Supreme Leader's Speech on Sunday

Below is the translation of the Supreme Leader's speech, as he addressed the Baseej students and pupils on the eve of the US embassy takeover, last Sunday. The event was not shown live on Iranian state TV but they showed the following 15 mins clip later on the news channel:

Translation:

“Even governments  mistrust America,  the reason is the behaviour of the Americans in their policies, anyone who trusted America paid the price, hence one can say today the most hated state  in the world is that of the Americans, 

Crowds chant [Allah Akbar, Khamenei is the Leader, Death to those who oppose him, Death to America, Death to the Hypocrites and the infidels, Death to Israel]

I want to mention a few points about our current problems with America which are being discussed these days

People ask the question, but first let me alert you all to an important issue, no one should regard our negotiators who are negotiating on our behalf with this American collection, the 5+1, as compromisers, this is wrong, these are our own children, they are the children of our revolution, they have a mission to achieve and its a difficult task, they are working hard to do what they have to do, therefore no one should undermine an official engaged in such work, or insult them or make false interpretations like sometimes we hear said 'they are compromisers'. No, this is not the case. The task they are engaged in currently is to do with negotiations on nuclear issues, so pay attention the negotiations that are taking place with the six countries which America is also included in. These talks are purely negotiations on nuclear issues specifically and nothing else.

I said in Mashad, in the beginning of the year, on specific issues, there is no problem with talks, but I also did say I don’t trust talks and negotiations, I am not optimistic, but if they want to talk, fine they can go and negotiate, it won’t be a loss for us either, God willing. The nation of Iran possesses an experience already gained, which I will mention, this experience will raise the thinking capacity of our nation, like the experience gained in 2003 and 2004, regarding the suspension of enrichment, back then the Islamic Republic accepted negotiations with Europeans on enrichment suspension, and we got delayed by two years, delayed by two years, but it was to our gain, why? because we learned by suspending the enrichment we can not expect any cooperation from the Western partners, there is absolutely no such hope. We learned this. WIth that voluntarily suspension, which of course was imposed on us, but nevertheless our officials had agreed to, had we not agreed, then some may have said, well you could have conceded a bit and the problems would have been resolved.

What we learned from that experience was that by conceding, by suspending enrichment, by getting behind our plans timescale, the problems will not be resolved. The opposite side are after something else. So we learned this and started the enrichment and our situation is now totally different from that in 2003. In those days we would barter over one or two centrifuges, today we have thousands of centrifuges, our youth, our scientists, our officials did their utmost and we moved on.

Therefore there won’t be a loss for us in these current negotiations either, although as I said before I am pessimistic. I don’t think these negotiations will yield results, not the results that the people of Iran are expecting. Nevertheless it will be another experience, it will increase the experience base of our country. Nothing wrong with that. But it is essential that the nation remains alert. We support our officials who are working in the diplomacy front, we give them steadfast support, but the people should remain alert and know what is happening. Don’t let some of the paid propagandists of the enemy, and some of their naive unpaid propagandists, deviate the public opinion.

One of their lies and tricks is to induce to the public opinion that if we give total submission in nuclear issue all our economic problems will be solved. This is what they are saying in their propagandas, of course the foreign propagandists give them the targets and very skilfully using their propaganda techniques induce some in the country to also go along with them, some from pure naivety without having ill intentions, but some really through ill intentions are propagating such idea that if we submit to the opposing side over the nuclear issue all the economic problems will be resolved. This is wrong.

This is what we have told all our officials, past and present that to solve our problems we will have to rely on our internal forces. We have a lot of capacities inside the country, the capacities of this country include natural and manpower skills resources, we have geographical capacities too and of course these must all be utilised

and we will back the diplomatic endeavours too. When we say there must be a reliance on internal potentials it does not mean there should be no diplomatic moves or that we don’t work with the rest of the world. Diplomatic work, diplomatic moves are all appropriate and officials that do these things must continue but the emphasis must be on internal potentials.

In diplomacy too, the country will be successful which has an internal generating outlook, It is those states that rely on their internal strengths which can establish their arguments and reach the conclusions they are after in their diplomacy. Thats the sort of government others will respect. We repeat our former advise, do not trust the enemy that smiles, this is what we tell our officials, to our children who are working in the diplomacy arena, these are our own ilk, our advice to them is to be careful the devious smile does not compel you to make mistakes. Look at the fine prints of the enemy,

Americans have most of their obligations to the declining Zionist regime, they care the most for the Zionist assemblies, we see this situation, the claws of economic powers and Zionist companies have such a firm grip on the US congress and American officials that they have to care for them  but we don’t have to.

We say today and we will say it after today we regard the Zionist regime as an illegitimate and bastard regime

[people chant: Death to AMerica, Death to England, Death to Infildels and hypocrites, Death to Israel]

So our officials pay attention to this point; on one hand they smile and show interest in talks and on the other hand they say all options are on the table. What the hell can they do with their ‘options’? 

[people chant Death to America (10 times)]

If they are serious about talks, they should control themselves, they have to stop those who talk such rubbish things, some rich American politician suggests that they should attack some part of an Iranian wilderness with nuclear weapons and threaten us with such things, they should strike such a person and smash his mouth, 

[people chant: Death to America, Death to England — The Leader of the Free, We are ready we are ready]

The state that claims it has the illusions if responsibility to deal with world matters, and thinks it is responsible to deal with the nuclear issue of this and that country can go to hell with its nuclear threats against another country at such times, they should stop such nonsense, 

A Nightmare Even Worse than the Islamic Republic

A new Sunni extremist terror group, Jeish-ol-Adl (Army of Justice), claimed responsibility for the attack on the Iranian border guards at Sarawan last week.

Looking at the group's websites and videos on the internet suggest this is an Al-Qaedeh like terrorist unit, most probably financed by the Saudi blood money.

The picture on the left shows Jeisholadl training young children for their idea of Jihad.


The idea of financing and using such groups, as Jeisholadl, to repeat the Syrian tragedy, even on a small scale in Iran, is so repulsive that it will only serve to unite all Iranians, for or against the current regime.

The ruling Ayatollahs in Iran should appreciate the main stream peaceful civil opposition that they face in Iran as a responsible opposition which wants nothing other than peace and prosperity for all Iranians. To further clamp down on the mainstream opposition in Iran will only breed more terrorist outfits such as Jeish-ol-Adl, a prospect that no patriotic Iranian wishes to contemplate.

The Daily Telegraph Nonsense of Iran Cyber Army Warfare Officer Assassination

The pure speculation, without any basis, by the Daily Telegraph regarding the death of an IRGC employee three weeks ago in Karaj, outside Tehran, was a typical media manufactured nonsense that just goes viral and the joe public then regard it as factual news.

It was not just speculation and conjecture, it was deliberate news engineering.

Contrary to the claims made by the authors of this fantasy news, Alborz news site is neither affiliated to IRGC nor did it ever change its story. There is also no bonafide "Facebook page of the officers of the Cyber War Headquarters . In fact when one of the authors was contacted regarding the story and asked where this Facebook page was, a url of a website was given, which again did not convey any such information as the Daily Telegraph story claimed.

Incredibly without any verification, the mass media picked up on the story, and since there was no meat on the story, it was all linked to the "assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists" etc. :))
The completely fabricated story then became the foundation material for much of "analysis". Shashanak Joshi, a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute(RUSI), for example wrote a whole load of claptrap on "Iran, the Mossad and the power of cyber-warfare". Only at some point, Joshi must have realised the original news is not that reliable. The paragraph below with a different font seems to have been inserted in the middle of the article, 'Details remain murky' as an after-thought in case it was later proved to be all nonsense.

But there is a difference between murky and fabricated and this story was totally fabricated. The commander of Iran Cyber Warfare would neither be known by name nor live in Mohamad-Shahr of Karaj. The assassination of a Cyber Warfare Commander would not be investigated by the police either. 

Ramezan Sahrif, the spokesperson for the IRGC told ISNA, that the death of Mojtaba Ahmadi was not as a result of an "assassination".

Khomeini’s Grand-daughter Shuts Down her Facebook Page After Vulgar Joke about War Martyrs

Khomeini’s grand-daughter, Naeimeh Eshraghi, shut down her Facebook page, after a vulgar joke by her about Iran war martyrs, caused an uproar on the Iranian cyber space, notably amongst the children of war martyrs.

Two of Khomeini’s famous sayings during the war were:
“Revolutionary Guards should marry the widows of their fallen comrades, so as they were not left without guardianship” and “I wish I was a revolutionary guard”.

Word quickly spread that Naeemeh has left a comment via her Facebook account, saying 'sometimes we used to joke with our grand-father by combining the two statements “Revolutionary guards should marry the widows of their fallen comrades, so as they were not left without guardianship. I wish, I was a revolutionary guard” ‘

Son of Ibrahim Hemat, a distinguished war martyr, wrote “when the children of this country were being blown to bits with bullets, bombs and mortars, the leader of the country for whom many had sacrificed their lives, was making vulgar jokes..”

Faced with such a strong backlash and grasping at straws, Naeimeh Eshraghi, denied the comment was from her and claimed her Facebook account had been hacked. Those who had spotted her comment, before her Facebook page was closed, were adamant however that they had checked several times and it was definitely from her Facebook account.

Previously Naeimeh had got in trouble for photoshopping her daughter’s picture and exaggerating the award she had won. More recently Naeimeh had posted a picture posing with her red boots, saying how much her grand-father liked happy colours and hated the colour black, encouraging all the girls in the family to wear brighter colour dresses.

The Outcome of the "Death to America" Chant in the Islamic Republic

In the Islamic Republic, "Death to America" slogan has been chanted consistently and held with much reverence  - with the exception of the Friday Prayer after 9/11; until Jack Straw called the Islamic Republic "UK's partner in the fight against global terrorism" and it was business as usual after that. 

In 1995, Rouhani, himself, referred to the chant as the "Beautiful unifying chant" which unified Iran.

The recent rapprochement between Rouhani's team and Obama's administration, started a debate however as whether chanting this slogan should be continued? Rafsanjani, as usual these days, pulled up a new, as yet untold memoirs of his close conversations with the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini, saying how Khomeini was against chanting this slogan and Iran's current Foreign Minister, Zarif (means delicate in Persian) delicately suggested, in an interview with ABC,  that the slogan meant death to the US policies and not death to America as a country.

Last Friday, however, it seems any ambiguity as to whether to continue with this slogan was clearly resolved. Friday Prayer leaders who are all appointed by the Supreme Leader, spelled it out in black and white.

Translation of the sermon speech:
"We think America is a liar, a hypocrite and an oath-breaker,

[crowds chant death to ...]

From one side they smile these days and welcome negotiations and they lie by saying sanctions have brought Iran to the negotiating table, these are all lies, first sign of them telling lies is that in meeting with Netanyahu they say all options are on the table with Iran, including military option, well Iranian people have all the options on the table, including the option of 8 years of defence and a hard slap in the mouth of the aggressors, 

[crowds chant death to...]

The liar president of US says they are not after regime change in Iran, for 35 years you have been wanting regime change in Iran and you couldn't, neither can you now, not that you didn't want to, why do you lie to the world?

In the sedition of 2009 [post-election protests] who was it that wholeheartedly supported the seditioners? It was you!

You let all your media in the hands of the seditioners, so that was the second point

Third point is

The basis of the hatred of our people towards America is these things, I said this as just one last example, otherwise if we want to list all their lies, and America's hypocrisies it will be a huge novel, this is the secret to the chant of death to America being alive amongst our people, 

[Death to America...]

This slogan was chanted for 10 years during the time of Imam Khomeini, in his presence. In the last message by Imam given to the Mecca pilgrims, he referred 46 times to America with hatred, this is the way of the Imam, and the basis for it is clear too, the basis is that America is the Great Satan, Did Imam say this or no? Everyone heard this, In this 35 years has America become less of a Satan or has it become 35 times more of a Satan?

If in the last 35 years with regard to Iran, US was a snake, today it has become python, in every conspiracy formed against Iran, one constant pillar is always US, therefore we have logic on our side and we say logically Death to America

[Death to America] 

Let the American know and let those who are trying to remove this slogan know, this slogans is the manifestation of the resistance of the Iranian people, and until he devilishness of the US remains, this magnificent slogan will remain amongst the people too, this is a reality without doubt

I have two more things to say and then I will finish. First thing is let the diplomats do their work, our FMA should do its work, everyone has their own task to do, we believe in fact these chants put more impact in the fists of our officials, and they can confront US with more strength, even collide with them, this is even in favour of our country's diplomacy, this was the first point, secondly, if one day according to the edicts of the Supreme Leader, because the US case is in th ehands of the Supreme Leader, it has been, it is and it will be, in this regard, the last word will be only with that of the Supreme Leader and no one else, if one day, negotiations take place, even restoring relations, our hatred towards America with the help of God will not wear away"

Rouhani as the Nobel Peace Prize Candidate

The nomination of Hassan Rouhani as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize by the Guardian's Saeed Kamali-Dehghan, reminded me of the nomination of Ayatollah Khalkhali for the Iranian Majlis elections, by Iran's Soviet puppet Communist Party (Tudeh Party),  after the 1979 revolution.

More than three decades ago, the Tudeh Party, Iran's Soviet backed Communist Party, or as the party leaders liked to refer to their outfit in their publications, "Iran Workers Leading Progressive Party", nominated the mad Ayatollah Sadegh Khalkhali as one of their parliamentary candidates for his "uncompromising stand against US imperialism".

Khalkhali was a mad henchman, who strangled kittens in his youth as a hobby. Ayatollah Khomeini appointed Khalkhali as his first Revolutionary Chief of Justice in 1979. Khalkhali quickly gained notoriety with his summary executions, Haj Mehdi Araghi, a bazaar merchant and the first governor of Qasr prison after the 1979 revolution, complained that "this guy [Khalkhali] executes people first and then makes up their charges" and when others also criticised Khalkhali's swift executions and suggested to him that he may be killing innocents, Khalkhali replied without showing any emotion "If they are innocent, then they will go to heaven, so what's the problem?".

One of Khalkhali's victims was a family friend who was arrested on his way to work, where an anti-government demonstration had taken place nearby. The family friend had nothing to do with the demonstration, his second child was born a few days earlier and all he thought about was raising his children.  He was killed without a trial, because Khalkhali had a quota to kill 100 people that day.

Khalkhali wrote in his memoirs, how he shot a 16 year old boy in cold blood. He said he was talking in the car with a friend and they were discussing how these counter-revolutionary groups should be dealt with; when right in the middle of their discussions, he saw a young teenager selling a Leftist newspaper. Khalkhali then pulled out his revolver and shot the boy dead, while calmly turning to his friend laughing and saying "thats how they should be dealt with". Such was the "progressive" anti-imperialist nature of the candidate nominated by "Iran Workers Leading Progressive Party"!

Three decades after, Saeed Kamali-Dehghan, a refugee Leftist journalist from the Islamic Republic, has nominated Hasan Rouhani for the Nobel Peace Prize candidate. The spirit of the Tudeh Party lives on in many of Iran's Leftist "intellectuals".

Saeed Kamali-Dehghan is also responsible for propagating the false story of a haemophiliac boy dying in Iran because of the medicine shortages that were caused by the sanctions.

'Heroic Flexibility" Overseas, Tanks and Bulldozers at Home

When Rouhani was the guest speaker at the Asia Society and Foreign Policy Relations, he was asked if people in Iran were allowed to watch satellite channels in Iran?

He smiled and replied with one of his clever statements that are neither false nor tell the whole truth, by saying "In Iran everyone has easy access to satellite, you see satellite dishes even on the roof tops throughout the Iranian villages'.


Of course the true answer is that owning satellite dishes and satellite receiver equipments in Iran is illegal and the regime makes it even more difficult by jamming signals both locally and at source, but the public are so fed up with the nonsense which is aired from the state TV that they risk the punishments and try to watch the satellite channels despite all its possible dire consequences.

And interestingly just when Rouhani was pulling the wool over the eyes of his American audiences, tanks and bulldozers in Shiraz had come to the streets to crush people's confiscated dishes and receiver equipments.

and of course "Death to America" written on an American flag marked with foot prints on it were part and parcel of the festivity:

BBC Persian's Version of What Happened at Manchester University

I attended a two day seminar and workshop at Manchester university last week. The scholarly seminar was organised by Drs. Oliver Bast and Siavush Ranjbar-Daemi and examined the fall of the Iranian Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, in 1953.

The seminar included academics from around the world, who had researched and studied the documentary evidence of the 1953 events in Iran. It was both enjoyable and illuminating as the experts on the subject presented their arguments and conjectures based on the different aspects of the evidence and archived documents they had studied.

Siavush Ranjbar-Daemi gave a brief presentation of what the various newspapers at the time had reported and in particular which political groups had called for a Republic in the two day aftermath of the initial failed attempt to bring down Mossadeq on 16th August, 1953.

Shahram Kholdi, from Western University in Canada, gave a presentation of the Iranian legal constitution at the time, its origins and what the legal authority of the Shah and the Prime Minister were. An important study to determine whether the toppling of Mossadeq was a coup or a legal constitutional move.

The American scholar, Mark Gasiorowsky, talked about the evidence he had gathered from the people he had interviewed, which included CIA operatives at the time.

Darioush Bayandor criticised Gasiorowsky for not having taken into consideration the declassified information that has been available since 2000 and that what most bothered him was an attempt by Gasiorowsky and his co-author, Malcolm Byrne at splashing some sensational headlines that new evidence proved the role of a CIA coup on 19th August as undeniable and argued that they were much sensationalism about nothing. A point that Gasiorowsky himself later admitted.

Regarding the mystery of who brought out the crowds on 19th August that toppled Mossadeq, Bayandor offered his theory and the reasons as to why in his view, it was actually the influential Ayatollah Boroujerdi.

Oliver Bast, on the second day of the seminar, listed the popular myths propagated into the public consciousness by the media and the role of academics in this. Some of these myths were:
Mossadeq nationalised the Iranian oil industry - it was nationalised before Mossadeq became PM
Mossadeq was democratically elected by popular vote - He was appointed by the Shah
The Shah was reinstated after a CIA backed coup - He never abdicated
The 1953 was a huge national trauma for Iranians- there have been many more events that can be described as a national trauma in recent Iranian history
That Mossadeq was brutally dealt with - Bast compared what happened to Hoveyda after 1979 revolution and the trial he got with that of Mossadeq
and finally the East German born scholar ridiculed Madeline Albright for having apologised to the Islamic Republic of the 1953 coup, describing her as ill informed and badly advised on the subject.

I was very much in agreement with Oliver Bast as to what he had to say about the media myths about Mossadeq. A recent report by CNN on Malcolm Byrne's sensational headlines for example, mentioned how Iran had gained its independence from Britain and Mossadeq had been sentenced to death for nationalising the Iranian oil!

Oliver Bast also mentioned that in terms of tangible results, Mossadeq's success was almost zero and that there were other Iranian Prime Ministers, before and after Mossadeq, who were far more successful in achieving real results.

There was also an interesting glimpse into the few Russian documents that are available on the subject. Next to nothing has been declassified by the KGB as this is not the norm in Russia but some diplomatic correspondence that were made available to one Russian born academic, showed contacts were established between Ayatollah Kashani and the Soviets who regarded Ayatollah Kashani as the only player able to bring the crowds into the streets.

It was a lively debate and perhaps, there were only two points that all sides agreed on:
a) There was nothing new in Malcolm Byrne's sensation headlines
b) Until more documents are released and declassified, what actually happened on 19th August, 1953 will remain debatable.

I hope in writing the above notes, I have given a flavour of what happened during the two day seminar at Manchester University, which is in far contrast to the simplistic and biased report aired by BBC Persian television. See below:

Fariba Sahraei, the BBC Persian reporter narrating the above footage, reduced the seminar into a much simpler event. According to her, there is no doubt that Mossadeq was toppled by a CIA coup on 19th August, 1953 and almost all academics and experts agree on this except one man, Darioush Bayandor, who is single handedly trying to give a different version, and Bayandor's statements were strongly challenged by other academics who attended the seminar!

A vivid example of lazy journalism and biased reporting that is becoming predominant on BBC Persian television.

The “Result" of Khomeini

The word for great grandchild in Persian is “Natijeh” which also means result. Last week the great granddaughter of Ayatollah Khomeini, or the “Result” of Ayatollah Khomeini, Naima Taheri, became the subject of much discussion throughout the Iranian cyberspace.

Ayatollah Khomeini’s granddaughter, Naimeh Eshraghi, posted this on her Facebook:
“A young Iranian girl, has won the first prize in OCE student competition, held in Ontario, Canada. Guess, who this young talented student is? My own daughter, Naima Taheri, studying international relations” and she finished her Facebook status by saying:
“Naima, my beloved daughter, I congratulate you for having won the first prize of the Ontario state’s competition for the elite”.

The competition that Naimeh Eshraghi referred to, was in fact a student video competition, not so much  a competition for the creme-de-la-creme or the elite of the Ontario state, as she had implied on her Facebook page. Khomeini’s great grand daughter also did not win the competition single handedly, but was part of a team who were awarded the first prize in 'Discovery Video Competition'.

Exaggerating the eliteness of the competition and the role of her daughter in winning the prize is not untypical of most Iranian parents. Most typical Iranian mothers exaggerate and boast the successes of their children, especially in education. I remember a colleague of my father who was once boasting his son’s educational achievements in studying nuclear physics and later receiving a slap on the back of my head from my father, who chided me by saying “why can’t you concentrate in your studies like him so we can have pleasure in telling others about your achievements?”. Of course, most of the boasting for which I had the misfortune of receiving my father’s wrath, turned out to be wishful thinking and in the same league as Naimeh Eshraghi’s exaggeration of her daughter’s achievement.

The controversy however, was not just over the typical maternal instinct to show off the achievements of one’s child, Khomeini’s granddaughter also photoshopped her daughter’s attire. The skin tight trousers,  the close fitting top and the high heels from the original picture were replaced by a knee length manteau and the picture was cropped so as not to show her “provocative" high heels.

Since then, more pictures of Ayatollah Khomeini’s great grand-daughter have been released. This is the “Result of Khomeini” were the typical headlines in Persian. Pictures that will make Khomeini turn in his grave but also remind us that the Islamic Republic will be just a blip in Iran’s history.
Naturally I wish Naeema Taheri all the success in fulfilling her potentials for the future, as I always do for everyone else.

Where is a foreign country?

Last week, "Negin-e-Kerman", a local publication in the Kerman province in Iran, was banned. Hamid Eshaghi, the interrogator for branch 3 of the Kerman revolutionary court said the publication was banned for "Insulting the sacred values, propaganda against the Islamic Republic and perturbing the public's thoughts".

An article that was published in the form of an essay, titled "Where is a foreign country?" was deemed as an insult to the holy Koran, Islam and the Martyrs".

The essay was in fact a lampooning of the Islamic Republic's propaganda on how everything is fine inside Iran and how the foreigners are always suffering because of their misguided way of life.

Here is the translation of the essay that aroused the wrath of the revolutionary courts in Kerman:

Where is a foreign country?

A foreign country is a place where they all have AIDS.

Foreign country is where they all try to have sex with each other

Whereas in our country, everyone is faithful to each other.

A foreign country is where their leader has more than one set of clothes and therefore they are very pompous and affluent.

They also all wear neck ties which everyone knows is a sort of a sign and an arrow pointing to "below the belt" part.

All foreigners are Westoxificated.

Foreigners are always drunk and are always telling each other “You Are…”

But here in Iran we are always very polite and always ask about the well being of each other’s families.

We have everything in Iran, bread, housing and according to some, we have freedom too. The only difference is we say we don’t have these things ourselves but our officials say we do have them, but we are so nescient that we keep asking “so where is it?” Our officials are then forced to set up morality police units and force us to understand that we have all these things.

But its not like this in foreign countries, because they are so illogical.

Foreign country is a backward place where they have no morality police and they don’t get fined for wearing nail polish.

In foreign countries they still haven’t understood that black is a suitable colour for summer.

Because foreigners have a very weak religious and spiritual mind set, when they see strands of female hair, they are not provoked and they show no reaction. But if we see a few strands of female hair, we shake and shiver, because we have deep religious convictions.

Because foreigners are so uncultivated and irreligious, they have no idea what temporary marriage is and because they are so effeminate they think men and women are equal. They have never had a decent and noble teacher to make them understand that a man, is in fact, equal to four women.

They are so unrefined that when they walk into a church they walk with their shoes on and burn incense, they have no idea that the joy of speaking to God is in the sweet fragrance of old socks mixed with rosewater.

They sing their prayers with music, because they are such donkeys that they do not realise when man speaks with God, he is not permitted to be joyous. God is very frightening and only Iranians know this. 

Our conclusion at the end of this essay is that a foreign country is a very bad place and a foreign country is where every one has AIDS.

CIA Documents, GWU Much Ado About Nothing

Malcolm Byrne, Deputy Director and
Director of Research at GWU National Archives

News of CIA finally acknowledging its role in the 1953 coup in Iran after the National Security Archive Dept at George Washington University used the "Freedom of Information Act" to obtain some new CIA declassified documents, quickly hit the headlines last week.
Headlines such as:

"CIA finally admits it was behind 1953 coup which deposed Iranian prime minister who stood up to the West" - Daily Mail

"CIA documents acknowledge its role in Iran's 1953 coup" - BBC

"CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup" - The Guardian 

Reading beyond the news headlines however quickly indicated that none of the authors of these articles with the glitzy headlines had actually bothered to read the documents. The fact that there was nothing new in these documents was also admitted to me in an email correspondence I had with Malcolm Byrne, the director of the GWU National Security Archive Dept who spearheaded the media frenzy about the new declassified documents:

"They [the new documents released] do not change our understanding of the coup in a major way"

The GWU national archives published 35 documents on their web page: 

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/#doc1

The first document, in the list of CIA documents on the GWU website, is a 200 page account by a CIA operative named Donald Wilber. There is nothing new about this document,  it was in fact published by the New York Times in 2000. Yet even more than a decade since; it seems most media have been content at headline grabbing rather than actually reading the Wilber account. 

Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect a news reporter, faced with a one day deadline for publishing, would have the time to read more than 700 pages of documents in such a short time, but nevertheless most news readers and viewers also stop at just reading the sexy headlines and ignore the actual contents of the source. This is how you get the "know it all" plebs in meetings about Iran, who think they know all about the 1953 events in Iran or worse still, this is how the likes of Madeline Albright, Bill Clinton's US Secretary of State, ends up apologising to the Islamic Republic about the US involvement in the removal of Mossadeq in 1953. If only Albright or her advisors had read the documents, they would realise those ruling Iran now are the very ones who helped the CIA in their objectives.

Wilbur's account is in fact full of references to the role of the clergy in the overthrow of Mossadeq. In fact there are so many items listed as possible risks to the project, but the one thing both the British and the US spy stations in Iran are fully confident about, is that they can rely on the clergy to carry out their role in the overthrow of Mossadeq.

Appendix B, pp20 from Wilber's documents:

Another excerpt from Wilbur's documents even spells out what the clergy in Iran must do on the "appointed day":

and another excerpt :

The Islamic terrorist group at the time connected to the clergy in Iran, the Fedayeen Islam, is not mentioned explicitly in this excerpt but with a high degree of certainty one can assume it is this group which is referred to in this excerpt:

Threatening the pro-Mossadeq deputies and his entourage by the Fedayeen Islam terrorist group, with "direct action", of course is another word for assassinations.

The other myth is that the documents reveal the project to overthrow Mossadeq is because of oil. The documents in fact suggest that central to the success of the project is the co-operation by the Shah, which is listed as the top risk for the project's failure or success. In order to convince the Shah to co-operate, the documents suggest that an enormous effort must have been made to convince the Shah that the pursuit to overthrow Mossadeq was not because of the oil nationalisation issue, which the Shah was sympathetic towards but that Iran's economy was on the verge of collapse, the Tudeh Party, Iran's Soviet backed Communist Party was becoming increasingly powerful and the American feared Iran would fall to the Soviets. That is why the project is code named "TPAJAX", short for Tudeh Party cleansing in Iran. 

It is also debatable whether the overthrow of Mossadeq should be called a coup. It is in fact a quasi-legal move and not a coup. Mossadeq had become increasing dictatorial, he had dissolved the parliament and the dissatisfaction with him had reached  even his own close ranks. The documents in fact reveal that his own supporters were thinking of replacing him with another National Front candidate. 

In the absence of the parliament, according to Iran's constitution, it was the legal authority of the Shah to dismiss the Prime Minister by issuing a Firman. What the TPAJAX project required to do was to convince the Shah and encourage him to put his signature at the bottom of a Firman (Shah's order) that replaced Mossadeq with the new Prime Minister, Gen. Zahedi.

The project TPAJAX was supposed to have been carried out on the 16th of August, 1953. The plan however had leaked to Mossadeq, this was one of the major risks listed during the planning. Mossadeq was ready with his troops and when the Firman to replace him was delivered to him, his troops arrested the messenger. The Shah fled and this sparked a series of demonstrations by the Tudeh Party across the country calling for a republic, accompanied by fiery speeches from Mossadeq's supporters who demanded the Shah to abdicate. Yet all this helped to mobilise the support for the Shah in a way that surprised everyone.

Wilbur's documents describe the turn around of fortunes:

In another part of the document the make up of these pro-Shah crowds is described as such:

Document 3 on GWU's website list is also not new, it was declassified once in 1981 and again in 2011. Judging by the footnotes in the document, it is thought it was written either in 1974 or after. An unexpected feature of the document (Appendix C) is the inclusion of a series of lengthy excerpts of published accounts of the overthrow designed, apparently, to underscore how poorly the public understood the episode at the time.

Document 4 was written in 1998 and most parts, even the table of contents, are fully excised.

Document 5 is the first in the list that has been recently classified. It is a memo by Kermit Roosevelt written on 14th July, 1953. It is a regular report of the events unfolding in Iran, including the prospect of Mossadeq closing the parliament.

Document 6 is another memo by Kermit Roosevelt written on July 15th. Again it is a report of the legalities of how many MPs must be present for a vote by the deputies to have legal effect. It also mentions article 48 which gives the Shah the authority as the only person to dissolve the parliament.

Document 7, another memo by Kermit Roosevelt on 16th July, 1953, examines Zahedi's military assets and mentions Zahedi is against extra-legal moves to oust Mossadeq and considers this to be a political suicide.

Document 8, is anther report by Kermit roosevelt on the resignation of deputies, the idea being to avert Mossadeq's move to call for a referendum by making sure the minimum required number of deputies will not be present. 

Document 9 is a brief on 22nd July, 1953 to Mr. Waller by an unknown writer saying that Roosevelt wishes Mr. Waller to pursue the preparation of a statement after the fall of Mossadeq. Document 10 is the draft text of that prepared statement.

Document 11 is a proposed commendation for the communication specialists who kept the CIA headquarters informed as the events unfolded.

Document 12 is another request commendation specifically asked for John Waller.

Document 13 is mostly excised, except for one line which says perhaps its best an unspecified person should not receive commendation for security implications.

Document 14 is written on September 10, 1953 and is a memo by the acting chief of Division of Africa and Near East and is giving an update on the latest status of the Tudeh Party.

Document 15, written by Kermit Roosevelt on 21 Sept, 1953 is reporting on the internal power struggle of the Zahedi government. It also mentions that Zahedi's government had been financially supporting Ayatollah Behbahani. The influential Ayatollah was responsible for organising a mob of thugs and hoodlums in support of the Shah on 28th Feb, 1953. He also rallied behind the Shah in the events of 19th August later that year but in June 1963, Behbahani backed Ayatollah Khomeini's reactionary opposition to the Shah's reforms.

Document 15 also reveals that Ayatollah Behbahani's son, Ja'afar wanted "the portfolio of Minister of National Economy, but because Zahedi had refused to give him the job, it had caused a rift between Zahedi and Ayatollah Behbahani.

Document 16, bullet point 5, talks about Zahedi's restlessness in wishing to execute Mossadeq and that he had sent 5 messages to the Shah requesting him to order the Military Tribunal to expedite execution of Mossadeq and others but the Shah had not complied.

Document 17 is yet another memo by Kermit Roosevelt and it talks about the Shah's fears of an imminent Tudeh Party attack.

Document 18 reveals two further payments to Ayatollah Behbahani by Gen. Zahedi.

In Document 19, written by Roosevelt on 20th October, 1953, Zahedi is reported to have visited Ayatollah Kashani's house and how friendly the meeting was.

Documents 20 and 21 are just some mumbo jumbo and the rest of the documents are British records,  previously released, mostly in 1978, where the meetings are not about the events of 1953 but in which there may be a hint or a small mention about 1953 with the British mostly requiring to be put in the loop if the relevant documents are to be released and declassified by the Americans.

So there you have it, nothing new in the documents, much ado about nothing, just a brilliant marketing strategy by the GWU National Security Archive department by banking on the news media not having time to read the contents but keen to create the headlines to make the department get a lot of attention and possibly more funds.

Mystery of Rowhani's First PHD before GCU

On the day, Hasan Rowhani was inaugurated, a documentary was shown on the Islamic Republic state TV about the new president.

The "Elected President" was the name of the documentary which glorified Hasan Rowhani as a long serving trusted figure of the establishment, who has been through the thick and thin and served in various key positions as a loyal reliable servant of the regime.

In the documentary a letter was shown- see screenshot on the left. It commends the air defence personnel for their courage and successes in recent operations. Nothing wrong with that of course. The letter is signed by the then head of Iran's Air Defences, Dr. Hassan Rowhani.

The date of the above letter is April 20, 1986, almost a decade before Rowhani got his PHD from Glasgow Caledonian University.

So the question once agains remains unanswered, where did Rowhani get his other PHD from?! This time there can be no accusations of misunderstanding by the reporter who interviewed him or photoshop forgeries of documents to slander him, it is an official letter shown on his own documentary which was aired from Iran's state TV.

A nice "moderate" start?

Labour’s shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander, said the decision by Britain to decline the invitation to attend the inauguration ceremony of the new president of the Islamic Republic was “ill-judged and short sighted”.

It would be good to know what Douglas Alexander would have expected the UK representative to do when the rest of the invitees to the inauguration ceremony were asked to chant “Death to those who oppose the Supreme Leader, Death to America, Death to England, Death to Israel” as seen in this clip from yesterday's inauguration ceremony?

And in this clip below, the Supreme Leader tells the inauguration audience how Iranians have only ever “tasted democracy” during the 34 year rule of the Islamic Republic, as the cameras pan across the elite and the beneficiaries of this “democracy”



The new “moderate” president is also seen here meeting the representative of North Korea, one of Islamic Republic’s closest allies



Former Iranian president, Mohamad Khatami, who did so much of the leg work to bring the crowds to the polling stations, wasn’t even allowed any where near the ceremony.

It was also unclear from the live coverage if Omar Al-Bashir was in the audience but Iran’s news media  were saying that the wanted war criminal was definitely amongst the invitees and would attend the inauguration ceremony.

It seems its business as usual for Islamic Republic but few nice words and a few smiles here and there can pull the wool over the eyes of many including those of Douglas Alexander.

Islamic Republic State TV Special Report on the Birth of the Royal Baby

See Full Transcript below:

Transcript:

Nothing could have manifested English people's hatred of their monarchy as much as the birth of this baby

A birth that took place after 9 months of controversy during which the Queen of England tried her best to seen more and cover up her weaknesses

VT report:

[bells ringing]

The sound of church bells can be heard ringing again, bells that are indicative of a high costs the people of England have to pay.  England has one of the most reactionary and medieval forms of governments.

This time the bells are not ringing for the coronation or another royal wedding, but this time the bells carry the news of a new birth in the Royal family.

The royal family had placed a whole collection of media outlets and their cameras, from a month before,  outside the hospital where the royal bride was being looked after

What the media outlets had to do during the birth of this latest heir to the throne was to convince the public opinion of the people in England that monarchy is accepted by them. 

[the VT then shows Pooneh Ghoddoosi from BBC Persian outside the palace wearing a black dress]

But amongst all this when the presenter of the official English media was making a live report wearing a black dress outside the palace, the Queen's guards apparently gave her a scolding and forced her to change her dress [she is then seen wearing a formal white suit]

Finally on Tuesday, they unveiled the new heir to the throne, the baby is a boy and the announcement was placed on a luxury tripod in the palace yard.

[a VT of a parliamentary ceremony is then shown]

and the "red jackets" once again threw in a big party. Without a doubt, he is the most expensive baby in the history

[report shows some presenter as saying..the subtitle that the birth is boosting Britain's economy is ignored]

"..it is estimated the cost of this baby so far has been $375 Million"

The prodigality of this royal family has resulted in much protests across this country. People are fed up with the power and wealth concentrated in the hands of a few

[a protester is interviewed]

These expenses are paid out of the pockets of tax payers

This troublesome baby has already resulted in the death of a nurse. This nurse had been talking to reporters about the royal bride being pregnant and died a few days later, in mysterious circumstances

The British government claimed the nurse had committed suicide because she was so upset at disclosing the news of the pregnancy

[a passer by is interviewed who says all this luxury and lavishness for the birth of a baby is unacceptable]

[David Cameron is seen congratulating the couple outside Downing St.]

[A Ladbroke spokesperson is interviewed saying the government is constantly cutting back on health services but there is never a penny cut back on Royal family expenditures]

The Queen reigns as an absolute dictator in this country

She can annul the parliament and appoint the key positions

The Prime Minister is also chosen by a parliament whose members have been appointed by the Queen

This baby is the third in line to the throne

If Queen Elizabeth II, who has been reigning for 60 years, dies there are two other waiting in line

An Exceptional Act of Courage

In the Islamic Apartheid Republic of Iran, all religious minorities have been made into second class citizens. Even Shiites who adhere to a different interpretation of the faith than the official state ideology have been victims. However, one can say without a shadow of doubt that the Iranian Bahaiis have sufferd the most and have been the biggest victims of this religious apartheid regime.

Iranian Bahaiis are stripped of all citizenship rights and are discriminated against in all walks of life. One of the most shameful discriminations against the Bahaiis in Iran has been to deny them the rights to higher education. Imagine what tumultuous uproar there would have been, if the Israelis denied their Arab citizens the right to higher education and yet there is such a disgraceful silence on the plight of Iranian Bahaiis by the so-called "progressive" forces in the West.

The parents of Artin, the little four year old boy in the picture, are in prison and Artin is being looked after by his grandmother. Artin's parents are not criminals however; Kamran Rahimian and Faran Hessami are Bahaiis who were teaching in an online university for Iranian Bahaiis who wanted to receive higher education. They have both been sentenced to four years in prison.

The man seen in the picture is Mohammad Nourizad. An Iranian filmmaker and a former journalist in the hardline Kayhan Daily printed in Iran. Nourizad was once an ally of the Supreme Leader but he broke ranks with the Supreme Leader in 2009. In an open letter to the Supreme Leader, Nourizad urged Ayatollah Khamenei to apologise to the nation for the bloody crackdown on the protesters.
"As commander in chief of the armed forces, you didn't treat people well after the election. Your agents opened fire, killed the people, beat them and destroyed and burnt their property. Your role in this can't be ignored, ... Your apology can cool down the wrath of the people."

Nourizad was sentenced to three and half years imprisonment for writing the letter. In prison he saw more wrongs that had been done to the nation. He met young talented people suffering imprisonment and ill treatment who would in any other normal country been regarded as the nation's assets and promoted. The prison made Nourizad even more resolute to make up for the times he had been on the wrong side.

Yesterday in an another exceptionally courageous act, Nourizad went to meet the little Artin and kissed the feet of the four year old and apologised as a Shiite Muslim for the injustice this innocent little boy was made to suffer. Considering the "Representatives of God on Earth", who rule Iran, regard the Bahaiis as "unclean", to do this in the holy month of Ramadan took exceptional courage.

Nourizad wrote on his Facebook page:
"Artin's innocent little eyes looked me in the eyes and asked me, 'You who consider yourself a Shiite, clean and Godly, was it not the prophet himself who said 'seek knowledge from cradle to grave?' So what was it that my parents did wrong? were they not merely teaching physics, chemistry and sciences? So why should they be in prison now and my grandmother have to look after me?'
"
Artin's grandfather was executed by the Islamic Republic many years ago.

Rafighdoost: "Supreme Leader Engineered the Elections Beautifully"

When it comes to revolutionary credentials, Mohsen Rafighdoost has it all. He is said to have been active against the Shah since he was ten years old. In 1964, when he was in his early twenties, he is reputed to have battered a man to death with a club, because the man was thought to have been a SAVAK agent.

Rafighdoost was an active supporter of the MeK [Mojahedin Khalq Organisation] before the revolution until an ideological battle within the MeK resulted in a Marxist splinter group and a bloody internal infighting within the organisation.

Prior to the split within the MeK, Rafighdoost helped the organisation by smuggling guns and ammunition from Lebanon via the Kurdish borders for the MeK operatives fighting against the Shah
.
Rafighdoost was imprisoned in 1975, along with the rest of the MeK leadership. In prison, he distanced himself from the MeK and joined the Islamic Coalition Society.
Upon Khomeini's return from exile, Rafighdoost was the driver who drove the Ayatollah through the frantic crowds from the airport to the cemetery.

After the victory of the 1979 revolution, Rafighdoost was made in charge of repossessing the properties of the officials from the Ancien Régime until the decision was made to form the Revolutionary Guards and he was called to help shape this new military corps. Rafighdoost always says with pride, if the formation of the IRGC can be narrowed down to 5 to 10 people, he is the top man amongst them.

Rafighdoost was then the head of the Dispossessed Foundation for years until he was removed from there and now runs many lucrative businesses and is particularly active in construction and medicine.


In an interview with the Iranian news website, Khabaronline, Mohsen Rafighdoost talks about his memoires of the new Iranian president, Hassan Rowhani, during the war years, when Rafighdoost himself was the Minister of the Revolutionary Guards and also expresses his views about the last presidential elections in Iran.

Most interestingly during the lengthy interview, Rafighdoost talks about how the Supreme Leader "beautifully engineered" the last election.
"We all thought after the events that took place in 2009, the participation by the eligible voters will be under 40%, but the Supreme Leader beautifully engineered the elections. Even we never imagined there would be a 72% participation"

Rafighdoost also refuses the notion that this was a victory for the reformists and says "If the reformists had even the slightest confidence that they have the votes, they wouldn't ask Aref to withdraw. Most of the principalists I know are pleased about the election outcome"

Rafighdoost praised the Islamic Republic election process and said "It is a source of much pride that nowhere in the world has free elections like Iran...After the elections I went to see the Supreme Leader and he said he was very pleased about the election results"