Video : Dr. Mossadegh speaking in 1952

to :Anonymous-2 Guess what??

to :Anonymous-2

Guess what?? Iranians were 100% Zoroastrians before the Invasion of savage Islamic Armies...Big Freaking deal? Religions come and go...Deal with it.

The entire population of Germans were also Nazi and believed in Nazim when Hitler ruled over them....guess what happened to them and their beliefs...Deal with it.

Khengollah:

What happend in Iran 1978/79 was the only true Revolution in the History of man. Because its Dynamics was perforemed only by Iranian Nation.

You must be one of the most ignorant devotees of the regime. Have you signed up for martyrdom? I hope you have...The coup of 1978/79 was planned 10 years in advance by Jimmy Carter et al. Read the book by william Engdhal, "A century of war"...

//www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-P...

For you Islamists, keeping the firey and destructive pseudo-revolutionary" rhetoric alive is your bread and butter; Your very existence depends upon it. Therefore, it is not surprising that you vehmently resist progress and change...

Until last year I thought Iranians revolted against their monarchy...how wrong I was.

Iranians did not revolt to have Islam enslave them and keep them in ever sliding journey into sewere of Middle Ages's religous subjugation.

The revolution was hijacked by the most violent factions of the society, namely, those who will kill "the enemies of Islam". The other groups were not nearly brutal or violent enough as this group of murderous hoodlum.
Many years before the revolution, The Mullahs, especially Khomeini, felt their Islam was undermined by the rapid progress the world was making towards secularism and humanism and thus rendering Islam and the clergies job and their only product in their inventory, which was religion.

The 1979 revolution would had taken place regardless of the system of governance. The 1979 uprising was everything to do with saving Islam and the clergies lucrative and most profitable job.

Khomeini used to say, "ISLAM IS IN DANGER" and he was right and he did something about it and the rest is history.

To: Islamist Lie -America Bought Back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your provided a most ignorant response! You are either in some bull shit fantasy land or smoking something - "Iranians have to decide whether they want to go back to their roots or move to Arabia!!"

You seem to have forgotten that over 98% of the Iranians are Muslims that doesn't mean they are political Islamists (if you know what you are speaking about).

You are neither going to be able to take Islam out of Iran, nor are you going to take the influence of Iranian culture and civilization out of Islam. The two have become too integrated. So just accept reality!

With respect to America or any other foreign intervention:

Anyone who has any integrity would rather die standing on their feet as opposed to live by crawling
on their knees and being a slave to the U.S. or any other country. Now some of you may not have any integrity, or self-respect and would rather survive as a slave by throwing the red carpet for the American occupiers. I would not and I hope my countrymen/women have self-respect and dignity!

Those who have gained honor in history have been those who have resisted foreign occupation and foreign intervention.

America brought the

America brought the Shahanshaykhi back to Iran and America will take them out when it's good and ready.

NO Shahanshai,
No Shahansheikhi

Those zealous fanatic muslim who have taken Iranian hostage at a gun point will need to move to Saudi Arabia. True Iranians need to understand if they want to stay Iranian, they need to convert back to their roots. And that will take hard work to educate people on how corrupt the clergies have been and the tremendous damage they have done to Iran and true Iranians. A time will come when Iranians will realize that they have to choose between being Iranian or Islamist...This might take another half a century but it will happen. The longer the mullahs stay in power the sooner Iranians will be able to purge Islam out of their great nation.

The thorny path !

The way of life and the way people thought in those days in the 1950s and 60s and early 70s was totally different than the post 79 revolution you are seeing.

From your writing I assume you an American visiting this website. So you must be unaware of the Iranian way of thinking. The pre-revolutionary Iran was a secular country, the religion being limited to the personal lives and it was not the dominant trend in the political life of people.

The first parliament in the first decade of 20th century, had many secularist trends and even though there were some clergies in it, yet the dominant trend was secular. It was heading Iran towards the ideals of liberalism and social justice. This you can read in the famous book by 'Kasravi' on the constitutional revolution.

The 1979 revolution and the frenzy trend of religiosity which you correctly criticize is partly due to the frustration the people perceived from western colonial powers and their representatives. Yet the clergy utilized this mood towards radicalizing it and this is not in the benefit of the country.

All I am saying is that, had it not been for the 1953 coup, the people of Iran would have continued their genuine path towards democracy, secular democracy. But the colonial coup changed that path and ended in 'extremism'. The reward for staging unlawful coups is extremism which benefits none.

This coup (1953) was not the first interference. In the aftermath of the 1906 revolt the people had found their thorny way toward secularism and democracy but again the colonial 'interests' were in danger. Because, remember, true independence always endangers the illegitimate colonial interests, so it must be stopped.

It was stopped by Reza Khan's coup and reign.

So twice the thorny path towards democracy was diverted towards dictatorship and colonial dominance.

Democracy is a 'long' path, needing 'time' (several decades) for the intellectual development of its participants (people).

The third time, however, religious extremism took dominance and 'independence' got mixed with extremism; the result: all the difficulties we are encountering now.

Solution? diplomacy or 'intervention'?

I advise the first but it is most probable you will choose the second because you think with military force can solve all problems.

Try it! Bomb Iran, nuke Iran. I don't live there! It is not going to hurt me. I am living fine and nice here and I intend to do so. but I don't think it is going to 'solve' or even 'diminish' your problems.

What was the result of the Iraqi intervention?

Anti-distorter

He just called India and Israel democracies. Who is this clown. If Israel is a democracy, Paris Hilton is a prude. And since when is India in the middle east? Looks like you are the distorter hamvatan. Maybe youre an Iranian Jew who defends Israel and Hindus that equally kill Muslims, one in Palestine, other in Kashmir.

As for the rest of you, you're all retarded, nobody in Iran's past or present has been good for the country. stop glorifying anyone. the real heros arent in the history books.

???

Would have gained Independence? (I believe they DID after the 1979 revolution)

On path to democracy (I believe they are with over 40 national elections in past 29 years. Have you even been to Iran? Have you seen the people? They are nothing like Mossadegh and the elitits he surrounded himself with. A guy like Ahmadinejad is more in tune with the people of Iran than any of these western educated pricks. You weren't around then, we WERE. You just read about this Mossadegh guy from history books.)

Who are all you morons writing here? Nobody has ever had the popularity of these dam akhoonds for better or worse. I've given it a lot.

I often thought who Iranians would vote for in case they had a democracy. And we know who the members of the first Iranian parliament in the first decade of the 20th century were. They were mostly the clergy. Good for them! Iranians, would naturally vote for Shia Islam, even today. Hey, scream and shout that our compatriots are some idiots!? No! We may be idiots for thinking that we are right and they are wrong. The reality is out there. Don't like it? Go and find the society you fit in! God created us free, right? What would Iranians vote for today? I know that most Iranians are pretty much fed up with this regime, but what would they vote for? I think they would still vote for some hypocrite, mostly an Islamist one.

Why do you distort history ? Ashamed?

I do agree with you over the issue of "Persian Nationalism". I think nationalism is good but to a certain degree. It should not amount to patriotic chauvinism.
However, I do not agree with your judgement about Mossadegh. You are fundamentally wrong and biased.
Mossadegh was not a stooge of Ghajar dynasty set upon the Pahlavis. He was a western educated lawyer who loved his country and believed in the true independence of Iran from the western and leftist influence. He was a constitutional monarchist in the appearance (because he swore to it) and a democratic republican at heart.
If he was not overthrown, Iran would have gained its true independence and would be on its way to genuine democracy. Iran would have soon become the first and best true democracy in the middle east, much better than India and Israel.
The danger of communism was much exaggerated for the forces who planned his overthrow. They had (have) to distort history to justify their mistake (crime).

Mossadeq

It's funny because the only reason Mossadeq is famous is for what he was VICTIM of, rather than what he DID. Mossadeq was made popular because of the CIA coup. Had he stayed in power, he would have been a nobody. In the words of Sepeher Zabir, Mossadeq was already losing major popularity and the CIA just pushed a falling door down. Kermit Roosevelt even admitted later it was exaggerating its role, but did so for its later ventures such as in Guatemala in 1954. End of the day Mossadeq is a symbol today, the man himself was a product of Qajar royal family who made his living off opposing Pahlavi's, something all Qajars do today. Either way down with shah, mossadeq, and mullahs. They are all products of the past. Even Mossadeq's nationalism according to Noam Chomsky was nothing more than a conservative nationalit government that never challenged anything fundamental. He just appeals to these racist Iranians who dislike Arab influence in Iran. "Persian Nationalism" doesnt do much for Iran in a region filled with Arabs, Turks, Kurds, Afghans, so GET OVER IT PEOPLE! Understand the reality of the region, not the reality of the racism that overfills your weak brain cells.

Mossadegh was a true nationalist not a communist!

Do not Distort History for your imperial causes!
Mossadegh was a true nationalist and lover of Iran's independence. He was a true believer in constitutional monarchy where the king does not actually rule. He was also against foreign influence.

If the communists showed partial support of him it was because Mossadegh wanted to gain Iran's independence from the west. But Mossadegh was equally suspicious of Russia and that was what made the Tudeh Party critical of him and they finally betrayed him and did not help him in the coup.

The communists later on expressed their regret for their betrayal of Mossadegh and for not helping him to defeat the coup but it was too later, they were all crushed and killed.

Kinzer?

Since when did Kinzer become an expert on Iran? so since he said it, it must be true? Mossadeq betrayed Kashani, because he was namak nashnas!!!!!!!!

Listen to this (Kashani had bazaar closed, gave fatwas, etc. all in support of Mossadegh, and Mossadegh used this religous support to his advantage, but since he had no belief in them, he betrayed them!)

//irannegah.com/Video.aspx?id=15

Also:

//irannegah.com/Video.aspx?id=80

(If you knew your history you would know that Kashani disobeyed Borjuerdi and got involved in backing Mossadegh)

And the reason later many Islamists shyed away from Mossadegh was because of the Communist support for him and his movement, and in the game of weighing interests, it was more acceptable to the ulama to have a king who believes in Islam than a government siding with communists who disbelieve in God.

Censorship and Freedom of Speech

JJ and other admin,
Freedom of speech/expression is an absolute right in this society.

In your site you pretend to be an advocate of it by saying nothing is scared (what a joke!). Practically you are much worse than Mullahs. They don’t know anything better, you know and with your censorship with no real reason, downgrading yourself to the same level as mullahs!

This is my opinion that 'Ying Yang Paintings' in main page of Iranian.com is a trashy painting, and you don’t have any tolerance to hear it.

Go head again and delete my comment again as you did for past 12 hours.

Now is not the painting anymore it is your action and censorship that portrait you to the same low level as Mullahs

13/6/05 The Coming Iranian

13/6/05 The Coming Iranian Class Wars by Rosa Faiz

www.covertactionquarterly.org/iranianclasswars.htm...

The particular shape of the ruling classes in Iran has, for the past one thousand and one years at least, consisted of two major components. In Iran they are referred to as the ‘Shah’ and the ‘Shaykh’; the King and the Cleric.

For those less familiar with the history of Iran, it is instructive to know that the clergy were a most integral part of the ruling classes all the way until 1920s, when the founder of the Pahlavi Dynasty, Reza Shah, summarily stripped the mullahs of almost all their social institutions of power.

From that point on the clergy had to stay content with running the mosques for the most part. Even large land holdings of the organized clergy were confiscated.

As Reza Shah’s liking grew for Germans, who built the first railway system in Iran, his occupancy of the Peacock Throne eventually became too intolerable for the British and the Soviets, who jointly invaded Iran in 1941; the British occupying the southern regions and the Soviets occupying the northern regions. So, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had to watch his father sent to exile, and was himself installed as the king.

Seeing how his father had been hated and feared so fiercely, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi decided to at least start out as a nicer, gentler Pahlavi King, and so, “To assure the public that the dictatorship would not be re-imposed, the new shah granted amnesty to all political prisoners,… and decreed a return of ecclesiastical lands to the religious foundations,…” (Abrahamian). 1

In time, there would shortly come a big turn to the right, big crackdowns would follow, and a huge new wave of dissidents would be created, consisting mostly of the communist sympathizers of the Tudeh Party and the left-nationalist supporters of the National Front led by Dr.Mohammad Mossadegh.

So, for the most part, the second King of the Pahlavi ‘dynasty’ set his priorities in line with the Cold War-dictated aims and goals of his enablers in the West, and participated wholeheartedly in pursuing the leftists and making them into public enemy number one.

A most telling episode of a Pahlavi-era union between the Shah and the Shaykh, harkening back to the good old days when the two ruled harmoniously together, came in the wake of the social struggles of 1951-1953, which pit different factions of Iranian bourgeoisie against each other: the monarchist-comprador bourgeoisie and the feudal landowners against the nationalist factions, led by Mossadegh, the Prime Minister who successfully nationalized the Iranian oil industry. The struggle between these two factions naturally opened up the political arena to a wider participation on the part of other segments of society with other political inclinations, most significantly other nationalist-democrats as well as leftists.

It is instructive to see how Khomeini’s mentor, Ayatollah Kashani, acted in the fight between the nationalist and the comprador (i.e. imperialist lackey) factions of the Iranian bourgeoisie. At the height of the struggle, Ayatollah Kashani, a leading clergy of that time, openly sided with the absolutist monarch, inciting his followers to oppose Mossadegh, who, according to Ayatollah Kashani, was clearly a communist/atheist lover; which he was not.

We must take a slight detour here, in connection with the coup organized by the CIA to overthrow Mossadegh, a pleasing event not only to the monarchist-comprador factions, but also the clergy. The point of the detour being to show how thoroughly the imperialists plan when it comes to clearly marking their strategic friends and their strategic enemies.

According to documents released by the National Security Archives, in June 2004, there were plans drawn up by the CIA in late 1952, early 1953 to train and arm a guerilla army in southern Iran, as a contingency backup in case of the failure of Operation AJAX, which was the covert coup carried out by the CIA and the British intelligence, in August 1953, securing Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s installment as an absolute monarch servile to the U.K. and the U.S. interests.

At the time the coup organizers were planning, one point of anxiety was the possibility of failure; in which case, they calculated, the communists (Tudeh Party), utilizing their popularity and influence among the rank and file of the National Front (Mossadegh’s party), plus using their own sizable social support, would gain the upper hand and seize some or all state power. For this contingency, the coup organizers needed a guerilla army (death squads) that would literally target communists. Although this back-up plan was eventually shelved (the coup was successful enough), it served as a clear prototype for what the U.S. later did in Guatemala, the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Contras attacks against Nicaragua, and other death squads funded, trained and sustained in Central America throughout the 1980s.

Kermit Roosevelt, the operations-manager for Operation AJAX, in his book, Counter Coup: The Struggle for the Control of Iran, recounts that after the completion of the coup, and as he was giving his oral report to John Foster Dulles, he noticed something eerie, “Despite his posture [leaning back in his chair], he was anything but sleepy. His eyes were gleaming; he seemed to be purring like a giant cat. Clearly, he was not only enjoying what he was hearing, but my instincts told me that he was planning as well.” And sure enough, “Within weeks I was offered command of a Guatemalan undertaking already in preparation … ,” (Counter Coup, p. 209-210).

Then Came the White Revolution

So, the relations between the Shah and Shaykh were somewhat smoothed out during the reign of our second Pahlavi so-called king. Until, that is, the White Revolution, which was a package of social reforms instigated by the Kennedy administration and implemented by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Chief among these reforms was a land redistribution law, as well as laws recognizing suffrage for women, along with other measures such as health and education corps to be sent to all rural areas of Iran. These reform measures either took the mullahs’ and their traditional social allies’ lands, which alone caused extreme alarm, or else cut into areas such as education in rural areas where they had enjoyed a de facto position of hegemony. The mullahs were also voicing a loud opposition to those parts of the reforms that gave women some rights previously denied them.

So, by modernizing the performance of all social functions that the clergy might have had a traditional role in, the White Revolution would codify into law the cutting of the hands of the clergy from essential spheres of social control outside the actual running of the mosques. Naturally, the mullahs were not going to take this sitting down, and though a sizeable segment manning the state-sponsored mosques dared not enter the fray, others such as Ayatollah Khomeini did come out in open rebellion against the so-called White Revolution.

As a result of this package of reforms, therefore, large sections of the traditional classes (the feudal landlords, as well as significant segments of the clergy) became the enemies of the state. The enemies of the monarchist bourgeois state, therefore, consisted not only of those on the left, but also of those solidly on the reactionary side of the fence.

And strange as it may sound, the Iranian bourgeois ‘liberals’ have historically been able to work with both factions of the ruling classes, whether the immediate rulers came in the uniforms of the monarchists or the robes of the clergy, or a combination of both. And this, better than anything else, proves the incapacity of the Iranian liberals for consistency and adherence to their own supposed ideals when it comes to two of the most fundamental cornerstones of bourgeois liberalism: 1) commitment to the separation of religion from governance (an absolute minimum), neglected by the ‘liberals’ who comfortably work inside the clerical regime; and 2) commitment to democracy, neglected by the ‘liberals’ who find it unproblematic to work with the monarchists.

So, in effect, any true nationalist, or any true liberal in Iran has no place left to go, politically speaking, but to the socialists!! It is only a socialist program that can satisfy the most basic social demands of both the liberal and democratic segments of the so-called middle classes (the professional class), as well as liberate the rest of the working classes in Iran.

The Next Round of History

The monarchists who are now lining up again for another ride on Uncle Sam’s Magic Bus Ride, have adopted a new slogan, a ‘democratic’ one in which, the Newly Improved Reza Pahlavi, has been espousing a funny neo-monarchist slogan: I want to be the King of all Iranians! Implying, inadvertently of course, that his father was a bit of a despot who chose to be the king of only a few!!

It is more-than-slightly embarrassing, of course, to enunciate such a position at all. Does not every king worthy of the title take it for granted that he is the king of all his subjects?

We must repeat that with or without the imperialist invasion by the US-British-Israeli axis, the liberation of the Iranian peoples of all nationalities remains in our own hands.

As such, those of us the people of Iran who will yield neither to the Shah nor to the Shaykh, will have to make an unambiguous stance:

Anybody who, for the purpose of taking the state power, is collaborating with the imperialists including U.S., U.K. or Israeli colonialists, you are a traitor to the country, and as such, a pimp who is selling the future of generations of your fellow country men and women, for the price of a temporary taste of political power; meaning, you have earned yourselves an eternal entry into the large ledger of historical traitors to community, and will forever be placed in Lower Hell, on the ninth circle to be exact, on the lake of ice called Cocytus, on the inner circle Antenora, where the Traitors to Their Country are housed, if Dante’s map constructed from his memory, after his journey with Virgil, is to be trusted. 2

Weapons of Mass Destruction or not, next on the agenda for another century of barbarity is if and when and how to attack Iran. The ‘if’ relates to whether or not the imperialists can get ‘their man’ at the helm of the power in Iran. That man is said to be Akbar Rafsanjani, aka Akbar shah. He is well known to have very cordial relations with institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF, and is the author of a ‘privatization’ plan very popular with Western investors. He is known as a ‘pragmatist’ for very good reasons. And if the imperialists can subjugate a nation and make it crawl, by finding compliant national leaders who like to live on their knees and beg for dependency, then why go through all the mess of a war to get what they want?

But, again, imperialists are thorough. All contingencies must be accounted for and a plan A and a plan B for all such contingencies must be drawn up.

Times are strange indeed. There are some Iranians, who would like to lend a hand to occupying rapists. Such Iranians both inside and outside Iran are rubbing their miserable and well-manicured hands together, salivating over the prospects of the rewards for being a U.S. poodle dog. Count in this group Reza Pahlavi and his allies.

There are other types of Iranians, too, some of whom we can safely and accurately call fools, who think that the U.S. will fire a few shots allowing them to storm the streets and overthrow the tyrannical regime, and once the Iranian tyrants are overthrown, the U.S. tyrants too will go back home, only to send postcards from afar. These Iranian, much like first-time gangsters, with shaky fingers, filled with nervous adrenaline, can’t wait to get some action going.

Then there are, of course, those Iranians inside and outside Iran who constitute the business classes, and they are nervous too. But only to a degree. They are mostly busy counting these days. Counting their assets, that is. They are also counting the possibilities, and counting the costs of each possibility.

Not least, we have the Iranian tyrants running the state apparatuses, who are very nervous right now. They know that their particular political leaning, religious orientation, or actual plans or possible actions are not at issue, and that is why they are very nervous. Because they know very well how they got to be the current rulers in the first place: Like the Pahlavis, they are imperialist assisted too with an expiration date!

//www.williambowles.info/guests/2005/iran_cla...

DO NOT TRUST ANY PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED BY THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, THEY HAVE ALL BEEN ALTERED FOR PROPAGANDA REASONS.

That is a big lie. Kashani

That is a big lie. Kashani helped the Shah to overthrow Mossadegh. Read Kinser all the Shah's men the English version not the Persian one. In the Persian version, the Islamic Republic has omitted/scractched that part about Kashani. What a revisionist bunch of hypocrits.

TO DAHAN SHAH VA HARCHI SHAH

TO DAHAN SHAH VA HARCHI SHAH PARASTEEEEE

A+

Dear Sir:

I totally agree with you, In Mosadeq grave stone.........

Khoda-Shah-Mihan

ALI P

This is for you on Kashani:

//irannegah.com/Video.aspx?id=84

What kind of jerk are you A+, an F-?

Traitors like you are a shame for our nation.
You, and the like of you ar called: "traitors".

Reedam be ghabreh pedareh haroomzadet!
Haroomzadeh!

To ALI P

Ali jaan kashani came as religous leader and supported mossadegh and gave fatwa to people to support him and after that more of the poor and middle class people join the movement and stood behind mossadegh and kashani

Is that why every time they bring up Shah's name in Iran, they

say "Noor Beh Ghabresh Bebareh!" On the other hand, every time they bring up Mosadeq's name they say "Reedam Beh Ghabresh!"

To A+

Is that right?

look at Shah's place in history vs. Mossadegh's. One went down as a "Tyrant", "Dictator" and the other as a "Hero"!

I guess he kicked a WRONG ass this time!

What the hell is he talking about?

No wonder Shah kicked his ass!?

Nice video!

Thanks!

Kashani?

Just curious.... What did Kashani ever do for Iran?

The "greatest" Iranian ever!

Many thanks for posting this.

In my book, you cannot call yurself an Iranian if you don't like Dr. Mossadegh.

The one and ONLY!