PBD Podcast - Crown Prince of Iran Opens Up on the Revolution & Mistakes Made by Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi

Episode Date: November 20, 2023

Patrick Bet-David interviews Reza Pahlavi, the Crown Prince of Iran. They discuss the seismic events of the Iranian Revolution and how it shaped Iran and the entire Middle Eastern region. Reza Pahlavi offers his unique perspective, reflecting on his family's legacy and the tumultuous events that have marked Iran's recent history. The conversation shifts to the current situation in Iran, where Patrick and the Crown Prince discuss the ongoing challenges faced by the Iranian people, the state of governance, and the international community's role in the region. They delve into what life is like in Iran today and what hope lies ahead for its citizens. Purchase tickets to the PBD Town Hall with Robert F. Kennedy Jr on December 6th: https://bit.ly/3sog9qg Connect With Experts On Minnect: https://app.minnect.com/ Get best-in-class business advice with Bet-David Consulting: https://www.betdavidconsulting.com/ Visit VT.com for the latest news and insights from the world of politics, business and entertainment: https://valuetainment.com/university/ Subscribe to the VT Network:  @VALUETAINMENT   @PBDPodcast   @ValuetainmentShortClips   @vtsoscast   @ValuetainmentComedy   @bizdocpodcast  @BrandonAceto   @kvoncomedy  Want to get clear on your next 5 business moves? https://valuetainment.com/academy/ Join the channel to get exclusive access to perks: https://bit.ly/3Q9rSQL Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N Text: PODCAST to 310.340.1132 to get the latest updates in real-time! Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller Your Next Five Moves (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pbdpodcast/support

So imagine in 1976 CBS is interviewing your father, okay? And they're calling him the most powerful man in the world, okay? Your father is a king at the time. Muhammad Reza Shah-Palawi, okay? He has taken Iran from where it was before, of one percent of the population spoke the language, to 50 percent revolutionized everything in Iran, and there was peace in the Middle East. The chaos we have in the Middle East today, that wasn't happening back then, but he's

becoming more and more and more powerful. And then the fall comes and your father is kicked out of the country that he built. And you're sitting on as an 18, 19, 20 year old boy, man, saying, what's going on here? Then your father dies. And after 40 plus years, Iranians worldwide, every time they saw you, they're expecting you to bring back freedom to Iran, how would you handle all of that pressure if that was you? That's the person I spoke to today,

the crown prince of Iran, Resah Pahlavi. We first met I think eight years ago, 2015, 2014, and we had a three, four-hour conversation in DC at a nice Italian restaurant, and from there on we've been trying to do something about an interview. And this is the first time he's done a long form, three hours. Every question I ask, I have all these questions that we prepared, hours for. I covered everything I wanted to ask him.

I showed clips. Some clips about his father when he did interviews with CBS, when he did interview with Wallace and comments that Nixon made or Kennedy made, Reagan made or Carter made. We talked about a lot of different things. The mistakes his father made. You know what caused the fall? Was it the CIA? Was it MI6?

Was it the oil deal where the contract was coming up in the four powerful countries at the time? We're worried that this guy was going to raise the prizes. Was it the time were worried that this guy was gonna raise their prizes. Was it the show showing his hand because it was becoming too powerful? What was it? And what are his next, well, one thing that will happen if you're Iranian, specifically if you're Iranian,

this is something you're gonna wanna watch from beginning to the end. Some of you are watching this right now because you saw a click on viral on Twitter or TikTok or Facebook and you finally seen this clip. But some of you are gonna watch it from beginning to the end. You're going to want to share this with anybody and everybody you know that's Iranian to

watch it specifically if you're like me and you would like to one day go to Iran and have your family see Iran. I got four kids. I like to one day them go to Iran and see their pop, their dad, me, grown up in a street, Kachyawana Hojat, and what that was like. Because some of the things he and I talk about, you'll see one part gets very emotional, gets very intense, I challenge them a bit because I really wanted to get clear on a question

to an answer of whether he really wants this job. Because everybody's expecting him to go back to Iran and be the person and help out. And he addresses that. And this is the most transparent. I've ever seen him in any interview. And I followed his story for a while because I lived in Iran for 10 years and I escaped. I was born three months before his father went into exile.

When they kicked him out, I was born three months prior to that. And when my mom and dad were being escorted to the hospital because my mom's a water broke and you know, the security's out there at 10 o'clock. I was saying, what are you doing out there? I was like, listen, my wife's pregnant. And I'm born after midnight on October 18, 1978. This is in my blood. This is where I was born, okay.

I'm made in America, but I'm born in Iran. This is why this has been an interview. I've been looking forward to for a long time. But yeah, you're going to see a lot of different things we talk about. And if you're non-Iranian saying, why should I be interested in this topic? I'm not Iranian. I live in France. I live in New York.

I live in LA. I live in Australia. Why should I care about this? Because the more chaotic Middle East is, the more of a price you pay for it because it could bleed into your area. Middle East is one bad decision away from a war starting and I'm talking not a pretty war because the next one's not gonna be a pretty war. World War I we lost 19 million, World War II we lost 60 million. God knows how many we will lose in World War III. Our job is to prevent it. So the more peaceful the Middle East is, most likely the more peace you will have in your community because chaos seemed

to come from the Middle East. So before I forget, we translated this into Farsi as well, Persian. You can listen to this by going to the settings if you're watching this on YouTube, not on Spotify, but if you're watching this on YouTube, click on the settings at the top. Go to audio track, click Persian, you can listen to the whole thing in Farsi. Having said that, enjoy this interview. It's going to prompt a lot of questions. I encourage you to watch the whole thing from beginning to the end. And I want to hear your thoughts at the end. I will be going through the comments and you can message me on Twitter as well, we'd love to hear your thoughts. With this interview, enjoy the three hours sit down with Crown Prince Reza Palavi.

Your father was right. He was doing the right things. He made Iran a better place. Unfortunately, the competitors noticed he was getting stronger and he revealed his hand instead of maybe holding his hand and I kind of pissed off the enemy. I think mistakes were made on every front, including my own father. Inflation right now is 45%, interest rates 12%. Some will say there's a business model for the Middle East being chaotic.

At some point it's got to give. What can happen after we eliminate this mafia-like regime that uses repression at home and aggression abroad? What they fear are the people, more than anything. What gives us the incentives we deserve better than what we have right now. Iran should have been today, the Japan of the Middle East. I mean what I say when we can move from hook to belief, because I believe all the ingredients for that exists both internally and abroad. Do you want a job?

Crown Prince Reza Palavi. We've been looking forward to this for a long time. It's great to have you on the show. Thank you so much, Patrick, for having me on your show. I was looking forward to it as well. So I'm very happy to have this opportunity to speak to you and to your audience. Likewise, trust me.

The pleasure is all mine. We've had a couple conversations. We met once in DC, but this is an actual conversation. And the audience has been asking for it. They're saying, hey, you know, it'd be great for you to have a conversation. And to have this conversation, this is probably one of the most chaotic times we've had in a long time in the Middle East.

I have a lot of notes of where I want to go with this. The audience we have, a part of the audience, doesn't know the history of Iran, what your father, the majesty, Muhammad Reza, Palavi, the Shah was doing back in the days. What happened to Iran then? So we'll talk a little bit about that time on how he improved the conditions, how Middle East wasn't chaotic, the relationship between Iran and Israel was actually good relationship. The relationship between Iran and the U.S. was a good relationship. We used to go to Iran and celebrities would go there, they would go to concerts, all this stuff. So we'll talk about that, then we'll talk about the fall,

then we'll talk about exile, then we'll talk about coming out to the states, what that experience was like. And then obviously myself as a father of four, I would like to one day take my kids back to Iran, so they can see their dad living in Chiyomane Hojjat, in Tehran, going to Gulbangyan, going to Bandar Palavi. I still call it Bandar Palavi.

I know the name has changed. So we'll talk about some of that stuff. But the main outcome today is to speak to you about conditions and to see if there is any possibilities of Iran going through a transition, some color to regime change, some color to transition. I want to regime change, some color to transition, I want to start off with the survey here. A new online survey by Netherlands-based institute has found that over 60% of Iranians want regime change,

or transition from the Islamic Republic. Now, this is a Netherlands-based institute. This is not US, this is not your party, this is an institute doing independently. The result of the survey showed that 88% of the population favor a democratic political system, which they don't have today, while 67% of the population are against having a system governed by religious war, which is what they have today. Only 28% evaluate favored a religious governing system.

That's less than a third. Muhammad Raza'u Pahlavi, your father, the majesty, was viewed positively by 64% of respondents while 28% judged him negatively. 28% of respondents had a positive view of Rahulullah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Revolution, while 64% of value negatively. When you read these numbers today, there's been many instances over the last 44 years that there's been an attempt to create a regime change to bring back democracy and its failed.

What's different about today? I think the most important element for everyone to understand is first and foremost, the process that the Iranian nation, at least let's say over the last century, were able to experiment with at the start of the 20th century Iran had a constitutional revolution. We were there for the first country to move away from an absolute system of governance to a parliamentary system. And that was in its days and time quite a leap forward. But what further brought our country out of being underdeveloped or during the Qajar period really, way behind, was the advent of modernity and secularism, which was really what my grandfather brought into the country in the early

20s. And that was the game changer for society that was extremely traditional, very much religious space. There were no modern institution of any kind, whether it was the police or the post office or the army or what have you. And later on, at the time that my father took over, I write towards the end of the Second World War, and by bringing, I think, at the time, something that was quite visionary through the white revolution, everything that led to the emancipation of women,

the right to vote and participate, equalities, the economic opportunities. And in many ways, quite socialist viewpoints, like making, for instance, factory workers having stakes in the profits that the factories would have, no way in the even the sources of Minnesota. that factories would have, no way in the even the sources of resoda. These were quite unique when you come to think of of other countries in comparison to Iran as far as the region was concerned, but what was also very important was not what we were doing domestically, but also in order to achieve all of this

development, we had to have stability. So therefore, it was important for us to have good, neighborly relationship with our immediate neighbors with the Arab countries, in the Persian Gulf area, with other neighbors, including the Soviet Union, mind you, at the town of the Cold War. And I think Iran had a very balanced foreign policy when it came to our relationship with China,

with Europe, with the United States. Obviously, obviously because of the fact that foreign policy when it came to our relationship with China, with Europe, with the United States. Obviously, obviously, because of the fact that for all those who are old enough to remember what the climate was doing in the Cold War, we had no choice but to have a look towards the West. The West that was free market economy, which was free, as opposed to the communist world. And that pretty much explained the reason why we were much more in line or in, you know, sort of bilateral or multilateral relations with the European countries. And mostly the Western countries, then we would be with the other block.

But that didn't mean that we didn't have any relationship there. So all of that, I I think is a process whereby Iranians, for decades, benefited from those aspects of newly developing countries in the direction of progress, modernity, technology, education, and what have you. In that sense, we had a stronger polity, we had a strengthening of our civil society, which of course is a component that besides the structure of governance for any countries is extremely important. And of course, we reached a stage where there was a political crisis, which I'm sure we're going to discuss further. But the bottom line is that when you look at Iran today, and since the question is in the polling indicates of why is it that now people say, hey, we had enough of this term of governance. And the question therefore is, are Iranians

prepared to have a democratic future? The answer is an absolute yes. And the reason I'm saying this is because when I hear the Gen Z of Iran today, when I hear the generation of Mahsa Amini and where they stand today, having heard from their parents, remember what Iran was like before the revolution. They experienced at least two or three generations of them. How many chances the regime had to reform if indeed it was reformable, but came to the conclusion that it is not reformerable. And therefore the ultimate conclusion that the only way out is to go beyond this regime, that as long as this regime is in place, we cannot attain any of those ideas or opportunities

or what have you. And so it's not surprising to hear these statistics. I would even argue it's perhaps even more than that, but let's say we take the lesser value. It still is quite overwhelming. It's a big number. It is a small number. And you know, you were talking about how things weren't Iran. For the average person who doesn't know,

all day when they go to school and they read the word, the Shah of Iran, Muhammad Reza Palavi, the dictator, the oppressor, they'll, you know, he took money for that. That's what they're being taught in most liberal institutes, and we know what that conditions like in the states here. But I want to kind of read a couple of stats if that's okay with you on what happened during that time. During your father's 37 year rule, he spent billions of dollars on industry education, health,

and armed forces, and enjoyed economic growth, rates exceeding the U.S., Britain, and France. These are the three empires at the time that everybody was looking at. National income rose 423 times during his 37 years. That's 423 times something we've never seen before anywhere else. He made the Iran Iran the world's fifth strongest military. The world's fifth strongest military. And sometimes they're like, we are, but he was not, you know, for religions and he was not good with Muslims building mosques.

He helped build 3,700 mosques when he was there. So it's not like he was preventing people from doing that. Some call on a mistake. Some say he was being naive, but to him, he was about freedom of religion. Hey, you believe in that? Go for it, do your thing. Women could vote, and it's very important to say why that's important, because the gentleman that took over Ayatollah Khomeini, he was saying in his sermons that the fate of Iran should never be allowed to be decided by women. He didn't look at women as making decisions on the fate of Iran. He improved literacy rate from 1% to 50% in a little over a decade. Numerous assassinations attempt on multiple times took place.

A CBS in 1975 called your father the most powerful man on earth, the most powerful man on earth at the time. Now, there was peace in the Middle East, people were getting along, you know, people were having good relationships together. It wasn't fantastic, but it wasn't what we have today. When you go back, because you lived there for 18 years, it's not like you don't have memories. I lived in Iran. I'm in October 1878, baby. So I'm peak of the revolution. I think in August of 78, you came to the States for

flight school or you were doing something you were traveling, afflying the Northrop plane and all these different things because you were a pilot. For some, you flew a plane, you were 11 years old. And there's a club sub-o. We'll look at that. But when you go back with memories, I'm going to go back memories. I remember going to the palace that you and your family lived in. I remember going there and seeing all the pictures of your father put upside down.

And it was till today's disturbing to me when I see pictures upside down. If I go into a room and I see anything put upside down, I correct it. It's because of my experience when I took the tour. And it was an interesting experience for me as an eight-year-old, nine-year-old going through it. I corrected it's because of my experience when I took the tour and It was an interesting experience for me as an eight-year-old nine-year-old going through it But you lived till 18 years old

What was beautiful about Iran? What's the memories you have of the Iran in the 60s and 70s? For me outside The aesthetics and nature. I'm a very nature oriented person. I have a big interest in environment and in fact anything that has to do with protecting our environment. Because I think in the future one of the key industries Iran can have is tourism and if you don't have a conducive environment to attract people, it will be something overshame. I think many of my compatriots are very much concerned about everything that we are facing

today, including the water crisis and everything else that we need to pay care for attention to. But having said that, I remember all these trips that I took in various parts of the country and how much I enjoyed it, but most importantly was the human interaction. Now, understand that, of course, people will assume that because I was a Crown Prince, it would be extremely ceremonial or sort of like a stage or it would be sort of official. But to the country, most of my experience outside of whenever I had to perform an official duty was very much incognito. I would travel in a very casual way with a couple of people accompanying me with the security

people, discreetly following from a distance. There were instances that people would not immediately recognize me. And I tell you as an anecdote, I remember one time we were in an elevator coming down in one of the hotels in Tehran, and I was together with my governors at the time, and my adjutant who was with me.

I was maybe seven or eight years old, something like that. And the guy turns around and tells the gentleman who was accompanying me, you know, your son looks so much like the crown prince. They wouldn't believe that I could possibly be in a sort of or going to, let's say, the boss of R to purchase something.

And that first people won't recognize me, but then the wood then there will be a whole crowd gathering and all those things. But to me, the experience was so natural with people when I would talk to a villager, if I would interact, let's say with a fisherman on a barge in the Persian Gulf, with a bunch of them trying to do their fishing. And I was very interested to hang out with them,

so to speak, literally hang out with them in a very casual manner. And other instances, what I would play soccer with local kids, in a military base in Avaaz or somewhere else. And so it was not at all something that people would say, well, how would he know or be in touch? Those were the practical experiences that I had. And this was all doing my teen ages, where I was older and therefore, you know, it's a different thing when you're six or seven or nine years old.

But when you're 12, 13, 14, 15, it's a different experience. Yes. And so I had the benefit of being able to at least go, I didn't travel to all parts of the country. So I knew some of it, some of them that I would hope to one day see for the first time, because I've never been there. But all of that is the collective memory that I have. And most of it, as I just told you, is not so much what I did in my official capacity, but most what I did in an unofficial capacity, which is quite different from the other. But you found this memory.

When you go back, what's your fondest memory? Rob, can you pull up that clip? Your mom has a YouTube channel. And she likes to brag about her kids, right? And this video here, I was watching a couple of days ago, if you just want to play this, this is you when you were younger and the family together, you know, your father, how often you watch this yourself? Oh, you know, there are so many of my compatriots who constantly send me clips, you know, I have a couple of Instagram accounts and an official one and a couple of unofficial ones.

So they send me clips and footage and it's funny that I get so much more clips about our family that I would search myself. They keep sending me material like that. Very nostalgic in some way, but it shows that, and you know what's interesting, you would assume that, well, most of these clips are people identified with it who are probably my age or older.

But today you'll be amazed how many members of the younger generation actually relate to these scenes, albeit that they never lived that era, that they only heard it through their parents. And I'm very touched when they keep calling me father, almost like a father figure, and they're related in that sense. And when I see myself two years old,

and now they call me that, it's interesting, as you go in time, how generations to generations have a different outtake. There's the generation of my parents and older who have a different kind of reverence. But I think it's mostly because of the institution. But a lot of people today would don't know any of that, and are much more relaxed about it.

But look at it, much more of how they relate to the individual and that to me is quite valuable. Is that you? Yeah, that's probably when we were in the palace in Tehran. We were not yet, we had not yet moved to either Sad Abad or Niovaran which was not even constructed there. This was I think they called it Kakhishar or Kakhishar. K-Shar means the city, Paris. Does it get you, like, for example, for me, when I think about things that drive me, because to do something that most would say it's impossible,

a lot of people would say it's impossible to create a regime change today. Iran has a 25-year, 400-billion-dollar contract now with China. They're backed up by them. Russia's there defending Iran as well because China and Russia are partners. You got Turkey who's got one of the strongest militaries. They have the strongest militia in the Middle East, but they got one of the strongest in the world.

There's an alliance there where they're almost distancing themselves from NATO. You're almost seeing there's a division going on between the community and NATO. You got not necessarily Briggs, because India is kind of plain neutral. But when you're wanting to do something, this challenging, you almost have to tap into something that gets you emotional and gets you fired up to say, you know, I really want to do this. And the way you almost have to do that, like at least for me, you have to go see old clips and see old conversations and see yourself back in the days

and say, do you really wanna be a voice and a leader in the help and this become a reality? Do you find yourself when you go back and reflect and reminisce, getting emotional and kind of having the pride of wanting to do something about it? Of course, and let me start by saying that there was a time where I didn't think that it would possibly see the fall of the Berlin Wall in my lifetime, and yet it happened. My point is there are so many things that a lot of people may assume is like we have to deal with it, it's a fact of life,

and do not anticipate that at any moment things can change. And to me, the X factor has nothing to do with the powers around, it has to do with the people themselves. They are the X factor. And when I look at Iranians today, particularly it's important to understand that it's not like for the first time they're going to experience something. Many of the liberties that were lost due to this regime coming in power existed before the revolution. The freedom that our religious communities had, women had, we never had an issue of discrimination

in the form that we see today. Whether you were a Jew or Baha'i or Christian or anything like that, we didn't even look at things in that context. I remember as a kid, you know, he asked me what's one of the most remembering moment. That's the moment that Iran qualified for the first time for the World Cup. And I remember watching the game in Tehran in that stadium. There were 115,000 people in a 100,000-seat stadium, which was overcapacity. And I remember we were playing Kuwait. And I think that was the game that was the one pre-qualifying

for us, but it was a huge huge consequence. And the energy, the atmosphere. But the reason I raised this is because I remember I had the privilege bring the Crown Prince to everyone and then invite the national soccer team to play along with them, me and my fellow classmates in school and we had you know players of our national team playing with us and they're at a good time and we had fun. But the point that I'm raising is that in that national team we had all sorts of Iranian ethnicities and religions represented.

There were people from Huzas, with the darker skin, people from the north, with the most lighter, fairer skin. There were Armenians, there were Azaris, there were from Kurdistan, from Huzas, there were Muslims, there were Christians,

there were, you know, the point that I'm making is we looked at each other as fellow Iranians. There was never a question of who is the minority, and that's a climate that this regime created. All of this goes towards what I'm telling to you. What gives us the incentive? What gives us the incentive is we deserve better than what we have right now, particularly the fact that we know once where Iran was. Iran should have been today the Japan of the Middle East,

not North Korea. We had all the potentials and we still do. Wow. And when you look at the fact that Iranians are aware of the fact that we have these resources, my job today and my campaign is in fact to let them and move the needle from hope to believe. It's one thing to have hope, everybody has a dream.

But I believe that empowerment is key to success, the power of the people, but in order of people to be empowered, they have to have more than hope, they have to actually believe that it can be done. And I believe that it can be done. And I believe that it can be done. Irrespective of the fact of what you just cited, we understand, of course, what's that state. I'm not saying it's easy. But if we believe is ourselves much more

than we believe in what others can do to keep us from doing it, it's almost like throwing the white flag. We're not going to surrender, because to us, when I say us, I mean Iranians today, self-determination, freedom, prostitution, human rights, all of that depends on us successfully getting rid of the evil the governing our country today. And our message to the rest of the world is, when we share the same values of freedom, of democracy, of human rights, of equality, of putting an end to any form of discrimination,

we are talking the same language. So we are your allies in principle. And so we believe, and we expect that the Western world, way before it's a calculation of national security or economic interests, which by the way, they will have with a regime that cares about its people and its inclined to go towards cooperation. I mean, how many democracies do you know that go to war against one another? And that's why I think that Iran, by bringing that factor in place,

will automatically be in ally, but we need support. We need to be able to work the problem together. So I start by saying first we have to work on ourselves. First we have to believe not that there is light at the end of the tunnel, of course there is, but that we can actually do it. You know, I've talked to many former dissidents of the Eastern Black countries, including Soviet dissidents.

And they were saying at the time where that's before Ronald Reagan or Margaret Tatcher were on the scene, sitting in some gulag inside beer, pondering upon the faith of Mother Russia and what would happen to all of us as dissidents. And one of them, I remember attending one of his lectures, was saying the day we saw light remember attending one of his lectures, was saying, the day we saw light at the end of the tunnel, is the day Ronald Reagan called Russia an evil empire.

We sled ultimately to Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall and so on and so forth, those who have followed recent history. Meaning that there are certain external factors that come into play, and foreign policy of some key countries, of course, plays a big role. But that doesn't mean that all of the dissidents, whether they're in China or they were at the time in Russia or what led to an end of a partite in South Africa or the Solidarity Movement in Poland or many other examples that I can put on the table as people who felt empowered enough to to launch their own campaign of liberalization. They had faith that they have to do it. Whether or not they're learning it may be a different thing. We have to do it no

matter what. That's why I always told my fellow compatriots we cannot depend on anyone else but ourselves. But our message to them is our task will be far more easier if they come along for the right which is win-win at the end of the day. And who wins ultimately and we'll get into that is the world wins because the temperatures are so high right now that everybody's worried what could happen if this thing escalates to the next level. Exactly. God forbid. But you know, I want to talk about, you know, during that phase what's happening, you're the son of a king, you're the grandson of one of the most respected and feared leaders in Iran, Reza Khan, the majesty who he was a whole different

type of leader. When you drop his name, it's a different kind of respect you get from people that are older. You ask somebody younger right now, they don't really know what it is. They know about your father. But your grandfather was a superior general. He was a doer. He got things done and loved and hated at the same time. But I want to talk about your father

and the events that led to the fall of Iran. I have my opinions of mistakes that were potentially made. I want to know what you think it was. And I'll make a list. I want to play a couple of clips to you. Couple of the clips are in the book that I'm writing that I've been working on for 13 years. It's not coming out.

It's something that I've worked on for many years. And he's in it. When I think about the fall of Iran, you know, you'll typically hear about the fact that CIA was involved. MI6 was involved. That's why they fell. Okay. Jimmy Carter came in, he did the toast. If you can pull up the picture when you're looking at the toast between the two, you know,

you see this here, when I look at this, your dad looks very uncomfortable. And it's almost as if your dad is trying to be respectful, but doesn't trust an ounce of words coming out of Carter's mouth. But he's trying to be accommodating and respectful and then Carter at the same time, he's given a look of, you have no idea what I'm about to do to you when I leave this place. This is December 31st of 1970. No. What is it?

1977. Correct. And he leaves. And then next thing you know, the conditions get worse and the rest of history. So CIA, MI6, the Shah, there's another documentary I watch about the 1954 oil consortium agreement that they had. It was a 25 year agreement that was coming to an end and it was a way where originally

it was an agreement they made in 1954, 50% of all on ownership to foreign companies. 50, 40% of all was divided equally, 8% each among the five major American companies were British petroleum, BP. They had 40% of it, Royal Dutch, Shell, they each had 14% of it, CFP, a French company to receive 6% of it. And this was a very profitable venture, because if Iran's grown the way they are during that 25 year, from 1954 to 1979, nobody wants to give up that annuity,

nobody wants to give up that investment. There's some documentaries done about the fact that it was a meeting in Central or South America about what they can do for your father to fall. That's a different conversation that comes up. And then there's a couple other things, comments that he made. Way before, there was a president Trump calling out to fake news.

Your father was the first one that called out fake news. I don't know if you remember the interview. If you want to play this clip, I want to play this clip and get your reaction of this. This is October 24th, 1976. I want want to say sixty minutes he's sitting with michael is and you've seen this before but i just want to get some commentary on this going to play rap

surely i'm i just a you're not telling me that the jewish lobby in the united states holds the strings of the presidency hot in tali but i think even a little too much even for Israel interests. You think the Jewish lobbying in the United States is too powerful for the interests of Israel? I think so. Sometimes they are diserving the interests of Israel. Because they are pushing around too many people.

How do you mean pushing around? Well, pressuring, they have many means at their disposal, they are put toying up pressure on many, many people. And at the end, I don't think that it will even help Israel. Why, if this is true, why would the President of the United States pay attention to that lobby? They are strong. Strong in what sense?

They are controlling many things. Controlling what? Newspapers, media, your majesty. Banks, finances, and I'm going to stop there. Well, now wait just a second. You really do believe That the Jewish community in the United States is that powerful. They make the media reflect their view of foreign policy Yes, they do not report. We do not report honestly. I like oraxe here Don't mix things piece. I don't say the media. I will say in the media they have people. Not the entire media.

Some newspapers will only reflect their views, yes. Next part is important. The New York Times, for instance, is owned by the Salzburg family, who are Jewish. Are you suggesting that the New York Times is biased in its treatment of the question of Zionism, Israel's existence, the United States' relationship with the Arab world?

I will have to put all the articles of the New York Times written on this subject and roll the conclusion. You can put this to the computer and it will answer you. What you're saying is that yes you do believe. Well let's wait for the answer of the computer. Washington Post. The same. The networks. Less. I must say you are speaking with your characteristic candle. Pause right there. So, so when you're hearing that, too, today, CIMI-6, Jimmy Carter, 1954 Oil Concertium, him calling out mainstream media, and then I'll give you this last 22nd clip, if you want to play this rap when he's being interviewed on not this one the one where it's right there the first 20 seconds if you can play this.

Probably and maybe more because we are going to invest in the UK. Have you been able to assure the British government that you'll be investing much of the money we pay you for your oil in British industry? Sure because I think the hard country in the 10 years, will be what you are today. The smile coming up, you can't hold it. In the next 25 years, according to other people, I'm not saying that, will be among the five most prosperous countries of the world. When you become something like that. So to me, I enjoy sports, post game interview more than the game.

I'm that guy. Like, I like to watch Michael Jordan's interview after the game. Great game you had. I wanted to know how you're going to answer the question. I want to know how LeBron answers question or Michael or Brady of all this stuff, right? I was born in this country. I lived there 10 years. C-I-M-I-6, oil, Jimmy Carter, him, Colin Admainstream Media, you don't mess with those guys, and him

Colin Admain, their eyes saying, we're about to pass you guys up, where his ambitions are being revealed, were those any of the reasons for the fall of Iran? It's certain it's part of the reasons. And I think for most people who heard the rhetoric and the narrative of his arch-enemies that he was a puppet of the West or along those lines, this proves how much he cared and valued the interests of our country to the point of risking his own throne knowing that some would not take it the right way and may plot against him. Very risky. Well, but that proves his sense of absolutely and I feel that history will be judged for

that. But to be honest with it, look, there are so many components to what happened and I think it will be too easy to focus on some aspects only. The biggest challenge that my father faced was, and let's not forget one thing, most of the old revenue that Iran generated did not happen until the late 60s early 70s because we were still selling if I'm not mistaken a barrel of oil to either run one dollar 80 cents to about two dollars 20 cents something around those lines. It was not until it came up to about seven to eight dollar range that it created more revenue for us.

Of course, you know, OPEC was formed. We were sensitive to the fact that if we overpriced it, then the value of raw material that would be important to Iran will also increase comparably. So it had to be a reasonable price. My father always believed that the price of all was not fair as it was earlier. So eventually we get the generated more revenue, which allowed us to commit to much more heavy-loaded project in terms of modernization, in terms of industry, in terms of everything that was done in the country, in terms of infrastructure, including done in the country in terms of infrastructure, including, of course, building schools and universities and what have you and all sorts

of facilities. But the critics at the time in terms of the liberal debate of why was the political sphere limited. Part of it is because, again, I need to remind the audience that we're talking about a Cold War era. Many of the groups at the time who were critical of the regime were liberal in the sense that they wanted more political participation. But the actual groups that were waging literally war with the regime, including arms struggles,

were Marxist groups that were aligned with Moscow. And Moscow's intention at the time was to find a way to somehow annex Iran, as they did in Czechoslovakia, as they did at the time. Iran never faltered. Are you talking about the two-day group? I'm talking about certain groups. Sure, right.

And the two-day group just so- And they aligned themselves with the Islamists, which led to this alliance, and my father called, the alliance of the Red and Black, which is red being the communist, and Black being the Islamists. And to be fair, while on the topic, the spokesperson for today party,

pre-your father used to be Mossadeh. That was one of the people that represented that community, the communists. Is that a first statement? Well, actually, you know, most people forget that my father actually nominated Mossadeh to become the prime minister at the time because he believed he would be the best person to push the agenda for nationalization of oil for Iran. As a result of us, nationalizing the oil, of course, the British were not happy about that. So our oil was boy-cotted and all of a sudden that led to loss of revenue to the point

that the most other government was becoming bankrupt. And it was not before my father gave the farm to remove him from office where the communists already had the Soviet flag floating inside the Tehran on some, you know, polls, you know, flag polls, meaning that the danger was at the time that the country will fall into the hand of the Russians by means of the two-day party taking over. These, those were the dynamics of the time. Now, if you took that into one sense

and the argument for liberalization in terms of political participation, where is the balance? We didn't have at the time sufficient number of organized parties to create some level of balance. Most of the organized parties were these leftist or monk's parties, including to the party. So, and again, and you pointed to the fact of how educated society was, even today people

asked whether or not Iranians are ready to have true democratic participation. I believe today, yes, but in a realistic aspect, let's say the sphere for political openness was completely open. Who would have once in a lopsided way prevailed? Now critics of my father's regime only focused on the fact that there was not political freedom in the sense that you had in the West. There was not. All other liberties was but the political arena was restricted. But it was not just because he wanted so, because the circumstances was so. But it was still committed to reform.

My point is that when we reached a stage where there was a political crisis in Iran in 1978, a year preceding the revolution. There were many elements within Iran, some of them members of the National Front, who were urging that my father should take a step back from being directly involved in making the decision and become you know, not exceed the limit of a constitutional monarch and

allow for him to as they say Saitanatvokorinahu Kumat, which means he will reign and not rule. This was the whole argument then Hukumat, which means he will reign and not rule. This was the whole argument then. But the climate went in the direction when the Islam is prevailed with the help of the Marxists saying, no, we have to completely get rid of the Shah. And therefore, instead of seeking reform of the system, that in fact my father was willing to do that. I mean, this is all Monday morning quarterback, but these are the facts, because I've heard it both from this side of the island, the opponents of my parents over the past 40 years. And the fact was that there was an opportunity for reform,

but it did not lead to that. Now, let's say if Gorbachev had happened five years earlier, maybe we would not be here right now. It would have been a different outcome. So to pin everything on foreign elements would not be really fair, but it's not untrue either. So that's one aspect. Some of it was domestic. I think mistakes were made on every front, including my own father. But the opposition, in my view, made more mistakes than he did, because he was offering a possibility for reform. They didn't take

that. They thought that actually by bringing this cleric in charge, everything will change for the better. And as a result, by the time people found out what happened, it was too late. And since then, we've been facing, faced with this regime. My point is, what is the lesson in all this? The lesson is all this is, my father, I'm sorry, I forgot one more aspect which is also important. Right after that clip that you showed me, which one? The one with Carter being interrun and talking about all that.

Well, the undercurrent was beginning to shape and some of these governments, including the French government, who hosted Chomene as a political refugee, which by the way, under French law, if given that status of asylum, you are forbidden from conducting any kind of campaign against another government, which was what was assumed, but the French asked my father at the time after he moved from Iraq to Paris and you know went to that location called Neufluchat, which everybody remember. He was not in any form of shape contained in in continuing his campaign. And my father assumed that the French would obviously,

in exchange for allowing him to go there. In fact, many before that were suggesting, should we get rid of him? And my father was not at all in agreement of making Homanium martyr. I'm telling you this, because these are not the facts in history that most people have heard, because media didn't talk about it. the revolution didn't talk about it, because

these are the facts that happen at the time. My father refused, besides the behest of many of the governments, including the Carter administration to stand firm. He said, I'm not going to turn my arms against my own people after 37 years of reign. I'm not going to stain my hands with the blood of my own people. And he left voluntarily. When they found out by day, I mean, Carter and Company, the Guadalupe Summit took place. They, you know, summit, where himself, Kalahan, who was the British Foreign Minister, Helmuczmit, who I think at

the time was the German Chancellor, and the French President, Shiskartesna, they all decided that if we cannot rely on the Shah to maintain his power, we have no choice but to support Hormone. Was it, but was it, did they want the fall? Did they want the fall because they knew the leverage and negotiation was all on your father's hands because he was about to spike the prices of oil where they had to go through him and it was gonna make you even a more powerful regime,

was it more that being their fear that they influenced the fall? Well, I mean, remember that I think if I'm not mistaken at the time, we were selling a barrel of oil at about 14 to 15 dollars if I'm not mistaken, three months after the fall of my father, the price of all spike to all the way up to about $35. The North CEO was not cost effective under $17 a barrel. So I don't know what calculation was into play. Was it only a fear that price of world will go higher? Well, it did hire as a result of the revolution. No, I'm with you. I agree because you at least have somebody that you can deal with. The new regime, you have no relationship with.

Do you think they're going to sit there and negotiate with you? They're going to do whatever they can to. Nobody knew who this character is. That everybody thought that, how many, some kind of a religious guru, the nice old wise man who go back to Rome and say his role. I mean, you know, people like Andrew Young, they call him a saint. Andrew Young, the guy that ran for office, UBI, the Democrat. Yeah, you know, it was the mayor in Atlanta, if I'm not mistaken at the time, I think.

Andrew Young, I got you. Andrew Young called him a saint, yes. And others really believe that he really is that clerical figure who could possibly and it turned out to be far from a saint. Far from a saint, because you brought in this ideology about the rest of history, as we say, but we need to address these issues, because I think if our audience doesn't understand,

the complexity of what's at play in that region and the dynamics of it, and why Iran is so different than the other countries in the region, because our sense of identity with our national identity as opposed to the prevailing religion, which is not the priority, makes us say always we are first Iranian, then we are, let's say, of this ethnic tendency or that religion. That's very important to understand. What do we relate to in terms of our national identity?

You know, there's a part also for me that I wonder a mistake that maybe your father was making. And by the way, listen, these are quite frankly, more selfishly my own questions. The audience is probably gonna get value from it because I'm curious about it, but it's more my own reason for asking these questions. I think the challenge every leader has, you're a father, I'm a father, you're a leader, I'm a leader, when you're a leader, you try to, there's a great book written that five

temptations of a CO one or the one is you trying to please everybody. Okay, and I think there was an element of your father that was trying to please the poor, the socialist element, and he was trying to please the rich and the higher class, which is very hard to do. In 1963, the White Revolution, he redistributed land from the rich and he gave it to the poor, the 2.5 million people that got land imagine You're just like hey, here's some land what he did that redistributed. That's a word of a Socialist that's something Bernie Sanders Elizabeth Warren aOC would use we did that right and in a 1967 October 16th You know the 2500 year celebration

Of the Persian Empire, which you kind of watch it, there's a documentary done on that as well, on how unbelievable. Maybe there's never been a party like that celebration last 100 years where that many powerful people are coming to a party and everyone wants to know who's gonna get the best table to see it,

you know, they're going through it, right? Do you think there was also an element of him trying to win the rich and the poor, and ultimately he ended up partially losing both of them? You know, in the context of social justice, you cannot have an imbalance between the rich and the poor. There's always that divide, you have to try to reconcile, and to put the labor forces in your own artwork,

you have to provide them with the incentives, with the protections. And as a result, if you make education free, if you make, I don't know, many other aspects of the thing for you, equalize the field for the people have lesser means. And he tried to do that through some of the programs that was the result of the white revolution, but also the way the system was going.

At the same time, we had to encourage the private sector from investing in the country, which is why many of our top industries or factories were basically funded or brought in by Iranian entrepreneurs. What a huge impact in Iran's economy in the past. Many of them were non-Muslims. Many of them were families who were from different persuasion, which is why the minute the revolution happened,

Homeni started confiscating their goods, they were forced to flee, and the first brain drain that Iran faced at the time was right after the revolution, where most of these people had to live the country, living all their properties and belongings behind. The country still functions as a result of all the efforts and living all their properties and belongings behind. The country still functions as a result of all the efforts and investments of the period at the time. So it was, I think, if you come to think of it, addressing both those who could help build

the country and we needed them, and there were people who were affluent and were capable and had the means, but also at the same time, and love for the country to become more and more educated, so we to become more and more educated so we can be more and more independent from others. Let's say, for instance, if you want to bring in a company and have a bunch of engineers trained, so they ultimately replace whatever is transfer of technology and at first you have to have your foreign, so-called engineers and or operators, and you train the local people so they can take over that industry.

You cannot do that if there's not a basis of education. So if you look at it and the reason why even today, we have many runners strong in mathematics or science, and they go to places like MIT and Harvard, and we had that kind of a training back then in the Iranian schools. That meant that a lot of these kids, and they were not from privileged families, everybody had an opportunity to sign up, and if of course you passed the grades and the concours as you were schooled with in Iran, you would be almost guaranteed a job after you were.

Which is very important, because you say, hey, if you go get a degree if you go get a degree in a job it's important to deliver on that promise and it was practically what was happening as opposed to today were despite the fact that the this kids got those after so much effort managed to somehow get a degree that they don't have any opportunities for employment irrespective of which class of society to come from no that's right but and by the way while you're saying this i'm gonna want to kind of show what you were talking about earlier, young praises Islam as vibrant and cause Ayatollah, a saint.

This is important because you said he was a mayor of, what did you say was a mayor of? I think I said. Yeah, but he was also part of the UN. So we're not talking about just anybody. For somebody that was a UN chief or something like that, he was a very powerful man. What was his role with the UN if he can zoom in?

He became, he had a responsibility with the right there. Okay, US government of Georgia, United States ambassador to the United Nations and the Court of Administration, 50th May or Atlanta, called Homanie a saint. That tells you how, you know, disconnected they were, but I wanna go back to this i i i have a uh i speak to robert kennedy uh junior uh every once in a while and then we're gonna have them on in a couple weeks you'll be here for town hall but when i was with them i wanted to know you know we are so enamored and fascinated by who really killed jfk and who really

killed rfk right but there's nobody that cares more about what happened there than probably RFK Jr. The only person that has the name of the father who got assassinated and an uncle who got assassinated that caused them to go through a 14 years of mess with drugs because he had a hard time recovering from. It's gotta be hard as a boy. All you're thinking about your dad's,

you're here, you're going through that. So for you, from where you're looking at, you're by yourself, you're praying, you're talking to your father. Let's say visually, I'm thinking, let's just say you do that, okay? And you're like, hey, why did you do this? Can you give me a sign why you did this?

Why do we make this decision? Why did that? And your dad's a firm person. I don't think he would be a person coming talking to you and say, hey son, what do you think sign why you did this? Why do we make this decision? Why did that? And you're, that's a firm person. I don't think he would be a person coming to talking to you and saying, hey son, what do you think about doing something like this? He's gonna do, because he would look at you as a younger. He's like, what is he gonna do?

I'm gonna make this decision. He seemed like a guy that got things done. In your core, what do you think was, a mistake he made that can't be repeated? Especially with all these things that we're talking about. Was it him leaving? Should he have left? Should he have stayed?

Was he bragging too much? Should he have stepped back a little bit and reigned instead of ruled? What do you think as a son of one of the greatest leaders he runs ever had? You know, you and I write now sitting in 2023, way past an epoch and an era where things were quite different and the changes are very the same. Are relating to our actual world based on what we know of the world now. It's very hard for us to put ourselves in what the circumstances were then and the mindset. And for that matter, the discussions that I was in preview too, because obviously was not just talking to himself, was talking to other heads of states,

other governments. I understand. And there are so many things that we perhaps will never know. But you've read all the books. You watch all the documentaries, because it's related to your family and your father. Even if you do, even if you do, it's very hard

to really get in somebody's head and say, OK, why prompted him or her to do X, Y or Z? Because I mean, look, for instance, at the time that my father had to contemplate how to maintain a cordial relationship with both India and Pakistan. What's going on between the two? Absolutely. As nuclear, can't... Sure. Oh, yeah. I mean, there are so many things that may not immediately pop in your mind, but you have

to say, okay, that's part of the equation, that's part of the calculation. When Saudi Arabia were producing four times more oil than Iran with one-six of the population, then would you blame my father for vouching for a fair price because he had to feed 35 million miles, as opposed to maybe less than 10 million or six million is not Arabia, before times of revenue. How could he have possibly done all what he had to do? And was that, had that created some issues? Now you might argue if you want to go really to the details, economists were saying, you know, we are overspending our revenue.

It's not sustainable economically, so on and so forth. At some point, we're going to hit a wall and all that. Which really happened towards the end of the Hoveida era. Now, maybe this is what Iran is going to follow more, a foreign audience may not understand what I'm talking about. But what I'm saying is that, sure, you could go back in time and rewind the tape and say, maybe here they should have done this as opposed to that. But I think in terms of the macro picture, generally, by trying to put Iran on the map and

the direction it was taking and you yourself started by giving us a sense of you know the steady economic growth that Iran was enjoying and it was not just oil and gas mine in fact gas was even less a fact it was purely oil but other stuff that Iran was starting to do. I think that what I would say is a very tough is a very tough decision to make. Is the criticism that he did too much too fast. Whether or not society has enough time to catch up to this new adjustment. Can people coming from rural areas adjust to life in urban society? That is a completely different set of circumstances.

Does that harm the agricultural community because industrialization is pulling you towards things that are much more lucrative? In other words, if you are somebody in the agriculture field, and maybe you know that because of rainfall, you may or may not get lucky enough to have more than one harvest per year of a certain thing. And then after all the efforts is done,

if your kid goes to Tehran and has the minimal training to be a refrigerator repairman, he's probably in one hour more money that the father will earn in an entire month. And you know, all of these things at least to more urbanization and dis space people, all these calculations that goes into play, not that they were not thinking of it. But all of a sudden you find a country where the income per capita jumps to the level

it was, and people's purchase power made them capable of having so much more, was that too fast? And then you have the resistance coming from the clergy, who never liked where my father was taking the country, thereby the protests about the women, about land reform, everything that Homanie started, being the element to challenge all of that. And so there was that sort of struggle going on. Was he right in modernizing the country, as opposed to go with the flow and say, well, we have to take it a step at a time and make sure that the clergy donor doesn't resist. You know, it's a little bit of a damn if you do, damn if you don't.

You would have people on the liberal side who say we had to open much faster. Some people said, no, we went too fast. We had to keep a treasure. Which argument stands to, at the end, to be the winning argument. You were right in raising this point. I had a friend, a businessman who once told me somebody had said that, I know what the secret to, I don't know yet what the secret to success is, but I sure know what the secret to failure is, and that is trying to satisfy

everybody. You cannot satisfy everybody. But then again, if it's more of a collective responsibility, in other words, if you take too much on your own shoulder, regardless of whether you mean well or not, you're going to take the blame. And was he an expandable element, given the fact that he put himself in that position to have so much impact, to become so vulnerable when he didn't have to? But besides, that's more on the selfish side of the thing. He literally sacrificed himself. Maybe today people understand where he was trying to go, because a lot of his critics,

or even people who never were born, says, you know, we wish we could understand where he was trying to take us then, which we didn't. And in a way, I think history only repeats itself if we're not willing to learn from past experiences. So, you know, I'm not doing what I do on the basis of wanting to follow in a particular direction that my predecessors had done. on the basis of wanting to follow in a particular direction that my predecessors had done. First of all, I don't know where I'm going to end up

and in fact, I'm not running for any job. I'm all I'm trying to do is to be an agent of transition and try the best role that I can on the confidence that people have in me to bring as much unity and coalition together for us to get to the point when Iranians can decide for themselves. And the rest of the directions and leading, I think we are mature enough of a society right now, not to have to depend on a very pyramidal sense of governance.

We have to get to that point. We have to get people involved in the decisions. That's that my style, that's my approach. And I start by saying that when you look at my predecessors, what my grandfather had to do, to first and foremost bring stability for the country, which was challenged in the four corners, bringing a centralized government, to bring back those instances, those institutions for governing and modernizing them, secularize them, because everything was controlled by the mosques.

And then the next phase, which was my father's era, and what he needed to do. I think I belong to a generation of people whose chief responsibility is to maximize participation and liberalize the system in terms of democratization and bringing those values into place, which is more attainable today, I believe, than the era in which my father lived,

in terms of education, in terms of awareness, in terms of experience, in terms of the tools we have in our hands that didn't exist before. I mean, the world of communications today, you're in it, the value of social media and impact it has, and the way it makes the wheels turn today. You know, we're showing footages at the time where CBS is a huge institution,

and people will get their news from broadcast television. Today, how do you get your news most of the time? You can't even, you can program the kind of news you want to get. Sunbites, shorts, and you don't rely on the New York Times anymore or on CBS News anymore or 60 minutes or what have you. Not that they don't exist and they don't have an audience, but I think today's world is very different in terms of how people communicate with each other and are aware of each other. And they even, I mean, bypass, I think, governments and media.

We have to understand the world in which we are living today, to understand how people react to something or communicate their messages. And if you're not sensitive to that, you missed a vote. I'm trying to first and foremost listen more than talk. I try to get a sense of where they are and understanding the challenges. But at the same time, say, what we want is not so much different

than an average American would like to have, or a French would like to have a British would have thought, which goes back to my point about the common values. That means that instead of saying, well, that's the Middle East way over there. I'm sitting here as an American looking at it from far distance. We are now far more intertwined in terms of consequences

of what happens in one corner of the world does impact the rest of us. So we are in a way propelled to an era where we need to interact. We need to be more engaged with one another as opposed to go back to isolationism and divestment from one place or the other. I don't think that's the way our world is evolving. You know, it's interesting the answer you give and you be an agent in the transition and you're like, you're not run afore anything anything That's my approach. We'll come back to that and we'll have some conversations on that but in regards to the speed of how Iran grew

We're experiencing that a little bit in Florida here right now where you know People who have been living in Miami for a long time rent was whatever $2,100 $2,200 All of a sudden the Santas as policies are so good Boom hundreds of thousands of people move here, numbers grow up, and people have been living there. I was like, wait a minute, what are you doing? I can't afford $4,500 a month and rent them. I mean, well, that's kind of what comes when you have sudden growth in an economy.

I take that to Iran at the ways they had it. It's got to be a lot different as well. But no one, I don't think a lot of the people, I can't say everybody, a lot of the people if they can be honest with themselves they can look back and say Your father was right. He was doing the right things. He made Iran a better place You know unfortunately Maybe the the enemy the competitors noticed his ambitions were bigger notice. He was getting stronger He realized he has a better hand and he revealed his hand instead of maybe holding his hand and you have pocket aces, don't tell everybody

you got a pocket ace, he kind of played a little bit as if he has a pocket ace. And I kind of pissed off the enemy because you're kind of like showing your hand. You know how sometimes you play poker and at the end you show and you beat somebody like, okay, look what I had, you got crushed. And maybe there was a little bit of that who knows,

but you know. Yeah, I would tend to agree with that assessment because sometimes honesty doesn't pay. Rebealing everything you have on your end as a leverage, I think if he doesn't do that, one, you and I are living in Iran today. And I don't know what I'd be doing, but I'd be living in Iran today

because Iran would probably be a great society economically, business, finance, lifestyle, media. There be so many different opportunities. But I'm sure the competitors didn't like that. Hey, we used to own you. Who are you to think that you going to be this powerful? This was our oil and we owned all this place. You know, what do you think you're doing here? Well, that, that's the part that I think indicates how much he loved his country and what was the fact that that really vexed him, was the fact that why was he so underappreciated

by people at the time? I could see in his eyes, what did I do to these people? Yeah. Except for trying to put them in a better place. At one point, he had an approval rating of 90% approval rating and how quickly mainstream media was able to spin it with the power of CIMI-6, if they were involved, Carter, how quickly they were able to spin and use these stories of cinema, other X-Fire.

And by the way, how much did you yourself want to find that exactly what happened to Sinai Madhurex fire right across the street? There's a police station, they blinced Savak, they did it, the shock killed the 400 people, pregnant kids are in this place, like we're going through right now in this, in Israel and in Palestine, the hospital, it was done by Israel, it was done by Himalayan, by him else who did it how much of that because we're expansion today Story obviously eventually came out that the person that was behind The cinema rex fire was part of Chomenis camp. It wasn't the facts are not completely open for all to see But it took a year though for us to find out about that

He didn't take a half a century when you have a whole period revisited based on facts rather than narratives and myths, for instance, the whole 1953 element, which is very little understudied in this country. You know, often when they talk about that era, they say, the democratically elected government of Mosad. Why do I raise this? Not because I want to be the main argument, but it's one indication of how easily you can distort the narrative. First of all, prime ministers in Iran were never elected. They were either appointed by the monarch, subject to parliament approval,

or parliament would recommend a candidate subject to the approval of the king. We didn't have a process of elections to form government in Iran. That was the Iranian Constitution at the time. So this argument, first of all, that he was democratically elected is not true. He was appointed, number one. And then if they called the removal of a Prime minister a coup d'état, then therefore you should have to argue that every single prime minister in Iran was removed by coup d'état,

if that's the argument. And what happened is that he resisted that fermon, and that led to the whole crisis that existed. And when a lot of the clerics at the time, including Kaushani company, knew knew that, you know, the two-day parties waiting in the wings, the tide turned completely. My father was already outside of the country, was somewhere in Rome, I think. And the chance that we're pro-Musad, within three days, completely flipped towards along with the king. I don't think there's any foreign intelligence agencies in the world capable to flip a country in three days.

So this whole narrative about the CIA being behind it, a lot of it was the time of Kermit Roosevelt who they screwed up in the Bay of Pigs and they wanted to take credit somewhere else. And that's how somehow they tied this whole narrative of 1953 to that. And you know, I invite people to go and do their own diligence. I'm not saying this, Abbas Milani who did the most research on the subject, who was an three, two, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three,

two, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, two, three, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, two, two, three, two, three, two, two, three, two, two, two, two, two, two, two, go read his research and his findings about that whole period. We have to set the record straight. Good, bad and ugly, because people, whether Iran is a foreigner, deserves to know the truth. And sometimes I feel that many aspect of that era has been so distorted that it leads to this false expectation. But this is important only because I still see the remnants of this kind of argument, not just vis-à-vis Iran, even today when you look at what's happening in this conflict in between Hamas and Israel, and the whole narrative behind that, and not understanding what happened in Iran at the time of the revolution, the fact that even today, elements that are tied to organizations such as

Hezbollah as the Proxy of the regime that are utilized in Iran to repress and crack that on people. The dynamics are such that, because at the end, what are we talking about, Patrick? At the end, we're talking about what do the Iranian people want and what do the Iranian people want? And what do they need to obtain? My priorities to guarantee that they achieve their ask and hope that what they want is not in direct conflict with what the world wants, unlike the 20th century. Because there was a fight for influence on oil reserves or this country.

Many democratic countries who today condemn dictatorships actually supported dictatorships against the Soviet bloc at the time. Let's not forget that. When the Iran-Irach war broke out, most of the countries who later on led a campaign that the previous Bush administration had since 9-11 and the whole issue with Baghdad forget the fact that they were all aligned at the time to back Iraq to make sure that Iran does not prevail in the Iran-Iraq war. Why is that? Not because they believe that it is right for the war to exist, but they knew that the revolutionary Iran, with the mission of exporting an ideology, is not a threat. I want to go back to the Carter administration. The only individual in that

administration who understood what could be the consequences of such a regime taking over was the big new Briginski. In fact, I remember the discussion I had with him because I happened to be at the White House on my birthday, October 31, 1978. Wow. You're at the White House, October 31, 1978. I flew up from a research for space. You know, I was, that's why I was training.

I came to Washington. I had a short meeting with President Carter, and we had a longer discussion at the time. With our ambassador at the time, I had issues, not heavy, and we were together with Zipping Huberzynski. The rest of Cyrus Vance, Gary Sik, Clark, all of those guys worked completely on this premise of, let's create a religious belt to contain communism

from spreading into the area. That was the theory of the Carter administration. So back in Hormane, creating a religious belt to, like a dam, to protect the region from the on to gain influence in the area namely the Soviet Union Literally, they know that at the time the KGB had over 40,000 Iranians Under their control many of them dressed as Moodless Leading prayers in mashad and this one in other countries

They already had their influence. They were already there. Did your father know that he already know or know? Didn't he warn so many governments that if I go, Iran would become Iranistan, was not less than a year after he left that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. I mean, look at the whole downfall, the Domino effect that he took. But that was the leading theory of the Carter look at the whole downfall, the domino effect that it took. But that was the leading theory of the Carter administration at the time, containing communism. When that

backfired, Saddam took advantage of a weakness of the Iranian military because most of the heads were being executed by the revolution regimes. Many of our officers are best officers were executed. And I thought that it would be a preventive act of vis-à-vis Iran who was trying to already gain territory, which propelled us in the war. But the reason you had a problem with Saddam Hussein, mind you, many years later when you had the desert shield and desert storm and the invasion of the way, was because of Iran in the first place.

Let's not forget that part. So when today you see that the same degree of weakness that Carter showed at the time, and today you see the same signals of weakness vis-à-vis this character regime to embole them to go further. It's pretty much the same rationale. It's a continuation of the same rationale. You know what's interesting, Nixon in his book said he would have preferred for the Shah to have been more brutal and even said this in a book and he said it in an interview

as well. But can you pull up the clip, Rob, of President Arono Reagan, what he said, right, there's two clips. If you can just play both of these clips, go for the degree of unpopularity of a regime when the choice is total authoritarianism uh... totalitarianism i should say uh... in the alternative government

makes one wonder whether you are being helpful to the people and we've been guilty of that because someone didn't meet exactly our standards of human rights, even though they were an ally of ours. Instead of trying patiently to persuade them to change their ways, we have, in a number of instances, aided a revolutionary overthrow which results in complete totalitarianism instead for those people. And I think that this is a kind of a hypocritical policy. One at the same time, we're maintaining a datant with the one nation in the world where there are no human rights at all, the Soviet Union.

I did criticize the president. You can pause that right there. That's for the audience. That's a 1980 presidential debate depends on what platform you listen to this, whether Spotify or podcasts or YouTube. He's calling out Carter in this debate and then the second part is even clearer than this one if you can play the second one. I did criticize the president because of our undercutting of what was a stalwart ally,

the Shah of Iran, and I am not at all convinced that he was that far out of that he was that far out of line with his people or that they wanted that to happen. The Shah had done our bidding and carried our load in the Middle East for quite some time, and I did think that it was a blot on our record, that we let him down. Have things gotten better? The Shah, whatever he might have done, was building low-cost housing, had taken land away from the Mollism, was distributing it to the peasants so they could be landowners, things of that kind. But we turned it over to a maniacal fanatic who has slaughtered thousands and thousands of people calling it executions.

And by the way, when you're watching this, when you say, in the middle of the world, thousands, some people may say, well, Patrick, there's no way he's just Reagan to say that. Can you go to the Washington Post story from 1980? It's a Washington Post story from 1979. I want to say it's February,

okay, that's the one. Iran calls executions just the beginning. Can you show the logo at the top so people know that's WAPO? Go all the way to the top so they can see that's Washington. Pozoom in Article February 1779, Iran calls executions just the beginning. Tehran says four executions are beginning of the purge. They use the word purge. They're cleaning the streets of Iran. People of opposing religions or not even opposing religions, Bahá'is were being killed left and right. Military personnel were being killed left and

right. One of the kernels, I want to say, was a kernel, maybe a general Rahimi, I think he was, when he came into the court and they had Chomeini's picture on the wall and he said, you guys have to take that picture down, put the shah's picture because he was saluting it. They cut his arms. One of the most famous performers in Iran, Fatr al-Qazad, I think that was his name. If I'm not saying his name correctly, you know who I'm talking about. The gentleman who was a, he was like the Jimmy Fallon or the Jimmy Kimmel. He was found in his hotel in Germany, killed left and right.

By the way, try being gay in Iran right now for the people that are the liberal leftists that would like to see that taking place in Iran. Of course, it would happen to Iran if you walk around and say, no, part of the LGBTQ community. Matter of fact, why don't you start a social media campaign and say, let's go and protest in Iran and the streets today and with rainbow flags. See what they'll do to you. It's a very good market research. It won't last a long time because you'll be meeting a St. Peter or whoever you're got is very quickly if you do do something like that. Even Reagan gave credit to your father on what he was doing in Iran, saying he was doing our job. You know sometimes when people criticize Israel, Netanyahu, they'll say, look, at least Netanyahu is not calling us saying send us, you know, 50,000 soldiers or send us is, you know, Zelensky is coming,

he's the greatest money manager of all time, can pay the raising money of all time, give me another 40 billion, give me another 20 billion, if you don't, your kids are going to go, your kids are going to go, at least Netanyahu is doing his own thing, okay, he's not asking for help. Iran at the time, they're like, we'll handle this problem ourselves with issues around the Middle East. But when you see Reagan saying that in the 1980 debate, then he gets elected.

The moment he does within minutes, Chomene releases prisoners of war because they had that level of fear with them. Do you think our current president is more of a Jimmy Carter or more of a Ronald Reagan comparison who we have today? It's interesting to say this because it just popped in my mind something that is quite telling and that is on this whole final release of the hostages in the Iranian embassy in Tehran, there's something similar.

In the sense that, well, the left here has been criticizing the Trump administration of pulling out from JCPOA, and that was the reason to, in fact, increase the rate of enrichment and all that. The fact is that it was not until two days after the new administration, now in place in Washington won the elections that they started enriching, not before. Wow. It's a little bit of a parallel between the release of the hostages. What I'm trying to say here is that whether it was at previous time for those who were in opposition to the previous regime,

and now they are in power after the revolution, the reaction to strength, crumpling from the outside is one and the same. As much as they saw that Carter is weak in not supporting the shot, that emboldened the opposition against my father at the time. And the fact that now they're in power. The same weakness that America is now demonstrating is again emboldening them. As opposed to in the past four decades, every time America shoots strength, they step back, they pull the way. It they stepped back, they pulled away. It's a direct correlation between the two.

So when I look at these pictures, and I see some articles and all that, and first of all, let me make something very strict for the record. I know there are a lot of people on the other side who say, there are so many things that was in condemn, the subacted, this, that was decent. I have never condone excess of violence. I've never condone torture. I'm personally I'm against it. But that doesn't mean that when they talk about

a completely unrealistic picture of how many people were political prisoners, which is not true, and who were those political prisoners? The very same people like Ali Hamine being one of them, who were getting trained in Bekah Valley in Palestinian camps financed by the KGB. What do you do under the circumstances? I wonder if as an American you thought that some of your people are being trained clandestinely to wage war against your own country or take the American government. What would you do with them?

The very least would be Guantanamo, right? At least. What would you do with them? The very least would be Guantanamo, right? What would you do with them? What would you call them? How would you respond to it in terms of national security? Your number one priority would be to protect the nation. Correct. And what manner were they operating? Were they just writing articles and say would be gagled or

or or muscled, or were they actually trying to conduct armed warfare groups such as the Mojadinahal who were assassinating military attachers at the time in Iran, or other groups who were waging armed warfare and killing Iranian police officer or soldiers, how do you deal with that? It's not like a free exercise. In fact, the two-day party, you mentioned the two-day party and how many times my father was subject

to assassination attempts. I think it was two times. And one of the first time it occurred was by a soldier who was influenced by the two-day party and who attempted an assassination on my father. My father survived that. But the fact is that until then, the two-day party was still a legal party.

In fact, the second oldest communist party in the world after the Soviet Communist Party. They were still legal. So, you know, it's always easy to fault a government, but how much of the other side of the equation has to take some responsibility in it? I'm not here to start making judgments. I'm just trying to explain to the audience

of what it is we're talking about. Where do we stand today? Where is there is commonality of interest? Where can we meet in minds irrespective of whether we are left, right, or center? Is there an issue of being a Republican or a monarchist or a socialist or a conservative? What do we want for our country?

Where do we stand with David the rest of the world? This is, I think, the real debate that is taking place in Iran today, particularly in today's generation. And I'm very much encouraged by it, Patrick, because I think that today's generation is showing such a degree of dexterity, of due diligence, of not relying on anything that somebody tells them and that gives me hope and when I get hope that now finally we have the potential then I'm trying to tell them okay, let's move from hope to believe that we can actually get it.

It's interesting you're saying this because while every great empire is going to have some sort of a secret intelligence organization US as the CIA Britain had the MI has the MI6 Israel Mossad Iran had Savak but here's the here's the interesting thing couple the people that betrayed your your father what then it was Hossein fatdust Hossein fatdust was one the deputy directors of Savag for 10 years and you know your your grandfather

This is the story your your Your grandfather I believe was sending your father to France to go get educated and to accompany him He paid for Fardust to go with him to France. I believe if I'm not mistaken So they went there together Fardust comes back I think I went in the, Fardous comes back. I think the way the Rose School is set to go. Yes, so then they come back. So, meaning, imagine what this family is doing to you

and you end up being the one that betrays him. And then he goes from being a deputy director for Savak and then he was like, how come they didn't ever kill them? He becomes a leader of Savam. Savam is like a similar of Savak, but for Chomeini. And then later on when you kind of do a little bit more digging and you hear stories about him and General Abbas, Rarabagi, that there was a relationship there

between the two of them. And some people have speculated that's how Chomeini was able to get intel from him because he promised the information wasn't gonna be leaked to the public that you're maybe like a J. Edgar Hooverver type you're gay and that was kind of something I was kept now again. This isn't public information, you know, I'm doing my research and talk to a lot of different people to see who's saying this stuff.

We also got a couple calls from people we spoke to around that said these things. There was betrayal in those same people from Savak, some of them ended up helping Savam, but secret intelligence is gonna be around for a while, no matter how big the organization is, and no one's ever gonna, no one looks at CI, says, what a great organization, am I six? What a great organization? Your job as somebody being part of that intelligence

is you're gonna get criticized a lot. Now, having said that, let's talk exile. You leave. Okay. Your, you know, Sadat, Egypt, you know, come to the States. You're welcomed. You're not welcomed. Palm Springs, Texas, Mexico. Do this. Don't do that, Surge. Your father's dealing with cancer. He's kept it to himself. They don't want people to know. It's a tumultuous time already. And on top of that, you guys are constantly moving, right?

And during that phase, while you're going through it, your father, and by the way, did you know he had cancer before the world knew he had cancer? The first time I siblings and I found out when he was in New York hospital in 1979, right before the hostages were taken. That's the first time you guys found that. Yes, we didn't know.

Did he know? And he was kind of like out of the guy. He knew us of 1973 or 2004, I knew. And very privately, he had some of the doctors including a couple of I think French doctors at the time who initially diagnosed him but it was not the correct diagnosis there was misdiagnosis it was cancer but the kind of cancer they thought it was a bit different and so the treatment that they had given him was the wrong kind of medication to begin with anyway it was from the mid-70s to the late 70s.

In fact, most people don't know this, including my fellow compatriots. My father had in mind to pretty much retire and pass the torch onto me. By the time I would have reached the end of, at the most, maybe, a 22. And we're talking about the early 80s. Knowing, of course, that his ill and anticipation of that.

And some people had later on said, well, if he knew, he was going to do that. What didn't he announce his game plan and all those things? But I don't know to what extent he wanted to protect me in some ways, or the fact that maybe by the time the crisis had reached where it was, it may have been too late. If he had said it earlier, maybe the whole country would have responded differently, but then that would have been a weakness that would have been taken advantage of by the outside world. I mean, it's such a complex thing, which direction does one take? And anyway, these are a few factoids out there

for people to ponder upon, because history has a funny way of taking shape sometimes. Very interesting. Again, I was born in Iran during Shahan Shai for three months, right? And then, you know, exile happens, then Khomeini shows up and mayhem is there. But masking is question because on November 1st, 1980, they after your birthday, your Halloween. So October 31st is your birthday. And 20 years old, you announce yourself as the new king.

When you do in Washington State Department spokesman John Tratner, okay, said the U.S. had no intentions of supporting Resup Alavi yourself to crown prince, adding that we accept the result of the April referendum and accept the government of Iran as the legally constituted government in Iran. What was your initial reaction when you saw John Trattner saying that and, you know, do you as taken a position like that? Well, let me also say something that I think your audience needs to hear in the context of history.

Three months before, or what was it, no, a month before that statement, the war between Iran and Iraq broke out. At the time, my first initiative was to send a message to the Iranian staff for the Air Force, volunteering as a pilot to join with our Air Force to fight back against the invading forces of Saddam Hussein when the war broke out. That was the only thing on my mind at the time, knowing full well that, well, what's that stay here, you know, but you know, that was my first instinct as an Iranian, you know, nationalist is my job and my duty, first and foremost, to go and fight that war. I never got an answer. And in fact, later on we found out that the

regime was very suspicious. That is that some kind of a veiled thing that is pushing towards a coup of some form and those kind of ideas. Anyway, the point is that that went on answer. You refer to that message. My intentions was simply this. To say, listen, we are at war. There's a sense of mayhem, confidence loss,

the morale of the military. And my sole intention at the time was to say, you may have turned your back to the institution, but the institution that I represent has not turned its back on you, the people. I was 20 years at the time. I thought that this was perhaps necessary to bring in some element of stability and confidence in people's minds, albeit that we all

knew that there's a new regime in place. I knew Homini was in place when I volunteered to go there. That was not to serve the regime. It was to serve the country with that mindset. And over the years, I said, by the way, this is ultimately the running people who have to make that choice. I always said, this is a decision

that the running people have to make as to what kind of future they want to have. This has been my on-wavering position in the past 44 years and counting, which is why today, my focus and my goal and my sole mission is to see through it that we have a transition, a democratic transition, meaning that a constitutional assembly

where people's representatives would debate the constitution, the format has to take the content of the regime and ultimately submitting to a referendum. So I'm not vouching for either a monarchy or a republic, I'm vouching for democratic secular democratic outcome and let the people decide what they want. So my mission in the past 44 years has been to advocate for democratic change against religious dictatorship, to say that we cannot achieve a democratic system without a clear separation of church from state, which is a prerequisite to democracy, which is why we cannot even fathom that under a religious system we could ever achieve that. And you mentioned elements such as the LGBT community

and their rights. I recently was awarded by the law cabin of an Aspoken Award, defending the rights among others of our LGBT community. None of this can be achieved under an ideology that from the very beginning is not only antagonistic to religious communities or the LGBT community or anybody with any opinion other than theirs, but it's the fact that they're anti-Iran. They're not even

in any form or shape maintaining the interest of the nation. And so, you know, when I was sitting in Egypt, knowing full well that my father had to leave the country, I'm now practically next to what is my role, what is my duty, what is, besides the fact of being, you know, the former crown prince and all that, as an Iranian, what is my responsibility today? As somebody who can inspire people, as somebody who people trust, as some people who got to know me over the years, not just because once my father was King once or I was a Crown Prince once, but a whole generation that never knew that time.

But they read me, they follow me, they talk to me. I think they know where I'm trying to go with this. So, where we were in October 31, 1980, as opposed to where we are today in 2023, is a very, very different set of circumstances. So let's talk about that. You were recently, and by the way, I want to talk about the conditions in Iran, why they also may want to have a change taking place there. Inflation right now is 45% in Iran, okay. Interest rates. Actually, the government's latest figures was 55%. 55%?

They won't be on figures. Fantastic. So 55% interest rates, 12%, their net real interest rate would be minus 43%, which is a terrible place to be when the market is like that. Safety for women, children, we saw what they did with, just a year ago when the protesting in Iran was absolutely wild, with women going around fighting, defending themselves, standing up,

and the government was a little bit worried about it. You know, when I came from Iran to the States, I was always, you know, I always thought the math was way too easy here, not because I was a mad phenom, because math and Iran, the standards in Iran, math was very, very high, right? You kind of, we took that very seriously.

What are the conditions today in Iran? What crisis are they dealing with? I know you mentioned water crisis earlier. Can you kind of unpack some of the challenges Iranian people are dealing with today? Well, I guess the most obvious factors and the economic factor obviously is the overwhelming factor in terms of not just income and ability of

feeding your family and having, you know, 60% of our society living at or under the poverty line, and with the descriptions that you give, opportunities to find work or anything like that, people having to literally sell organs to be able to pay the rent because they have no other ways of having means how long can this be sustainable? Especially that despite the fact that since the new administration in Washington, Iran had had access to over 90 billion dollars. A lot of it as a result of all revenues that were not subject to sanctions that could have prevented them from having access to more money, but it's not been spent

on people. It's not been spent on workers, it's not been spent on, you know, the whole strata of people who are truly struggling to put food on the table. Instead, they're spending on their proxies, they're financing his Bollah in Hamas, they're doing everything else in the region, including antagonizing the Saudis, through the Houthis in Yemen, and what have you not to mention sending drones to the Russians in their conflict with Ukraine and so on and so forth. You know, in comparison, people know that the more they go in time, the more they become destitute, the more half of our banks are insolvent, I mean, practically bankrupt. People don't even know if whatever they're supposed to have in a bank is really there.

It's a sense of fear that is beginning to be sense. I'm not talking about political dissidents and that fight ever since the mass revolution and the brave struggle that our computers have shown. But it's also all of these malaise, meaning that at some point it's got to give. And the question is then what happens? The question is, what happens? The question is what directions can the

country take. It is why I also am very much focused on bringing into the narrative of change, not just political change, but what can happen after we eliminate this mafia-like regime that uses repression at home and aggression abroad, the IRGC and every aspect of control they have in the Iranian economy because once all of that is gone, then you have transparency, accountability, you eliminate the elements of corruptions and everything that is going on, meaning that you can finally have a positive impact in the way Iranians can see how our economy can restart. How can we bring in foreign investment?

How can we bring the best entities and industries that give Iran's all the needs it has in terms of infrastructure and its upgrade in terms of new technologies, the kind of enterprises that can create immediate income and jobs for people in the most disaffected areas such as in the Balochistan area, and so on and so forth. And that's part of the plan that is not just changing the structure of governance, which is, of course, an absolute necessity. But really, what it means to the average Jew, because the average Jew in Iran is not necessarily going to be enchanted with the mother who then apopied a wreck of human rights and democracy

and freedom and all of that. Okay, fine. But what does that really mean? How does it really impact me? That has to be part of the narrative that in absolute economic despair, there are these opportunities. I mean what I say when we can move from hope to belief, because I believe all the ingredients for that exists both internally and abroad.

We have enough people capable of managing the system properly, except for the regime has never given them a light of day because they're completely outside, because they only protect each other's and their own selfish benefits at the expense of the people. But there are so many capable people inside the country with fresh ideas that can be the future entrepreneurs that could be the directors and many levels of governmental private sector that are standing in the wings waiting for their opportunity that this regime has denied them. So we are not starting from scratch. We have all of that potential. We have natural resources. And I think the country is so quickly ready for that change. And but they understand now that in order to get there, we really have to eliminate and get rid of this regime.

That's what the Iran people today find themselves understanding. And the statistics that you started to indicate in the first is I think very cautious because they're afraid sometimes to even say more. And the part that remains the statistics that appear to be supportive of the regime I think is only the part that they financially benefit from the status quo. That doesn't mean that are necessarily ideologically

produced regime. But they simply have more interest and maybe from fear that if the regime was to change, they may use a lot of their interest, the force into thinking that, well, we have to benefit from what we have right now under the system. This explains perhaps that percentage that are still indicating their preference from what is.

But I don't think they can resist the change. It's a little bit like some South Africans who don't believe that we need to put an end to apartheid, but they came to the conclusion that, you know, resistance is futile and we have to live with the new reality of putting an end to a racist regime. Who else would like to see a regime change in the Middle East? Because some will say there's a business model

for the Middle East being chaotic, right? And when I say regime change in the Middle East, I mean, regime change in the Middle East because some will say there's a business model for the Middle East being chaotic, right? When I say regime change in the Middle East, I mean regime change in Iran specifically, but there are certain people that would like to see chaos continue in the Middle East. It's a business model, you know, whether it's what Eisenhower said at the end of his, you know, term A, be careful with the military industrial complex that we're constantly going to war and everybody was like, well, Biden's the one that's pulling troops out. We're no longer going to be in Afghanistan. He's the president of peace, look who he is. And then Biden became the president where tyrants and bullies woke up. And next thing, you know, you have Russia, Ukraine, you have Hamas,

what they did to Israel. And then back and forth now, Israel attacking Palestine. And, you know, what's going on with Iran getting involved? They're already involved proxy but has been on all these other guys getting involved. Turkey is now saying you better not cross the line Taiwan's on the other side. Say, wait a minute, what are we going to be doing? Who doesn't want to see Iran go through a regime change and who would like to see Iran go through a regime change aside from its people? I'm talking others. Well, without getting into potentially some conspiracy theory type arguments,

I would say that there are certain companies, including all companies in this country, are already investing a lot in R&D in alternative energies and renewable energies, albeit that there are all companies that depend on the existing thing, or companies like General Dynamics that knows that besides you know

Building a fighter planes there are other products that they could manufacture that will have a market for in these regions So we're not in that sort of industrial Rormachine only thinking in terms of guns and weapons and I Think that the population in these countries, who until now had less of a say, less of a say, in terms of what has been decided at the very top, are more into the game in some countries that are now

beginning to show more direction that gets people more involved into the argument, the case in points out the Arabian, whatever is the perspective of the current governance of Saudi Arabia, is it going in the wrong direction? No, I think it's going in the correct direction, which explains why in this whole Abrahamic courts, you had the interest of some of the key countries in the Arab world going along with that flow,

because they saw the light of the opportunities that you now see in Dubai, that you see in other countries. And then you have frustrated Iraqis or Iranians or Syrians who are looking at that and say, we want to be part of that opportunity for change. But they're trapped behind the alliance of resistance against that alliance for progress. It's a little bit like the way the people behind the Iron Curt curtain were envying the opportunities on the other side of the wall. This is a dynamic. So is chaos conducive to that growth? No, I think today is more regional cooperation. You were talking earlier about intelligence agencies or whatever is now, let's say what the Mossad does or Al-Mohabarat does or whatever is now, let's say, what the Mossad does or Al-Mohabarat does or whatever does.

But imagine, imagine that we could have just as much as Europe today in the context of the EU, or for instance NATO, have their own arrangements. Why couldn't we replicate and have something similar in the Middle East, where countries in the region have joined security arrangements, military alliances, because I think that liberates us from putting far too much of our national budget into military infrastructure and rather have that money spent on education,

on welfare, on healthcare, things of that nature, as opposed to the annual security and military budget that we would have to independently have if we don't work together. Therefore, that theory of creating chaos may have worked in the 20th century, but I don't think it's a direction that we would like to have our countries in the region to go. I mean, I would be at least if I were to represent the argument on behalf of my compatriots, say whether I'm talking to the Israelis or to the Saudis or whoever else in the region.

Look, we can only stand to benefit from it if we create an opportunities for economic growth for all of us. If there are enough Iranians invested in Egypt, an Egyptian invested in Saudi Arabia Arabia or Saudi Arabia invested in... I mean, people of that region will demand stability. And no foreign power, regardless of its industries, can disturb that, because you will not be dealing, not be the few leaders at the top that make the decisions. We're dealing with about three or four hundred million people who live in that

area resisting that sort of imposition. That's the nature of the game. So I mean obviously we can't guarantee that those who think differently may want to try and attempt to force again that scenario but it's very different than before. Before most of the people in the region will not have a saying this debate but if they say wait a second it is our assets, our properties, our economic interests. They will in fact demand their respective governments to maintain that situation. So I don't think that the dynamics in the 21st century resemble anything like what we saw in the latter part of the 20th century. Some of the rules have changed. I'm not saying that those problems have totally dissipated.

I'm not saying that we are out of the woods yet. But I think that if we look from that prison, that if the behavior is commitment to religious cooperation, regional cooperation, it is committed to working with, as opposed to against each other, that it's a collective benefit as opposed to a zero-sum game. It is not this camp or that camp. Of course, you have to create that vision. And I think that vision is through dialogue. And the more we have dialogue among our nations, the better we can achieve that. Because all those predispositions that exist in the past,

whether you are anti-Arab or anti-Israel or whatever, this is based on what? Is it based on correct information or is it based on a certain mindset that was cultivated or built by certain narratives or certain ideological pressures? I think in a realistic free world when debate and discussion is open and transparent, those kind of ideologies that tend to radicalize people or mount them

in an attitude of being anti-something to justify your own ends, we can reverse that or we can at least eliminate that. That my gain doesn't have to be your loss. That I don't have to necessarily say, you know, what's in my national interest or my national identity by having to be anti-Arab, let's say, or this or anti-dat. That's really my approach and my philosophy. this or anti that. That's really my approach and my philosophy. I may be from the point of you of some maybe naive or maybe simple minded, but I think we ought to give this process a chance in our region which never has never has had so far the opportunity to experiment. It's tough to negotiate with unreasonable people. You know, it's easy to negotiate with reasonable people. When you're doing a business deal and you sit down and within the first 30 minutes, you're like, you

know what? Okay, I think we can get a deal here. Maybe we're not going to like the price, but they seem like they have reason to say, you're thinking this is worth 300 million. It's not worth 300 million. It's 220. We're willing to come at 2, 18 if you go to it. You're out of your mind. This is 400 million. Oh, you're unreasonable. We're walking away. We don't need to. Some of the people over there, you're not dealing with reasonable people in the go-shade. It just doesn't make any sense. But there's a couple of things I want to ask you here. One, Saudi Arabia. If you pull up the map in the Middle East, Rob, just pull up map Middle East. And if we just look at the conditions here and just zoom in. Yeah, just a basic map is good right there. Zoom in, you got Iran there. If you go southeast, you're dealing with Pakistan

is on the other side, Afghanistan to the east of you, you're dealing with Turkmenistan, you got Azerbaijan, Iraq to your west, Kuwait, and Saudi right across the Persian Gulf, and all these other things that you're looking at, right? Okay. Saudi Arabia is MBS, and I'm specifically talking MBS here, Muhammad bin Salman, who seems

very ambitious, okay, and he wants to make it a safe place for Ronaldo to choose to go play there, right? Okay, so Messi said no, all the money in the world, Messi said no, that Messi say no because his wife and family didn't feel safe going there. Maybe that's not good for him. Liv golf, Greg Norman, all the stuff that they were doing would live golf.

Hey, come golf over here, Phil Nicholson, I'm gonna go over there, Tiger, stay PGA, right? And he's doing what he's doing here. But if he has the aspirations that he has, which by the way, Saudi Arabia, 50 years, what they've been able to do, you know, progress, and now they like to have the reputation of one of the safer places to be at. Great, to the point where Ronaldo wants to be there. He doesn't want to see chaotic times in the Middle East, and his argument may be, well, listen, I can't do anything about my neighbors, but my house is safe.

And my house is Saudi Arabia, we're safe. That's like me living in a gated community, or me living in a community where your house may be safe because the family's good. But right next to you are assassins, and people who kill for living and drug dealers and all this stuff, doesn't want to save your houses.

The surrounding area is super chaotic, right? Somebody like him that he has to almost like play the, you know, man, I kind of want to support Israel, you know, Abraham's court, but at the same time, you know, I don't want to upset Palestine because they're right here as well because I'm selling customers and they're also in the in the element of trying to please everybody, but would he and Saudi be one of the places that would would like to see a regime change taking place in Iran? I think the mindset and I'm not guessing

I think the mindset, and I'm not guessing, because I had the opportunity to meet with the MBS several years ago when he was visiting in Washington, and I happened to have an opportunity to sit and talk to him. It's a one-time meeting, but as a member of the younger generation within the Saudi Royal the Royal Family, and I had met four decades ago, his uncles, I mean, the previous generation at the time. And I don't see that only in Saudi, I've seen many of the other countries, all of these younger generation of princes who are educated in a Western sense,

and have a totally different outlook that used to be before. In terms of, again, that sense of modernity, that sense of going towards, you know, as far as the status, as far as the women had in Saudi Arabia, ten years ago compared to all. This is all under revision, under vision that he's bringing in. And he was telling me, you know, he remembered, not that he remembered, but he knew through the experiences that Iran had at the time before the revolution, the kind of relationship that we had with Saudi Arabia.

I'm talking about Iran's Saudi relations and how everything turned for the worst since the revolution. And as a matter of fact, Homanie was extremely vocal from the very beginning in pretty much challenging the Saudi royal family as whether or not they ought to have the legitimacy to be the custodian of the two holy mosques. That's where this whole Shiite Sunni type conflicts started in the region and sort of creating that sense

of tension and hostility from the get-go, from the get-go. And therefore, saying that, of course, we know how different the world will be once we are rid of this system, go back to an era where we had those kind of relationship and, of course, so much more, which are truly think it's attainable, because back then the whole Palestinian issue and everything that

existed in fact the assassination of And War Sadat as a result of his suing for peace and going towards the direction of having peace between Egypt and Israel and all that. I mean, all of these factors that, again, to some extent, you brush the punitive in terms of the chaos and conflict. But I think that right now, the whole body language, the whole determination is, how can we progress towards regional cooperation?

So you have to eliminate the element that creates chaos. You have to eliminate the element that creates instability. You have to eliminate the element that is creating violence and uncertainty. Guess what? The only regime in the area that is hell bent on that and is actually behind all of this instability is nothing other than the Islamic regime in terror. The other ones constantly creating chaos, The other ones constantly creating chaos, the other ones constantly creating instability,

the other one, formant terrorism, radicalism, and after all, it's part of their sacred mission of exporting this ideology with the ultimate goal of creating this modern-drenched Shi'i caliphate. That's basically the mission statement of this regime. Homanic said it very clear. Homanic said to a, I don't know if it was an Italian reporter or some reporter on his way as he was flying back to Tehran, what are your sentiments after 15 years in exile of returning to Iran? You know what he said? One word, nothing. Nothing

was his answer. No sentiment. Because to him, Iran is not even the issue. It was the omat. It was all about the world of Islam, borderless. It was not even in the interest of the nation. That's what he said. And do know that word ominously is today in the mindset of Iranians. Each meaning nothing infarcie. Yep. Yeah. No sentiments. And then you look at the kind of leaders who today say, what can we do for our own countries, our own respective countries, but wouldn't be easier if we did it in collaboration and together. I mean, it's a simple, rational expectation. Does it pose new challenges?

Yes, it does. But there are good problems to have. But if you have a constant antagonist, that doesn't allow for having what could by now have existed, had we not had the regime in Iran between the Palestinian and the Israelis in the two-stage solution, for instance. Why has it been delayed? Because there are those who don't have interest in having stability and peace in the region, and they are at work. So there is a true battle going on between those who are committed to good relationship, to stability and those who are against it. One side

has to win, Patrick. No, I don't disagree. One side has to. I don't disagree. The only thing is like, you know, when Reagan would say, you know, he doesn't negotiate with terrorists. You can't negotiate with extremists. It's very hard to sit. Let me ask this question. What do they fear? What does, where will they feel pain the most? I'm talking about Hamine, Reisi, Ayatollah, Mullah. I'm talking about them in Iran.

What do they fear the most? Because there's a few things. One, is it the people? You know, is it, you know, certain sects where they fear that are armed because only 7.3% of Iran is armed. So if the populist wanted to kind of do something to the government, it's not gonna be high

or just to kind of put things in perspective. They're at 7.3%. You got Taiwan is zero in Indonesia's zero. US is 120%. So that means we have more guns than our populace. Like if it's 340 million, we have 390 million of guns in America, give or take. In Iran, they don't have it.

So we the people, maybe, is it more sanctions? Because when the sanctions came up, if you can pull up that CNBC article wrap that we have the these six charts showed Trump's Sanctions and Obama sanctions when he lifted it what it did and our painful was a cost of nearly a trillion dollars if he can go a little lower to look at this First chart shows economic Iran's economy last reported growth in 2017 so here's's in the grade that's Obama-Titan sanctions on Iran until a nuclear deal is reached in 2015.

Boom, once it's reached, he releases the sanctions, you notice the economy explodes, goes up 2016, and then Trump comes in, he withdraws from the 2015 nuclear agreement. Boom, it collapses, not a little bit, dramatically below the GDP change total left, if you're looking at the number, that shows the change. And then obviously Biden comes in, he releases it,

and it's kind of going back and forth. Go to the next chart to see what sanctions did to Iran. Oil exports have fallen since new sanctions were imposed. So again, nuclear deal signed, oil exports go up, 15, 16, 17, Trump reimposes sanctions. It drops dramatically of the number of millions of barrels per day. Go a little lower, the next one.

Iran trade had been on a downward trend. God worse, even after that in 2017, once the sanctions came back up, if you want, and by the way, these are the lowest levels they've had in decades, which is problematic for them. Go to the next couple of charts. This is inflation. We just talked about that today.

Dave and really said that they're at 55%. Go to the next one, Rob, if you could. Unemployment, steady 12%, climbed again. And I think there's one other one if I'm not mistaken, or is that the last one? Yeah, this is Iran's fiscal deficit. It's set to widen further. I mean, go back to 2011, okay, they're doing okay. Iran realls in trillions and then look at what happens.

17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21. You don't want your company to look like this. You don't want your bank account to look like this. Let her own your US, your Iranian government to look like this. You don't want your bank account to look like this. Let her on your US, your Iranian government to look like this. So is it the people they fear the most? Is it sanctions they fear the most? Is it women they fear the most? Is it young people they fear the most?

Is it courage? Who is it that they fear the most to say? That's the one way to impose pain on the regime to cause a change. I think it's a little bit of all of what you describe. one way to impose pain on the regime to cause a change. I think it's a little bit of all of what you described, because let's say if you are on a sort of parallel track approach, and by that I mean, let's focus for a while

on the, let's say, campaign of maximum pressure in the context of all sorts of sanctions that can be, in fact, implemented, and I must say that some of the sanctions that have been called for have not really been implemented, which is why they have had access to more all revenue that they wouldn't have had. But, you know, again, that's the result of the policies of the current administration. But other steps that they can take, because part of their means of conducting their campaign of aggression abroad, is the fact that they have not been dealt with. For instance, Chamanee has offices in England that operate as distribution centers for money that funds all sorts of activities in that country that antagonizes

the Jewish community, or for instance, threatens journalists and what have you just to cite a couple of examples. And I'm sure they have similar entities that are operating in Canada, in the US, and so on and so forth. We haven't seen a policy that actually takes note of these elements that are tied with the regime that are conducting these money laundering operations. There have been an expelling of members, of course,

he associated with people that are criminally responsible for many actions that have taken, that are freely roaming the streets of America right now. Some of them even work for the US government. So these are the kind of things that we put fear in their mind that the world is now really taking this seriously and they're cutting us from having that leverage outside. But what about the domestic component?

What they fear are the people more than anything. Why would you go and try to poison girls in their schools? Why would you go and shoot people in the face? How would you dispatch troops to kill Kurds in their own region? I'm talking artillery and tanks against your own citizenry. They are afraid of the people the most. But as long as they think that the Iranian people are not being helped or supported or backed, then they think that they still have a chance to buy some time and take advantage of some weak foreign government policies vis-à-vis them.

So what I'm trying to say here is that while you could increase the maximum pressure by bringing even more element into limiting the regime's ability to repress, aggress a broad or repress at home, you have to bring in parallel to that a policy of maximum support. That policy of maximum support means that you bring more opportunities for people to bring pressure from within. The combination of the two is, first of all, what could help the Iranian people ultimately

triumph. And the regime is not dumb. You know, even at the time of the Green Movement, which was far short of what people in Iran today call for. Promenadeesplain was filled and ready to take him outside of Tehran. Many days before ultimately started to tank. They are very paranoid about that. They are just counting on that thing not being continued.

So that's the way to address it. But if I may, raise one of the things that have always been critical of in terms of the basic flaw in the foreign policy of most Western governments, I'm talking about Western Europe and of course the United States. Is that all this policy of sanctions was based on the false premise of behavior

change as an expectation, as if this regime could possibly change its behavior, become good guys, sit at the table and reasonably negotiate. And that was a false expectation to begin with. Irrespective of whether sometimes it was the carrot and sometimes the stick approach. But it didn't pay off simply because it is not in the DNA of this regime to be able to co-exist in the same world that talks about liberty and human rights

and democratic values. It is a regime that is totalitarian in terms of its vision of exporting an ideology. It is as fascist as ititarian in terms of its vision, of exporting an ideology. It is as fascist as it comes in terms of the way it treats the citizenry, not unlike the Nazi's during the war. It is racist in terms of how it behaves as of the other ethnicities and a little bit

like what we had in apartheid. What's interesting to me, by the way, Patrick, is that the world went to the free world at least, went to war with communist Russia and triumphed at the end. Then we had to go to war to defeat the Nazis. You brought pressure to eliminate and put an end to apartheid. Each of these were separate systems.

But if you look at the regime in Iran, it is all of the above. It is totalitarian in one way, like the Soviet Union was. It is fascist the way Hitler's regime was. It is racist the way it was in South Africa. And yet, nothing has been done about it. That's a bit odd. What do, and yet nothing has been done about it. That's a bit odd.

Wouldn't you buy nothing has been done about it? It's almost like, well, let's accept this as a feta complete, and so they all hit behind the argument, let's talk to the moderates. I want to take you back to why is the regime fearful of the people, because the first indication that the world thought it's actually for real was this promise or reform. It all started at the time where Khatami was in the picture or came into the picture. And the first wave of young Iranians who were promised reform and stood behind him to the count of almost 22 million votes. A year after Khatami who was perceived by the West as an agent for change and reform in

Iran, didn't carry out on his promises in his campaign of, you know, adjusting to that. And the first wave of young Iranians who protested against him found themselves university students, they were thrown out of their dorms to their death by the regime elements. A generation later during the Green Movement, the Iranian people were on the streets of Iran to the tune of over two million people chanting the slogan Obama Obama Yaba Una Yaba Ma which means either with them or with us. By the way that's an answer to those who say oh we don't want to get involved

we're going to accuse us of interference in domestic affairs. Well, the people were asking for it for some kind of a taking of a position. Why didn't happen? It's a different story, but at least that was the ask. And the regime feared that. Fear the fact that maybe the world will come to a CC running people. Now we're talking about the generation of Masa Amini and the women life with the movement. Every time and every generation, the regime had to severely repress them. So that's an indication of weakness, not strength. Why would they go and repress people at this level? Why would they go and not be fearful of saying, okay, fine, we respect your vote. They couldn't from day one.

fearful of saying, OK, fine, we'll respect your vote. They couldn't from day one. So the fear factor is from the people themselves. But it's a question of leveling the playing field. Empowerment in a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience is critical. Because if we escalate it to domestic conflict, it's going to be a mess. It's going to be a vicious and less

cycle of revenge and retribution. That's not the way to go. But you cannot let people defenseless. There are ways that the world can help us by bringing even more pressure on the regime. Provided, provided, of course, that this time, the optic is not behavior change and maintaining the status quo. But getting rid of the head of the snake that has been the root cause in the region, not by means of foreign intervention, mind you. But by the ask of a nation that want to liberate itself, and it's your natural army in the grounds, and with the resources that doesn't even cost a single dollar to a taxpayer of this or that country to say, oh, yet again, we're

going to have to embark on an adventure in some region that we already failed a couple of times in the resource, namely Afghanistan and Iraq. But in the case of Iran, it's very different. And there are existing assets to be able to take care of that if you really want to help them, help them to financially organize labor strikes, which is the quickest way to bring paralysis to the regime. Because our objective as Iranians is to get rid of this regime. The world doesn't have to call for it, but if they are truly in defense of people's liberties and aspirations to self-determination, then they have to follow suit and help Iranians,

get to their goal. That is not part of the stated narrative of Western government. And we need more than lip service and condemnation of human rights violation by this regime. We need to really understand what side of the fence do they stand? Do they stand with us in knowing that ultimately it's win-win for us to get rid of this regime or do they delay the process and in fact interfere in Iran's domestic affairs but releasing funds to a regime that cracks on its own citizenry by delaying the process of the regime failing because in reality that's

what has happened recently. You haven't actually helped the Iranian people regardless of your You haven't actually helped the Iranian people regardless of your lip service. You have actually helped the regime catch their breath, their second breath, so to speak, and delay its demise. And I think that's why we see that the Iranian people at some point are going to ask the question, do we really have a chance without the world backing us up? And that's the part that it, it would be a shame. It would be a shame. And the reason I'm saying is to shame is that we consider this.

We all know what the ultimate argument will be in the elephant in the room, in avoidable conflict and escalation. Nobody wants that, right? But it's not going to happen by miracle. And if you don't understand that while you say, okay, diplomacy has failed, and there's reasons for it, and go straight to conflict, and don't give an opportunity for change without having the result for conflict and escalation, to a nation to liberate itself.

I find it honestly, historically criminal, not to allow for that opportunity to occur, which is right in front of our faces, right now as we speak. The people are still in the streets in Iran protesting. Was that added element that would give them more leverage, coupled with the pressure from outside. That's what we forced the regime to collapse. And the regime at the end knows that the days are numbered when people are mobilized properly. And there is a cavalry that is helping them.

And if you look at the end of all these regimes, it was not until there was a tacit support for that to happen that it actually happened, not because necessarily the West wanted to put an end to, let's say, the Soviet Empire, because most of the dissidents and people of those countries wanted it, or people who wanted an end to apartheid in South Africa,

or people who wanted assistance in terms of their struggle, like the solidarity movement in Poland, and there are so many other examples we can say. None of these managed to be successful without some element of support from the outside world. That's why I'm asking a question about MBS. It's obviously, and by the way, for somebody like you, even with this nuclear deal that Obama was negotiating with them,

I think John Kerry was leading with $150 billion, do you think that's going to prevent Iran from creating, you know, making advancements on nuclear bombs? Well, again, I think the nature of the regime is really why there's a lack of trust. Because even if you sign the best contract possible, what guarantees do you have that they'll be honoring that contract? It's a matter of trust. In that sense, it's not the gun.

It's the finger on the trigger. Why do you negotiate with a country that believes in death upon America, yet you wanna release 150 billion dollars as long as they commit to not building nuclear, not making advancements on a nuclear bomb? Why do you trust that regime? That's exactly, that's a contradiction in that analysis.

That's again pointing to what I'm saying, there's a flaw because you think that these people have the rationality of real politic in mind. They don't. They really don't. So all that takes for them is that if my enemy is weakening, I'm going to take advantage of it. America is the enemy.

America is the great Satan in the mindset of the regime. Not the people, the regime. When you see Iranian students bypassing the American flag that is at the entrance of every main door, and you've seen the footage. They don't step on it, they walk over. That's a signal not to the mullahs. Beautiful thing, when you see that.

If a signal to Mr. Biden. That's right. And the American people. That's right. And the American people. That's right. As we used to say, they're not practicing their linguistic skills when they're holding signs in English or in French when they're protesting the regime. It's a signal to the outside world, which is why if you look at the Iranian people and where they stand, as opposed to this regime that cannot possibly be trusted, you cannot eliminate what is the argument of people like Bibine Tania, who

is about existential threat to Israel because they know the nature of this regime. And in fact, it is really known that the Iranian people are so different than this regime. So do the Saudis, in my view. I think some of the Europeans are beginning to pick up on that. I sure hope that the American people already know that, because we have at least one and a half million, if not more, Iranian Americans, or people of Iranian origin living in America, and have a chance to discover them

and their thoughts about their country and what they represent in contrast to what this regime is. What I wonder is I don't think so many politicians today in Washington really understand it, whether they are on the Congress side or in the executive. And that's a shame because this is the moment in time that we need America to be fully aligned to where the Iranian people want to go.

When we know that outside of this, what China is trying to do, what Russia is trying to do. Yeah, I mean, it's, it's, it's, it's interesting. By the way, this is it where you're talking about. They don't even want to step on the Israel flag or the American flag. When I lived in Iran, that, that flag to us was an idea. I didn't link it to a face.

I linked it to an idea of freedom of what it meant to dream. One day, you know, you're watching Rocky IV, you know, what America would one day look like. By the way, so I'm convinced they're going to build a nuclear bomb. What do you like it or not? They're going to hide it from me. They've got plenty of desert, plenty of underground stuff that they can do what I even you know and about it. So you better off when you're negotiating with someone like that to just say guys, what are we doing? They're gonna build it anyways no matter what you tell them not to do they're gonna build it anyways So you know while you're saying this obviously, you know the nuclear stuff that we're talking about my question for you is the following There's a clip with Pierce Morgan

If you want to bring up Rob the clip with Pierce Morgan your Your interview with him, this is I think a week ago, maybe two weeks ago. And at the end of the clip, he asks you a question. And I want to kind of ask the question in a different way to see what your thoughts are. But play the clip when he asks us one word answer he wants from you,

which he doesn't get, but go for it. If you've got the opportunity democratically, would you go back and lead Iran? I will help my fellow competitors as much as I can with no personal ambition. I don't think that the issue for me is anything beyond helping the creation of the kind of institutions, well beyond the constitutional government, because civil society is the ultimate watchdog for society and we need to strengthen this institution to make democracy a lasting system in a country.

Okay, I'll say that as a yes, not 76 words, Rosa. That's 70, you can pause it right there, but I think my question... I didn't hear the one word by the way. Oh, I got you. Okay, I got it. So, you know, my question for you would be more from the standpoint of do you want a job? And let me explain what I mean by this.

Because so I got four kids, I got two boys and I watch one of my kids play certain sports and he's playing it because he wants to make me happy, right? And it's kind of doing, like, yeah, I'll do it, you know, it notice what it is. But I watch and play a game that I'm not a fan of, but that makes him happy and he wants to do it, right? Obviously, nobody in the world can really explain

what it is to be crown prince Resaul Palavi. With the pressures of, hey, everybody wants to ask you about your father, everybody wants to ask you about your grand, you do, you do, you do, you're like, what are you gonna do? What are you gonna do this? And it's this constant pressure that only one person can understand.

Your kids are not gonna understand it. Your wife's not gonna understand it. Your supporters are not gonna understand it. No one's gonna understand it. Your mother may not even fully understand it because it's a son. Your mother just wants the best for you. Mother's relationship with a son is very different.

And she has to play diplomatic role, right? Because her husband, but she also loves her kid. So when you see a, to get the kind of support, I believe, from people behind you to go through this that's going to be very, very ugly, you got to want the job. Do you see it as you want the job? You want to be the person to help bring democracy

to Iran or help people be free? Or is it more like, you know, if the people want me, I will, it is my duty, it is my responsibility. I'll do the job. How do you see it? Well, honestly, Patrick, and I'm not giving you BS, this is really what I wholeheartedly believe. I think that a lot of people trust me in the sense that I could help them with the transition.

That doesn't mean that I represent the outcome. That means that I can help the transition. On this note, I have many people who are monarchists who support me, and many people are Republicans and support me. And I've said time and again that I'm not running for any office because, and I tell you why, because in terms of the job, let's define what a job is. I will tell you what I'm willing to do and what I'm not willing to do.

I start by telling you that I might have been destined at some point, probably in the future king as a result of having been a crown prince, and of course then everything goes south and the regime changes and a new reality sets in. So I'm now a young man in exile, and of course I'm engaged with the opposition activity of Iranians against the regime from the get-go, from the early 80s. And now, as I said, 43 years and counting, I'm still doing the same. Because I believe that this regime at some point will not last. Hopefully, it will be my lifetime. And in that sense, we as Iranians have an opportunity to design our future. But what do I bring to the table?

What do I really bring to the table? First of all, I think that it was a blessing in disguise for me in terms of the experiences that I have acquired in all these years that I would never have acquired if I had just been in Iran and just went to a transition. I had the opportunity of traveling the four corners of the world. I had the opportunity to see different cultures and civilizations.

I had the opportunity to talk to average people, cab drivers, merchants, students, officers, all type of people, understanding how citizens in respective countries look towards their leaders or governments or what are their paves, what are their frustrations, what are their demands. That's a wealth of information. And when I look at Iran, forget about the governing part of it. But what I think the country needs, and I think what the country needs in terms of beyond the structure of governance,

that's what I was trying to tell Pierce, that civil society eats raw in maintaining the process. I mean, the older watchdogs in society, all the wizard blores. When you look at the whole story about Watergate and what happened then, and had it not been for these two reporters, what would have happened? And so many examples like that. What are the, I really think that what I can bring, which

is most helpful to the nation, are all these elements that strengthen society, that educates and prepares society, that gives citizens the understanding of how to fight for their rights. Example, I guarantee you, Patrick, right now, we're bringing the best constitution that guarantees the right of citizens, particularly that of women.

And it's there, encoded in the laws. What percentage of Iranian women in Iran do you think today are even aware of what are entitled to begin with, less than 10%. So what do you do? Is it sufficient to simply have the laws and the books? Or do you have to bring awareness to society, bring them those extra elements that actually equip them to fight for their rights, or to obtain their rights, or to be guaranteed their rights? I don't see that in the position if you are engaged in today, today, routine of running the country as an executive. I don't see myself in that role.

Worst, if people want me to be in that institutional role, you're technically mausled. You can have opinions, and boy, do I have opinions. But can the Queen of England or the King of England today have an actual opinion on the government and its policies? They can. And that's a ceremonial role that I don't see for myself either. It's very awkward if you think of it. I'm actually liking this because are you saying you don't want the job, you don't want to move your family to Iran and run it, but you're willing to help in the transition and help somebody else

to it. Is that kind of what you're saying? And that doesn't mean that I won't go there. That doesn't mean that I won't be there. That simply means that do I have to absolutely be in a position of authority to be able to do a job? Do you want to be the one living in Iran moving your family? They're running Iran. Do you see that? It depends on the circumstances. I mean, seriously, it's impossible to answer some

of these hypothetical questions because a lot depends on whether or not in fact, we have attained that B. Is it something that you could do? C, do they even want that? I don't think that's how it works. Your crown prince would all do respect. If I may challenge you on this topic, this might. Now, what do you mean, do so? I, only reason I'm saying this is the following reason, because for me, so, you know, I do, let's just, I do business planning

with my different business owners we consult for. I will sit for. And what do you want? Well, you know, I want this isn't, you could, can't really help you. What do you want? Well, you know, I want this isn't a good book. I can't really help you. What do you want? Here's what I want. Within 10 years, 100 million revenue, expansion, then I'd like to sell the business within 20 years. When I'm 72 years old, because I want my two boys to run the company and I want to be a chairman of the board.

So, da da da da da da da, perfect. Let's go raise capital. Let me make some calls, call this recruiting from Lesca Cornferry on the line. Let's get you three C-sweets. You No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, can't even play for myself. So here's what I think the reason why I'm challenging you with this thing is because the more we know as the audience, then we can back you up or your word carries weight where you can come like, you know, there's a couple of names I can't say, couple of names I cannot say. I can say Ali Katimi. I can say Ali Dai. I can say these names.

You know, these names, very loved, beloved. One is a coach, player, 15 million followers, respect, they're kind of sitting sidelines, but there's also a couple of military people there in Iran that they don't want me to release the names. And some of them are purely at a respect to you. Like the level of respect they have for you,

they don't even want the name to be mentioned because this is not my business. I don't wanna do this, this is him. We're willing to do anything to help him, you know, come and bring freedom to Iran. And so I think, and if you don't agree with me, please push back and challenge me, I think there's a part of it that you're holding back

the community because you are the face everybody's waiting to do. I think that it would be beneficial to the people for you to say, yes, I've spoken to my wife, I've spoken to my family. Here's what I'm willing to do at this age and I'm willing to go. I'm no longer 20 years old. I'm no longer 30 years old. I'm no longer, there's a different perspective on your 20. I told Roaching Retirement Day, that's one, I respect that. I told you, and that's why I'm saying

it is a different life today than there. But that doesn't mean that you cannot still have influence at any time. But you see, when you say that, you simply have to have an absolute, I love, I love, I love, that's the debate here. But I love that because to me when you say that, what it does to me is it creates an opening for me

that's on the sidelines, not me, I'm not, you know, but for somebody on the sidelines to say, okay, great. I'd like to put my hand on there. Can we have a meeting, current prince? Hey, I'd love to get your supporting council. Can we fly out to, you know, maybe Dubai and have a meeting. We want to come and put an event together and we think you're going to be the flag carrier and the voice to rally and get people. And I actually think

you'll have more moral authority because there is no motive there. You know how sometimes like somebody, you know, it's, it's, it's a tricky thing. And maybe maybe there's some level of hesitational paranoia might be have simply because if they miss, construe or misunderstand the intention, all he's doing this because he wants to put the crown on the set, all he's doing is because he wants to have power, all he's doing this because of this and this and that, which is not the case.

I'm not the other hand. But on the other hand, it could be, well, how committed is he? I think that I proved in 43 years of living a life that I could have otherwise said, you know, screw you, you screw us up and my family, I'm going to go after myself. I think I paid my dues and proved that I've sacrificed a lot.

And again, with no other intentions I paid my dues and proved that I've sacrificed a lot. And again, with no other intentions that to be able to help my fellow compatriots achieve something deserving. So my focus right now is on facing which we are. How do we get rid of this regime? And then how do we manage the transition? And I know that that requires leadership. To that extent, I'm playing to play that role,

to be the agent of transition, to help people achieve that. I don't know how they will vote in the end. And as I said, I'm not placing myself as a candidate for the job. Do you have interest in that? I'm an ambition. Do you have interest in that? My interest is to help Iran have the proper governance in place that they desire, and

I would like to be able to help that. Let me ask you. I still think that I can't help the country. The way I want to help the country. I think I can help the country. Go for it. It's not by saying we're a bunch of ministers around the table debating what should be, how do we set the price for all today, or what's this aspect of diplomacy vis-à-vis these

countries that can write such a contract. There are enough people capable of doing that. There's something that I think I'm capable of doing that a lot of them may not be able to as easy do. The whole network of people that I know. The whole people that, from a point of view of entrepreneurs in this industry and technologies that I can't speak to my country.

The kind of connectivity that I can't talk about. So, I think, to my country. Yes. The kind of connectivity that I can make Iranians be connected to the outside world. Maybe I could be an ambassador on behalf of the country worldwide to be able to do that. I really don't see myself isolated in some chamber with a bunch of the decision makers and not be able to free to roam the country, to see the people from near, know exactly what they want, not be to be surrounded constantly by a whole call of security guards

and have an overworked schedule where you really are stuck, some function of executive, honestly, truth to God, that's not me. And I think that I can still contribute to the country. So if you run this comment, say, you know, you either have to say absolutely 100% unless you're not going to be there to put the crown on your head or be the next president. It was the point.

I said, guys, I cannot be someone that I'm not. That's what I am. That's what I want. That's what I would like to be able to help you with. That's not good enough. That's fine. Buy pass me. Find somebody else. But I'm not here to gain power. I'm not here for the job in the sense of being in control. At least not now, because I think we are far from that debate and argument. What we are here is how can we manage this transition? And that's where I recognize,

and that's where I feel that a lot of Iranians are pinning their hopes on me to play that role, because they don't see too many other people they can trust around. Let me restate what I think I read from what you said and correct me from wrong, because I want to be as clear and concise as possible. My understanding of what you just state is,

for example, when you think about the US Constitution, declaration of independence, you got the 56 writers and they have Jefferson and Smith and Washington and Washington becomes the first president, et cetera, but there was a guy nobody talks about that all of those guys respect, there was a man named Benjamin Rush, okay. And amongst them, he was the alpha.

He was the guy, but he didn't want the job. But they all needed him, because he was the most experienced, smartest guy. Of course, Washington at the military side, but then Washington becomes president that it's a different system we're talking about. I'm getting the feeling you're saying, I would play a very good role of a chairman at the board,

but I have no desire to be the CEO, moving my entire family to Iran, running Iran, putting the crown, and being the third king that represents to do this when my family does not my interest. Am I reading that correctly? Yes. Okay, so do you notice the first time I've heard you say this? Mm. So do you notice the first time I've heard you say this?

Mm-hmm. And just the first time I've heard you say this. And for me, what it does to me as a viewer, how I interpret this now is I think you have officially opened the door for a bunch of people say, how about me? Okay. And that allows for people to vote and say What do you think about this guy then you can be a person that's the endorser and supporter and strategic behind closed doors

This could open up an event to be taking place a private function Happening that's by invitation only that's gonna be held in some part of the world that people can come through and talk and say How can we now unify to make sure this becomes a reality? I think that was the first stepping stone. Again, my opinion, I think this was the first stepping stone and I respect you for being straight up and transparent about where you see yourself. Because I think, you know, for somebody to be an honest broker

as an agent for democratic change, you have to be impartial. You have to be above the fray. You cannot advocate for one system versus the other. You have to allow for the democratic process to be the final determination of that. So what I'm trying to say here is that I see myself in the best way to be able to help that process post regime collapse, to facilitate that process by doing two things. A, make sure that we have a proper transitional government in place that has to manage the country's affairs temporarily while we are working on the constitutional modifications, and to be able to be there to help the best and as soon as possible

appointment or election of Iranians representative to go to that constitutional assembly. Because Patrick, right now if you look at the secular democratic opposition in Iran, we don't agree on every point. That's normal. We have Republicans, you have monarchies, you have all sorts of different ideas. But the idea of how can we have the proper coalition that can work together on a common agenda with a one single enemy in front of us, which is the regime. We cannot have maximum elements to agree with, but there are minimal elements that we can agree on. Human rights, a secular system of democracy, where there's separation of religions from state, and are belief in Iran's territorial integrity. These are the minimum requirements to have enough

conditions to form a broad coalition. And it's not here that we're going to define the final shape of the regime. I say, who's a monarchist, who's the Republican? At this stage it's irrelevant. But are we Democrats? Do we believe in a secular democratic outcome? Is there enough of us to form enough of a broad coalition to lead the country in that direction. Question number one, that's the first one we have to answer. So right now, as we speak, my agenda is what? My agenda is that I think we have to move beyond the classic distribution of how the Iranian political structures or groups and organizations have been defined in the context of opposition. I look at it more on the basis of a coalition of the willing. There could

be individuals, it could be organizations, it could be parties, it's a competition of all of the above. But a coalition of the willing, in other words, those who want to be part of the solution, as opposed to those who still remain part of the problem, and we have some of them, it's a question of how we can mobilize the nation, enough of a critical mass that can represent the alternative, not just for domestic consumption, but for international consumption. Because many times I've heard lawmakers or politicians here and in Europe and elsewhere say, well, what's the alternative? Where is the opposition?

The opposition is fragmented, it is this, this is that. And to which I say, look, there is good dialogue, there's good progress in that respect. And one of the key factors for that progress is because now we have a new strata that until now we're not part of the equation. And those are the former reformists who no longer believe that this system is tenable. And they might find now a way of converges with us. And they have tremendous amount of influence back home.

And that's a huge asset that can be gained as a result of these converges. How could you play that role without being somebody that invites collaboration coordination? So, if I'm an agent in that process, it's to bring everybody to the table as much as possible, and to broaden this coalition, which is what I'm trying to do. I think you can now broker everybody to come to the table.

That's what I'm doing now. I think it's going to happen now. I'm taking responsibility to the extent of saying, as it relates to a transition, I'm your man and I'm willing to play that role. And I will play that role. But that doesn't mean that we are already putting me in a box and saying, that's the outcome. I don't know what the outcome will be. And even then I will say, there's no way now, Patrick, realistically speaking, that

I can answer, because all of this is with the assumption that we can get to the point that finally people can determine what the final form is. And then does that alternative have a candidate representing that alternative? Well, wait before that. We could get there.

And as I said, I don't know. Is it going to what I'm still 65 years old? Is it going to be what I'm 80, 85 years old, I don't know. Is it going to be what I'm still 65 years old? Is it going to be what I'm 80, 85 years old? I don't know how long it will take? None of us know how long it will take, realistically speaking. But you keep asking one question, whether or not I'm going to take my family back there. Because in a way you are thinking whether or not you can't take your family back there. We would all like to be able to go back home and be able to live there, if possible. And I see the real success that we can keep flowing and going back and forth,

we don't have to be pinned in one place. We cannot dive as because honestly, my life has been for the past four years here in America. My children live here, my friends live here, everybody that I know is here. So it's almost unfair to them. If I was to go back, what do I go back to? From a human aspect. So I'm a human being of course. I mean, I would be easy to pretend or to put on a front and be easy to pretend or to put on a front and that will be misleading people. I'd rather pay the price for honesty and transparency than pretension that will be literally not

telling the truth. I'm telling you the truth. tremendous respect. We have no idea how much respect I have for how straight up you're being right now with positions. Like, because that's what I'm thinking about with, I'm like, okay, 20 years old, okay, let me put a minister of course, 30, fine, 40, okay, 50, 30 years, my kids, like, I gotta go convince them. 43, 44 years, my wife, the places you go to, where you live, schools, you know, the system, all of that. And by the way, for me, I have no desire to move back. It

would be the most unfair thing for me to do to my American wife, which you've met, and who's from Houston. And my four kids who are used to this, but I would love to go taking for a month, two months, three months and stay there and go You know, you know, I'll sit in a backyard. I don't know what songs you listen to But when you were coming in I was listened to Vigain Lollabai and him and his brother and it's funny What his brother was a activist that was actually at was not a fan of certain things But I will listen to Moeen, you know, De La Michalbes, Fambargarda, you know, that whole song,

well I'll listen to Moeen, Bego Kegor, Nafaris, that Cassie Bechone, you know, that whole song, you should listen to it, you go there, right? I went to, I think it was a Darius concert, Darius is the one that had challenges with drugs before he cleaned up and he's got millions of followers, right? So my brother in law,

Siamak Sabatimani, who is outside with the family, he wants to meet you. Of course you guys have seen before because his father, you know whose father was. He takes me to this concert. This is when I lost my voice for a couple months and had to do surgery. So he takes me and I'm sitting there.

He says the most amazing thing that till today gave me the chills. This was 10 years ago. He says, can I force? I say, I first want to say a couple things. One, I want to apologize because none of you ever invite him into your weddings because my music was depressing. So I was never invited to your weddings because you don't want to play my music at your wedding because you're not crying and doing that. So I apologize for not creating the kind of music that you wouldn't buy into your weddings because I wanted to come to your wedding. He's talking to serenading with the audience. Beautiful thing.

Then he says for a moment, he says, let me take a moment and talk to the young people in the room. He says, and he says it in Farsi and Siamac fully translated for me, he says, make sure the young wolf in you takes care the old wolf that you'll one day be. What a thing to say, because the young wolf is hungry. The young wolf wants to go take over the world. The young wolf is like trying to go

and make sure the young wolf is taking care the old wolf one day you will be. So my desire is to go there and show my kids S1. It's the only vacation my parents took before they got divorced, so we went to S1. you will be. So my desires to go there and show my kids as one is to only be a kitchen my parents took before they got divorced. So we want to as one. So that's where my desire lies with it. And you know, you now saying what you're saying. I know a lot of people that have been wanting to watch this interview. And they're going to get a much better perspective to see where you're at. Final thoughts before we wrap up.

There's a place before. I'm going to complete this discussion. The way I see myself any run tomorrow, certainly not being entrapped in some damn palace or in any form, whether it's presidential or royal. Maybe in a way what has been taken away from me for 40 years of being able to roam my own country rather than be forcing to life into exile. But I see myself much more in things that really am passionate about.

What can we do to clean up our environment? What can we do to remedy some of the problems? What are the areas of needs that I see can be impactful? And from all the networks of people that I know in the ads that will bring that to the country and do those kind of things, go to the four corners of Iran and really see it firsthand. That's what I like to be able to do, rather than to sit around a table with a bunch of bureaucrats

and make some executive decisions. There are plenty of people who can fit that role. If I can simply be able to pass the torch to the next generation, I think I've done more than and beyond the call of duty. So you know, Iranians should not look at me only because I represent the future in the sense that everything is going to circle with me. In fact, I think that doesn't do service to the nation because again, you are enforcing the view from bottom to the

top and someone sitting at the very top, which is not at all my agenda, nor my objective. But if at first you need somebody to anchor the direction and put it in the right direction fair enough, I already would have done quite a lot, but it's not because I have any personal gains out of it. I think there are plenty of people capable of running the country in that context. There are certain aspects that I think I have maybe unique capabilities that other can't do. So the real question is, whatever my thoughts, what is the best use of someone named Resol Pa'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h'h But the same question will come with who's next. This should not be the issue in the first place.

That's what I'm trying to say. But that's again, far way down the line. Right now, the question should be, what is he doing now? What is his role now? And I'm trying to explain what my role now is. And the only role that I could possibly have is to say, fell or Iranians, whether you are monarchist or Republicans, whether you are conservatives or socialist,

whoever you are or wherever you are, we can only have one common agenda to liberate our country. And when we differ in opinion, let you are representatives debated in the Constitution of Assembly. And the final measure is the ballot box. The highest instance is the line, which is a parliament, and the only mechanism of a measuring popular will

is the ballot box. It's as simple as that. Do we have that in Iran right now? No. Can we determine our future without this? No. So let's get it to a position where we have those mechanisms because that's the only way we'll be able to argue that we have determined our future in the true democratic process.

Crown Prince, I'll give you the final thoughts here with the role if I'm watching this right now from US. And I'm Iranian and you know I'm watching this whole thing blown away by the conversations we've had. What can I do? If I'm watching this in Iran, VPN, and I'm listening to what you're saying, what can I do? Whether I'm younger, middle-aged, older, if I'm watching this on Manotol, whatever the different

media outlets are going to show it or any of the places, what can I do to create progress? How can I help? To this Gen Z generation of Iranians, young Iranians, I'm sure will be extremely positively impacted and encouraged doing that a fellow member of their generation in America or elsewhere are really connected in the same vision and goals and they know that they have synergy, they have the same interest of working with one another. One day they may become business partners, one day they may become associates, one day

they may be able to connect to do whatever it is as a project that they are trying to lead. And I think that my message to the outside world, to the audience that is watching this program, particularly the younger people in these countries, you would not possibly imagine how impactful it is, whether you are active in social media or in any means of communicating, whatever you want to communicate, that at the other end, Iranians will hear you.

Young Iranians will follow you, will hear what you have to say. They want to connect with you, because the biggest problem we have is we have this obstacle, like what the iron curtain was, that separates Iranians from the rest of the world. And every time we've seen in this whole, we're in life freedom, how much solidarity was demonstrated by the world? You don't know how far it went in giving hope and courage to our young Iranians fighting the regime on the street. So I think today we cannot argue like it was at the time of the revolution.

There was very little means of communication and or hearing back from the country. Right now as we spoke Patrick, you showed some of the footage we see in Iran. Where did you obtain it from? So Armenia. Exactly. So we cannot have the excuse that we don't know what's going on

because it's out there. And what's interesting is that sometimes certain governments or government officials sound like they haven't even seen such footages. What I'm trying to say is that if we believe in people's power Then at the end is people who force their decision-makers to act the demand change

the demand end to apartheid the demand end to bigotry or whatever is the agenda people's power and they should not be underestimated, particularly in this day and age of social media, because I think the ultimate leverage is not because some senator or congressman will become passionate about understanding what it is that I'm trying to explain to them at the end of the day in the interest of Iran. Politicians understand one thing, getting reelected. And who are the people who reelect them? It's the people. The same message I have to an American citizen,

to the Iranian-American voters, I say make sure that your vote is counted. And as Iranians, if you want support for your fellow compatriots, it behooves you to put pressure on your local politicians or federal politicians to be on the right side of the equation. So really my message is here, utilizing social media's best because it's a key instrument for mobilizing, for organizing, for messaging. And at the end of the day, giving hope, because once the nation is hopeful, that's when they begin shifting from hope to belief. And it ties back to my theory of empowerment, that the men and people start believing that it actually can be done. That's when ultimately change actually happens.

There's no question about that. Crown Prince, thank you so much for this. It's been a pleasure. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Of course. I hope you enjoyed this interview as much as I did. I've never had this much insight into this man's mind. For 44 years, Iranians around the world have been waiting to see

what he wants to do. This is the question I ask at the end. Do you want this job? Not will you do the job? And he was as transparent as any man could be saying the fact that I'm willing to do anything to help with that, but it doesn't have to be me. He's willing to go back to Iran. He's willing to go work with anybody. He's willing to spend months at a time doing all that stuff. At least that's how I interpreted. You could tell he is fully committed towards bringing freedom and democracy back to Iran,

but at the same time, he's also wanting to know who are the people that are going to rise up. Who wants to do something about it? There are many different names that I'm in communication with, but some of them may be others you may know about. But it's going to be very interesting. Now that this is out there and people have seen it, like I said, when I said that to him, I said, I've never seen you this transparent. This is the first time I've heard you say this and he said, yes, this is out there and people have seen it. Like I said, when I said that to my set, I've never seen you this transparent. This is the first time I've heard you say this and he said, yes, this is the first time. But now we know what things he wants to do at this age, not at 20, not at 30, not at 40, not at 50. But like he said, at 63, 40 years of haven't lived here,

and he still wants to contribute to help bring back freedom to Iran. You got a plodum for it. You got a respect for his transparency because that's what we need as, you know, whether you're somebody that's in Iran and now living in different parts of the world and you like to be able to go back

and feel safe about it, he made it very clear that he's committed to being able to do that. Having said that, I want to hear your thoughts on what your biggest takeaway from this was. Comment below. If you enjoyed this interview, you got value from it, please give us a thumbs up and subscribe to the channel.

Take care everybody.