1979: U.S. Tells Shah It's Time to Go

ABC News


Recently by mehrdadmCommentsDate
Omid Djalili: The Baha'i Faith in Words and Images
Dec 05, 2012
Dimmed Lanterns
Dec 05, 2012
Iranian TV shows off 'captured US ScanEagle drone'
Dec 04, 2012
more from mehrdadm


by shushtari on

I would disagree with you- the policies of nixon were completely opposite of carter's (and ford would likely have followed him, if elected)

it is the lefty democrats who felt khomeini was a saint!!

the shah should have sent the family out of iran, and he should have gone to kish island and let badrei and oveissi unleash hell on the traitors who were stealing weapons from the barracks- and exterminated the felestini terrorists who were burning cinema rex and shooting at our soldiers.....all those top notch special forces didn't fire a bullet, and are either dead or driving cabs in europe!!!


there is plenty of blame to go around- and the shah deserves some of it, even though he was a wonderful patriot 

Poosteh Pesteh

yes.they did it

by Poosteh Pesteh on

and now is time that american got piss off out of iran noboay wants them back we are scik of them.


shushtari/maziar we need to learn to stop blaming Carter

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Seriously, Carter had little Alternative and either way had carter or gerald ford been elected the outcome would have been exactly the same, the core foreign policy institutions and their policy makers would not have changed.

What we now know is that the betrayal had been done a few years before by kisinger and nixon, the aim of winning the shahs confidence, while building a plan to deal with the aims of the usa/uk/france/italy based on their institution funded research known as the Club of Rome. "limit to growth"

Nothing has changed or will if you read the conclusions made in "limit to growth" today like then these countries united at the highest levels for generations to pursue a policy of being the manufacturers and supporters of religous extremism and bringing religion into government.   What does extremism do for them????? The #1 Goal of these countries is what most people don't see, it is neo-colonialism not old colonialism, they don't prevent the coutries from getting the money from the sale of their resources, they make sure the management is so backards and volatile that the resources the people get is mismanaged and not used for health care, education, development and all the things the late shah was doing for Iran.  It is a very complex subject, with oil, weapons sales and retarding the people through economic warfare for the entire region being the wests top priorities, which is why the USA loves ISLAM for Iran and will never be on the side of democracy and human rights for Iranians or others.  Their motives are self written and crystal clear, its just they are only open to educated people that read and speak in policy circles, otherwise the policy is intentionally well concealed and covered up by the corporate controlled mass media, who's job it is to implement this policy.

The USA supporting religous extremists in Libya and Syria is not good for Iran, that is what people on IC don't see. 

THE POLITICS This is is a continuation of current US policy and plans for next 50 years despite whoever gets elected, the democrats go after this goal one way (friendship with intended betrayal/stab in the back approach, libya/egypt/iran) as we see today very little/limited use of military more cia, the republicans go for the same goal another way through military means and force (you are either with us or against us approach Iraq/Afghnistan/).  The USA is giving democracy a bad name, the same way the IRI is giving Islam a bad name.  Both are lead by criminals Not leaders.  Both harm human rights as a matter of policy.  Both deny it 100%. 

The West gives total protection to those that do Not develop their people, industries and are nowkars to them, like saudi arabi, kuwait, etc.  But if you have ones that pursue their peoples politcal development and industrial/techological development like the late shah or putin, the corporate controlled media works on the people of the world startig with its own people and then the foreign opposition Manufactuing An intentional exageration/Lie which is an image of corruption, dictatorship & repression, which it does not do for its nowkars and is factually rooted in exagerrations and lies, however if you read it in the media a 1000 times a year, after a while people are very susceptible to believing it all.  

This is why I have such a problem with our commie guy roozbeh, vildemose, vpk, darius kadivar and others they are stuck playing the wests game against Iran and can't see their views, understanding and feelings are harmful for Iran and the reason for our national dis-unity (though rooted in controlled media expert misinformation), they are victims of the media too and not really having much up there where it counts doesn't help.  

The Good News, this policy will fall on its face hard taking out those who are actively pursuing it, because it is rooted in the IRI being containable #1 and Russia being susceptible to the same thing that ws done to the late shah #2, if you have enough information or speak with experts on this both are pipe dreams hence the west will fail in the long term.  Soon the IRI won't even be able to keep itslef in place even with all the covert western help it has and the west won't likely be able to get its extremists in power or control Irans future in its favor, unless it does a 180.


maziar 58


by maziar 58 on

shushtari jaan

the 2 super powers played a scene where USSR will take Afghanistan and USA put a REAL nookar in Iran so they can succeed the new world order.....

MY A**.



khaake aalam too sare carte KHAR

by shushtari on


that idiot has to be the biggest moron in history!

he helped destroy iran and launch the fundamentalist looney muslim movement

I wish he would have never been elected as president......

none of us would be here and iran would not have been destroyed 


the aim of us policy being to defend

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

IRI extremism.

ie the basis for their overall decisions wrt saddam.

what we have seen makes sense, the usa loves islamic extremists for Iran and for 33 years has done its all including fighting wars to keep the Islamists in power in Iran. the why is based on neocolonialism, extremists retard iran the #1 goal of the usa accomplished even more important than the oil.


I liked the post under the video description more than the video

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

from video page:


Why Bush Sr.'s 1991 Gulf War? To Protect Iranian Islamism //www.hirhome.com/iraniraq/gulfwar.htm
A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order by F. William Engdahl;

November 1978, President Carter named the Bilderberg group's George
Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special
White House Iran task force under the National Security Council's
Brzezinski. Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah
of Iran and support the fundamentalistic Islamic opposition of Ayatollah
Khomeini. Robert Bowie from the CIA was one of the lead 'case officers'
in the new CIA-led coup against the man their covert actions had placed
into power 25 years earlier.

Their scheme was based on a
detailed study of the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism, as presented
by British Islamic expert, Dr. Bernard Lewis, then on assignment at
Princeton University in the United States. Lewis's scheme, which was
unveiled at the May 1979 Bilderberg meeting in Austria, endorsed the
radical Muslim Brotherhood movement behind Khomeini, in order to promote
balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious
lines. Lewis argued that the West should encourage autonomous groups
such as the Kurds, Armenians, Lebanese Maronites, Ethiopian Copts,
Azerbaijani Turks, and so forth. The chaos would spread in what he
termed an 'Arc of Crisis,' which would spill over into Muslim regions of
the Soviet Union.

The coup against the Shah, like that against
Mossadegh in 1953, was run by British and American intelligence, with
the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public 'credit' for getting
rid of the 'corrupt' Shah, while the British characteristically remained
safely in the background.

During 1978, negotiations were under
way between the Shah's government and British Petroleum for renewal of
the 25-year old extraction agreement. By October 1978, the talks had
collapsed over a British 'offer' which demanded exclusive rights to
Iran's future oil output, while refusing to guarantee purchase of the
oil. With their dependence on British-controlled export apparently at an
end, Iran appeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy
for the first time since 1953, with eager prospective buyers in
Germany, France, Japan and elsewhere. In its lead editorial that
September, Iran's Kayhan International stated:

In retrospect, the
25-year partnership with the [British Petroleum] consortium and the
50-year relationship with British Petroleum which preceded it, have not
been satisfactory ones for Iran Looking to the future, NIOC [National
Iranian Oil Company] should plan to handle all operations by itself.

was blackmailing and putting enormous economic pressure on the Shah's
regime by refusing to buy Iranian oil production, taking only 3 million
or so barrels daily of an agreed minimum of 5 million barrels per day.
This imposed dramatic revenue pressures on Iran, which provided the
context in which religious discontent against the Shah could be fanned
by trained agitators deployed by British and U.S. intelligence. In
addition, strikes among oil workers at this critical juncture crippled
Iranian oil production.

As Iran's domestic economic troubles
grew, American 'security' advisers to the Shah's Savak secret police
implemented a policy of ever more brutal repression, in a manner
calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah. At the same time,
the Carter administration cynically began protesting abuses of 'human
rights' under the Shah.

British Petroleum reportedly began to
organize capital flight out of Iran, through its strong influence in
Iran's financial and banking community. The British Broadcasting
Corporation's Persian-language broadcasts, with dozens of
Persian-speaking BBC 'correspondents' sent into even the smallest
village, drummed up hysteria against the Shah. The BBC gave Ayatollah
Khomeini a full propaganda platform inside Iran during this time. The
British government-owned broadcasting organization refused to give the
Shah's government an equal chance to reply. Repeated personal appeals
from the Shah to the BBC yielded no result. Anglo-American intelligence
was committed to toppling the Shah. The Shah fled in January, and by
February 1979, Khomeini had been flown into Tehran to proclaim the
establishment of his repressive theocratic state to replace the Shah's

did not know it then perhaps I did not want to
know but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out. Clearly
this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted
What was I to make of the Administration's sudden decision to call
former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an
adviser on Iran? Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me
and ultimately my country

maziar 58


by maziar 58 on

Don't know If we should thanks the U.s state dept.'s finding a treason or  abc's news coverage worthy!

I'll offer a late responce to them both : Take your finding & reports and shove it!!



Lesson number 22 for Iranians

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Betraying the best we had (in comparison to the alternatives), the late
shahs team, for the anti-progress, anti-peace & anti-human rights extremist
alternatives who called for revolution in 1979, even resulted in harming pets and yet the shameless politics against Irans PROVEN 2500 year political
& cultural institution continues by some, in a futile way, despite its lack of support
among the majority of Iranians who have seen, experienced and learned the
results of supporting alternatives.

Gharibe Ashena

Let's see which one became a reality?

by Gharibe Ashena on

An anti western, highly conservative state, followed by 35 years of misery!! Etch & Scatch anyone!?


This is an important clip,

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Too many are in denial about it and wish to stay in denial about it.



The USA has so much in common with the IRI

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

The IRI gives islam a filthy name.

The USA gives democracy a filthy name also.

Both pursue power over all else

Neither are Noble

Neither represent success,

unless you redefine power for its own sake a success.

The majority of people living within each system are troubled by it

The USA helped to create the IRI covertly.  And keeps the IRI in power with the same allies covertly too.







Hezaar baar ino didim baba!