- Martial law agents In Mashhad opened fire on thousands of demonstrators

Killing at least two and injuring many others.

- Political prisoners went on a hunger strike in Tabriz.

A few days after being installed as new Prime Minister, Ja’ far Sharif

Imami proclaimed martial law in Tehran and with it announced the impending murder of the people of Tehran and other cities. In this way, he wanted to deter the people from participating in demonstrations and protest marches.

However, not only were his designs unsuccessful, but also they also further damaged his position. William Sullivan, the US ambassador to Iran at the time, in his book Mission to Iran writes: “The military, after the first shock of) ale Square, were given orders to refrain from firing at demonstrators. Instead, they made a belated effort to develop riot-control tactics and sought additional equipment and training from the United States and the United Kingdom.

Since our Congress had specifically prohibited police training for foreigners, the British were required to pick up the responsibility for much of this work. They did send a small military mission under the direction of an expert in riot control, and he, in turn, made arrangements for the sale to the Iranians of rubber bullets, plastic shields and other riot-control equipment that the British had developed in the course of their experience in Northern Ireland. We continued to ship tear gas but otherwise to take no direct responsibility for its application (!) As the opposition forces began to recognize that they could resume their demonstrations in the streets without fear of mortal consequences (!), their actions became bolder. They developed tactics of fraternization with the troops, and young female students began placing flowers in the muzzles of their weapons, as had been done during the revolution in Portugal^{( 52)} .

In his book The Confessions of a General, General ‘Abbas Qarabaghi refers to the Ineffectiveness of martial law and the people’s disregard of the regime’s threats and intimidation and writes: “in one of the cabinet meetings as Interior Minister I said: “As you see, even with the proclamation of martial law not only has calm not been restored, but the security situation of the country has worsened day by day. In addition, one does not see signs of any activity by SAVAK, and indeed It is not clear why this organisation is unable to predict and stop these events from taking place or why it does not take the Necessary steps. In my opinion, a fundamental decision about the establishment of security in the country needs to be made^{( 53)} .

Day by day, he In Neauphle-le-Chateau led the number of those wishing to meet Imam in Paris Increased, and the congregational prayer gatherings for the afternoon and evening prayers. The foreign reporters there, whose numbers ran into the dozens, found these gatherings very interesting and impressive. Although Neauphle-le-Chateau had become the focus of attention for the world’s media, the French government still persisted with its restrictions. In spite of these constraints, just before the noon prayer on October 1 5, 1978 (Mehr 23, 1 357 AHS), as he sat amongst his devout friends, the humble leader of the greatest and most original revolution of contemporary history delivered the present speech to the students and Iranians who had come to visit him.

In this speech, Imam first of all gives a brief history of how the agents for the British, American and other Imperialist governments penetrated the countries of the Middle East with a view to discovering and taking possession of the natural resources to be found there, and in this regard he relates a few of his own bitter memories. Then, while noting the great potential of the Islamic world, he describes the Islamic culture and the clerical establishment as two great obstacles to the designs of the imperialists, and discusses in detail the type of propaganda used by the imperialists against Islam and its ecclesiastics. Imam then turns to the subject of the separation of religion and politics, and while stressing that the two are inseparable in Islam, he draws on the example of the Prophet’s rule and that of Imam ‘All along with the struggles of the Immaculate Imams and the combatant ‘ulama and describes resistance to the Shah’s crimes and to American interference in the country as a most pressing duty for both himself and the true ‘ulama. Elsewhere in his speech, imam refers to the treachery of the Pahlavi regime, in particular the sale of oil in return for equipment and arms to strengthen the American military bases in the country, and the regime’s wont to grant concessions to the Russians.

SPEECH NUMBERTHIRTY-FOUR

IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE COMPASSIONATE, THE MERCIFUL

It is unfortunate that I meet you gentlemen now when my power of speech is greatly impaired due partly to my age, which does not allow my voice to carry more than a few feet away from me, and partly to the situation of the Islamic countries in general and Iran in particular which is now enough to distress anyone and sap their strength. I had wanted today to come to the place where you gentlemen had gathered to speak to you about some of the problems we face, but circumstances were such that the French authorities did not deem it wise for me to do so^{( 54)} .

That aside, the situation of the Islamic countries, especially those which have resources like Iran - which leads the others in this regard has been studied by the experts of foreign powers and superpowers. From perhaps three hundred years ago, those travelers who came to the East, allegedly to tour the countries were all political agents sent to gather information on the situation there. They came to Iran and travelled to all her cities and villages in pursuit of their investigations. Their studies into the geographical situation of the East, and in particular Iran - about which we are informed - took them all over these countries, even through the desert regions where no grass or water existed and which they crossed with caravans, riding on camels and suffering many hardships in doing so. Their main aim was to discover where our mineral reserves lay - our gold, copper, petroleum, and gas, whatever. They made a careful study and drew maps. Whatever they found which was of use to them, they marked the spot on the map and noted the area, and these records are still in their possession.

Before America set foot into the region, it was Britain, which exerted the most influence over these countries, then Russia, then some other countries. For more than three hundred years, they subjected these Eastern countries to their studies and their avarice. As time went on, their specialists developed more expertise, their travels became more widespread and more regular, indeed they found out more about these countries than the indigenous peoples themselves knew. For example, in Iran they studied the mental and spiritual make-up of such tribes as the Bakhtiyari, the Qashqa’ i and the Shahsivar in order to find out how these people think and how they could use them to their advantage. They sent their experts to study and gather information on all the provincial cities and villages in Iran, all the villages that exist in Iran came under their scrutiny, even the most remote, mountain village. They drew maps of them all and marked those places where they found something of use to them. They recorded everything and then made themselves ready for plundering our resources. The rulers of the Eastern countries however, whether kings or others, acted differently in complying to the wishes of the imperialists, some allowed their countries to be pillaged in all aspects whereas others were not as traitorous.

Once when I was in Hamadan, one of my friends brought a map to me, a large map that perhaps measured one square metro. It was a map of Hamadan province which, he said, showed all the villages of that province, and which was covered with many colored dots. He told me that these dots indicated where minerals, such as copper or petroleum, lay beneath the ground. These minerals had not yet been mined, but the foreign experts knew their location. They made their designs and then entered the countries of the East and studied their situation, and in Iran, which directly concerns us, they drew up plans and marked where all its natural resources lay.

They then undertook some psychological studies to determine how they could easily lay their hands on these countries’ abundant resources without inciting opposition and confrontation from the people. The imperialists carried out extensive studies in this regard, and they concluded that in the Islamic countries there were two possible barriers, which could block their way; one was Islam itself. They realised that were true Islam implemented, that is the Islam that God the Blessed and exalted had established, then it would sound the death knell for all their hopes. And the other obstacle to their designs they perceived as being Islam’s religious scholars, for the latter were involved in all the affairs of the people, and if anyone had authority amongst the people, it was a religious scholar. The imperialists realised that if the religious men became powerful, as they should be in these lands, then they would not be able to profit from these countries the way they wanted to. Therefore, they decided to smash these two barriers, which they deemed more dangerous than anything else to their designs, in whatever way necessary. They started devising schemes by means of which they hoped to make the people themselves smash these two barriers for them, and so from that time on, the propaganda against Islam and the clergy began.

Of course, there was something else which also constituted an obstacle to their contrivances, and that was the culture of these communities. The imperialists have studied the latter and have discovered that if their culture were an independent, correct culture then it would produce loyal and independent political groups, which would prove to be disadvantageous for them. Thus, on one side they saw the two barriers of Islam and the clergy, and on the other they saw the prospect of an independent culture which would train some youth and nurture some leading personalities who, even if the imperialists were to hold sway over the country, would still prevent them from attaining that which they desired, and that which they desired lay beneath the ground. They directed their efforts to acquiring the resources, which lay above the ground as well, but the most important for them were those, which were to be found underground. Hence, they set about destroying these three barriers.

With regard to Islam, they began to propagate the idea - gradually as is their wont - that Islam is an acquiescent religion! That it is an ideology concerned only with supplicatory prayer and invocation of God (dhikr), that it constitutes solely a relationship between man and the Creator and has nothing to do with politics or government. They have propagated this idea so well that even members of the clerical establishment have been influenced by it and many of them now believe that they have no role to play in politics or government, maintaining instead that their duties lie only in going to the mosque, engaging in canonical prayer, instructing the people, debating certain matters and presenting the people with legitimate rules of conduct. The imperialists saw that the prayers of the clergy posed no threat to them. Prayers in Islam are not harmful to their policies, so they deemed that the clergy could pray as much as they like, they could pray until they were tired of praying, as long as they had nothing to do with the oil. They could teach as much as they liked, debate matters to their heart’s content, as long as they did not start to question the policies of the imperialists in their countries and begin to speak out against them. This idea that Islam has nothing to do with politics or government was reiterated so much and propagated so well amongst the people that it became commonly accepted that interference in the affairs of state was incompatible with the status of a clergyman; that it was unbecoming the position of a clergyman to take an interest in the form the government takes or in what these oppressors were doing to the people; that it was only befitting the position of a clergyman to remain in the schools and lead the noon and afternoon congregational prayers; and that the people should expect nothing more than this of the clergy! They said that essentially Islam had nothing to do with politics, that politics and religion were separate from one another. Politics is for them and religion is for us! The centres of power are in their hands to do with as they please, and the mosques and the old men who attend them are in ours!

This is a division that they created from the beginning. Those who were a bit more daring went so far as to describe Islam as “reactionary.” They said that basically religion was the opium of the people, that from the very beginning it was used by the capitalists and those with power to stupefy the people so they could take their wealth. Gradually, this notion came to be believed even by the Muslims themselves. Some of the clergy even came to believe that Islam was something, which belonged to one thousand and so many hundreds of years ago and could not be put into practice now! This is how the imperialists presented Islam to the Muslim societies; and as for the akhunds, they portrayed them as men who just sit in a corner and survive on the money they take from the people.

Thus, they presented Islam as an ideology, which was, concerned with nothing more than prayer and fasting and which was not involved with the people’s lives and their affairs. In addition, on the other side, they presented the clergymen as people installed by the rulers and the powerful elite to opiate society, to put the people to sleep, stupefy them so that these rulers could plunder them and the people would not utter a word. They propagated this notion so well that even some of our own intellectuals, who were not well versed in the Qur’ an and the traditions, came to believe it and they in turn also began to advance the same idea. We should not just accept whatever we hear or whatever is propagated by some groups as being true without proof of its verity. If someone accepts an unsubstantiated claim then that person suffers from a weak constitution, he is ill! A healthy human being does not accept something he is told without it first being substantiated.

We need only take a cursory glance at the lives of the prophets and of others who called the people to God to see what their intention was:

Were they agents of the powerful elite? Were their aims to enfeeble the people, make them powerless, and lull them to sleep? In addition, we need only dry out a partial study of the Qur’an - it does not need to be a detailed study - to see if its purpose is simply to teach us invocatory prayer,

Supplicatory prayers, deprecations^{( 55)} and the such like, or whether this is not the case and it has not been understood properly If you study the Qur’ an you will see that there are so many verses encouraging the people to do battle with the holders of power. The verses pertaining to battle and the way it must be fought do not consist of only one or two, there are many in this regard. The battles, which took place in the early years of Islam’s history, were between the powerful elite and the Prophet of Islam. The Qur’ an is a book which favours “movement,” it awakens the people and stirs them from their stupor to confront the taghuts.

When the noble Prophet was in the Hijaz, he had to confront the plutocracy there. One group was found in Mecca and comprised the town’s reputable, powerful merchants, while another was made up of the wealthy, proponent people of Ta’ if. People such as Abu Sufyan were like rulers or kings and had everything, yet the Prophet opposed him. When he went to Medina, he associated with the poor people; he did not align himself with the rich to stupefy the community. He was on the side of the poor, he encouraged them to rise up against the rich who plundered the people and oppressed them. The Prophet fought many battles, and in all of them, he fought against the rich and powerful oppressors.

If we go further back in history, we see that Hazrat Moses, upon who is peace, also confronted the holders of power. With his staff in hand, he confronted Pharaoh; he did not opiate the people for the Egyptian king! With his staff and his words, he encouraged them to rise against the king. And you all know how Abraham took up his axe and shattered all the idols belonging to the aristocrats (of his time). He confronted the aristocrats in the interests of the masses, to stop them from oppressing the masses. Of course the mission of these prophets was primarily a spiritual one, but when they came across tyranny in the society they deemed it their duty to confront the oppressive leaders and do battle with them in whatever way they could. So this notion that the men of religion are used by the powerful elite to opiate the people is one which the imperialists themselves created and advanced to turn you away from the Qur’ an, the book of God, and Islam so that they could smash this barrier to their designs.

Indeed, they have been successful in this, for the Muslims have now been lulled to sleep by their propaganda. The Muslims have now risen to do battle with Islam without themselves knowing it. For when a Muslim asks what Islam has to do with temporal issues, this constitutes war against Islam, this does not know Islam. When he asks what Islam has to do with politics, again this is like waging war against Islam. These ideas are spread amongst Muslims by Muslims and the posing of such questions means they have taken up arms against Islam.