Interviewer: The reporter of CBS television network of the United States
[Your Reverend Ayatullah Mr. Mc Farr is from CBS television network. One of the three important American television networks it has a program called" Sixty-Minutes", which is broadcast every Sunday. This program is one of the most watched programs and one of the most reliable ones trusted by American viewers. He is asking you to be permitted to ask certain questions concerning the latest occurrences in regard with American Embassy.]
Yes it is all right. But I ask him not to distort the facts. Some of the previous interviewers approached here, recorded the interview, and distorted my statements. They even have added some untrue statements. This is against the journalistic ethics. I hope my statements be broadcast not a word less or a word more without distortion or intervention in our affairs.
[I want to assure the Reverend Ayatullah that you get satisfied and he is also assured that your Reverence will become delighted at the result of the broadcast of this program. He thanks you for the honor you have given him and is asking God for your recovery from your cold. You might feel better. He assumes that you have already seen the questions. These questions he will address to you are very important. However, depending on the answers you would give, he might have certain other questions which are relevant to the questions previously presented. And depending on the answers Your Eminence gives, he may ask questions for clarification. Nevertheless, they are the same main questions. He assures you that this interview will have an impact on the whole world and he recognizes himself its significance.]
[Is Your Reverence still of the opinion that the American hostages will not be freed unless the Shah is not handed over to Iran?]
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. This issue concerns our nation. It is the demand of thirty-five million of our nation. We should look into the reason why our nation insists on the Shah's extradition and until that time, the hostages will be held and why Carter persists in keeping the Shah.
Let us see why our nation insists on the extradition of the Shah. What does our nation, which considers the Shah its enemy, want to do? He is not a gift to be kept in the museum. There are two reasons for nation's and ours' insistence on his return. These two reasons which one is of more importance than the other; the first reason is that we are the nation whom economy is not that strong and most of our assets are in the hands of the deposed Shah and his relatives. These assets are being kept in the American banks and those of other countries. These assets belong to the nation. We insist on the return of the Shah to find out where this usurped wealth of poor people which captured by him and his cohorts because it must be returned to the nation. The second reason which is of more importance and we desire that he should come up to here so we can find out the roots of the thirty-seven years of crimes in Iran and the disloyalties he has committed against Iran. We want to know who ordered him to perpetrate these crimes and killing. A human being who wants to rule over a country does not get involved in wanton crimes. He must have received orders from somebody else. He himself had admitted that he has a mission to carry out for his country. We want to find out where he got his orders to commit such crimes in his own country, who and what persons had ordered him so? From this point of view, our nation wants him extradited to prove the two points we brought up, and carry out whatever verdict is reached during his trial.
But concerning the next issue: Carter continues keeping this criminal. Is it out of Carter's feelings for humanity and Carter's sense of friendship for the humanity has persuaded him to insist such extent and take a stand against the Muslim nations, intimate and bring about troubles and endanger the region. Does a philanthropist act this way for" humanitarian reason?" We do not see any traces of philanthropy in Carter. Any one that keeps a criminal under one's care and supports in the name of humanitarianism should not commit such crimes and massacre in many countries. This man is not a humanitarian and it is not doing it for humanitarianism. If he had any humanitarian feeling, he would not have allowed such crimes be committed against thirty-five million people one of whom was Muhammad-Rida and all of whom were from one country and nation. His actions show that he lacks such a feeling. What happened that numerous crimes were practiced against us during thirty-five years.
Recently the mass killings were committed by him during the rule of Carter and never had his" humanitarian feeling" motivated him to at least ask the Shah to desist from doing so. Instead, to the best of our knowledge, Carter not only did not dissuade him, but he even encouraged him. As they insist that this done on humanitarian grounds; obviously, it is not for humanitarian reasons. It becomes clear that such is being done so their secrets don't outflow and the secrets of American head of states don't seep out. We will leak the secrets of Carter and his predecessors
Recently, many crimes have been committed by the Shah and this was when Carter was in power. But to the best of our knowledge, not only Carter did not ask him, but he even encouraged him to carry out his horrendous crimes. The reasons why Carter insists on keeping the Shah are for his secrets and those of his predecessors [previous American presidents] not to be disclosed. It becomes obvious then that it is to keep the secrets of American leaders undisclosed. By having the Shah back to Iran we will reveal Carter's personal clandestine activities and those of his predecessors to the American nation and they will understand and let the American people know what had been going on in Iran. The Americans, then, will find out what mischievous actions their presidents have been involved in and how far they have disgraced the American nation in the eyes of Muslims. That is why we insist on the Shah's extradition and why Carter has been refusing to meet this demand. Carter knows that if American people found out of his mischiefs, he could no longer lead a decent life and would lose the chance of being re-elected. American people will cease supporting Carter if they learn of afflictions he and his predecessors have caused our nation, are made to understand by the mass media regarding the suffering our nation has undergone. Iran. I am certain Carter is being supported by a special layer of the community in the same way that the Shah was being supported by a specific clique of protectors. For instance, when an American president came to Iran, a certain group of people was taken to welcome him as the representatives of the Iranian nation. Whereas the Iranian nation never had any correct information about it nor was it ready to welcome the Shah or his guests. But they had a large number of agents to carry out such schemes. I am sure Carter, too, has some agents, perhaps security organization and its agents, who work for him. And these agents insult and treat harshly our university students living abroad. Carter himself who claims to be a" humanitarian" ordered[ his security agents ]to harass Iranian students who had gone there[ the U. S. A ]to seek scientific education has issued orders to hurt Iranian university students living in the States. He has ordered his agents to attack them with dogs and commit other crimes against them.
[This is what this so-called Mr. Humanitarian and we, as an oppressed nation, want to expose the nature and roots of the exploits of those who committed treason against us. But this is not the answer to the question of whether the hostages will be released or not.]
The answer was given.[The answer is no] because this is the demand of the nation will not allow such move. We cannot act against the nation's will.
[Will these hostages then be held right there for good?]
Yes, they will stay here till the Shah is extradited. It is up to Carter to decide. He can be instrumental to their release. Let him surrender the criminal; we shall release the hostages.
[And is that the only condition?]
He wants to continue asking. I will not answer more than one question. I do not have time. I don't have time. Ask me your last question.
[I did not mean importune you. I just wanted an explicit looking answer.]
It is clear no question remains. I do not have time. My health does not permit me to continue with this interview. His other questions might remain unanswered. Let him have his last question.
[Your Reverend Ayatullah: Mr. Carter accuses the government of Iran as a terrorist and reiterates that if anything, God forbid, happens to these hostages, your government will be held responsible.]
Is a nation of thirty-five million a terrorist? Ask Carter if his other political judgments are like this. When thirty-five million people support these detainers, are they still terrorists? I heard Carter as saying that they «1» were not university students and that they were hooligans. His statement is regrettably irrational. He has said these are rascals, and terrorists. In your logic, are rascals and university students the same? Are you taking object persons and university students to be the same? In no country in the world have students been subject to such effrontery. Do you consider our nation a terrorist? Is your political judgment telling you to consider our nation as terrorists? Be sure that our nation is Muslim and a Muslim is not a terrorist and that our nation will treat these people «2» amicably. Our treatment of the detainees is better than the treatment given by you to our students living in the United States. Is it not a terrorist act to harass our students and have dogs attack them? And is it a terrorist act on our part to keep these detainees in the place where they used to work provided with all means of convenience? We have let the observers see how they live here. Is this an act of terrorists or is it" a humane" one? The acts that people like you commit are similar to terroristic acts.
[Your Reverend Imam: Mr. Sadat, the Egyptian president, who is highly religious and a Muslim, has said- Pardon me this is not the interviewer's wording, but Sadat's wording, that you have disgraced Islam and he has so far advanced in his insolence as calling the Imam as a lunatic. Could you comment on this statement of Mr. Sadat's?]
Answer Sadat's Islam is different from the real one. His Islam complies with the opposite of the Qur'anic texts. In Qur'an it is explicitly said that a Muslim does not make friends with the foes of Islam. And Sadat has made friends with Carter and Begin, «3» and taken a stance opposing Muslims.
It is evident that words have occupied another meaning with you, when you call Sadat religious one committed to Islam and Muslim a genuine. It is stated in the Qur'an that those who make friends with the enemies of Islam are not Muslims. Sadat claims to be a Muslim, but he attacks Muslims. Mr. Sadat knows what Israel is doing to the people of the southern Lebanon. He knows what this criminal (i.e., Israel) is doing to the people of Palestine. Then he befriends Israel and still calls himself a Muslim. Now we should weigh his actions based on Islamic criteria and standards to see if he has preserved Islam's dignity. Likewise, our nation's actions should be evaluated based on the same criteria in order to find out whether it has betrayed and disgraced Islam. This is the way Mr. Sadat and the likes of him act. Even the Egyptian nation does not agree with him and Muslims have already condemned him. Our situation has been such due to the pressures exerted on us by Americans and other superpowers, we that had lost our independence. We had lost our freedom. We had lost our reserves and assets. Now we have risen up to secure our freedom.
We have risen up to gain our independence. Does Mr. Sadat consider an uprising for independence, for our Islam, for the realization of an Islamic republic as acts against Islam?
Does he see Islam's dignity and endangered when a nation rises up to topple despots and the monarchial regime and to establish an Islamic regime. Does this ruin Islam's reputation? Do we disgrace Islam when we want criminal [the Shah], who has betrayed nation, Islam and the Holy Qur'an, extradited to be tried here or the man who offered his private plane for the Shah who disgraced Islam? «4» In the nation which wants to be extradite and try this criminal (Shah) and expose the crimes he had committed the traitor and deformer of Islam, or the one that entertains and gives shelter to that criminal. It becomes clear then that Mr. Sadat misconstrued the meanings of the phrases" Islam and treachery," and should therefore be corrected. The meaning of each word itself should be applied.
[Therefore, is Sadat a traitor to Islam?]
He has betrayed both Islam and the Muslims. Now, when he signed[ the accord ]with Carter and Begin, Camp David called, which is entirely against the interests of Muslims, he committed treason against Islam. «5» It is treason when he protects a traitor to Islam. Sadat has betrayed Islam and I ask the Egyptians to get rid of him in the same way that we have got rid of that traitor [the Shah].
[Your Excellency the Ayatullah: What do you expect from the United States for the release of the women and the black hostages?]
We set women and the blacks free because in Islam women are accorded special respect and the blacks have always been suppressed by the United States and the afflictions have been committed against them. They are not held gravely responsible in our views. Perhaps they might have been forced to come here. We did it as an example of an Islamic and Godly act, and we do not expect any reward from Carter.
All we ask is for Carter to give back the traitor «6» to us. He is who committed crime against a nation and country and it is a universal law to extradite the criminal to the country. He is acting against all of laws rationality and wisdom.
[Have they been freed?]
I have no information
[Your Reverend Ayatullah: You seem a kind man, a sacred man. You have a sacred face. Reverend Ayatullah; you have a face popular among the people. I, as a human, wish that, God forbid nothing untoward happen to the relations of the two countries. I hope nothing unusual will happen.]
I, too, pray God that Mr. Carter will care for the welfare of his country as well as ours; and I hope he will extradite this criminal, who should be, based on all existing laws when he is returned, all problems will be solved.
[I have met your grandchild. I, too, have children. I sincerely hope nothing untoward will happen.]
God willing, nothing untoward will happen. Tell them we will give away everything of ours for Islam. We will sacrifice our grandchildren and our sons. Our nation is ready to sacrifice everything. Do not get worry about us!
[No, he is not worried about us; rather, he is worried about both nations.]
It is up to Carter to remove the nation's worries.
[Are you in person or Iran in general presently at war with the United States?]
What do you mean by" war"? If by" war" you mean military conflict with the American army, no such a thing exists now.
But, if by" war" you mean" war of nerves," it is being created by Carter. We have always avoided wars. We are a Muslim nation and we want peace for all nations. But Mr. Carter will not allow peace to endure and prevail this peace. What will bring peace for us and for the American nation and for all nations in the region is for Mr. Carter to put aside his so-called " humanitarian sense" and submit to us the traitor who has committed crimes. Everything will be settled then. We want Carter to change this espionage center into a decent one. It should be a center for human activities, not a center for dominating another nation, not a center for intelligence against a nation. We are being faced by these two problems.
If these two problems are resolved, nothing will remain for disagreement. We are not opposed to the American nation. They are, in our views, like other nations. We are at peace with all nations. We are ready to face even If Mr. Carter intends to plan some actions against us which leads to some undesirable troubles.
[If Your Reverence is so sure that American embassy is an espionage den, why did you not go close it down? Why did you not cut your diplomatic ties with the United States? Why did you wait for a group of Iranian youth to do the job and occupy the embassy?]
We had never assumed an embassy to be a espionage center. And if our youth assumed and moved ahead which was against my own assumption. I myself have never considered such a thought.
I had not previously assumed that Carter would do anything against universal standards and regulations, and convert this place into a center for espionage, for conspiracies, and a center to dominate the nation. Now that our youth have acted in accordance with their assumptions, and I am not informed of whatever possible reasons they did it for, their work is approved by the entire nation. Now that we have understood it is a center for spying, we will close it down. While Carter is at power, I do not think we will establish any relations with the United States.
[But Carter will be the president at least for another year.]
Well, it depends on our government. When we and the government see it advisable to cut relations in all aspects, we will do so.
[Is the severing of relations with the U. S. presently being discussed?]
We will see to it.
[Will you permit them to ask the remaining two questions which you have already approved? In the year 1976, this interviewer made an interview with the Shah at the Niyavaran palace. During that interview they read to the Shah the report of some research done by CIA psychologists. They had found the Shah to be a shrewd, power-mongering and dangerous one. Last week the New York Times, rather boldly, gave a view on Ayatullah. They had made a survey and asked from different persons about you. One psychologist claimed that you have a strong sense of revenge. Is it possible that I request you if could you please comment on this?]
Do these psychologists talk from memory or politically? Do they base their discussions on memorized things without analyzing them, or are they politically oriented? They have said the Shah was an intelligent person. I want to say that if he were intelligent, he would not be afflicted with the sufferings he is now undergoing. If he had been shrewd, he would have listened to the advice given by the Islamic clergy. That he is now burdened with tribulations is because he was quite stupid and dimwitted. The other two attributes bring power-hungry and ego-centered, befit him perfectly. And to extant, that is why he met with so many problems.
Concerning my being revengeful, you, yourself, could ask this nation and the congregation of the nation. Take note of point: whether all thirty-five million nation be vindictive? Did it stage such an uprising to seek revenge? Or, did they want get rid of oppression, tyranny and plundering? Now, this nation will oppose anybody who has denied them their freedom. Is this considered an act of revenge in your terminology and that of those psychologists?
Is it being revengeful on the part of a nation who has risen to gain its independence and rebel against those who robbed them of it? Is it called revenge in terminology of your psychologist. What do we have to revenge for?
We demand the extradition of this person so that we may try him and find out the roots of the crimes he committed against Iran. We will let the nations of the world know who the enemy of mankind is. This is not an act of revenge; rather, it is a human act performed by a nation who has risen to defend itself. Defending our interests is not revenge in our terminology. Perhaps, in the vocabulary of your psychologists, it has been named as revenge.
[Your Reverence, would you permit this interviewer to go to the American Embassy to talk to the hostages and tell the world about the good treatment that they are receiving?]
I see no problem. He may go there. Our youth are there. And they will not hinder anybody from meeting with the detainees. Let them see that they are comfort, healthy and enjoying welfare, how comfortable the detainees are. There is nothing whatsoever that may cause them any inconvenience. They are being kept in a place where they are protected. You can rest assured that they are well protected and are in good condition and will come to no harm. You do no have to worry. Islam in regard with these issues; treats with its prisoners on humanitarian grounds and protect them in all aspects. We are the followers of Islam and our youth are as well Muslims students. Be sure they will treat them kindly. I even asked my son «7» to convey them such aspect of the issue and take care and he has assured me that they are in good condition.
I hope they will be safe here without getting hurt until this (issue) comes to an end. However, they should ask Carter to prepare the means for their release. Our nation is talking about its demand. Let them accept this demand. They will be also released.
[Will you permit him to go alone?]
He should arrange it with the Muslim youth there.