Before I respond to your post line by line, perhaps we can take a step back and see if we have any areas of agreement. Do you dispute any point listed below.
The lawful government of Iran in 1953 operated under the constitution of 1906, with revisions adopted in 1907 and 1948.
That government was divided into three branches, executive, legislative, and judicial.
The head of the legislative branch was the king, known as the shah.
The head of the legislative branch was the prime minister.
The shah held the power under Article 46 of the constitution to appoint and dismiss the prime minister.
Are any of these untrue?
Before I answer, if it could be shown that any of Iran’s leaders violated the constitution, would that be a valid reason for overthrowing that leader?