Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

U.S. and Ayatollah Khomeini

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Forum Administrators

This is a long article by the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36431160

Quote

Khomeini's message is part of a trove of newly declassified US government documents - diplomatic cables, policy memos, meeting records - that tell the largely unknown story of America's secret engagement with Khomeini, an enigmatic cleric who would soon inspire Islamic fundamentalism and anti-Americanism worldwide.

 

The thing to remember is that U.S. government disclosures at the time and BBC news were managed with specific policy goals in mind.

Today the release of some documents (and very likely not others) is likely to present a partial and policy directed view of history, rather than what appears at first glance as a dispassionate and neutral perspective.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
40 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:

This is a long article by the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36431160

The thing to remember is that U.S. government disclosures at the time and BBC news were managed with specific policy goals in mind.

Today the release of some documents (and very likely not others) is likely to present a partial and policy directed view of history, rather than what appears at first glance as a dispassionate and neutral perspective.

 

This is not the first time they spread such lies, I read the few first lines and I understood what is the authors goal and I see no reason to read the rest. This is not the first time, Imam Khomeini(ra) entered Iran at the hour 9:27m:30s but BBC keeps saying that he entered Iran at 9:33 because 33 is a masonic symbol. Let's assume these to be true then how can BBC explains the war that was waged against Iran by Saddam and the support of USA and its allies which counted to be 27 countries. The war that in the end USA interfered directly by sending its navy to Persian Gulf and attacked Iran.

They say so because Khomeini(ra) is no longer alive and those who have heard his speeches themselves are now old people and the youths are not aware as they should be, It is exactly what Freemasons do, attacking someone after his/her death. 

These kinda news are not even worthy of reading, listening, or watching. And when you spread it by sharing it in other forums you are doing exactly what they want, there aren't people who can criticize such news in every forums and thus many would accept them and the responsible for their lie acceptance is the one who shared it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
22 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

And when you spread it by sharing it in other forums you are doing exactly what they want, there aren't people who can criticize such news in every forums and thus many would accept them and the responsible for their lie acceptance is the one who shared it.

 
 

My flagging the material for analysis is not the problem, I think.

Rather the problem is the 'defenders' of the IRI offering references to masonic symbols and Freemasons. Is that really the best you can come up with?

I use quotation marks above, because of course, a weak response to the article makes the pro-IRI position look weak.

Edited by Haji 2003
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:

My flagging the material for analysis is not the problem, I think.

Rather the problem is the defenders of the IRI offering references to masonic symbols and Freemasons. Is that really the best you can come up with?

I didn't said go and learn masonic symbols, I just made an example what they do, slowly for you to learn something, besides you only linked a part of what I said which means this part is the only part that you can argue about, I mentioned the masonic way because knowing masons, Zionists, and ... will help you know their tricks and thus whenever you hear a news you won't even argue it because you see the same story with different names, this is called enemy knowing:

Anyway if you want to know the truth, here is the way:

Learn Persian and then use the newspaper archives related to 38 years ago and see what was the truth from Persian news papers, and use the English newspaper archives related to the same time, in those days, see what they used to say about him.

And you can read the book Sahife Imam/Noor which has 22 volumes containing the speeches and the sayings of Khomeini(ra) himself.

This is the way to testify the news, and finding out the truth. 

Here is a saying of Khomeini(ra) about USA:" Those who dream of having relationships with USA, may Allah wakes them up"

 

If you read history you see that no country has done crimes to Iranians more than UK, UK is the same and now they are introducing others about Iran, and some claim BBC is correct, BBC works for UK. It is like this: I want to know you and I go to your enemy who killed your father and ask him about you, and expecting him to tell the truth, definitely your enemy will lie about you, so it is true about BBC, 99% of BBC news about Iran are lies.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
4 hours ago, Hidaren said:

Imam Khomeini(ra) entered Iran at the hour 9:27m:30s 

Is that when the plane landed or his foot stepped onto the tarmac? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I didn't find anything in the article that was too anti-Khomeini.

It is not inconceivable that he would want and got a bloodless revolution.

Also from the US perspective, once the writing was on the wall that the Shah's reign was over, then the US was more concerned with Iran becoming a communist country rather than a Muslim country so chose the lesser of two evils (in their opinion, not mine) i.e. they chose Khomeini over communism.

After having said that, Khamenei just rejected the report:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36447219

 

Edited by shiaman14
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

what would the BBC gain by doing this? 

 

They are slowly work for the future, in the future they will say he was a freemason, and as proof they use the number 33 and other things they have made and are making for him to indicate that he was a freemason, they have done this too much before. 

3 hours ago, hameedeh said:

Is that when the plane landed or his foot stepped onto the tarmac? 

199766_254.jpg

This news paper was published the day he returned.

It is written:

After 15 years, today at 9:27 minutes and 30 seconds, the foot of Imam khomeini(ra) reached Iran's dust.

2 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

I didn't find anything in the article that was too anti-Khomeini.

It is not inconceivable that he would want and got a bloodless revolution.

Also from the US perspective, once the writing was on the wall that the Shah's reign was over, then the US was more concerned with Iran becoming a communist country rather than a Muslim country so chose the lesser of two evils (in their opinion, not mine) i.e. they chose Khomeini over communism.

After having said that, Khamenei just rejected the report:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36447219

 

This is not the point that they said bad things about him or not, the point is he has somehow negotiated with US president while he disagreed this case during his life whenever others asked him we need to talk to Americans he always disagreed. In his speeches he mocked USA presidents and .... one famous example of this case happened when Mr. Rafsanjani went to him and said:" We want to have relationships with USA what do we do?" Imam answered:" We want relationship with USA for what?( In Persian this way of talking means we don't want). Here is the Persian text for those who can read:

رفسنجانی: رابطه با آمریکا می خواهیم، چکار کنیم؟

امام: رابطه ی با آمریکا را، می خواهیم چکار کنیم؟

Edited by Hidaren
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

This is not the point that they said bad things about him or not, the point is he has somehow negotiated with US president while he disagreed this case during his life whenever others asked him we need to talk to Americans he always disagreed. In his speeches he mocked USA presidents and .... one famous example of this case happened when Mr. Rafsanjani went to him and said:" We want to have relationships with USA what do we do?" Imam answered:" We want relationship with USA for what?( In Persian this way of talking means we don't want). Here is the Persian text for those who can read:

رفسنجانی: رابطه با آمریکا می خواهیم، چکار کنیم؟

امام: رابطه ی با آمریکا را، می خواهیم چکار کنیم؟

what if the documents are true?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

what if the documents are true?

About Imam Khomeini(ra) they are not, because there are many proofs the show they are wrong, for instance the newspaper archives show something different from what they claim and those who were alive and saw him and live with him yet remain loyal to him and his way states these are things are all wrong, besides these all of Imam Khomeini's speeches are gathered in 22 volumes of book called Sahife Noor.  This is the filter that you can use to see the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

About Imam Khomeini(ra) they are not, because there are many proofs the show they are wrong, for instance the newspaper archives show something different from what they claim and those who were alive and saw him and live with him yet remain loyal to him and his way states these are things are all wrong, besides these all of Imam Khomeini's speeches are gathered in 22 volumes of book called Sahife Noor.  This is the filter that you can use to see the truth.

my brother...never...EVER....google "the 1980 october surprise". stay happy. stay uninformed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
19 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

my brother...never...EVER....google "the 1980 october surprise". stay happy. stay uninformed.

You mean this: :D

Capture.JPG

It's a joke, and it is very funny, Iran receives weapon from Israel. :D too funny conspiracy theory. Iran sent a general named Ahmad Motevaselian to examine the possibility of taking back Palestine and rescuing Lebanon from being occupied, but he was captured by Israeli forces and he is still captive for 30 years.

First of all those hostages were released based on the terms of the Algeria agreement in 1979, but when the hostages were released USA did nothing that they had promised, Iran's possessions, read the truth of the Algeria agreement. Carter lost the election due to the military rescue mission, which ended up to failure, due to the sand storm in Tabas desert in Iran. 

But know this Wikipedia is not reliable, I've seen many wrong information in it. One example is about Mr. Raefipour, the most famous lecturer of Iran, months ago there was a page on Wikipedia that introduced him very precisely, after a while the page was replaced with wrong information, now they have deleted the page entirely.

If your source is BBC, CNN, FOX news, and Wikipedia then I have nothing to tell you :D 

Anyway if you know more of these theoretical Jokes, let me know I haven't laughed so much for ages.

If you are found of conspiracy theories, search for the fake moon landing, Disney adult contents, holocaust  and ... . These are far more authentic for there are evidences that prove them right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

You mean this: :D

Capture.JPG

It's a joke, and it is very funny, Iran receives weapon from Israel. :D too funny conspiracy theory. Iran sent a general named Ahmad Motevaselian to examine the possibility of taking back Palestine and rescuing Lebanon from being occupied, but he was captured by Israeli forces and he is still captive for 30 years.

First of all those hostages were released based on the terms of the Algeria agreement in 1979, but when the hostages were released USA did nothing that they had promised, Iran's possessions, read the truth of the Algeria agreement. Carter lost the election due to the military rescue mission, which ended up to failure, due to the sand storm in Tabas desert in Iran. 

But know this Wikipedia is not reliable, I've seen many wrong information in it. One example is about Mr. Raefipour, the most famous lecturer of Iran, months ago there was a page on Wikipedia that introduced him very precisely, after a while the page was replaced with wrong information, now they have deleted the page entirely.

If your source is BBC, CNN, FOX news, and Wikipedia then I have nothing to tell you :D 

Anyway if you know more of these theoretical Jokes, let me know I haven't laughed so much for ages.

If you are found of conspiracy theories, search for the fake moon landing, Disney adult contents, holocaust  and ... . These are far more authentic for there are evidences that prove them right.

understood. it was an absolute coincidence that the hostages were released within 20 minutes of reagens inaugural speech. got it *thumbs up*

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
1 hour ago, Hidaren said:

199766_254.jpg

This news paper was published the day he returned.

It is written:

After 15 years, today at 9:27 minutes and 30 seconds, the foot of Imam khomeini(ra) reached Iran's dust.

Alhamdulillah. Thank you for explaining that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
21 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

understood. it was an absolute coincidence that the hostages were released within 20 minutes of reagens inaugural speech. got it *thumbs up*

Carter sent troops in Iran which means he attacked Iran, why shouldn't Iranians do something to take revenge from him? It is ibvious that Iran did this to prevent him from being elected, which again if they were released sooner it made no difference, for still he was responsible for the death of US soldiers in Tabas incident. Freeing hostages won't make any difference, for US presidents are chosen not by US people but by the Biderburge club, don't believe it see what Bush the father said years before his son became the president, He said my son is the monarch of the end time, years before his son was elected as president or a Cartoon was made 15 years ago showing that a woman becomes the president of USA while before her a man named Trump was the president and his face is very similar to the Trump we have today, and when she became president USA is bankrupt.

 

You cannot judge a situation from only one view.

1440497573575.cached.jpg

It is joke to think USA election is real.

Watch the documentary Obama's Deception made by Alex Jones and learn something.

Anyway this discussion won't get anywhere, neither you will accept what I am saying nor I can believe words that are without real evidences.

Edited by Hidaren
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

Carter sent troops in Iran which means he attacked Iran, why shouldn't Iranians do something to take revenge from him? It is ibvious that Iran did this to prevent him from being elected,

you dont find it even a little bit suspicious that Iran provided such a powerful and open help to the US presidents image, minutes after his first speech, when the act would be the most powerful?

Edited by DigitalUmmah
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
8 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

you dont find it even a little bit suspicious that Iran provided such a powerful and open help to the US presidents image, minites after his first speech?

It is meaningless, no president can even drink a glass of water within 20 minutes after being elected, now you say USA people believed that Reagan was the savior of their hostages, within 20 minutes??? It is an insult to USA people :D.

Edited by Hidaren
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

It is meaningless, no president can even drink a glass of water after being elected, now you say USA people believed that Reagan was the savior of their hostages, within 20 minutes??? It is an insult to USA people :D.

as a symbolic act to demonstrate reagens power as president, dont you think Iran freeing the hostages 20 minutes after he was sworn in as predident was even the smallest bit suspicious?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

as a symbolic act to demonstrate reagens power as president, dont you think Iran freeing the hostages 20 minutes after he was sworn in as predident was even the smallest bit suspicious?

You know there's an story in Persian:

A man was sentenced to death by the king and the soldiers bound him to a pillar and asked him, what is your last wish, he looked around and saw another pillar and said, unbound me and bound me to the other pillar and when they asked him why, he said maybe king sends someone to stop you in this few seconds. 

What you are doing is exactly the same, you started from a big conspiracy theory and now you put your hope in one single hesitation???  20 minutes? symbol? Reagan didn't have time to pay bathroom a visit, what glory is in this for Reagan? 

Now you spoke of symbol. it is more likely to be a symbol of Iran's power, Iran didn't release the prisoners until a change in US government, which indicates that Iran can bring down the president of USA by do not valuing him, to show that US presidents are nothing to Iran. It is more logical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Hidaren said:

You know there's an story in Persian:

A man was sentenced to death by the king and the soldiers bound him to a pillar and asked him, what is your last wish, he looked around and saw another pillar and said, unbound me and bound me to the other pillar and when they asked him why, he said maybe king sends someone to stop you in this few seconds. 

What you are doing is exactly the same, you started from a big conspiracy theory and now you put your hope in one single hesitation???  20 minutes? symbol? Reagan didn't have time to pay bathroom a visit, what glory is in this for Reagan? 

Now you spoke of symbol. it is more likely to be a symbol of Iran's power, Iran didn't release the prisoners until a change in US government, which indicates that Iran can bring down the president of USA by do not valuing him, to show that US presidents are nothing to Iran. It is more logical.

I think you are missing the entire point.

Iran freeing the hostages was quite obviously a move done which helped the US president. this thread is discussing an article which talks about Iran not being so anti USA as regular, "Marj Bar USA" crowd chanting IRI supporters such as yourself think it is. I was making the point that Iran clearly is capable of working with the USA when it suits irans interests.

Edited by DigitalUmmah
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I think you are missing the entire point.

Iran freeing the hostages was quite obviously a move done which helped the US president. this thread is discussing an article which talks about Iran not being so anti USA as regular, "Marj Bar USA" crowd chanting IRI supporters such as yourself think it is. I was making the point that Iran clearly is capable of working with the USA when it suits irans interests.

There are some politicians and people in Iran that are fans of USA and will die for USA, they were here from the very beginning, but Majority of people don't even want to speak to USA, the actions of some fool politicians is not the desire of Iran, above them all were Mr Rafsanjani and Mr. Khatami who are both fans of USA, they made many mistakes and disobeyed Iran's leader for multiple times, and now Khatami is isolated and no news agency is allowed to interview with him, and Rafsanjani is losing his power day after day and soon he will face the same destiny, if he don't die first :D. Iran will never work with USA because USA won't miss a chance to harm Iran, while we know they will stab us if we co-operate with them, why should we even try it? Iran and USA will never co-operate as you say, Khomeini(ra) said 4 decades ago:" We got rid of Shah but we will not get rid of US lovers soon." It is undeniable that some are here who love USA but they are almost done. 

Iran and USA are against each other in their very existence, the earth is not big enough for both of the ideologies and soon we will have the Islamic Republic of America or the secular Iran. But as we learned from history, the death of liberalism will be death of the most devoted country to it, USA will become the second Soviet Union which was destroyed by the destruction of commonism, and based on what American military, economical, academic and .... experts say: the destruction of the US has already begun.

Watch 4 horsemen documentary to know how.

One thing more :D It is not "Marj bar USA" it is :"Marg bar USA" 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Anyway Rafsanjani is old and started to do odd irrational things, and while I am revealing him somehow :D I might get myself killed by him :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, Hidaren said:

This is not the point that they said bad things about him or not, the point is he has somehow negotiated with US president while he disagreed this case during his life whenever others asked him we need to talk to Americans he always disagreed. In his speeches he mocked USA presidents and .... one famous example of this case happened when Mr. Rafsanjani went to him and said:" We want to have relationships with USA what do we do?" Imam answered:" We want relationship with USA for what?( In Persian this way of talking means we don't want). Here is the Persian text for those who can read:

رفسنجانی: رابطه با آمریکا می خواهیم، چکار کنیم؟

امام: رابطه ی با آمریکا را، می خواهیم چکار کنیم؟

I read the article as Ayatollah Khomeini being politically savvy and astute and knew when/how to use the Americans for the benefit of the Iranians. Either way, his accomplishments are not diminished by what is stated in this article.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

I read the article as Ayatollah Khomeini being politically savvy and astute and knew when/how to use the Americans for the benefit of the Iranians. Either way, his accomplishments are not diminished by what is stated in this article.

Unfortunately this puts the most.....passionate......sayed khomeini supporters in an awkward situation because on the one hand theyre whipped into a frenzy like idiots to swear at the usa in every congregational prayer, on the other hand, their leader(s) dont seem to have a problem with making deals with the USA behind their backs.

Like I said originally though, until the sources are verified as legit, i dont believe them. The BBC isnt reliable, so all this is just hypothetical

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I would never take something that the BBC says to the heart nor something that the CIA chooses to declassify to the public. They both have their agendas and they can both go to hell.

Either way, IF Ayatollah Khomeini used the US in order to help him get rid of the shah, I see not problem with that. The US was the ones who installed the shah in the first place after the former prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh decided to nationalize the Iranian oil industry that was up until that point owned by the brittish BP (Operation AJAX).

So if the shah of iran had become a bit too self confident and did not listen as much as he did before (like the dog saddam or gaddafi, etc), then I do not see it unlikely that they would overthrow him as well in their own interest. If what the BBC says is true, then Ayatollah Khomeini used the US against themselves which was very smart, since that would mean the US helped him create the biggest enemy of the US on the planet in modern time.

Either way, the islamic republic of Iran was created and it became and still is the strong hold of shia Islam and the single most powerful shia nation in the world.

@DigitalUmmah

I can never understand what problem you have with Iran and Ayatollah Khomeini, I think it boils down into your sense of national pride, but you should see yourself as a shia before you see yourself as a pakistani.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
51 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

other hand, their leader(s) dont seem to have a problem with making deals with the USA behind their backs.

You could look at it the other way. Assuming the story is true ... dealing with the U.S. neutralises military opposition to the Revolution, avoids civil war and minimises Iranian civilian casualties as a result.

The only way the U.S. can then respond and thereby demonstrate its political weakness, is to start a war (via its proxy Saddam).

Even worse is yet to come for the United States, since a decade later, the U.S. has to intervene directly and get rid of Saddam. As they do so they end up with Iraqi governments favourable to Iran.

Edited by Haji 2003
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

I can never understand what problem you have with Iran and Ayatollah Khomeini, I think it boils down into your sense of national pride, but you should see yourself as a shia before you see yourself as a pakistani.

well you are wrong if you think that then, aren't you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:

You could look at it the other way. Assuming the story is true ... dealing with the U.S. neutralises military opposition to the Revolution, avoids civil war and minimises Iranian civilian casualties as a result

that's fine by me. I don't have any issues with any nation state having diplomatic ties with another nation state.

as you yourself have seen in this thread - as soon as you try bringing that up, IRI zealots immediately start talking about freemasons and the illuminati as proof why it could never happen. then people like me get annoyed and everything just goes into a death spiral after that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/06/2016 at 1:59 AM, Hidaren said:

 Iran will never work with USA because USA won't miss a chance to harm Iran, while we know they will stab us if we co-operate with them, why should we even try it? Iran and USA will never co-operate as you say, Khomeini(ra) said 4 decades ago:" We got rid of Shah but we will not get rid of US lovers soon." It is undeniable that some are here who love USA but they are almost done. 

So Iran wont ever work with the USA, but will help the US President in the most public way possible, by freeing the hostages at such a time that it couldn't be possible to boost his image and PR any more?

On 04/06/2016 at 1:59 AM, Hidaren said:

Iran and USA are against each other in their very existence, the earth is not big enough for both of the ideologies and soon we will have the Islamic Republic of America or the secular Iran. But as we learned from history, the death of liberalism will be death of the most devoted country to it, USA will become the second Soviet Union which was destroyed by the destruction of commonism, and based on what American military, economical, academic and .... experts say: the destruction of the US has already begun.

people have been saying that since 1776, and yet, here we are. 

On 04/06/2016 at 1:59 AM, Hidaren said:

Watch 4 horsemen documentary to know how.

no. 

On 04/06/2016 at 1:59 AM, Hidaren said:

One thing more :D It is not "Marj bar USA" it is :"Marg bar USA" 

they say the same thing, [edited out]

Edited by starlight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@DigitalUmmah

You did not really address what I wrote in my earlier post, only the question that I asked you and that one you answered with bad attitude and rudely.

Then you continue by insulting you other brother in the posts to follow.

I dont understand why you would enter a discussion with someone regarding a topic if you know you will not be able to control yourself and insult the other person as a result.

Anyways, I hope iA you will become more calmer in the future and not get angry so quickly. Khoda hafez.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Salam and Ramadhan Mubarak;

I took a course on lran taught by a Farsi specialist whose work concentrated on the theology of the ayatollahs. He was on the periphery of the Paris meetings and such. That writ:

What is in the OP article is what we had in the class almost 40 years ago.

There was also a half page newspaper article in January-February 1979 time frame about Gen. Huyser's travels to lran. The article concentrated on the "why is he there?". [l found this a few years ago as my parents had cut it out and kept it.] ln class, it was said Huyser was there to make sure the pro-Shah lranian military understood they will have no support from the US for a coup. This also limited the veracity of the military purge later, which the US exercised influence operations.

Now l figure the Iranian readers will not agree with this next part, but: As US actions and policy was always formed in the anti-Communist Cold War and the US knew about the Tudeheen(oil communists) and MEK (who tried to murder all the ayatollahs), the US priority at this time was to prevent a civil war. A 'sub-routine' of this was to forement instability in Afghnaistan which led to the Soviet invasion in December 1979. A priority was to "protect" the ayatollahs, especially Khomenei (for several reasons, such as "he was known" to the US, had extensive popular support, sufficient evaluative information from the US's Muslim Students Association which was organizing against the Shah, etc). This last part, protection, is how Huyser got selected to go to Iran rather than the 'usual' messengers: as commander of the EUCOM airlift, he also arranged Khomenei's transportation because the plane would have onboard a US pilot which the Soviets were informed about. This way, if the Soviets or their agents did anything to the plane, the US would automatically respond. [Yes, l know an lranian pilot was onboard, l have seen his interview, but whether he actually flew the plane depends on the source cited.]

That is a couple of points. l will add this story:

The students took over the US embassy in April '79. Then left after some negotiations. But in November, 1979, the Tudeheen took over the embassy again while Khomenei was in Qom meeting with other ayatollahs. As soon as the communists did this, the USArmy's 97Cs in lran (covert operators) started buying up every gun they could and sent many into Qom to protect the ayatollahs and a few guns to in-Tehran locations. Things stabilized. The Tudeheen did not leave the embassy as usual, Khomenei then sent his son back to Tehran on Friday to gain release of the embassy. At this time, the US started another policy -when the release was arranged. The US people in the field were cut-off from instructions. The fall-on-your-rubber-sword story that National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, "not liking" Carter's policy on Poland, withheld information from Pres. Carter; so Carter didn't act as agreed. The public result being "Carter thought Khomenei was trying to screw-him and Khomenei thought the same about Carter". And the "Hostage Crisis" began and went on for 444 days.

I hope we all live long enough get all the details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...