Pahlavi on Fox

Reza Pahlavi interview with Fox News>>>Watch


more from Darius Kadivar
evil islam

ferdousi could see it clearly but we can not.

by evil islam on

our ferdousi gerami could see it more than 1100 years ago when he said:

CHO TAKHAT BA MENBAR BARABAR SHAVAD HAME NAAM OMMAR VA BOOBAKR SHAVAD NEJAADY PADEED AAYAD AZ MEYAN NA TURKO NA DEHGHAN O NA TAAZI BOVAD SOKHANHA BE KERDARE BAAZI BOVAD. our problem is one thing and one thing only: Evil Islam is why we have lost our very IDENTITY,Two guys tried to give us back our IDENTITY but guess what Prfessor Bernard LEWIS advised the British govenment when he was asked what to do with IRAN? ISLAMIC REVOLUTION.


Reply to kurdboy

by ardeshir keyvan (not verified) on

I wanted to apologize to you but after the other comment I realized it wasn't necessary. Federalism? All the separtists now talk about Federalism.
Do you have any idea about federalism? Why a united and old country like Iran should turn to a federal system? The basic law in a federal system is the financial independence of each province. It means Khuzestan will swim in money and the other provinces should starve to death.
Don't tell me they should divide the money from oil to all the states. No dude! A federal system does not work like that and
Maybe you think about the oil in kurdestan in Iraq. In this case you need to make a new country.

Dear kurdboy

arze khod mibario zahmate ma midari

Look at Europe, they are almost one country now for being stronger and you are talking about...

and final thing;
As much as a kurdestan belongs to you it belongs to me too and the same about Tehran.

Because of the fear and hate that almost everybody has about separatism, federalism... the mullahs take a lot of advantage and some how cram this idea to people's brain that if we go Iran will dismantle.
In history we had one country, one language. I bet you can talk kurdish fluently so it means nobody bothered you to learn it.

Why kurds and turks think they should learn Physics or anything else in their language but a guy from Rasht does not have that right?
In Iran each spot has a native language.
No wonder you don't like monarchy which I don't care about that.
This idea came to Iran by "Hezbe Tude".


To Kurd boy

by To Kurdboy (not verified) on

As a non-kurd, i admit the injustice by central governments to kurds and other minorities. Few weeks ago another iranian kurd had a detailed historical article on this site about kurds of iran and how they were at the root of the continuity of iran; this injustice is more of a modern phenomenon rather than historical. the injustice, in any shape and form, should be totally wiped out, but federalism for iran is a recipe for partition (example: iraq) since there are people who would benefit from separation (example: see articles by kamal artin on this site). how about total equality and self-determination for all. I personally look forward for the day that a brave nationalist kurd would save and rule the "whole" iran. I would sure trust him far more than any mulla. here is a fact: kurds are ethnically at least as iranian as any other iranian (who were mixed with arabs, turks, etc.), so why not view them as such; remember mandana, mother of the greatest king of iran was a kurd; our strength is in unity. division leads to domination by foreigners. i personally care so deeply and am so passionate about ALL minorities of iran (ethnic or religion) and am very disturbed by the injustice imposed on them by this farsi-speaking non-iranians who are running iran today. Payandeh iran.


The only solution is a

by Kurdboy (not verified) on

The only solution is a secular and federal Republic within a united Iran. Whic you prefer a divided Iran or a federal united Iran?


any rational for hating prince reza?

by trying to be rational (not verified) on

I am trying to find out why people have so much hatred towards prince reza? He is a man with no record, positive or negative. He, personally, has not harmed anyone. Anytime I listened to him, he said the decision belongs to people and he does not intend to return to power by force, just to save iran. My problem with him is that he has not been more effective as mullas continued selling of our the country. iran needs a leader today, why not using this known character to help us out - he can be trusted far more than mullas. Face the fact, we don't have many choices today, a continued mulla government, perhaps for another 30 years, or someone very effective (a modern reza shah) to get rid of these religious gangsters. we really don't have any good choice.


So, just because we hate

by Kurdboy (not verified) on

So, just because we hate Pahlavi makes us separatists? Why do you that I dont represent all Kurds in Iran? 90 % of Kurds hate pahlavi and Monarchists. There is no way that our people will accept Pahlavi as king. We Love Iran. We only hate Monarchists and Mullahs.


don't bother with sultanat-talabha

by theBiiiiiigshow (not verified) on

darius, nazanin,

don't bother with these fanatical monarchists. i read in the comments somebody saying "we pro-monarchists have NOTHING to apologize for". how can you put an ounce of sense into a head as hard as that? this arrogance reflects the attitude of a lot of these thieves and sellouts, and that's why they got chased out of iran by THE MAJORITY, i.e. muslims, atheists, zoroastrians, not just IRI supporters.

the shah was a coward and a tyrant who wilfully turned a blind eye to torture and imprisonment, and everybody, including those dinosaurs in Los Angeles, knows someone who disappeared or was thrown in prison for trying to speak up. he was not any better than the assholes in power right now, and his son is an opportunistic worm.

monarchists, go run some hair gel through those thinning locks and keep it PERSIAN, you fucking has-been sellouts.


great cross-section of proud iranians here!!

by high school drop out (not verified) on

my heart soars when i read all of these classy and educated proud iranians in here are so smart and insightful. i can see how iranians are the most educated immigrant group in america...the proof is evident in the comments on this page. only someone with a doctorate degree could leave these comments. i'm truly impressed. barikala....barikala...!


I think what Nazaninhaj

by Blue (not verified) on

I think what Nazaninhaj khanoom is trying to say in so many words is that she likes to be bare footed and pregnant and serv his haji husband ghyeme bademjoon every day for lunch. That is her Muslim identity she is talking about. Thanks for the akhoonds I lost all respect for any religion and religious people be it Islam or anything else for that matter. I was 9 when that monster set foot in Iran and since then Iran hasn't seen a good day. So many people died and displaced and separated. You can rant and tear your ass up about your Muslim identity but you cant deny that your akhoonds and mullas damaged your Islam beyond repair. Far greater than what Shah could have done. Back then if you were a devote Muslim you were genuinely were one not like now that everyone pretends to be one for their personal gain and then goes home and watches porno on their so-called illegal satellites.

Please dont even try to compare the after and before revolution cuz nobody in their right mind would agree with you that now is better than then. You are trying so hard to hide behind your religion and try indirectly and in disguise support this inhuman regime that is one of a kind and after its fall should be cataloged next to communist and Nazi.

Like it or not Reza Pahlavi will be in media and will write books and people will hear him. Time will tell what will happen. You have a right to disagree with his views but dont come here and lecture about that he has no right to be a leader or what not and his strong point is his DNA. People make someone a leader. I am sure he has enough followers. Question is in a fair election your ilk will out numbers his or not so till then let every body speak. Or Are you really worried that he might actually do something and get rid of the mullas that's why he really gets under your burka or lachak.


To Kurd boy

by aredeshir keyvan (not verified) on

Hey Talk for yourself boy. You are not representing all the kurds in Iran. I like to give you a friendly advice:
When Stalin was in power and brought the idea of separatism in Iran and used to support Ghazi mohammad or Pishevari nothing happened now you are just wasting your time and helping these mullas in Iran undirectly.

I assure you one inch of Iran won't dismantle.


Hakha Makha

by Nazanin Ghasemian on

I understand you don't agree with me. But made the broad statement that the history speaks for itself in supporting the shah as a great leader. So why do you need to vehemently point it out? Rant about it? The Iranian majority doesn't agree. You must realize that part of democracy is letting people judge for themselves and accepting that judgement even if it doesn't match yours.
I don't need to be involved with Reza Pahlavi on a daily basis to decipher his message. Isn't that why he goes on television? writes books? I've read what he has to say, and I don't buy it.
You can deny Muslim identity within Iranian culture, but it won't win you any support. Otherwise, shah and monarchists would be taken seriously. Instead, they focus over pre-Islamic history which has no relevence to the modern political landscape in Iran.
I can't imagine your logic in dissing Islam. Why would anyone join a group that tries to gather supporter by making fun of another group or claiming to aspire to democratic ideals but judge Muslims as less than human. 


Logic and Justice The Islamic way

by Colonel Hemayat (not verified) on

LOL!!! Punish him becuase his Last name is PAHLAVI!!!

True Islamic justice, Bravoooooooooooooo Nazanin!!
wanna to make sure he is circumsized too?
Like it or NOT, little girl, he is a PRINCE becuase his father was a KING, so his title is Prince Reza Pahlavi, let me break down to you in a way you understand, Imam Hassan was an Imam because his father was an Imam, no do you argue that? get it?
Salavatttttttttt Allah Akbar!!
p.s. Don't call me sir, or dear, I don't need or want your approval nor do I care about your opinions on the likes me.


What is his Highness Crowned Prince Reza Pahlavi doing?

by Colonel Hemayat (not verified) on

Nazanin Ghasemian on a personal level, I think any Iranian who has any regards for Islam, is either an ignorant fool or pretentious fuck. I really think your disgusting Hijab speaks aloud … but anyway.
My question remains , what have you done for your country and your people ? did you know, Prince Reza volunteered to participate in Iran-Iraq’ war/ Do you know what Amir Abbass Fakhravar and Ahmad Batebi , the leader of Iranian student movement which was purest dissent movement after 1979 have to say about Prince Reza Pahlavi? Do you know about Prince Reza’s hunger strike in 2005?Are you totally familiar with Prince Reza’s EVERY plan, are you involved with his daily schedule ?
Do you expect him to make a jack ass out of himself in National Television? Like Hakha, Like Ahmadinejad?
No, little girl you don’t SHIT about Pahlavi, and as far as coming up with questions like: if Shah was so goody good why he could n’t save the monarchy in 1979 ….., I think it is a little more complicated than JUST that, Muslims tend to simplify matters, human beings don’t!!!


kurdish separatists

by ardalan5 (not verified) on

this is the best regime option because it gives you the best chance to break apart iran. of course you don't like reza pahlavi b/c he stresses unity, which is the exact opposite of what separatists want, who owe a lot to their israeli masters.


Daryush: I hate to break it

by Anonymous21 (not verified) on

Daryush: I hate to break it to you, You have given Iran not just to Westerners but Arabs. Iran now is basically a client state of Russia, China, and partially EU. Yes, indepndence my foot...Independence from prosperity, dignity, and freedom. Yes, that is the mullahs brand of Indpendence and Esteghlal. Iran will not exist as Iran in the near future because it's being arbaized and you talk about foreigners...pathetic.


Shah could do no more than he did

by Nima (not verified) on

The Shah could not establish a lasting monarchy because he was dying of cancer, and his son was simply too young and inexperienced to head the country. Maybe Bakhtiar could have had a chance, but the US had already decided that the radical Islamist followers of Khomeini would take charge. In the end, the Shah yielded to the wishes of the revolutionaries, but their ultimate goal was not democracy, independence, or national self-determination -- it was to seek revenge against the Shah, promote their perverted version of Islam, erase Iran's historical and cultural identity, and enslave the people.


To all Eyeranians

by Daryush (not verified) on

guys and girls, please let this guy talk. He will not be the future of Iran period. Iranians are much smarter and politically active to allow a boy prince to rule them and give the country back to the hands of westerners [think:owners]. no, we will never ever give our country back to the hands of anyone but the Iranians. That's why at this time this is the best regime option. Also to my dear Kurdish countryman, be patient and keep in touch with the rest of Iran and Iranians so we all will reach where we want to be.


Islamists/Jihadists true to

by Anonymousw1 (not verified) on

Islamists/Jihadists true to form only care about money as revealed by the like of NG. The Islamists are only upset not because of Iran or Iranians; only for the mere fact that they want their spoils-trough they have been feeding off from to get bigger so they can steal more. They couldn't care less about those 40% who live below poverty level and have to sell their kidneys.

Reza Pahlavi deserves every penny he can get. Nooshe janesh. I don't see any of these Islamists/jihadist decry of the billions of dollars being spent on funding militia, building a stupid 100-year old antiquated nuclear technology/plant by giving Russia much more than they deserve ( or stealing it from Pakistan), and rebuilding Lebanon instead of Iran and Bam for God sake. The oil revenues in Iran has been unprecedented and unparalleled in the entire history of our nation. However, we have nothing to show for it because the mullah mafia pockets the revenues for personal use and profit and some of it used to fund the vast propagnada machinery of the Islamic Republic across the world...the lackeys, various Tv stations, various fake-Islamic associations, various website, and all other wasteful apparatus to prolong their reign of terror.


Pahlavis dreams

by Kurdboy (not verified) on

I am an Iranian Kurd and We Kurds will never accept this guy as a King. We Kurds passionately hate Iranian Monarchists. For us there is no difference between Monarchists and Mullahs. These Monarchists are just wasting their time and money in the hopes that this guy will one day become king. Keep on dreaming.

Darius Kadivar

From a 100 % KADIVAR to the 100 % SHIT you ARE ! ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

Comming from a guy calling himself 100 % of anything even less Iranian, your comment only reflect your rotten self.

How can I feel offended by a schoolboy drop out like you ? ...





Democracy is not about "personal views"!

by Sohrab Ferdows (not verified) on

I don't believe anyone can dismiss political rights of a portion of Iranian people who prefer a particular format of governing system in their homeland. It does not matter what I think about the political attitude of certain group of people if I have my own political agenda which from beginning. Monarchists (or better to say "constitutionalists") make a big portion of Iranian society today and it is understandable that propagators of "false democracy" who can only see democracy in the format of "republic system" come up with this false idea that an elected person can not be a despot and conclude that Iran should only be a republic!

Despotism is a cultural issue and from what one can see through the article, Mr. Rashidian who is intolerant of some people's political tendencies, can very well be another despot if he was given the chance! In his view, Prince Reza Pahlavi should not express his opinion unless it is in line with Mr. Rashidian who is apparently having solid information that majority of Iranians have the same view as his!

As Mr. Kadivar indicated, there is really nothing new other than same old baseless cliche in the writings of Mr. Rashidian with some accusatory statements which is indication of no change in attitude of some Iranians who consider themselves being of higher intelligence just because they are against monarchy while failing to understand that democracy is no only about and "elected president" and despotism is not rare among so called "elected people". Ahmadinejad and mullah Rafsanjani are also examples of elected people.

While "freedom of expression" is one of the fundamentals of democracy we must remember that democracy is not just the way we view it. democracy has no alternative definition and no one can equalize it with "republicanism". Whether we like it or not, monarchists, republicans and even islamic reformists are part of reality of Iranian political spectrum and denying that just means that we live in our own fantasy world!


Another point about Reza Pahlavi

by Nazanin Ghasemian on

Thanks Mr.Kadivar for asking people to focus on the issues rather than our personal lives.
Reza Pahlavi's biggest problem isn't his followers or whether he is a traitor/supporter of Israeli/US attack. No matter how hard he tries to make a contribution, the man's biggest problem in being taken seriously is his name- who his family is.
He tries so hard to deny this by always saying he exists outside the prism of the 2500 year old monarchy. Then he goes on FOX NEWS as the CROWN PRINCE.
"I see myself beyond the implications of my last name, as an Iranian burdened with the responsibility to look to the future, not the past. [hint to his followers who keep saying how great his dad is]" (Winds of change, p.7)
I can't take this seriously for one minute because he's given that voice, the publications/book deals because he is Pahlavi - not beacuse he cares about Iran.
It's also silly for him to pretend to be a regular schmoe in the opposition when no one, NO IRANIAN, is simple enough to overlook ALL he stands to gain in the event of US-Israeli regime change.
Why? All the frozen assets owed to the Iranian government were put in the Pahlavi estate in January 1981 in concluding the Algiers Accords (pages 703-705 American Journal of International Law, October 2000.) For him to try to deny any of this is ridiculous and explains why we cannot take what he says without many many grains of salt.


Nazanin Ghasemian: You're a

by Anonymousw1 (not verified) on

Nazanin Ghasemian: You're a loud mouth, spoiled brat who parrots the leftist meme. You still remain as bisavad and ill-informed as they come. You are so hate-filled that you can't even read or try to respond coherently.

This particular breed of virulently anti-Americans,and anti-semetic attempt to silence the debate by ruling that the other side is out of bounds for the duration. Like all ad hominem attacks, (argumentum ad hominem means “argument against the person”) it is an act of intellectual surrender. The person who employs an ad hominem attack is admitting they cannot win the debate on merit, and hope to chuck the entire thing out the window by attacking the messenger. This is a logical fallacy of the first order, because the messenger is not the message.

You also can't just disregard anyone you don't agree with ideologically because they don't share your philosophy and outlook on life. You can bring evidence to disagree with them, but the fact that you don't carry much weight. Intoning "Shah’s this or that" as a magic incantation doesn't obviate that.

I see that the new style of 'debunking' is of the form: "Don't believe X as he is associated with Y".


have concluded that the

by Anonymous12 (not verified) on

have concluded that the Iranian revolution was really masterminded to a greater extent by external forces (US, UK , France), who deliberatly engaged in a mud slinging campaign against the Shah in the late 1970's. They supported Khomeini against him, because they couldnt stand seeing Iran making significant strides forward, eventually being a modernised and westernised strong power and regional player, classic issue of betrayal in international politics.

I think the Shah had very good intentions for Iran, but could have done more to alleviate poverty (social programs) and develop the rural countryside, and shoudnt have spent so much on millitary hardware in 1970s, this would have taken the wind out of the sails of the extremists. However he wasnt a bloodthirsty dictator, but an autocratic monarch who knew that a developing country must first get solid foundation before anything else follows, just like Communist China is doing today (or since 1980) - that makes sense.

You know people in every country can be manipulated as sad as its seems, even in a democracy, because they do not think as critical individuals , but look blindley to leaders and act emotionally, abandoning reason and moderation in its wake...the Iranian revolution showed that very clearly ..... the people wanted someone parochial promising heaven on earth ( but delivering hell on earth) to lead them and werent even willing to give an intelligent and well edcuated man like Dr Shapor Baktiar a chance to govern, yes their hearts and minds were tottally infested with Khomeini'svenom.......Ironically , and with hindsight some people in your country now look back with regret , and think the Shah regardless of mistakes done wasn't so bad after all, what an irony or may be just plain human nature !

Sooner or later this anachronistic islamic regime will collapse against the tide of secularism (or via US military intervenrtion) sweeping Iran, just hope all mullas get summary execution along with it when it happens!.

Every Iranian should read this book to find out how anglo-americans manufactured the "iranian revolution" and installed the Mullahs into power:



and what are you a son of

by iraniannot (not verified) on

and what are you a son of the very notorious, very hot,world famous, iranian whores?


Darius KADIVAR is a French poodle

by 100% Iranian (not verified) on


Since when does a son of a French cunt think he an Iranian.

Iran belongs to Iranians, it does not belong to sons of fast and easy European whores.

David ET

30 years of defending Shah, Hezbolah and Rajavi with chomagh

by David ET on

After 30 year the Shah-o-llahi's , Hezbollahi's and Rajavi-o-llahi's still remain as dogmatic as ever ...

They use chomagh when it comes to defending their leaders: Reza, Khamenei and Rajavi








Darius Kadivar


by Darius Kadivar on

I have equally known foul language coming out from Republicans ( secular or Not) and from Monarchists ( Constitutional or Not).

I do not think this is a way to express one's views.

Miss  Nazanin Ghasemian has the right to express herself and I do not see any particular offense in questioning the Crown Prince's credentials or popularity. She is entitled to having an opinion iven if one can disagree and it is best to use arguments than slandering someone for having a different opinion. This applies to Republicans also.

In anycase I hope that this can be a good start for civilized exchange of views and debate amongst the Diaspora rather than the typical hate language we are alas all accustomed too regardless of which opinion we have.




Don't you dare attack my famly

by Nazanin Ghasemian on

I never discussed anyone's family, and you have no reason to bring up mine in any context. My family is not hate-filled. On the contrary they are hard working and kind people. To their credit, they never tried the unhealthy strategy of imposing their opinions and experiences in monarchist era Iran on my views today. And as far as Iranian politics goes, they are intelligent because they don't pretend to be leaders or fonts of wisdom.
The same can't be can't be said for the Reza Pahlavi, who talks glibly about women, democracy and freedom. If he cared so much about them, he ought to have a small meeting (emphasis small) of them to discuss respect and the importance of not cussing out your opponent. But if the monarchists aren't remotely organized enough to establish these things. Your group is responsible for most of the foul language on this site.
Foul langugage does not equal free speech.
I wouldn't go around quoting Jean Kirkpatrick so boldly. She is also one of the leaders who established the polemics Reagan Doctrine - the same doctrine that believed in lying to Americans to sell weapons to the Iranian government.
And finally, if the shah's record speaks for itself, then why didn't he succeed in making a lasting monarchy? I guess Iranians were too busy being employed by the CIA, KGB and others to care about their country? The conspiracy theories and blame for Iranian people is tantamount to nothing.
The shah deserves the blame he gets and Iranians judged him accordingly. It is the monarchist insistence that Iranians are stupid, mistaken and blame-worthy that keeps them from having any serious support anywhere in the world outside Morton's Steakhouse in Tysons Corner.


Nazanin Ghasemina is a

by Anonymousw1 (not verified) on

Nazanin Ghasemina is a mullah lackey and bisavad as they come growing up in an hatef-filled and dogma-driven household.

The evidence about the Shah speaks for itsef. Any authentic Comparison of the performance of the two pahlavis must be done with the previous dyansty and other monarchs of that time to provide a just, unbiased and balanced insight.

Iran looked worse than Afghanistan when the lates Shah's took over.

All the intellecutal of today abroad would be making their houses with cow dong let alone have electricity to use computer or speak English. Your parents or grandparents could afford to send you abroad instead of working the land in your villages because of the Pahalvis.

What have the mullahs done? Zero, Zilch. On all economic indices (e.g, income per capita, GDP, GNP, and so on) either we are at the same point we were thirty years ago or even lower.

In 1978, the coalition that overthrew the Shah of Iran consisted of the bazaar merchants who disliked the Shah's move to modernize the economy, including the merchandising sector; representatives of the Palestinian Liberation Organization who objected to Iran's recognition of Israel; the Tudeh, Iranian communist party; the Mujadin, composed of students following their fashionable new-left ideology and the misled intelligentsia; all these under the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers, fundamentalist Muslims who hated the Shah's regime for its tilt toward secularism, modernism, Westernization and America.

Of the many factors that eventually make for a better life, the Shah's record was quite good. Economic growth is always spotty, leaving some people behind. Nevertheless, the growth in Iranian per capita real income averaged around 6 percent a year over the 25 years of his government. It reached a peak of $6,700 in 1976, $6,400 in 1977, and fell to $5,400 in 1978, the year of the revolution. It averaged well below this level in all the years that followed. Now, with oil prices at a high 30 years later, it has reached the 1976 level.

Iran's record on education was notable. The literacy rate in 1955 was somewhere below 10 percent. The Shah's regime tried to make available primary school education covering 100 percent of the children. The literacy rate at the end of his time was about 80 percent. (Of course, the fundamentalists were enraged that the publicly funded schools were secular.) Much was done with higher education. The enrollment in secondary schools went from about 150,000 to 1.2 million students, and at the higher education level, enrollment rose from about 3,000 to 150,000 students (of whom 31 percent were female). In addition a goodly number attended U.S. and European schools under scholarships financed by the Pahlavi Foundation, i.e., the Shah's family fund.

NOTE: And the Aghazadeha va Khanoomzadeh (Parasitic offsrpings of Akhunds) and appeasers of the regime please don't give me that oh, there are more women in universities. Yes, because the idiot ultra-religious families deemed the secular society as corrupt and thus did not allow their girls to attend secular schools during the shah.

It is difficult to trace all the elements that led to the Shah's downfall. The Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the revolt was expelled from the country some years earlier. He first found refuge and muted encouragement in France. (Perhaps some resentment of American and British oil interests in Iran may have resided in France because their original place in the British French consortium that had first developed Persian oil had been displaced?) The Ayatollah's next sanctuary and place of encouragement was in Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Khomeini's incendiary speeches were taped, produced in volume and widely circulated in Iran. No doubt Saddam thought that if Khomeini deposed the Shah, Iran would be vitally weakened and Iraq could then move in and annex a province or two. (In fact, the ensuing Iraq-Iran war was a draw and a sad blood bath for both countries.)

The late Jeanne Kirkpatrick once made a nice distinction between totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. The Shah was at the most autocratic; he never brought his full powers to bear against the revolt. The Shah's American ally under President Jimmy Carter was inconsistent and President Carter proved himself completely inept. The growing Iranian middle and professional class should have supported the Shah, but they have told me, they were deceived by Khomeini. Sad. They neglected the ancient Hindu proverb, ''Do not ride to power on the back of the tiger.''

The mullahs may have done things in their own twisted and delusional world that has advanced "the cause of Islam" but "Cause Of Islam" doesn't and interests of Islam and Iran are not one and the same.

Iran is being destroyed and sacrificied to propagate the cause of militant Islam and Ummah at the expense of Iran and the Iranian nation, life, culture, heritage, legacy, liberty, and prosperity.

Ladies and Gentlmen: We're witnessing gradual 'cultural cleansing' and 'cultural genocide' done to Iran as we speak. The devestation will be irreprable and unalterable on the psyche of our nation.