Carter Sold Out Iran 1977-1978

phoenix80

Banned
As if a light were switched off, the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi, portrayed for 20 years as a progressive modern ruler by Islamic standards, was suddenly, in 1977-1978, turned into this foaming at the mouth monster by the international left media. Soon after becoming President in 1977, Jimmy Carter launched a deliberate campaign to undermine the Shah. The Soviets and their left-wing apparatchiks would coordinate with Carter by smearing the Shah in a campaign of lies meant to topple his throne. The result would be the establishment of a Marxist/Islamic state in Iran headed by the tyrannical Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The Iranian revolution, besides enthroning one of the world's most oppressive regimes, would greatly contribute to the creation of the Marxist/Islamic terror network challenging the free world today.

At the time, a senior Iranian diplomat in Washington observed, "President Carter betrayed the Shah and helped create the vacuum that will soon be filled by Soviet-trained agents and religious fanatics who hate America." Under the guise of promoting" human rights," Carter made demands on the Shah while blackmailing him with the threat that if the demands weren't fulfilled, vital military aid and training would be withheld. This strange policy, carried out against a staunch, 20 year Middle East ally, was a repeat of similar policies applied in the past by US governments to other allies such as pre Mao China and pre Castro Cuba.

Carter started by pressuring the Shah to release "political prisoners" including known terrorists and to put an end to military tribunals. The newly released terrorists would be tried under civil jurisdiction with the Marxist/Islamists using these trials as a platform for agitation and propaganda. This is a standard tactic of the left then and now. The free world operates at a distinct dis-advantage to Marxist and Islamic nations in this regard as in those countries, trials are staged to "show" the political faith of the ruling elite. Fair trials, an independent judiciary, and a search for justice is considered to be a western bourgeois prejudice.
Carter pressured Iran to allow for "free assembly" which meant that groups would be able to meet and agitate for the overthrow of the government. It goes without saying that such rights didn't exist in any Marxist or Islamic nation. The planned and predictable result of these policies was an escalation of opposition to the Shah, which would be viewed by his enemies as a weakness. A well-situated internal apparatus in Iran receiving its marching orders from the Kremlin egged on this growing opposition.

By the fall of 1977, university students, working in tandem with a Shi'ite clergy that had long opposed the Shah's modernizing policies, began a well coordinated and financed series of street demonstrations supported by a media campaign reminiscent of the 1947-1948 campaign against China's Chiang Ki Shek in favor of the "agrarian reformer" Mao tse Tung. At this point the Shah was unable to check the demonstrators, who were instigating violence as a means of inflaming the situation and providing their media stooges with atrocity propaganda. Rumors were circulating amongst Iranians that the CIA under the orders of President Carter organized these demonstrations.

In November 1977, the Shah and his Empress, Farah Diba, visited the White House where they were met with hostility. They were greeted by nearly 4,000 Marxist-led Iranian students, many wearing masks, waving clubs, and carrying banners festooned with the names of Iranian terrorist organizations. The rioters were allowed within 100 feet of the White House where they attacked other Iranians and Americans gathered to welcome the Shah. Only 15 were arrested and quickly released. Inside the White House, Carter pressured the Shah to implement even more radical changes. Meanwhile, the Soviets were mobilizing a campaign of propaganda, espionage, sabotage, and terror in Iran. The Shah was being squeezed on two sides.

In April 1978, Moscow would instigate a bloody coup in Afghanistan and install the communist puppet Nur Mohammad Taraki. Taraki would proceed to call for a "jihad" against the "Ikhwanu Shayateen" which translates into "brothers of devils," a label applied to opponents of the new red regime in Kabul and to the Iranian government. Subversives and Soviet-trained agents swarmed across the long Afghanistan/Iran border to infiltrate Shi'ite mosques and other Iranian institutions. By November 1978, there was an estimated 500,000 Soviet backed Afghanis in Iran where, among other activities, they set up training camps for terrorists.

Khomeini, a 78-year-old Shi'ite cleric whose brother had been imprisoned as a result of activities relating to his Iranian Communist party affiliations, and who had spent 15 years in exile in Ba'th Socialist Iraq, was poised to return. In exile, Khomeini spoke of the creation of a revolutionary Islamic republic, which would be anti-Western, socialist, and with total power in the hands of an ayatollah. In his efforts to violently overthrow the government of Iran, Khomeini received the full support of the Soviets.

Nureddin Klanuri, head of the Iranian Communist Tudeh Party, in exile in East Berlin, stated, "The Tudeh Party approves Ayatollah Khomeini's initiative in creating the Islamic Revolutionary Council. The ayatollah's program coincides with that of the Tudeh Party." Khomeini's closest advisor, Sadegh Ghothzadeh, was well known as a revolutionary with close links to communist intelligence. In January 1998, Pravda, the official Soviet organ, officially endorsed the Khomeini revolution.

American leaders were also supporting Khomeini. After the Pravda endorsement, Ramsey Clark, who served as Attorney General under President Lyndon B. Johnson, held a press conference where he reported on a trip to Iran and a Paris visit with Khomeini. He urged the US government to take no action to help the Shah so that Iran "could determine it's own fate." Clark played a behind the scenes role influencing members of Congress to not get involved in the crisis. Perhaps UN Ambassador Andrew Young best expressed the thinking of the left at the time when he stated that, if successful, Khomeini would "eventually be hailed as a saint." Khomeini was allowed to seize power in Iran and, as a result, we are now reaping the harvest of anti-American fanaticism and extremism. Khomeini unleashed the hybrid of Islam and Marxism that has spawned suicide bombers and hijackers. President Jimmy Carter, and the extremists in his administration are to blame and should be held accountable.

http://www.iranianvoice.org/article774.html


Just a little bit of info on how evil President Carter was and how he betrayed the best US Ally in the middle east!
 
Very good read phoneix i learned a bit.

evil President Carter

Now now, maybe he might of been the worst president in modern times.

He was a very good guy though.
 
Last edited:
Very well said, Phoenix. I have long contended that most of the current problems in Iran could be laid at feet of "Grinnin' Jimmie" Carter. Although the Shah also made some serious mistakes.

The Shah himself once said that his biggest mistakes were made when he stopped "paying off" the mullahs, and when he tried to drag an ancient people into the twentieth century.

I believe that after a few decades of living in the sixth century, most Iranians, especially the younger and better educated ones, would very much like to join the twenty first century.
 
Grinnin' Jimmy Carter is about as crooked as a hillbilly smile.

He's on my list of evil presidents.

Next to him is John F. Kennedy for leaving the Cuban Patriots on the shores of the Bay of Pigs.
Also Bill Clinton for selling out our country to the Communist Chinese, the United Nations, and for destorying the moral fabric of America with his "A BJ isn't sex" episode.
 
He's on my list of evil presidents.


He was a terrible president, one of the worst of all time. But he is NOT an evil man. He does a lot for the poor and the Jimmy Carter foundation is one of the best charity organizations in the world. He doesnt deserve the nobel peace prize for what he did in office but he does for what he did out of it.
 
Hey, no matter what you do. When you screw up. You Screw up. He caused a whole lot of problems. He helped make America look weak to the world. Helped destory the free Nation of Iran. Made America more liberal socialist. And just bastarderized the military.

Sure, does he help the poor. Yeah, but so did the soviets. What's the point.

Luis (5.56X45MM)

PS - Lincoln there's too.

War of Northen Aggresison, Deportation of those that oppose the government. Suspension of the US Constitution. laying the groundwork for the huge Federal Imperialistic Government of Today. Destorying States' Rights and making it illegal for a State to leave the Union.
 
Last edited:
Rabs thinks that it's intentions that determine a man's good or evil, not the actions.

I think that combined with his actions since losing the presidentcy, Carter has to go down as an evil president. He has done more to undermine America than the Russians could.
 
look by his failure to back up the US ally in the region, he allowed the soviets to invade Afghanistan, Saddam to invade Iran and then the US had to finance afghan fighters to defeat soviets and these fighters became Al-Qaeda later who staged the worst terror attack of the history (9/11)...

so to speak, Carter has made terrible mistakes in the first place by not supporting the best US ally in the mideast and allowing the extremists to think that the American government can be defeated and that Americans dont have guts to strike back
 
5.56X45mm said:
Grinnin' Jimmy Carter is about as crooked as a hillbilly smile.

He's on my list of evil presidents.

Next to him is John F. Kennedy for leaving the Cuban Patriots on the shores of the Bay of Pigs.
Also Bill Clinton for selling out our country to the Communist Chinese, the United Nations, and for destorying the moral fabric of America with his "A BJ isn't sex" episode.

and let's not forget that clinton was President during the 1995 Atlanta and Oakdale riots. That was just a huge political screwover and a serious mistake on our part as a political system.
 
Rabs said:
He was a terrible president, one of the worst of all time. But he is NOT an evil man. He does a lot for the poor and the Jimmy Carter foundation is one of the best charity organizations in the world. He doesnt deserve the nobel peace prize for what he did in office but he does for what he did out of it.

I have long believed that Carter was one of the worst presidents, and best ex-presidents we've ever had.

It's a shame he couldn't have become an ex-president without having to be president first.
 
"Grinnin Jimmie" wasn't one of my favorite presidents but c'monnn now.

"Evil" "Worst" Crooked" - couldn't you come up with something just a little more original.

Jimmy Carter's biggest problem was that at a time when we needed a "Pit Bull" in office we had a "Lap Dog" in the Office of the President. He was too kind hearted and too much of a religious man to believe that what was going on in the Mid-East required actions he just wasn't prepared to take.

As far as blackmailing the Shah of Iran is concerned, if you do a little investigative digging you will probably find that it wasn't Carter that was doing the blackmailing. At that time the State Department was trying to bring pressure to bear on the Shah to alleviate some of the humanitarian excesses that were part and parcel of the Shah's dictatorial rule. (Of course he has to accept responsibility for what happened on his watch, even if he didn't order the "blackmail" himself).

I will grant you that Jimmy Carter is near the bottom of the list as far as performance in office is concerned; he is however, at or near the top of the list for former presidents after they left office.
 
Last edited:
If the suceeding presidents after Carter had the same mentality as as he did, the Soviets would have taken us down or still be going strong today. Either that or the US and most likely the West would today be impotent about anything in the world to spread democracy. Therby other totalitarian forms of government would slowly crept up and choked us out of existance. For a metality like that to take over a civilization over a prolonged period I believe would assure its doom. Carter was one of the worst presidents ever!
 
Last edited:
Well Phoenix, thank you for the onsided info on the Shah. We have talked about this before, but obviously to no avail.
Marxist-Ismamist Ayatollah's (what a contradiction in terms) or middle and upper class students protesting to reinstate a reign that will curb their freedom (talk about illogical). Sure the Shah was dealt a lousy deck of cards, but not without a reason. If someone becomes ummaitainable he becomes redundant, regardless of a republican or democratic president. So pinning this on being democratic is too easy. And if you take the time you will find ample regimes getting the short end of the stick, with a republican president.
However; mostly these are regimes that most of you think worthless anyway. Usually regimes that tend to be socialist (to say the least) and willing to infringe on US economic interests so the better the lives of the millions of poor in their country. I usually think less of these republican presidents, but I reckon I am a minority on this forum thinking this. I'll have Clinton anyday of the week and twice on sunday then Reagan or the family Bush.......
 
Carter was doing what he thought best for the future of the country right or wrong. He saw a continued economic empire as wrong and that the drain of resources propping up and supporting other countries around the world as a waste that could be put to better use inside CONUS helping Americans. He was attempting to wind back the clock and follow the admonishments of Washington and Jefferson by divesting of ALL installation, posts, facilities etc outside the USofA- panama, korea, iran, taiwan etc. Good intention, poorly advised and I think a great deal of it was owing to truly not understanding the world as it was rather than viewing it how he wished it to be. He was not a rocket scientist, general or politician but a farmer. As they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
 
bulldogg said:
Good intention, poorly advised and I think a great deal of it was owing to truly not understanding the world as it was rather than viewing it how he wished it to be. He was not a rocket scientist, general or politician but a farmer. As they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You made a great point.

People like Carter truly don't understand how the world works. They go by how they wish it would be, rather than how it really is.

What some people wish things would be, and how they really are, ---are two completely different things. This thinking clouds their judgement, they see everything out of perspective and out of reality. They try to do good but it ends up doing more harm later.

You are right when you quoted, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions", a steady stream of Presidents with the mentality of a Carter would have sent us straight to hell.
 
Ted said:
However; mostly these are regimes that most of you think worthless anyway. Usually regimes that tend to be socialist (to say the least) and willing to infringe on US economic interests so the better the lives of the millions of poor in their country. I usually think less of these republican presidents, but I reckon I am a minority on this forum thinking this. I'll have Clinton anyday of the week and twice on sunday then Reagan or the family Bush.......[/quote

I hardly think that socialist regimes help the poor.

Churchill once said:
"The inheren't vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings, while the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery."

Reagan brought down the most powerful socialist monsters on the planet. Wouldn you share with me just which socialist regimes Clinton brought down?
 
Back
Top