I seek refuge in God from the accursed Satan
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Answering Carter's insults
In connection with the Shah's departure, which is one of the nation's demands, one of the things which have been said is that the Shah should not leave because if he does, Iran's and the region's stability would be shaken and would crumble. As it has been reported, Carter, in his last statement, has said that a powerful and independent Iran would contribute to and create stability. He further said that they could not bear to see a bunch of riffraff overthrow the Shah who was such and such a person. «1» Now, let us analyze these two issues that he (Carter) has brought up: firstly to see if Iran's, or the region's, stability will crumble with the Shah's departure and then we will scrutinize his(Carter's) statement saying that the people who do not want the Shah are a bunch of riffraff, a bunch of abject and ignoble people, and that he cannot bear to see this riffraff overthrow the Shah!
Carter's sympathy!
The real issue is not what he (Carter) thinks it is. He himself knows that it is not the case. But regarding Iran's stability, what point is he driving at by saying that it has to be stable and that his heart bleeds for Iran, that Iran or the region, which includes the Persian Gulf and its states, should have stability, and that he sees the absence of stability in Iran as the absence of stability in the region and that it is something he can never tolerate or bear to see? How come he has suddenly shown compassion for humanity? Is it really his philanthropic sentiment or his concern for human rights which has compelled Mr. Carter into believing that if the Shah left, Iran's and the region's stability would crumble? Does this sense emanate from his desire to protect human rights and the sorrow he feels for the Iranians who, God forbid, would be inconvenienced if an upheaval were to take place?! With this upheaval, the people's possessions may run to waste; the people's lives may be destroyed, is this why he is concerned? Is it because he is such a humanitarian and has his undivided attention glued on human rights that he cannot watch (the Shah's deposition)?! Perhaps, he is now sleepless at nights because Iranians are afflicted with such adversities! Is it indeed this way?! Or, is the real issue something else?
Well, if it were really his humanitarian feeling and love for human rights that drove him to make such statements, then how come he has kept mum during all the massacres which have taken place in Iran during this entire year, during all the killings since June 5 [Khordad 15,1341 AHS] up until now which he, or any sane individual, knows, have been perpetrated on the command of the Shah who is the fountainhead of all other orders, and that no top official is empowered to order a massacre and that such a thing can never occur unless the Shah orders it? How can we make sense out of these two (contradictory statements)? His love for humanity has caused him to be so apprehensive about regional stability being shaken, whereas this very same humanity, some thirty to thirty-five million of them, are now having their youth dragged into bloodshed, and their schools, universities and places of worship are now scenes of bloody confrontations! How can we make sense out of these two statements?! His heart bleeds for humanity, for the Iranians, lest Iran's stability be disturbed which will lead to chaos and turmoil, and to the people's property being destroyed and people's lives being wasted. In spite of the fact that this person (the Shah) has wasted the people's lives so wantonly and plundered the nation's wealth and allowed it to be plundered, he (Carter) now defends him and cannot bear to see him go! How can we make sense out of these two utterances?! Unless the real issue is something else and he himself knows that it is not the real issue.
Stability of Iran or stability of interests?
He is roused to an absolute frenzy fearing the loss of stability in Iran and the region, because if stability crumbles, then the region will not give him (Carter) any more oil! They fear lest their shipping lines used for taking oil and other interests be severed! That is the issue!! Why don't you (Carter) make yourself clear? Express yourself clearly like a decent human being. Say that you are afraid to lose your interests in Iran, just as the British Foreign Minister said. He stated that he (the Shah) is closely linked to them, that they (UK) had interests there and that he was the protector of the interests they had in Iran and so they were backing him up. You, too, should make yourself clear and state that you are scooping up benefits from Iran: one, you want to loot its oil; you want to have military bases in Iran which will serve as trenches in case a general war breaks out; you want to take the rest of Iran's oil reserves and it is the Shah who can guarantee you these gains, so you are supporting him. Well, this is the truth of the matter and how very right indeed! That is, if he had told the truth, this is what he could have said. But, he digressed from the real issue. On the one hand, he contends that regional stability must be safeguarded and, on the other, he denies any intervention in the country's internal affairs. «2» And that everybody knows that he, America, never, ever intervenes in Iranian affairs!! He is like an alien creature dwelling on the other side of the mountain and does not have any business with Iran at all!! He makes these asseverations. The Soviets are also making such claims, but who will believe their rhetoric?
Independent and powerful Iran
His assertions that a powerful and independent Iran means guarding its stability are correct. A powerful and independent Iran will engender stability, that is, if Iran were independent, were not controlled by outsiders and did not have its affairs interfered in by others, and if it were powerful enough with its system free from the clutches of another system, stability would be created. Iran is after such an order. The Iranians want Iran to be stable and not shaky, with no one meddling in its affairs every day, with its affairs not being carried out by their flunkies who should not interfere in the country's laws. Iran wants, the Iranian people, the great nation of Iran wants its country to be independent and powerful. At present, Iran is neither powerful nor independent. It has no power of its own because it is being run by other powers. There are 45,000 or 60,000, or even 80,000 according to one report, Americans, mostly advisers, running our system. Therefore, the powerful of today have the power; these powers hold the authority in Iran and not the Shah.
We want an Iran that is independent, an Iran that is powerful. Now, Iran is not powerful because its system, which is the fulcrum of power, is tied up to other governments and their systems. They do whatever they want and in this manner they despoil Iran. Iran is now a country held captive by these powers. They have bases here which are located in the mountains of Kurdistan and at the borders. «3» They have huge underground bases. Iran is such a country where they (the foreign powers) are depredating its oil resources, on the one hand, and erecting bases for themselves, on the other! If Iran were powerful, it would not allow such despoilment to take place.
So, Iran is not powerful. You cannot say that Iran has been, or is, powerful and that if the Shah leaves, this power will dissipate. We want the man who weakened Iran and laid it to waste to depart and be replaced by the nation which is powerful. The Iranians demand this. The Iranians want independence. They want to sever the tentacles of other powers. It is right to say that Iran possesses power and independence which can sustain regional stability. This is an undisputed fact. But now, Iran, or the region, is unstable. If Iran were stable, it would not let you (foreign powers) intervene in its affairs. Iran is shaky and is in chaos. This anarchy has plagued Iran for the last thirty-five years, or shall I say fifty years.
Iran's stability depending on its independence and power
So, it is not Iran's stability that you are after. What you really want is for Iran to lose its stability, so you can take advantage of it. If Iran becomes powerful and stable, if, for instance, the Iranian government enjoys power that it uses to serve the nation and for the betterment of Iran itself, if governments were borne out of the nation's will, they would never let you despoil Iran this way and cause this chaos. Iran lacks stability that it is plunged into this mess. It is without stability because it is without power or independence.
Iran says it has to have stability and a stability that emanates from power and independence; and we want power and independence, power that can deliver our military from the adversities that America has encumbered it with, so we can set up a military that is reliant upon the nation, not one that is dependent on American advisers. We will safeguard our independence and we will become an independent country, not a country whose every affair is in another country's hands, so that by this means, our country will attain stability.
When it has attained stability, then you (America) will not have any right to take its oil for free, or worse than this! By" worse," I mean they take our oil and as a payment, they build their bases here! God knows what a tribulation it is for a country whose oil is being plundered and then its plunderers compel it to buy 18 billion worth of arms, bring them to Iran and then erect military bases for Mr. Carter or America on the pretext that we want to be a powerful country! Well, the Iranian nation does not want this to be! It wants no strings attached. It wants to be independent. An independent country will not tolerate such things.
Covert US interference in the Iranian affairs
If a country has a population of 50,000 and is independent, and if this nation of 50,000 runs its own country, no power can ever impose these things on them. But the problem is they (foreign powers) are sowing seeds of corruption right in the heart of the country. That man abroad (Carter) sits pretty and claims that he does not meddle in the country's affairs! They are not meddling in the sense that they have not directly deployed an army with guns and tanks to invade Iran. This is not the case; however, you have sent military experts acting as so-called public servants to train the army and do anything they want; on the other hand, they interfere in and dominate each and every affair in the country.
A liberated Iran
We want a free Iran, an independent Iran. We want a powerful Iran. We want an Iran wherein the nation stands undeterred and runs the country. For the last fifty years, we have never had a Parliament, a government or even a king, nothing! We had nothing. Everything was run by others who were administering the country. Now, the country has risen up to get rid of this chaos which foreign governments wish to prevail (in the country). It does not want to let this anarchy prevail.
False stability
Well, his (Carter's) second statement which we will pose as a question to him is:" Does stability exist in Iran now?" Now, the Shah is there and has not gone yet. Now, that the Shah is still there, the whole country seethes with discord; the people are revolting and saying they do not want this wretched runt who is massacring and looting the people by unleashing his club-wielding hooligans and his henchmen armed with guns and tanks upon the people. Does stability exist now? A couple of days ago, as reported, his henchmen in tanks attacked the inside of a Muslim shrine in the holy city of Mashhad- the holy shrine of Imam Rida, upon whom be peace- riddling the walls and porch of the shrine with bullet holes. This is the umpteenth time that the Pahlavi dynasty has attacked places of worship, and the very same holy shrine of Imam Rida. «4»
Is this stability? Does our country have any stability?! Now, the Shah is there, is the country a stable one? Is it a country where nothing is shaky? Or, you (Carter) just want to talk nonsense for yourself! There is nobody there to stand up to him and say:" Mister, what is this (nonsense) you are blabbering about? The people are being killed; it is the people who are being victimized; the whole country looks as if an earthquake has struck; everything is topsy-turvy: when one group of people cries out that it does not want the Shah, a contemptible band (of hooligans) supporting him is unleashed upon these people, killing them and coercing the nation into wanting the Shah! The people have to love the Shah by hook or by crook!! Is this the stability that he (Carter) says Iran has, a stability he cannot bear to get shaky?
"Riffraff" in Carter's wisdom
Well, the next statement which he made so amicably is that they (the US) could not bear to witness the toppling of the Shah, who is such a wondrous personality, at the hands of a bunch of riffraff, of abject and ignoble people! Are the Iranian people who are saying they want freedom and independence riffraff, or those who are plundering their wealth? The Iranian nation is shouting that it wants freedom. Are those who say they want freedom the abject and ignoble ones in the eyes of the world, or those who divest people of their freedom? Is he who says he wants independence, abject and ignoble, or he who suppresses a nation's independence? Is a nation of thirty-five million people who have risen and spoken and are sacrificing their lives and their youth in order to rescue their country from your (US) clutches, wretched and contemptible and you the honorable one? Is he who speaks of human rights, on the one hand, and then tramples upon the rights of millions of human beings on the other- that we, here in Iran, are witness to, and others witness the same in other places- the honorable one? Is he who talks of human rights on the one hand, while on the other, suppresses humans, an honorable one? Is the Iranian nation which wants to be set free from their (US) yoke, the wretched and contemptible ones in your (Carter's) view? Your judgment is utterly wrong. You should change your view. Later on, you will be living with this nation. They will not let you live. A nation which witnesses the way you reproach them will not let you stay alive; it will not let Americans remain in Iran. This man (Carter) should do a little rethinking, this man who is saying:" We cannot bear to see the Shah who is such a bigwig be toppled by a bunch of wretched and contemptible people." Well, if you cannot bear to witness such, then close your eyes! The Iranian nation will carry it out, God willing, it will.(Audience invokes God's will). Of course, on the condition that God is there with them:" Say: `I admonish you to do one thing: to rise up for God; it may be in pairs or it may be singly." «5»
Large-scale uprising
If your uprising is for God then you will be victorious be you alone or in a multitude. Rise up for God. God willing, the Iranian nation has risen for God in order to sever the hands of the tyrants and rescue the Islamic country.
We are duty bound to help this movement. Gentlemen, if, God forbid, this movement does not reap its desired end and its flames are extinguished, we will be encumbered with adversities up until the end, that is, your future generations will be afflicted with another kind of exploitation under a tyrannical hoodlum who will come and kowtow to their (the foreigners') will. Do not let this movement die without reaching its goal. Come and join this movement for truth; co-operate with all your might until it reaches its desired goal and the hands (of the exploitative powers) are severed and this dynasty is toppled and plunged down the cliff of destruction.
God willing, He will protect you. May you all be successful, God willing; may God keep you in good health, God willing.