April Fools' Day in Iran

worldnetdaily.com ^ | Apr 1st | Michael Evans

[F14 Pilot]

On April 1, 1979, the greatest April Fool's joke of all time was played on the people of Iran. Ayatollah Khomeini proclaimed the "first day of God's government," and established himself as the grand ayatollah. The events that followed that proclamation have had a lasting effect not only in Iran, but in the entire Middle East.

The newly-crowned grand ayatollah showed the rest of his Arab brethren how to unify secular, social and religious groups in their hatred for the shah and the United States and use it as a political and military tool to overthrow the government – and he started it all while not even in the country. With the storming and capture of the U.S. Embassy on Nov. 4, 1979, he showed that the West was far from all-powerful. Suddenly, Islam became the David beginning to defeat the new Goliath of the "Great Satan" of America and "the illegitimate offspring of the Great Satan," the nation of Israel.

When the Israeli Mossad reported to the CIA in 1978 that Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi's position in power was shaky and would not hold, Jimmy Carter did the unthinkable and betrayed the shah, all in the name of human rights.

Despite the United States' surprise, the Saudis welcomed the overthrow of the shah in more ways than one. Saudi Arabia benefited from the Iranian revolution as it cut off Iranian oil to the West. Saudi oil revenues again grew disproportionately, just as they had after the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) embargo of 1973.

As a result, between 1982 and 2002, 1,500 mosques, 210 Islamic centers, and 2,000 Muslim schools were built in non-Muslim countries in order to promote Wahhabism. The Saudis also donated academic chairs for Islamic studies to Harvard Law School and the University of California in Berkley, as well as grants supporting Islamic research at American University (in Washington, D.C.), Howard University, Duke University, and Johns Hopkins University.

Since 1973, Saudis have spent $87 billion to spread Wahhabism throughout the U.S. and the Western Hemisphere. Thus Khomeini provided Saudis not only with an example, but also furthered their means.

The Saudis also began to purchase arms from the United States about this time. It was in February of 1978 that Jimmy Carter informed Congress he wanted to sell 50 F-15 fighters to Saudi Arabia. Despite objections from Israel, pro-Israel lobbyists, and demonstrators marching in the streets with signs saying things such as "Hell No to the P.L.O." and "Aid to Israel! Best Investment for America," the sale was eventually approved.

Hezbollah (Iran's "Party of Allah") contributed to the rise of Islamism by creating something that eventually became known as "asymmetrical terrorist attacks." The term asymmetrical was used because their attacks were disproportionately one-sided. These were not battles with visible soldiers on each side wearing distinguishing uniforms shooting at each other over a no-man's land – these were sudden, surprise kamikaze attacks that were aimed to kill as many as possible with no opportunity to retaliate. There was simply no one alive at which to return fire.

Under their careful manipulation of zealous minds, a new "H" bomb – the "Human" bomb had been created – one that could be used to zero in on any target with greater precision than any of America's smart bombs, and cost millions less – unless, of course, you want to include that loss of the life the bomb is strapped to, a cost that those who send them never consider. This demonic invention and ideology was exported to Palestine and the poor Arab masses.

I was in Beirut in October 1983 when two such attacks in the form of two truck bombs were launched against the U.S. and French troops stationed there. The explosions killed 241 U.S. military personnel and 58 French paratroopers. I remember the chaos and panic that rippled through the streets that day. The result was that the foreign troops withdrew and Lebanon was turned into a terrorist incubation center, where Christians were killed and children in day-care centers and kindergartens were taught the glory of being martyred for Allah as suicide-bombers against Israel. America had lost its first significant battle in the war on terrorism ... and we didn't even know we were at war.

It was President Jimmy Carter (known for his bent toward appeasement) who championed human rights, especially among freedom fighters (aka terrorists). Mr. Carter unlocked Pandora's Box when he permitted the destabilization of Iran. (I personally knew the American general to whom he gave the order to overthrow the shah of Iran.) Because of the Carter policy of appeasement, the USSR responded with the invasion Afghanistan.

The United States then partnered with Saudi Arabia to fund and train "freedom fighters" to battle the Soviets in Afghanistan. The tab for that project was $10 billion – the Saudis matched the funds. Osama bin Laden was one of the American trainees in Afghanistan.

At his inauguration, Jimmy Carter chose the Scripture in Micah 6:8: "He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God."

Perhaps had he chosen II Chronicles 7:14, as did President Ronald Reagan – "if my people who are called by my name shall ... repent of their wicked ways ... I will heal their land" – a spirit of repentance in America may have prevented the April Fools' nightmare in 1979.

Today, Iran stands on the brink of another encounter with the United States or Israel because of the proliferation of facilities with nuclear capabilities. This time, the joke may well be on Iran. President Bush is being pushed inexorably toward the unenviable position of having to take out Iran's nuclear reactors, or allowing Israel to do so. It will surely happen before April Fools' Day 2006.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael D. Evans is the author of "The American Prophecies," an Amazon and Barnes and Noble No.1 best seller, and a New York Times best seller. He is also the founder of America’s largest Christian coalition, the Jerusalem Prayer Team.

[F14 Pilot]

PING! Interesting Article!

[SF Republican]

Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi's position in power was shaky and would not hold, Jimmy Carter did the unthinkable and betrayed the shah, all in the name of human rights - Thank you jimmah for all of your help in spreading Islam

[nuconvert]

"When the Israeli Mossad reported to the CIA in 1978 that Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi's position in power was shaky and would not hold, Jimmy Carter did the unthinkable and betrayed the shah, all in the name of human rights. "

And for anyone who doubts the U.S. involvement in overthrowing the Shah.....and there are some here on FR......

" Mr. Carter unlocked Pandora's Box when he permitted the destabilization of Iran. (I personally knew the American general to whom he gave the order to overthrow the shah of Iran.)"

[Ramonchito]

When Hitler started World War II, he knew that the French leadership did not have the nerve to start a long and bloody war against the Germans. Everybody saw the tenacity of the French leadership during World War I, and they expected that same tenacity in World War II. The antiwar movement did not receive yet its christening but Hitler knew they were already existing. He knew that all that was needed to vanquish the French in their soil was to breach the Maginot Line and the French would quickly lose their will to fight.

The antiwar movement was unheard of when Ayatollah Khomeini ordered the seizure of the U.S. Embassy on Nov. 4, 1979, he knew about the antiwar movement already. Because Jimmy Carter belonged to this antiwar movement, he knew that he did not have the nerve to commit the United States to war to defend its legitimate rights. So he demanded ransom payments for the release of the hostages and he had the nerve to ask those conditions because he knew Jimmy Carter would comply.

And Khomeini was proven right after all. The Americans paid the ransom that the Iranians demanded for the release of the embassy hostages.

Initially they were dissatisfied with the amount negotiated by the Americans and they refused to release the hostages because they believe the ransom payment too small. Not until President elect Reagan threatened to invade Iran and not pay one cent of ransom demanded by the Iranians that the Iranians finally agreed to the sum of money offered by antiwar President Jimmy Carter.

It was the antiwar movement that kept the United States from entering World War I and II early enough. American Presidents at that time knew that the antiwar movement active in the United States at that time would strongly oppose America's early entry in the war.

I guess it requires a serious provocation on the part of belligerent nations to unite people in democracies in the common effort to war. Pearl Harbor united finally the American people to enter World War II in the side of the allies.

[F14 Pilot]

I hope some of those who call the Shah a brutal dictator read this article here on FR!

[F14 Pilot]

AFAIK, there was no talk of RANSOM during the hostage crisis.

[windchime]

Thanks!

[freedom44]

Mr. Evans has consistently referred to Iranians as Arabs. He's not exactly the smartest of the bunch.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Who IS she?

[F14 Pilot]

I noticed that and may be we need to write him.

[Ramonchito]

Politicians have a way of euphemizing what they are doing to avoid their real intentions. I don't know the hostage crisis in detail in Iran but I do know there were concessions granted by the Americans which included some transfer of money. Off course, a ransom agreement need not involve a transfer of money. It could be some concessions. The point is that the United States agreed to the demands of the Iranians under duress, that is, if they refused to concede what the Iranians wanted from them, the hostage would have not been released. If for example, the Iranians wanted the Americans to cast their vote in the United Nations for some kind of resolution, we can say it was a ransom payment because it was done in consideration for the release of somebody who has been forcibly kidnapped. There must be a release from detention in order for ransom to exist. Also the detention must be illegal. The Iranian government had no right to detain the Embassy personnel. Also, the Iranian government had no right to subject the Embassy personnel to torture as what they have claimed during the proceedings in which they sued the Iranian government in American courts.

In the negotiations for the release of the hostages, both the Iranians and the Americans carefully avoided the word ransom as the consideration for the release of the hostages. However, we say it was a ransom payment because of the definition of ransom. Ransom payment is the obligation to pay or do or not to do something in exchange for the release of custody of somebody forcibly detained by a kidnapping party. Just because both the Iranians and the Americans did not consider their agreement in the release of the hostage as a ransom payment does not mean it was not a ransom payment. The elements of a ransom payment is there. The agreement was a condition imposed by the Iranian kidnappers for the release of the embassy personnel whom they have forcibly kidnapped or detained against their will.

Anybody who makes a comment on the concessions granted by the Americans to the Iranians in consideration for the release of the hostages could logically infer that those concessions were a ransom payment given by the Americans to the Iranians for the release of those hostages.

The Americans would never say that they paid ransom to the Iranians for the release of the hostages because that would be very politically bad for them. Any cash strap nation could kidnap American embassy personnel and demand ransom payment for their release. The Iranians understood the position of the American negotiators on that point and therefore they went along with these negotiators that the concessions that were being demanded by them was not a ransom payment. But that does not mean because it wasn't called ransom payment, it isn't a ransom payment. All the elements of a ransom payment was there and therefore it could be called a ransom payment.