Iran Election Unrest 2009: Who's Behind Those Riots?

There's been some violence lately, and the Jewish president is outraged! "President Barack Obama said the world was "appalled and outraged" at Tehran's use of violence". (Iran’s crackdown dampens opposition, AP, 23 Jun 2009)

It usually doesn't happen this way. Back on 5 May 2009, the U.S. special forces liquidated more than 150 "children, women, and elderly men". And "the world" got all appalled and outraged? If it did, we didn't hear about it from Mr. Obama.

But then again, there were no MI6 agents among the Afghan dead.


"Iran's English-language Press TV said seven people were killed and several wounded at the end of Monday's rally -- a mainly peaceful gathering attended by many tens of thousands -- when "thugs" tried to attack a military post in central Tehran.

An Iranian photographer at the scene had said Islamic militiamen opened fire when people in the crowd attacked a post of the Basij religious militia. He said one person was killed and many wounded in the shooting." (Iran rules out annulment, Tehran crowds gather,, 16 Jun 2009)

"People in the crowd" attacking a police station? Those were the MI6 and CIA agents (pictured at left).

But would American and England really stoop that low? ""It's in the United States' national interest to make sure that we have employed all elements at our disposal, including diplomacy, to prevent Iran from achieving that nuclear capacity," Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said on CBS' "Face the Nation."" (William Kole, Iran: No downgrade of diplomatic ties with Britain, AP, 29 Jun 2009)

All elements? Thugs, riots, bribes? You read the quote. ALL elements.

And the CIA has really done that sort of thing? Read on.

But these agents fell in the line of duty, so they will at least get an honorable mention in the HQ at Vauxhall Cross. Sure the Indian press refers to these apostles of democracy as "thugs", but in the corridors of power in London they will receive as much as a minute of respectful silence before the boys more on to their next move against Iran.


President Obama's idea is that when CIA and MI6 agents burn Iranian police cars, the police shouldn't shoot. Oh, no, they should have a kissing party!


Like the one back in 1953.

"Between 4 and 5 pm Musaddiq’s house was completely encircled. General Riyahi, the chief of staff, had already been arrested in his office. A few hours earlier he had ordered his own deputy, General Kiyani, to lead an army group consisting of an infantry and a tank battalion into the city from lshrat-Abad Barracks which was then on the outskirts of Tehran. The effective deployment of this force could have sealed the fate of the coup. Kiyani ‘was a good man, but he was not up to the task’, as witnessed by Colonel Mumtaz many years afterwards. Here General Daftary played his crucial role. Flanked by a number of rebel officers, he met Kiyani’s force on the outskirts of the city with open arms, begging them not to intervene; there followed a ‘kissing party’, and the entire force was won over." (Homa Katouzian, Musaddiq and the struggle for power in Iran, I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd, 1990, p 192)


Musaddiq was the democratically elected president in Iran. His political view centered on nationalization of the oil fields with the idea that the profits should benefit the people of Iran rather than the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. He had an army, and police. But there were some riots going on: "Undoubtedly, there would have been no coup in August 1953 if it had not been for the CIA. The CIA devised Operation Ajax, paid a large sum to carry it out - estimates of the final cost range from $100,000 to $20 million, depending on which expenses are counted - and assigned one of its most imaginative agents to direct it." (Stephen Kinzer, All the Shah's Men, Wiley, 2007, p 210) And instead of having the police and army defend the state, there was a "kissing party", and Iranian independance came to an end.


And now the same game is going down. How do we know? The top dog in Iran says so: ""The most treacherous government is Britain," Ayatullah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, intoned at Friday prayers on June 19". (Joe Klein, Can the U.S. Deal With a Divided Iran?, TIME, 25 Jun 2009)


Homa Katouzian's Chapter 13 is entitled "The ways and means of overthrowing Musaddiq": "The title of this chapter has been extracted from the minutes written by Robin Zaehner for the Foreign Office of his conversation with Abbas Iskandari, in the summer of 1951, which make it clear that at the same time as the British government was taking its case to the Security Council, it was planning Musaddiq’s downfall by secret intervention in Iranian politics." (Katouzian, supra, p 177)

And what do we see going on today. England and America have been taking their "case to the Security Council". They think Iran may be "dangerous", and has dark nuclear ambitions. No proof, mind you. But plenty of innuendo.


And at the same time as these villains are working the "negotiations" angle, they are trying pull a "secret intervention".

So -- how secret is it?


Back on 28 February 1953, Musaddiq had been visiting the Shah in his palace. "As he approached the main palace gates, however, he was astonished to hear loud denunciations of himself outside the gates. By quick thinking and a stroke of luck he managed to leave through another gate which was unlocked on his own initiative by a palace official. The crowd then gave chase to his car, but were prevented by a police cordon from moving towards his home. At this point, Prince Hamid Reza, the shah’s youngest brother, intervened and ordered the police to give way. The mob then attacked Musaddiq’s house, and that of his son Ahmad next door. The house had an iron gate, and the well-known mobster, Sha'ban the Brainless, (with a retired army colonel sitting next to him) drove an army vehicle against it. " (Katouzian, supra, p 182)

And who paid for these mobsters? "CIA money was being regularly used to swell Tudeh meetings with large numbers of hired mobsters". (Katouzian, supra, p 185)

And the strategy? Kill Musaddiq. Get the police and military out of the way. And then send in hard-core thugs. Like Sha'ban the Brainless, or, say, the thugs who attacked the Iranian police station in 2009.

And this is what happens when England and America need to grab a country's wealth: "Shortly afterwards Eden turned down the American solution for a settlement (which Musaddiq had accepted), told the US Secretary of State that there were better Iranian alternatives both to Musaddiq and to the Tudeh party, and advised him to ‘send [Musaddiq] home’.


Eden was determined not to come to any settlement with Musaddiq (see chapter 11). The intelligence staff at the British embassy in Tehran were reinforced, and their domestic contacts mobilized for action against the government. An important Foreign Office strategy was to frighten the US government into the belief that Musaddiq would deliver Iran into the hands of the Soviet Union. The CIA co-operated in thus misleading their own government into taking hostile action against Musaddiq." (Katouzian, supra, p 177)


And that's how it is this time around. The intelligence staff at the British Embassy in Tehran has been reinforced. Their domestic contacts have been mobilized for action against the government. And the CIA is busy misleading people.

But have they fooled everyone? Not Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. And not even the people of Iran: "Iran also expelled two diplomats from Britain — a nation it bitterly accuses of meddling and spying". (Iran’s crackdown dampens opposition, AP, 23 Jun 2009) Those were the coordinators. But needless to say, they had some "local", dark-skinned talent: "Britain denounced the detention of nine local employees of its embassy in Tehran" (William Kole, Iran: No downgrade of diplomatic ties with Britain, AP, 29 Jun 2009)

And why should Iran be bitter about English meddling and spying? Because its always been this way!


"The Iranians pointed out that Britain had obtained the 1933 Agreement from an arbitrary ruler by the threat of force, or - as most of them believed - by issuing an order to him as its local agent; that it had been worse than the previous concession and had in fact led to a net financial loss to Iran ever since; that the company had ignored constant Iranian demands to see its general accounts, and to be told of the terms and quantity of its sales to the Royal Navy on special terms. They charged the company, on some objective evidence, with literally stealing crude oil via secret underwater pipelines connected to Iraq. They mentioned the company's effectively autonomous rule in a part of the country, its treatment of the inhabitants as second-class citizens in their own land, its discrimination between expatriate and domestic workers and staff, and its particularly low wage rates. They showed that they were being paid in royalties up to 10 or 12 per cent of the company's net proceeds, while the amount the company paid to the British government in taxes alone could be as high as 30 percent." (Katouzian, supra, p 139)

Yes, England has been lying to, cheating, and stealing from the Iranian people for years and years.


"About 100 hard-line students protested outside the British Embassy in Tehran, where they burned U.S., British and Israeli flags, pelted the building with tomatoes, and chanted: "Down with Britain!" and "Down with USA!" state TV reported." (Iran’s crackdown dampens opposition, AP, 23 Jun 2009)

The Jewish agitator and "Iranian" politician Mir Hossein Mousavi has tried denying this: "Mousavi also defended himself and his movement, identified by the color green, against the barrage of claims on state media about foreign hands behind the unrest. "The green movement is not dependent on foreigners," he said."" (Karin Laub, Iran reform leader says pressure to drop challenge, AP, 25 Jun 2009)

But not a soul believes him.

After all, the students know, the leader knows. "Iran has accused the West, particularly Britain and the United States, of inciting violence." And the country is right! (Doctor flees Iran over "Neda" killing: report, Reuters, 26 Jun 2009) Even Sha'ban the Brainless could figure this one out!


But these Sha'ban the Brainless types live on: "Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Friday that "we are very worried over these events" and that "we have underlined the need that violence cease immediately."

Frattini said G-8 officials deplored the violence and invited Iran to seek a peaceful solution. He stressed the group did not want to get into "electoral procedures" and interfere with Iran's internal affairs." (Karin Laub, Iranian cleric: harsh punishment for riot leaders, AP, 26 Jun 2009) If this Frattini the Brainless really wanted the violence to stop, he would talk to America and England. Those are the countries that buy the "leaders of the riots, who were supported by Israel and the U.S., strongly and with cruelty." (Ayatollah Ahmed Khatami, cited in Laub, supra)

And as long as they know the truth, and don't stand down in favor of a "kissing party", the country will continue to prosper.

But the English and Americans will not give up so easily: "Roosevelt had in the meatime sent emissaries to the commanders of the provincial armies in Isfahan and Kirmanshah, encouraging them to move on Tehran. This, incidentally, shows that the plotters were ready to go to any lengths, including a full-scale civil war." (Katouzian, supra, p 190) After all, its not their country.

It seems the English and Americans are having no problems finding brainless Iranian gangsters like Sha'ban the Brainless to work for them. Money is no problem, because the plotters were, and are, ready to go to any lengths to grab the country.

And the only safety for the Iranian people? Use all the tools they have, all they way, and things should be fine.


Right now, it looks like this is happening: "club-wielding security forces dispersed a small group of protesters outside Iran's parliament." (Laub, supra) And when they are quick enough to do this everytime? "A security crackdown by Iran's hardline government has largely driven demonstrators off Tehran's streets this week." (Doctor flees Iran over "Neda" killing: report, Reuters, 26 Jun 2009)

If the Iranians play their cards right, and learn from the lessons of 1953, this will turn into another Carridine situtation. So let the English talk tough. At the end of the day, they'll be off to the hotel closet with those red fishnet stockings on for a little bit of "stretch".