British officials fear WikiLeaks will disrupt Iran policy
The Daily Telegraph / Damien Mcelroy
29-Nov-2010 (3 comments)

In fact British officials were much closer to the high level power struggle at the top levels of the Islamic regime between Mr Ahmadinejad, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani and Ali Larijani, the speaker of parliament.

"We always believed that Ahmadinejad had won the election but that the result was exaggerated. The embarrassing thing for Britain would be to have the depth of our contacts within the factions trying to oust Ahmadinejad exposed. The embassy in Tehran did place its bets on other side winning in Tehran," the official said.

It is believed the strong British role played during the infighting in Tehran prompted the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to issue a strong denunciation of "evil" British policy in Tehran during a high profile speech in June 2009, when he declared the election was over.

The Foreign Office has always maintained the accusations of interference were unwarranted.


Britain admits it engineered the 2009 riots

by Shutruk on


So, now we have it: Ahmadi won, and the rioters were British stooges designed to overthrow him like Mossadegh had been deposed.

Wikileaks has reveealed that the head of Mossad ,Meir Dagan, in August 2007 devised a strategy to promote regime change that included using NGOs, students and minorities to stage a popular revolt against the Islamic Republic.



Not a cliche anymore, not for me at least....

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

These kniving  brits are firmly on akhoonds and islamists side. This "leak on leaks", so obviouly an exercise in damage control to keep their islamist boys in power for a few more years and keep the steady flow of cheap oil and Trillions of Pound sterlings of funds into British industry and banking system is a good example of that. 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Anonymous Observer

"Shutruk" or whatever old username you are

by Anonymous Observer on

You do realize that you're contradicting yourself, right?  On the one hand, you claim that there was no fraud in the elections and that the whole controversy and the ensuing violence was based on British manipulations.  But in order to prove your point, you use evidence from...who else...the British!!!! So, which British backed version should we believe?!!!!

How funny!!!  Seriously, you hezbollahis never seize to amaze me...