Friday, November 4, 2011

Iran Marks Anniversary of US Embassy Takeover and Hostage Taking

Today Iran marked the anniversary of the takeover of US Embassy in Tehran by rallies in front of the embassy building. On 4 November 1979, the so-called ‘Student Following the Imam (Khomeini)’s Path’ occupied the embassy and kept US diplomats hostage for 444 days. The event proved to become the most costly initiative of the newly installed Islamic revolutionary government under the leadership of the supreme leader Imam Khomeini, and the beginning of Iran’s isolation at world’s sage.

Photo: Rally in front of the former US embassy building. 4 November 2011. The red signs read “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” IRNA Photo.


Anonymous said...

any news about what those released (2)documents are ?? which proves terrorist activities of US in Iran ?

I have not been able to find anything online and in Irans onlin e papers.

Anyone ?? (please no anti Iran rehtoric).. just had dinner !

Anonymous said...

"the event proved to become the most costly initiative of the newly installed Islamic revolutiopnary Government under the leadership of the supreme leader Imam Khomeini, and the beggining of Iran's isolation"-


on the contray, this single incident brought some honor to the IRANIAN NATION and the US woke up to the reallity that IRAN WAS NOT READY to BOW ON ITS KNEES.



Anonymous said...

Khomeini said he had such documents...he didn't say that he was going to release any for public scrutiny and evaluation.....

the US had a guy like that..... Joseph McCarthy

Nader Uskowi said...

Anon 2:03 PM,

Hostage taking does not bring honor to any nation. No matter how much you shout (here by using capital letters), the fact remains that such acts are unbecoming for an old and proud nation like Iran. People responsible for such an shameful act need to answer to the Iranian people.

Anonymous said...

The den of spies closure was indeed a great day in Iran's history as the nation once and for all gained true freedom. Contrary to the apologists this historical event also highlighted the nefarious US interference in Iranian domestic affairs.

Never again will Iran be subservient to anyone despite the delusions of western paid anti-Iran blog sites.

Anonymous said...

"Hostage taking does not bring honor to any nation. No matter how much you shout (here by using capital letters), the fact remains that such acts are unbecoming for an old and proud nation like Iran. People responsible for such an shameful act need to answer to the Iranian people."

Tell that to all the hostages held by your beloved USA at Guantanamo..You really are so full of it..

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

----The US is a POLICE STATE at home-----

Anonymous said...

----The US is a POLICE STATE at home-----

Anonymous said...

Iran got rid of rotten garbage like you in 1979.

Iran, unfortunately, had some garbage return to it in 79.

-----""Even if Salman Rushdie repents and becomes the most pious man of all time, it is incumbent upon every Muslim to employ everything he has, his life and wealth, to send him to hell," Khomeini said in a statement released by the official Iranian news agency IRNA. The Iranian ruler also said that, while it is every Muslim's religious duty to try to kill Rushdie, Iran would also handsomely reward any non-Muslim assassin who got to the author first. Several Iranian clerics, responding to Khomeini's initial call last week for Rushdie's assassination, have already posted bounties of nearly $6 million on the 41-year-old author's head. "If a non-Muslim becomes aware of his whereabouts and has the ability to execute him faster than a Muslim, it is incumbent upon Muslims to pay a reward or a fee for this action," Khomeini said. "

garbage in charge of a nation

Anonymous said...

Salman Rushdie is still alive while the US and Zionist murderers have conducted holocaust of millions in the Middle-East. Get a dose of reality you anti-Iran pathetic FOOLS.

US is nothing but a FASCIST POLICE STATE!

Anonymous said...

true that Rushdie is alive, but that's because the West protected him
until the vile old creep who offered to pay anyone to murder him died...

As far as your bs about the US trying to "holocaust" is no more than bs.

and you obviously don't know the meaning of the term or how to apply it.

check back when you learn what you're talking about, please
or when you learn to express whatever you were attempting to say in a sensible and comprehensible manner.

Anonymous said...


you said hostage taking brings no honor to any Nation and that those who did it in Iran must answer to the Iranian Poeple for that 'shamefull act'.

question one-

what actually brings honor to a NATION acording to you

question two

the US is killing innocent women and kids in their donkey caravans searching for water in THE hot desert of south SOMALIA,[mistaking them for al Qaida activity] DOES THIS BRING HONOR OR SHAME TO A NATION? and has the US anwered to anybody for this mercilless,inhuman,'honorable' undertaking?.

Nader Uskowi said...

To our commentators,

This blog is about Iran. There are many great blogs focusing on US and its internal policies and as many great blogs focusing on US and its external policies. That is not our focus, and naturally we will not analyze the state of politics in the US. This blog is also not a site for a comparative study of Iran and US. We are Uskowi on Iran. If you are interested to discuss about issues related to Iran, this is your home.

Nader Uskowi said...

Anon 7:32 PM and Anon 1:36 AM,

in 1979, the new Islamic revolutionary government could legally close the US embassy. All that was necessary was a notice to the US embassy. Such action would have been within norms of relations among nations and would not have brought dishonor to Iran. Instead, following the behavior of street tugs, they took diplomats hostage for 444 days.

So the issue discussed in my comments earlier was not if the government needed to close the US embassy and cut its diplomatic ties with the US, but whether it needed to resort to hostage taking.

On the diplomatic relations between nations, one thing is clear: you want to have relations with those who disagree with you the most. Having embassies does not necessarily equate to friendship and acceptance of each other's policies. It opens a line of communication, which is even more vital in hostile situations.

Steve said...

Nader writes: "in 1979, the new Islamic revolutionary government could legally close the US embassy. All that was necessary was a notice to the US embassy."

This was not possible. It was necessary to raid the embassy by force and seize everything within, as the US embassy was also the headquarters of several US intelligence services operating in Iran at that time. Thousands of secret documents could be saved this way. It was also necessary to take captive all of the embassy personnel, as there was a high number of intelligence people among the embassy staff, who were actively involved in the crimes and human rights violations of the Shah against the Iranian people.

Nader Uskowi said...


Of course it was possible. This was the second "occupation" of the embassy. In the first round, the occupiers left after the Iranian foreign ministry's intervention. This time they gathered the support from the ruling clergy, and Khomeni in particular. It was absolutely no need to "raid" and take hostages. US would have and had to close its embassy if Iran had instead cut its diplomatic relations.

I am very sorry witnessing that after 32 years you still justify the “raid” and hostage taking against a foreign embassy. I always thought that the action on that November day was an emotional reaction by revolutionaries who had little if any experience in foreign affairs.

Anonymous said...

I know you don't want to hear this, but the take over secured the revolution in Iran and avoided another 28 Mordad Coup de tat.

that was the issue then and in all school books of Iran.

what the Us wants you guys to believe is irrelevant, the war is coming

We are going to have a war and Iran shall bleed but prevail.

We shall be having a war because the Iranians outside of Iran do not have the balls to stand for Iran.

Go Iran stand your man.

Nader Uskowi said...

Anon 1:51 PM,

I believe your comments are meant for me. You are making an amazing statement, that the takeover of the embassy “secured” the revolution, avoiding a coup. Why do you say that? Based on what facts?

Was the revolution so unsecured that it needed the embassy takeover and hostage taking to survive? What kind of revolution was it then that it could not survive if it didn’t take hostages?

I believe you are underestimating the popularity of the revolution at the time and its accomplishment in overthrowing a dictatorship and end the monarchy. It didn’t reuire to resort to criminal actions to stay in power.

Anonymous said...

Iran was rid of the Monarchy before and it was shoved back into its throat next to a SAVAK to secure it further in the early 50s.
Dear Mr Uskowi, What some reactionaries do after listening to some political speech is not synonym for "A revolution". Its simply a thing that happens.

The US embassy take over is a part of Irans contemporary history and will stay as one for decades and centuries to come.
Criminalizing it because the time allows it, is pouring water onto the mills of war.

Israel is pushing the US into yet another war but this time its not one of Irans enemies but its going to be Iran. We have to stand next to it regardless of any political belief.

Nader Uskowi said...

I didn’t understand the first paragraph; appreciate it if you clarify your comments. Are you saying the 1979 Islamic revolution was not actually a revolution but a reaction by reactionary elements to propaganda (presumably by the Islamists)?

And what is the relationship of criticizing hostage taking in 1979 to pouring water onto the mills of war? Do you believe the folks who want to start a war with Iran are waiting for comments like this to start the war? Wow, I believe you are overestimating the power of a blogger!

ProudPersian said...

Instead, following the behavior of street tugs, they took diplomats hostage for 444 days.

That's nothing compared with Iran being held hostage by the U.S. and Britain for 26 years.

STEPHEN KINZER: Well, I’ll tell you an interesting story to start off. I was recently on a panel in the National Cathedral in Washington, and one of the other panelists — we were talking about Iran —- was Bruce Laingen, who had been the chief American diplomat in Iran and was the most prominent figure among the hostages that were held there for 444 days. And I knew that Laingen had become an advocate of reconciliation with Iran, which I consider quite remarkable, considering the ordeal that he suffered, so I wanted to talk to him. I hadn’t met him before. And we exchanged some emails after that.

He told me an amazing story. He said, “I had been sitting in my solitary cell as a hostage for about a year, when one day the cell door opens, and there is standing one of the hostage takers, one of my jailers. And all of my rage and my fury built up over one year sitting in that cell just burst out, and I started screaming at him, and I was telling him, ‘You have no right to do this! This is cruel, this is inhumane! These people have done nothing! This is a violation of every law of god and man! You cannot take innocent people hostage!’” He said, “I went on like this for several minutes. When I was finally out of breath, the hostage taker paused for a moment, and then he leaned into my cell and said, in very good English, ‘You have no right to complain, because you took our whole country hostage in 1953.’

I want you to burn that quote (the one highlighted in bold) in your memory so the next time you criticize the hostage-takers, you will be reminded of this sobering quote.

Nader Uskowi said...


When defending the hostage taking, it is good to be reminded of an important fact in the Iranian history. Those Islamists, the hostage takers included, who had become the new rulers of Iran, had come from a political tradition that despised (and still do) Premier Mossadeq and his nationalist movement. One of their leading figures at the time of the coup against Mossadeq was Ayatollah Kashani who openly sided against Mossadeq when the nationalist leader needed all the support during the height of his oil nationalization movement against the British and the shah. So I will be very careful accepting their justification of hostage taking as an act to defend the ideals of Mossadeq and his nationalist movement against the imperial court and the British oil company. If they used this excuse, I assume they used it more as an excuse for their dubious action.

Again, The purpose of my original comment that started the discussion was not about US foreign policy and the anti-Mossadeq coup that brought the shah back to power. I was not also saying that the new Islamic government should not have cut the ties with the US and close the embassy. I was talking about an action that was illegal and criminal, taking people hostage. They could close the embassy without resorting to such tactics.

Anonymous said...

Interesting, I'm in the middle of reading Kinzer's "All the Shah's Men"

and Kinzer has Kashani standing squarely with MM about nationalizing the oil.
He says that when Truman sent Harriman to try to get MM and the Brits to work out a deal, Harriman asked Kashani to approach MM and Kashani absolutely refused, took the position that the oil HAD to be nationalized and threatened Harriman for seeking compromise.

Nader Uskowi said...

Anon 6:18 PM,

You probably need to read the later chapters. Kashani withdrew his support from Mossadeq after the prime minister's special powers were extended by a year (to fight the British and the imperial court) and when Mossadeq started some secular reforms. Kashani's parting way with Mossadeq during the crucial months leading to the 1953 coup was a key factor of the success of the coup and imprisonment of Mossadegh. After the coup, Kashani became a supporter of the shah who had returned to Iran from the exile. Kashani is also said to have favored the execution of Mossadeq for waging war against the shah. After Kashani's death in 1962, Khomeini rose to leadership position among the Islamists.

Anonymous said...

DEMONIZING THE REVOLUTION -Uskowi's stock in trade!!-.

WITH DUE RESPECT TO YOU ALLOW ME TO HIGHLIGHT something here which i feel is your biggest undoing.I have read carefully your insights and misgivings as to what happened during the revolution in 1979.In your spirited effort to paint the students or Clerics as inhuman for sizing the embassy and holding the staff hostage for such long ,you seem to go out of the way in that you are hiding the dark side of the US and the reasons that precipitated the seizure.

NOW for argument sake let me agree with you that it was a historical mistake a dark sport in the country's history !NOW APART FROM THIS ISSUE DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING POSITIVE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTION? let me help you with this story ABOUT THE TALIBAN-we all know that the Taliban rule was cruel,oppressive and was home to all terrorists , for these are the terms NATO used to justify their invasion .now that is not our business .BUT AGAINST ALL THESE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF THE TALIBAN RULE THERE IS ONE THING WHICH IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY NATO AS BEING ONE OF THE POSITIVE SIDE OF THE TALIBANS !-and this is the issue of drugs!they say during the reign of the Taliban, the poppy harvesting war very minimal compared with the current situation.-NOW BACK TO ,CAN YOU AFFORD TO HIGH LIGHTEN ANYTHING POSITIVE DONE BY THE CLERICAL REGIME SINCE THEY CAME TO POWER ?

Nader Uskowi said...

The revolution that ended tyrannical rule of the shah in Iran has produced mixed results. Progress in scientific fields and military developments coupled with a growing economy has always been highlighted in this blog during our four years of blogging. Lack of respect for human rights, the ever-shrinking ruling circle of “us” versus “them,” and a juvenile tendency to follow a path of global isolation have also been highlighted in this blog. A fair-minded reader can judge for himself or herself if we have made any contributions on the ever-important conversation on Iran.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:03 PM

What honor Mr Anon 2:03 except misery and dishonor and the flight of eight million Iranians across the globe because they were the ones lucky to get away from a bunch of thugs and killers acting as a so called government.
These people and their supporters will pay very dearly soon.
And one more thing Mr Anon 2:03 where do you live? In the West protecting Iran's honor you joker.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:48 AM

The revolution (if you can call it that)was the biggest mistake to happen for us in Iran's history period.
You and people like you who live in the West in comfort are nothing but little hypocrites that defend a dying anti Iranian regime in its last gasp of it's hypocritical life.

Anon 8:09 PM
By the tone of your comment you seem to be full of it.How about all the unmarked graves that litter Iran because of this murderous regime.

Anonymous said...

That picture above is but a handful of supporters that this fanciful regime can muster. It borders on the pathetic with their stupid dogmatic slogans against America and their backward and primitive stubborn so called resistance against the West that is costing Iran its place in the world community because some backward old Mullah says so.
This is a typical type of regime we have in the third world trying to justify their pathetic legitimacy through staged managed demonstrations in front of the television to convince the unconvinced Iranian people and the West that they have huge support of the masses but in reality just like that Qaddafi and his tin pot regime the Iranian people have read their blood stained hands and their day will arrive very soon.