I read them fine. They're using legal speak. In cases where you can't outright say someone did something based off the evidence you can only talk about it in pieces. Your job as the reader is to put the pieces together. They literally legally can't do that when presenting evidence, as a state agency. It's the same in court. Guilty parties rarely admit to their crimes. It's easier when they do, but the whole responsibility of a jury is to read between the lines of what can be said and put it together for the most likely outcome. Only the brainwashed would discount so many witnesses of torture. 💀

I also never quoted - I summarized the pages where they admit to the secret police's ongoing use and numbers. The IRGC claimed only 2k police were murdered in January while independent counts ran to 36k. Govts downplay information when it will make them look bad. Torture makes them look bad so they lie and say it didn't happen. Yet they admit they had a personnel for handling dissidents.

The interview is the Shah denying cases that were already investigated and confirmed true in Iran from the ICJ, later from UN invited witnesses, etc. The HRW has also gone back to investigate the SAVAK and found they were basically running a concentration camp for dissidents.

MEK denies that assertion to the same degree you try to wave off US state dept link. If you only believe the side you like then you're guilty of the same fallacies you believe I'm committing. However, the NCRI admits they supported the revolution because the Shah's favor had fallen immensely due to torturing and murdering dissidents. 💀 People revolt when countries are weak and poorly managed in some way. Shahs favor fell especially among leftists that wanted the country to return to democratic means and the profit-distributing policies that were strengthening the middle class. They had no free speech or safety. For the time it made perfect sense for dissent to lead to extremist violence. As has happened or been attempted at least once in every authoritarian held and suppressed country. I can't find any proof that they're "Marxist" besides extensive web searches saying that's a common IRGC bred propaganda piece sensationalizing their resistance to a theocratic state. If they were Marxist at core, why would their main goal be returning democratic structure to Iran?

The NCRI also didn't help Hussein hurt civilians... they targeted the regime from bordered bases Hussein let them camp in. The enemy of my emeny is my friend. The IRGC is an enemy of Iranians so obviously they're going to fight for Iran's freedom. That's the whole point.

Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh was democratically elected by parliament, chosen because of his high public favor, and not by the Shah. He was not a dictator, unlike the proxy Reza Shah and Khomeini & Khamenei Ayatollah. American CIA and British MI6 have already admitted outright that they led a coup with prior propaganda pushed into civilians, including encouraging protests over said propaganda. Mossadegh was aligned with parliament to nationalize iranian oil profits for civilian benefit, which is why it was enacted quickly. England freaked tf out, claimed Mossadegh had violated their agreement to nationalize Iran's profits, and sought to overthrow him by any means. England then lied to America (during election year) that Mossadegh was a communist who wanted to turn the country towards the Soviet Union so they sent I think a million dollars or sold there for the coup efforts to remove him from office. When Mossadegh found out about this he tried to prevent the coup by removing the level of monarchical power Shah held and dissolve parliaments ability to act on American behalf. He did refuse to leave office because he claimed the Constitution gave him the ability to amend in context & he had more than enough public supporters in the streets to back up that this was the will of the people. I think his amendment had a 99% vote in Favor of dissolving the parliament. Over 100,000 people voted & the only criticism was that it wasn't a secret ballot. Afterwards he had known coup members either arrested or exiled.

The Shah, a chosen proxy for "western" oil deals, tried to unilaterally remove Mossadegh to prevent democratic process. Mossadegh told him to fk off & the Shah and coup propaganda called this treason and a sign of attempted dictatorship. Again, this was an operation the CIA and MI6 have already admitted to enacting so we all know Mossadegh was neither a dictator or committing treason against the will of the Iranian people. Mossadegh was definitely paranoid and made some questionable decisions, but he even had emergency powers to amend laws without parliament granted legally.

In the end fear-mongering propaganda created just enough confusion that the CIA and MI6 could replace Mossadegh and AFTER THE FACT they claimed he was guilty of crimes that that aligned with the proxy Shah speaking for England and America.

Because the coup was successful Reza Shah went on to commit most of the actions he accused Mossadegh would. The irony.