Obama: first president to admit role in 1953 Iran coup

[Enrique]

Source: Washington Times

Of course, the Muslim world doesn't need to be told about this, they know all about it, but I'm sure this history is news to the vast majority of Americans.

So I wonder, will this be discussed by the pundits?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/04/obama-admits-us-role-in-1953-iran-coup/

President Obama Thursday became the first president to acknowledge responsibility for the 1953 CIA-led coup that overthrew the elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh.

Mr. Obama devoted a section of his speech to the Muslim world in Cairo to the "tumultuous history" and long enmity between the United States and Iran and outlined some of each country's historic grievances.

"In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government," Mr. Obama said, alluding to the 1953 coup. Funded and egged on by the CIA, Iranian monarchists removed Mr. Mossadegh - who had nationalized a British-owned oil company. The coup reinstalled Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, an autocratic ruler who was subsequently overthrown in a popular revolution in 1979.

Until Thursday, the most senior U.S. official to express regret for the coup was Madeleine Albright in 2000 when she was secretary of State.

(...)

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/04/obama-admits-us-role-in-1953-iran-coup/

[Poll_Blind]

1. There were so many unspeakable truths spoken in that speech. Amazing.

I really never believed I would live to see a President so candidly honest about America's history. It is truly the only way to rebuild our standing in the world- and he's making all the right moves.

PB

[izquierdista]

2. Keep it up

Maybe he should make Howard Zinn deputy press secretary. (I don't think America would be ready for him to be full-time press secretary.)

[Ken Burch]

26. He could give THAT job to Amy Goodman.

(I just wrote that in order to imagine all the right-wing heads that would explode when THAT appointment was announced).

[No Elephants]

57. At least 50 from DU alone.

[loudsue]

81. Huh. So true. n/t

:popcorn:

[riverwalker]

3. Iran Air Flight 655

Most Americans have also forgotten that in 1988 we shot down a civilian Iranian airliner with 290 civilians on board.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[closeupready]

16. Which was in retaliation for Beirut.

If I recall correctly.

[Pavulon]

19. No it was a fuckup after Iraq

accidentally fired a antiship missile into a us warship. We did not kill an airliner in retaliation for iran proxy killing us marines.

[cosmicone]

27. It was way before the Iraq war.

Some hair triggered nervous marine on USS Vincents (sp?) shot a missile at a plane on the radar while some ships were engaged in a firefight with some militia in rubber dinghies. Then the navy lied stating that the plane was in a direct flight path of the ship and that it was descending. Neither was true. The plane's route was in no way near the ship and it was proven that it was ascending.

Then the most outrageous thing was done -- a compensation was paid to all non-Iranian victims on the plane but Iranian victims were excluded ostensibly because "the money would go to the Iranian government."

I despised Ronald Reagan even more since then.

[The Stranger]

68. Also, don't forget, Bush Sr. refused to apologize for shooting down the civilian airliner.

[RaleighNCDUer]

86. That IS the official story. nt

[Alamuti Lotus]

42. You don't recall correctly

the terrorist bombing of Iran Air 655 was in the middle of a war that the US was simultaneously fighting against Iraq & Iran. There were other low-level hostilities relating to US/allied merchant shipping and spy ships assisting the Iraqi dictator, but this was plainly a terrorist bombing of a civilian aircraft. See cosmicone's post for a slightly more detailed mention of the event.

"retaliation for Beirut".. where to start with how wrong that is. What kind of fucked up argument is it to say that blowing up a packed civilian airplane is retaliation for a precision strike on a foreign occupation force? Oh right, it's just a fucked up argument. First of all, the Marines were targetted first for American support of Iraqi and Israeli aggressions in the region.
As far as what would be considered "retaliation for Beirut", consider this more appropriate comparison: A year or two following the elimination of the occupyers' barracks, American CIA terrorist leaders (in league with Saudi intelligence, using Christian fascist militias on the ground) attempted to assassinate Grand Ayatallah Sayyid Mohammed Husayn Fadlallah. The massive bomb went off as his mosque was ending services if I remember correctly; hundreds of people were massacred or maimed in the bombing, both people leaving the mosque and pregant women and other people residing at the medical center nearby. Great democracy and love of human rights on display, and certainly not any kind of imperial paradigm.

[mallard]

50. But you DO recall correctly, so thanks ...

You wrote:

"the terrorist bombing of Iran Air 655 was in the middle of a war that the US was simultaneously fighting against Iraq & Iran. There were other low-level hostilities relating to US/allied merchant shipping and spy ships assisting the Iraqi dictator, but this was plainly a terrorist bombing of a civilian aircraft."

The silver lining on that not-a-botch event, blamed on a trigger-happy sailor, is how quickly the 8-year Iran-Iraq War came to a sudden end shortly afterwards!

[JackRiddler]

89. It certainly was not! That was a protected civilian craft mistaken for a target.

What you may be remembering is the story (one of several alternative theories) that the Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am 103 was contracted by Iran in retaliation for the US shootdown of the Iranian Airbus passenger plane. The official story on that is that it was done by Libyans, though the case has fallen apart over the years, and there's also the belief that a Palestinian splinter group exploited a CIA or DEA drug channel who could place baggage undetected to pass a bomb into the plane through them.

[closeupready]

91. Oh, right, that's what I was thinking of. Sorry, folks.

n/t

[No Elephants]

59. Ooops. The Iranians will probably have forgottten that

in another 90 years or so.

[mule_train]

104. horrific incident, I've never forgotten it

horrified both by what those people went through, and what the consequences might be

what the heck could you possible say to the families?

what excuse would WE accept?

[Wizard777]

4. BRAVO! We are not without sin. Neither is Iran or even Israel.

It's no longer about how we cover up our treacheries to preserve and perpetuate disputes. It's about exposing them to settle the disputes. This moves us away from wars and toward the Peace we all claim to want. The Peace that comes from responsible governing. It's no longer about pride and arrogance walking hand in hand to war. It's about peace and responsibility walking hand in hand to a brighter future.

[RainDog]

32. thank you for this beautiful post

I need to hear things like this to hope humans can enter a time of peace and reason.

[Wizard777]

34. Anytime! It's my pleasure.

Faith in one person can lead to faith in everyone. It's gotta start somewhere. I put my full faith in Obama when I voted for him. I'm 77 years old. I've been voting since I was 18. That was the first time in my life I actually felt like I for something good instead of the lesser of two evils.

[madokie]

83. I'm 61 and I have total confidence in our President

I'm proud I voted for him and I can tell I will be proud to vote for him again in a few years. Our President is a good and honest man who has our countries best interest at heart. I simply love the man

[RufusTFirefly]

5. Wonder whether he mentioned Norman Schwarzkopf

The grandfather of the Desert Storm general created the dreaded SAVAK, the Iranian secret police. Meanwhile, Kermit Roosevelt, son of Theodore, engineered the coup.

[ColbertWatcher]

17. Damn. Small world. n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

18. Good book to read

All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror

[ColbertWatcher]

54. Thank you. n/t

[EFerrari]

6. It's so nice to be proud of your president for a change.

:)

[Dr.Phool]

39. He's been pissing me off to no end lately.

But, it's moments like these that keep me hoping.

[DURHAM D]

7. I am so glad you posted this.

I was thinking yesterday about what Obama would include in his speech today. I was hoping he would acknowledge the CIA's successful coup to overthrow the leader in Iran in the early 1950s and install the Shah. Then I thought - no, he won't mention it. I am so glad he did. I have not had a chance to watch his speech yet.

Few people are aware that democracy was breaking out in Iran shortly after WWII. Truman told Churchill to f-off when he wanted our help to protect British energy interests. The newly elected Eisenhower, however, listened to the bs about communism spreading. Eisenhower sent Norman Schwarzkopf senior to assist. Norm senior is father to Norm junior who went on to muck around in the mid-east as well leading Desert Storm.

I have often wondered where the mid-east would be today if we had stayed out of their business. Truman had it right - he told Churchill we don't interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. Imagine that...

I am truly glad Obama acknowledged this almost 60 year old mistake.

[mirrera]

8. I noticed that! It was a HUGE step in the right direction.

Maybe more people will research it and understand Iran's mistrust of us.

[Baby Snooks]

9. And so?

Is Barack Obama saying that we corrected that by removing the Shah and plunging Iran into the Dark Ages of Islam - for oil? Because we thought we would get a better deal with Khomeini?

[Canuckistanian]

25. The Shah was America's favorite puppet

With the Shah in, the oil flowed. And American and British oil firms profited mightily.

But the coup that removed the Shah was 100% Iranian. The people got tired of the Shah's heavy hand and looting of their resources by foreigners.

In the power vacuum that was left, the Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in a popular uprising. And the US Embassy hostage taking began.

So the Ayatollah was no "correction". It was the Iranian people taking their country back.

Which they are beginning to regret.

[saigon68]

58. This is NOW amerika's favorite puppet

MEET THE MAYOR OF KABUL

[Canuckistanian]

77. LOL n/t

[Ken Burch]

28. We didn't remove the Shah. Almost every Iranian wanted him and his bogus royal family gone

The rest was the law of unintended consequences.

Are you arguing that we should have fought to keep the Pahlevis in power?
And would you also have made that argument about Somoza?

(If Ford had been re-elected, Rumsfeld and Cheney, who were running his foreign policy operation, would have done both).

[Baby Snooks]

47. Absolutely

Compare "modern" Iran under the Pahlavis with "prehistoric" Iran under the ayatollahs. And then ask the question again.

[Ken Burch]

48. You do realize that there's no chance that the Shah could have been kept in power, right?

Why should we have fought against the entire Iranian population?

And why would you still defend our support of the Shah when that support led to the taking of American hostages(and the defeat of a Democratic president in his reelection campaign)?

Iran never had to have a dictatorial monarch in order to modernize. And the alternative to the Pahlevis wasn't always "the ayatollahs". If we had let the Mossadegh government stay in power, Iran would have had modernization with democracy. There was never an excuse for us to back the Shah and send Norman Schwartzkopf's grandfather over to create the Savak, a nightmarishly brutal secret police force.

[Baby Snooks]

87. Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot about SAVAK and the torture chambers...

Just where are the torture chambers? You would have thought the first thing Khomeini would have done was expose them for the world to see. He didn't. Because he couldn't. Because they didn't exist.

The protests splattered across the evening news and across the headlines of the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times of course led everyone to believe the Iranian people wanted the Shah removed.

The protests were organized by the CIA. While "someone" negotiated a
"better deal" with Khomeini.

[Ken Burch]

90. Why would anyone actually defend the freaking Shah?

The Pahlevis weren't ever even actual royalty. The guy's grandfather just staged a coup in the Thirties and the Brits talked him into being pretendy royalty.

How can you see defending a regime like Pahlevi's as possibly being consistent with being progressive?

[Baby Snooks]

93. Ask the Qajars...

It wasn't really a coup. The Qajars, who were the royal family, sort of just handed him the throne. He represented the modern world. They preferred the old world. "Tea in the garden with the cats" old world.

Under both the Qajars and the Pahlavis Iranians were a peaceful people.

Propaganda is propaganda. If there were ever an accounting, something else Khomeini carefully avoided, the reality is for every dollar the Shah received for the oil personally he probably spent five dollars on the Iranian people. The nuclear plan we are seeing unfold was in fact his plan. He was many things. Not all good. But he did act in the best interest of the Iranian people. His main goal was to bring them out of the Dark Ages of Islam.

Some apparently believe plunging the Iranian people back into the Dark Ages of Islam was best for the Iranian people. I feel sorry for those who do.

[Ken Burch]

94. But it wasn't exclusively a choice between the Pahlevis or the Mullahs

Iran would have modernized without a police state if Mossadegh had been left in power. It's never been the Shah or the mullahs with no other future possible.

Iran could have been allowed to evolve a democracy on its terms. Putting the Pahlevis back in power made that impossible.

Are you channeling Jeane Kirkpatrick or something?

[malletgirl02]

101. 1979 Revolution

The interesting thing about the revolution is that it wasn't just radical islamist protesting against the Shah. there was secularist, communist even women protesting. Unfortunately what happen in the aftermath as was happens with many revolutions one group takes power and turns against the other group that help them come to power. This case with the mullahs.

The lesson the US should have gotten with the Iranian revolution is what happens when you overthrow a leader just for some vague dislike of his politics and install a leader. Unfortunately the US did not learn that, and will probably never learn.

[Ken Burch]

105. But you're still assuming the US overthrew the Shah

They didn't. The Iranian people did, and something like 99% or them were anti-Pahlevi at the end. If we'd tried to save him, we'd have ended up in a Western Asian Vietnam, fighting on and on for years with no chance of victory.

The real lesson is that we should never have put the Shah back in power in 1953. And it was THAT that President Obama was rightfully apologizing for. There'd have been no "Islamic Republic" if we hadn't done that.

[bleever]

10. A watershed moment in U.S. foreign policy.

Astounding.

[whosinpower]

11. What will the pundits say?

Read the comments after the article - and you will gather all you need.

Of great import, in my mind, gleaned from the article, is that while he acknowledged the coup - he did not make apologies, justifications or excuses - he merely pointed out the truth.....and in all matters....truth is king. There are many who will be wondering if this is an apology tour - as per the comments I read.

Do that take that to infer this is my position - because it is not. I believe Obama takes the stand that he does because he has an overwhelming faith in people, in the American people, that they can handle the truth - as hard as it might be to hear, and he needs every single one of you to guide his policies--so if the healthcare reform is going awry--you must convey that to him--or the financial reform that America and THE WORLD desperately needs is tracking the wrong way--you must tell him so. He has faith in you that you care enough to see this through. If he did not--then he would never of gone to Cairo in the first place.

Warmongering and threats are a far easier path to take than the one Obama has set his presidency upon. I applaud his courage, his wisdom and his love for humanity, but he is just a man, and he needs all of us to help.

[Enrique]

13. ignore it, of course

when was the last time you heard a pundit mention that history? It's relevant to any discussion regarding our history with Iran, but it never comes up. It just doesn't fit with the kind of history the pundits like to talk about.

[bluestateguy]

12. Well duh

That would be like Israel admitting they had nuclear weapons.

"Really, you don't say?"

[Smarmie Doofus]

14. PBS ignored it. ( I THINK it was PBS I was watchng)

Which means that the rest of them ignored it too.

So the talking heads will talk about the usual inconsequential nonsense this Sunday and still not "get" Iran.

But it was important acknowledgement, nonetheless.

[Time for change]

15. It was great to hear him say that

Speaking the truth about ourselves is a major step towards peace.

[nikto]

20. Oh thank God...

I have had so many disagreements with Obama lately
on foreign/military policy and economic policy, I was starting to
feel real negative about Barack.

But this brings me back somewhat, for sure.

What a speech!!


But with Obama,


His speeches=Progressive GOLD, with all the best human values and aspirations.

His policies=Many are too damn conservative/pro-corporate.


But this speech gives me new hope.

persuading Israel's gov't to sincerely participate in peace talks
will be a bitch of a task.

But maybe, just maybe, the Neocons can be outmaneuvered,
and peace can be created in the Middle East.

What a beautiful dream!

I'm rooting for Obama to be the one to lead the way
and get it done.

[ooglymoogly]

21. My god If we open up the huge can of worms that is the evil of the CIA

America will become the portrait locked in the attic of Dorian Gray. In order to heal and become the country we once were, it all must come out into the sunshine. Just imagine the kind of world we could live in.

[Raksha]

41. America has been as much a victim of the CIA as any other country.

I've been reading up on the assassination of JFK these past few days.

[EFerrari]

44. That's an overstatement. We have no mass graves of the disappeared

and tortured and killed. But, yes, we have suffered, too.

[Raksha]

49. Not yet anyway.

Re We have no mass graves of the disappeared and tortured and killed.

But they've been bleeding us consistently without let-up for 40 years or more, both in lives and treasure. And chipping away at the Bill of Rights to the point where there's almost nothing left of it. I agree that it hasn't been as bad--but it's been relentless.

[EFerrari]

92. You'e right. I should have said "not yet". n/t

[ooglymoogly]

22. and a second KR nt

[The Wizard]

23. The United States government,

working for big oil, has tried to overthrow every government that has nationalized its oil.
We were in Vietnam until it was determined they didn't have the oil reserves originally believed to be in the South China Sea and the Tonkin Gulf.

[Canuckistanian]

24. I was astounded to hear that

He just..... says it - "we overthrew the elected Prime Minister"

BUT.

Then he goes on to mention Iranian sponsorship of terrorism and military training of Jihadists in Palestine and other places.

Not quite tit for tat here.

What the US and Britain in 1953 did was install a murderous dictator called Shah Reza Pahlavi, who ruled over Iran with an iron fist for over 26 years.
http://www.dictatorofthemonth.com/Pahlavi/Sep2004PahlaviEN.htm

Then there was the creation of SAVAK, the bloodiest state security agency ever, created with the help of the CIA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAVAK

It's no wonder that Americans and Britons were hated in Iran so much.

[jamieque]

29. Here is a little comical comment to lighten things up a little...

What do you think Osama Bin Laden was doing today while Obama was revealing this truth to the Muslim world?

Somehow I keep getting this funny little picture in my head...

Osama: (Doing his best Star Trek 2 Kirk impression from his cave of course) "OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA! (The echoes are heard all around the area as he keeps cursing his bad luck to have to deal with a REAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT not that nightmare joke of a cheater we got stuck with for eight long, hellish years.

It would seem that Obama turned the whole Muslim world on its collective head in ONE DAY! All this with just a SPEECH! Can you imagine how pissed off the various terrorist groups are right now. He just dropped a peacemaker nuke on their collective heads.

Oh... that has got to hurt and the funny thing is that there is more where that came from coming. I bet these groups now wished we Americans had voted for the 'other guy' to be our president. Sorry but we chose Obama and now you guys are going to have to seriously start looking for another job. Not that blowing yourselves up was much a job anyway. There were no benefits and the retiree package sucked worst then any on record. So why do it? Hmm... you know that is the million dollar question. The whole terrorist mental message about 'Holy War' is the most insane crap I have ever heard spouted by anyone... Well, actually we have all heard Rush Limbaugh and a few other nutcase groups in our own country sound pretty much like these people.

War is 'not' holy. War is hell. Nothing is gained from war but death, destruction and misery, not to mention a helluva lot of shed tears and blood. I pretty sure you guys, like me, are fucking tired of all the pointless bloodshed. This madness has to end and it is past time for it to end.

And while we're at it lets deal with own 'domestic' terrorist group problems here on our home soil. Yep, I am talking about the KKK, Skinheads and all those other lunatic fringe groups that contribute nothing to our society but BS. They can cry about their Right to Free Speech all they want but what they don't realize... A right is honor to have and with all honors they can be removed when they are misused and abused. Why should we be force to tolerate this BS any longer. Tolerance of this BS
nonsense does none of us any good. You know it and I know it.

I know I have kinda gone off-topic but I would hope what I am trying to say is understood.

[Nostalgic]

30. That's great

I'm surprised the Washington Times reported it.

[zeos3]

31. WTF? Page Not Found? eom

[L. Coyote]

33. What is "the Muslim world" anyway?

The rest of the world knows all this stuff, all about the real USA.
Only the USA and the English language is dominated by the propaganda paradigm.

[Fedja]

40. In part, you're correct.

But his speech wasn't meant to educate, it was meant as a step toward reconciliation. And the rest of the world has been hoping to hear one.

[Vilis Veritas]

61. Definately an interesting choice of words...

But most all of the worlds governments utilize propaganda to manipulate the masses.

I hear about the real China from my friends at college...or the Real Russia, or the real Mexico from some of my co-workers.

Reality is everywhere...so is propaganda.

V V

edited for spelling error and clarification...

[DFW]

35. I saw a brief stupid commentary on CNN over here

It was after midnight here in Germany, but I caught a brief bit of CNN's spin. Four commentatora,
right-wing Candy Crowley, Wolf Blitzer and David "axis-of-evil" Frum (WTF was he doing on a NEWS
program anyway?), along with Gloria something-or-other as a token, drowned-out voice from the center.

You could tell how far to the right the people were by their frowns. Frum was scowling, Crowley not
far behind, Blitzer trying desperately to look serious and Gloria not putting on any kind of weird
face.

[New Dawn]

36. All US citizens need to read William Blum's book, Killing Hope

William Blum's http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Hope-C-I-Interventions-II-Updated/dp/1567512526/">Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II covers the 1953 Iran coup and many other similar events.

[RufusTFirefly]

76. Stephen Kinzer's book "Overthrow" follows a similar theme

Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq

I haven't read Blum's book yet. I'll have to check it out. Thx!

[underpants]

37. I need to see this whole speech- Fox News had Goldberg on talking about something

and his point was that Obama was AGAINST democracy -this could be the part that horrible douchebag was talking about

[annabanana]

60. I believe we have it posted over in the video department. . .

It was truly a masterpiece.

[L. Coyote]

63. The Official Channel of the White House (These videos are public domain)

http://www.youtube.com/user/whitehouse

VIDEOS (206): http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=whitehouse&view=videos

WATCH (Arabic): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSShOFz3QrI&feature=channel_page

whitehouse
June 04, 2009

يلقي الرئيس أوباما خطابا في القاهرة، عاصمة جمهورية مصر العربية، يوضح فيه التزامه الشخصي بالعمل مع العالم الإسلامي على أساس المصالح المشتركة والاحترام المتبادل، كما يناقش الرئيس في خطابه الطريق الذي...
يلقي الرئيس أوباما خطابا في القاهرة، عاصمة جمهورية مصر العربية، يوضح فيه التزامه الشخصي بالعمل مع العالم الإسلامي على أساس المصالح المشتركة والاحترام المتبادل، كما يناقش الرئيس في خطابه الطريق الذي تستطيع من خلاله الولايات المتحدة والمجتمعات الإسلامية في مختلف أرجاء العالم سد الفجوة في بعض الأمور التي جرى خلاف بشأنها. 4 يونيو 2009
(ملكية عامة)

[chatnoir]

38. "Page not found"!

:wtf:

[TankLV]

43. Simply incredible. We are truely witnessing GREATNESS...

I have never used that word to think of Obama, let alone describe him.

All other issues pale in comparison to his performance today.

Nothing else need be said.

God protect our great President.

[eleny]

45. I was flabbergasted and delighted

K&R

[pjt7]

46. Yeah, but he said Al-Queda did 9.11

Is it going to take 50+ years to get the full story for that event?

[Tarc]

70. er, al-Qaeda did do 9/11

What nutball, tinfoil conspiracy are you chasing today?

[pjt7]

84. Al-queda took down WTC7?

..don't think so

[disndat]

85. Exactly right.

A flaw in an otherwise astoundingly courageous speech.

[DutchLiberal]

98. Al Qu'aida did 9/11. Bush ignored all warnings on purpose, yes.

Bush knew it was coming and did nothing, because he knew how he could exploit it. But Al Qu'aida did it.

[lutherj]

51. It's not exactly controversial that the US orchestrated the coup in 1953.

Kermit Roosevelt, who conducted the CIA operation called "Operation Ajax", subsequently wrote a book about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Roosevelt,_Jr.

[ohio2007]

52. So has Iran made official quotes on the Cairo speech ? It can't take that long to figure out what

actions Obama hoped would result from the commenteven though I know they do like to spend alot of time putting together 'properly worded statements.
Give the mullahs 24 hrs to digest it and figure out what they are going to say and
what the people are going do after friday prayers ?

The respone should be happening right about now I figure.

[Rhiannon12866]

53. K&R. That jumped out at me, too...

Thought this was something I'd only read about on DU (which I have). Kudos to President Obama. That was a historic and very courageous speech. He really is a man for our time. :patriot:

Here's the Rachel Maddow video on this amazing speech. Naturally, she showed clips of all the highlights, including this one... :applause:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=320582&mesg_id=320582

[blm]

55. I hope this leads to opening the books on ALL of it...let the American people KNOW and they'll

better understand.

[redqueen]

74. And let's hope other governments follow suit.

That would be truly awesome.

[shadowknows69]

56. Bravo for President Obama on this

But it is sad that it seems like it takes an average of 50 years for this country to bear to look upon its own dirty laundry.

[Vilis Veritas]

62. Maybe if we all start talking, we won't have so much time to kill...

V V

[mdmc]

64. ANYONE GOT A LINK?

please

[Kajsa]

65. I found two lines at the bottom of this page

that addressed it.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/05/obama-admits-us-role-in-1953-iran-coup/

[florida08]

72. there's more here

http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Obama_admits_US_involvement_in_Iran_06042009.html
Wonder why W/Times killed the story already?

[mdmc]

99. kick

[thucythucy]

66. This is a great step forward

and will hopefully educate at least some Americans to the fact that US/Iranian tensions didn't begin with the taking of American hostages in 1979. It's amazing how many Americans believe that Iranians for no good reason just happened to target the US for their "inexplicable" rage -- the whole "they hate us for our freedoms" line of BS. As if every Iranian of any intelligence doesn't know how the US hijacked their government. Imagine if a foreign government tried to do the same thing to us, the fury that Americans would feel. And then, to top it all off, following all those years of brutal repression and after the Shah was finally overthrown, the US offered him asylum, refusing to extradite him back to Iran to be tried for his many crimes. THAT was the tipping point, leading directly to the student takeover of the US embassy.

I'm hoping that President Obama will at some point also acknowledge US complicity in the overthrow of the democratically elected governments of Guatemala in the 1950s (also an Eisenhower/John Foster Dulles adventure) and of Chile in the 1970s (this one was the brainchild of Nixon/Kissenger). In both cases what followed were horrifically brutal regimes, and in Guatemala a savage civil war in which tens of thousands of innocent civilians were slain, mostly by the US funded and trained Guatemalan military.

As Richard Nixon once said, "Sure, democratic elections. Great. As long as our side wins."

[Blue_Tires]

67. brilliant

During the run-up to the invasion I even remember arguing with a couple of DUers who refused to believe we had anything to do with Mossadegh...

[pjt7]

69. It is true that a large percent & probably more than 50% of

Americans did not know that we overthrew Iran's leader in 53'. This puts their revolution & the taking over of our embassy (which the CIA worked out of) into a new light.

I'll be very suprised if it makes it into our kids history books.

[whosinpower]

71. That never occured to me until you stated it

But you are correct. And as the history, or how we have percieved it unravels, so to does all the events after take on a more nuanced look. Even up to and including the current Iraq war.
Who authorized the CIA to overthrow Mossadegh?

[florida08]

73. Eisenhower

http://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/news/dennis-kucinich/

[Turbineguy]

75. Yes, it's true.

But then everything was done in the context of the Cold War

[sofa king]

78. Wow. A conspiracy theory that was totally true in every respect.

I hope there are still some people alive from the 1950s who can still muster up an "I told you so."

And in fifty years, I hope I'll be there to say the same thing about 9/11, mass murder in Iraq, and Kenny Boy Lay's retirement in the Witness Protection Program.

[kiva]

79. One of the reasons I detest Dwight Eisenhower.

The others include Guatemala (hey, it worked in Iran, let's do it here too!), his reluctance to confront McCarthy, and his lukewarm support (if that) of the Civil Rights movement. Every time someone posts to pat him on the back for his 'military industrial complex' warning they should also remember these things.

[mule_train]

103. unfortunately, you're right

in many ways, I'm a fan of Eisenhower, I love his quotes

the worst part about the 1953 coup, was that we were carrying water for rich british people, their was THEIR problem (losing oil they stole from the Iranians), not ours

but the CIA went wild in his era, Iran and central America in particular, some very ugly things with long term consequences

[Kajsa]

80. Operation Ajax

was the name of the coup to remove Mosaddeq from office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mosaddeq#Operation_Ajax

more on Mohammed Mossaddeq,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mosaddeq

Mohammad Mosaddeq
( Mossadeq (help·info)) (Persian: محمد مصدق , pronounced , also Mosaddegh, Mossadegh, or Musaddiq) (19 May 1882 – 5 March 1967)

was the Prime Minister of Iran<1><2> from 1951 to 1953 when he was removed from power by a coup d'état. From an aristocratic background, Mosaddeq was an author, administrator, lawyer, prominent parliamentarian, and statesman, famous for his passionate opposition to foreign intervention in Iran. He is most famous as the architect of the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry,<3> which had been under British control through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), (later British Petroleum or BP), and which is thought by many to be the reason for his deposition.
Mosaddeq was removed from power in a 19 August 1953 coup supported and funded by the British and U.S. governments and led by General Fazlollah Zahedi. <4> The American operation came to be known as Operation Ajax in America, <5> after its CIA cryptonym, and as the 28 Mordad 1332 coup in Iran, after its date on the Iranian calendar. <6> Mosaddeq was imprisoned for three years and subsequently put under house arrest until his death.
Among many in Iran and abroad, Mosaddeq is known as a hero of Third World anti-imperialism, and victim of imperialist greed for Iran's oil.<7> However a number of scholars and historians believe beside the direct involvement of the UK and US, a major factor in Mossadeq's overthrow was the reactionary clerical dissatisfaction with a secular government, fomented with CIA propaganda.<8>

[Raksha]

82. K & R

[felinetta]

88. What a difference to finally get a LEGITIMATELY ELECTED President.

President Obama is brilliant.  I love seeing the Repub talking
mouths trying despartely to
disparage him.  They look so foolish.  Their arguments are
utterly lame.

[pjt7]

95. Let me know when our Iran CIA coup

makes it into all of our history books. & Obama does deserve credit for publicly acknowledging this. Madeline Albright was the first US politician to openly admit this.

I guess the "conspiracy theorists were right" :applause:

[JohnyCanuck]

96. Actually the British were the ones who initially wanted the coup.

They went to the American looking for support for a coup attempt and then brought the Americans on board. The CIA & MI6 then worked together on it.

Here's an informative article on how it all went down:

A 'great venture':
overthrowing the government of Iran
by Mark Curtis From Lobster 30

This is a slightly abridged version of part of chapter four of Mark Curtis's book The Ambiguities of Power: British Foreign Policy since 1945 (Zed Press, 1995).

In August 1953 a coup overthrew Iran's nationalist government of Mohammed Musaddiq and installed the Shah in power. The Shah subsequently used widespread repression and torture in a dictatorship that lasted until the 1979 Islamic revolution. The 1953 coup is conventionally regarded primarily as a CIA operation, yet the planning record reveals not only that Britain was the prime mover in the initial project to overthrow the government but also that British resources contributed significantly to the eventual success of the operation. Two first-hand accounts of the Anglo-American sponsorship of the coup - by the MI6 and CIA officers primarily responsible for it - are useful in reconstructing events. (1) Many of the secret planning documents that reveal the British role have been removed from public access and some of them remain closed until the next century - for reasons of 'national security'. Nevertheless, a fairly clear picture still emerges. Churchill later told the CIA officer responsible for the operation that he 'would have loved nothing better than to have served under your command in this great venture'. (2)

In the 1950s the Anglo Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) - later renamed British Petroleum - which was managed from London and owned by the British government and British private citizens, controlled Iran's main source of income: oil. According to one British official, the AIOC 'has become in effect an imperium in imperio in Persia'. Iranian nationalists objected to the fact that the AIOC not only made revenues from Iranian oil 'greatly in excess of the revenues of the Persian government but dominates the whole economic life of Persia, and therefore impairs her independence'. (3) The AIOC was recognised as 'a great foreign organisation controlling Persia's economic life and destiny'. The British oil business fared well from this state of affairs; the AIOC made £170 million in profits in 1950 alone. (4)

Iranians could also point to AIOC's effectively autonomous rule in the parts of the country where the oilfields lay, its low wage rates and the fact that the Iranian government was being paid royalties of 10% or 12% of the company's net proceeds, whilst the British government received as much as 30% of these in taxes alone. (5) Shown the overcrowded housing afforded to some of the AIOC workers, a British official commented: 'Well, this is just the way all Iranians live'. (6)

Britain's Ambassador in Tehran commented that 'it is so important to prevent the Persians from destroying their main source of revenue... by trying to run it themselves... The need for Persia is not to run the industry for herself (which she cannot do) but to profit from the technical ability of the West'.(7) The British Minister of Fuel and Power explained that 'in the case of a mineral like oil are of course morally entitled to a royalty' but to say 'that morally they are entitled to 50%, or... even more of the profits of enterprises to which they have made no contribution whatever, is bunk, and ought to be shown to be bunk'. (8)

Continued here:
http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/articles/l30iran.htm

As a side note, It's interesting to observe that this was an example of the CIA and MI6 using false flag terrorism against civilians as part of the plot. (Details in the article).

[DutchLiberal]

97. Now, when is he going to mention Chile, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador...

I could go on and on...

[Ilsa]

100. The Iranian students had a sit-in at my college in 1978 less than one year before

Pahlavi's overthrow. It was a pretty big deal at this junior college with alot of Iranian engineering and computer science majors. After junior college, they went on to four-year universities in Texas, usually Texas A&I, which was a leading public oil and gas engineering university.

I would say that most people probably don't know of the US involvement in the 1953 coup.

[mule_train]

102. The first presidential candidate to admit it was Ron Paul

calling 911 type terrorism 'blowback' from such issues

On this particular issue, there actually is a huge difference between Obama and McCain

there's no reason for Iran to be our enemy

none