to deduct an inherent Anti-Semitism in Iranian state or people, is total idiocy.
 
It is thus nothing but a  sad coincidence that the current Mullah regime in the Iran, and especially their leader, have crossed the line between Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism, and thus have transgressed from a understandable political oposition to the state of Israel to a policy that attempts to make the most of the still existing Anti-Semite prejudices all over the world.
 


Edited by Komnenos - 29-Oct-2006 at 06:27
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 08:41
Originally posted by gcle2003

 
Anywhere where the native languages are Indo-European.
 
Great.
 
Originally posted by gcle2003

 Aryan is a linguistic grouping.
 
Indo-European is the linguistic grouping.
 
 
Originally posted by gcle2003

It may or may not also be a racial one.
 
Would you care to elaborate.Are Iranians Aryan {Racially}.Are Pakistanis Aryan {Racially}.
 
Are the Brahui,Burushaski and Makrani people of Pakistan non-Aryan {Racially}.
 
What are the defining features of the Aryan race.
 
 
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 09:05
There is no Aryan race. Never has been - the closest thing would be the Aryan tribes that settled in Iran and elsewhere between 1500BC-100AD, but there is no evidence of racial homogenity - various Roman and Greek sources have described Iranians as a diverse people in appearance and that remains the case to this day. Even within the largely isolated nomadic tribes.
 
---
 
Komnenos and flyingzone: I will draw an analogy with my previous statement that you deemed as unacceptable.
 
The atrocities commited against Muslims natioans and people by the Imperialist powers in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestinian occupied territories have been the biggest blessing to befall militant Islam.  Does this in your eyes insult the memory of all those Muslims killed?  My definition of Zionism is not the existence of a state of Israel - it is the ruthless expansionist ideology among that state's ruling elite: the illegal settlement of occupied territory; the treatment of Palestinians as nothing more than animals and the lack of worth placed on their lives as a result. That is Zionism in its modern context.
Back to Top
Komnenos View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
  Quote Komnenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 11:27
Originally posted by Zagros

---
 
Komnenos and flyingzone: I will draw an analogy with my previous statement that you deemed as unacceptable.
 
The atrocities commited against Muslims natioans and people by the Imperialist powers in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestinian occupied territories have been the biggest blessing to befall militant Islam.  Does this in your eyes insult the memory of all those Muslims killed? 
 
Is that some sort of trick question?
To call the death of any people a "blessing" for something or someone is just cynical and obscene. Doesn't matter who the victims are.
I have an inkling what you want to say, the choice of words is rather unfortunate.


Edited by Komnenos - 29-Oct-2006 at 12:07
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 12:09
OK I will reword: rather than the deaths of Muslims, "the political ideology that has driven Western Imperialism against said nations has been the biggest blessing to befall militant Islam".  Since my original statement referred to two ideologies, Zionism and Nazism - the deaths of innocents was then deduced and used to distort what I said - and for that reason I stated "deaths of Muslims" above.
 
It is not a trick question, but I have a feeling that had this been in anotehr thread and i stated that Western Imperialism is the biggest blessing to befall militant Islam, then there would have been no outcry in any shape nor form.
 
And for the record, I stand by both statements equally with regard to Militant Islam and Zionism.
 
 


Edited by Zagros - 29-Oct-2006 at 12:21
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 15:22
Your argument is based on your and another bloggers flack[and one URL that malfunctioned] against Edwin Black.  Either what he says is true and therefore Iran's [re]-origination is spiritually tainted with Nazism/anti-semitism, or it's false. 
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2006 at 16:01
Your argument is based on Myth created by Edwin Black, for which he cites no sources except his imagination, the burden of proof is on you.
 
For instance, he claims that Iran's demand to have its name correctly recognised by teh international community was inspired in Berlin by the Nazis, because Iran and the Nazis were allied.
 
Iran and the Nazis had no alliance - so there goes the whole basis for his argument - even if there were an Iran Nazi alliance - the defamation is still based on conjecture.


Edited by Zagros - 29-Oct-2006 at 16:06
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2006 at 05:12
Originally posted by Xolotl1

Originally posted by gcle2003

 
Anywhere where the native languages are Indo-European.
 
Great.
 
Originally posted by gcle2003

 Aryan is a linguistic grouping.
 
Indo-European is the linguistic grouping.
 
 
Originally posted by gcle2003

It may or may not also be a racial one.
 
Would you care to elaborate.Are Iranians Aryan {Racially}.Are Pakistanis Aryan {Racially}.
 
Are the Brahui,Burushaski and Makrani people of Pakistan non-Aryan {Racially}.
 
What are the defining features of the Aryan race.
 
 
 
As Zagros pointed out, there probably is no Aryan race, so there aren't any distinguishing features.
 
The linguistic group is called either Indo-European or Aryan. But the hypothesis that there is/was an 'Aryan race' stems entirely from the discovery of the linguistic group.
 
Some future archaeologists/historian studying the 20th century based on the fragments left after a thousand years would notice that cultures world-wide left documents in some variety of the same language, the one we would call English, They might therefore conclude that there was some racial affinity between all these groups.
 
But they would be wrong.
 
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2006 at 05:25
GCLE, this is exactly what the Indian's say to the theory of Aryan migration.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.077 seconds.