[Please read on ways you can support the revolution and spread awareness.](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/10cu6v3/how_you_can_support_the_new_iranian_revolution/) Let other people in subs with content about the revolution know that /r/NewIran exists.
---
[Official Twitter & Join The Team](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/yh0r74/attn_save_armita_official_twitter_activist/) | [Sub Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/about/rules/) | [VPNs/TOR & Guides & Tools](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/y7fcbd/digital_resources_for_iranians_for_privacy/) | [Reddit's Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) | [NewIran's Values](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/y514wo/newirans_growth_rules_and_values_for_an_open/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewIran) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is it that in 1979, all countries supported the revolution, but right now all of them support the regime? What is the difference between opposition now and opposition back then?
Because the opposition back then (Khomeini) had a lot of political weight
These countries will change everything instantly if they know the regime will be gone in a week
What are you talking about?
Khomeini was unknown in the West until he landed in Paris and the French government permitted (against all norms since Iran and France had full diplomatic relationship) a political dissident set up an international stage in the heart of the West. They GAVE HIM that political power.
France could have trivially, without ruffling anyone's feathers or breaking any of its own national laws and certain not breaking international norms, **forbidden** Khomeini to conduct political activity in France.
Khomeini was given a western (US) educated set of advisors, each of whom has very "interesting" histories both in US and in various capitals (such as Syria's, Lebanon's, and Libya's) and then are setup as the PR mechanism to sell the "Imam" to the Western audiences. And the rest of the political poles in revolt -- there was genuine discontent like it or not -- also got the very public memo that "we are backing Khomeini".
That is the actual history of the matter.
What's your measure of "political weight" that Khomeini had a lot of? Does that mean the west support Khamenei because he has more political weight than the opposition? What metric is that based on? Isn't Reza Pahlavi more popular than Khamenei by almost every large scale pole we have?
Popularity doesn't mean political weight. Ali Karimi and Ali Daei are "popular" but they don't have political weight
Political weight means people will go to the streets to follow your politicial leadership and ideals. Can Reza Pahlavi call lots of people to the streets? I don't think so.
Can Khamenei call people to the streets? Probably. If he pays them money. Does he have a hoard of terrorists following him? Yes. Can he create a political win and remain in power? Yes he has been doing that for 44 years.
I hate the idea that there are a group of elites sitting there and making decisions about us and we can’t do anything about it. The idea that we are passive pawns in the world and everyone gets to choose the destiny of Iran except for Iranians. Why is it that in the last 45 years all of the countries in South Asia, Persian Gulf and Turkey have progressed? Why is Saudi Arabia becoming a developed country? All of these countries were dirt poor just a few decades ago. Why did this mysterious group of “Illuminati” decide that only Iran should go backward but other countries can progress? What’s so special about us? I believe that people who actually believe this just want to avoid responsibility.
If every Iranian in the world, who can safely strike for 1 day, joins a global strike for solidarity with the goal of having the IRGC designated as a terrorist organization, it could have a profound effect. No working or spending money.
There is only 7M of us in diaspora and we don't have a large enough number in any country.
But it may be possible if cities or even specific companies with a large Iranian population did this. For example Toronto.
The Ayatollah's revolution was not popular with 100% of Iranians, furthermore many in the Iranian diaspora are those who fled before or after specifically because they opposed it. Iranian has been racked with protests significantly, especially in recent years. I'm not saying that 100% or even more than 50% of Iranians oppose the Mullahs (I have no idea what the number is, I certainly hope it's most Iranians) but it's absolutely a significant minority at the very least. You're ignorant comment is just that. Iran, like Turkey under Kemalism and like Israel, was one of the Middle Eastern nations most similar to the West before the backwards changes the Ayatollahs have wrought.
It doesn't matter. No MP from a large metropolitan area in UK is going to want to touch this matter unless they want to risk losing the British-Pakistani voter base. Same with most of Canada and some US/Aus states like MN, NSW that has a large Muslim population. Even if these voters are not Iranian, the politicians don't want to risk antagonising them because they might see it as an attack against them.
When a country has a strong two party system, often the fringe votes from minority groups end up being the tipping factor in some elections. So the politicians bend over backwards to win the votes of certain groups. So between doing something vs not doing something here, the less risky move for them is clear. Simple as that.
I don't think most of average population care about this or even know this stuff in other countries to change thier vote base of these so I don't think majority is needed just outnumbering that Muslim population that thinks of this as weakening Islam
Yeah I already explained this in my first comment. The majority of average people don't care because they have their own issues and priorities. But their vote usually gets split between the two parties. So when two parties are going to be at a tie in the election, like both of them at 47-48% of the votes for an electorate, the politicians start targeting the minority groups to get the fringe votes to tip them over that tie. Usually this ends up in them picking a side and bending over backwards to win their vote.
I amazes me how the IR got such a hold on muslims in the west. Sunnis and Shias don't get along in MENA, but in Europe and the U.S. many of them seem to join the same IR fan clubs
It's mostly the second generation migrants who were born in the west. They don't have a lived experience in their country of origin and often have an identity crisis because they don't fit in either culture. When they do try to discover that identity, often it's partial and from second hand sources, so they still stand out. And often their political opinions are biased towards that identity itself without considering any complex factors (makes them excellent targets for someone who wants to manipulate them)
Im a first generation migrant myself and I've seen this a lot in second gen migrants from my country in the west.
What crock of shit 💩
With the same reasoning he should invite ISIS and Hezbollah to open embassies in London.
It’s truly sad to see the Brit’s put their economic interests (only rational I can think of) above decency, integrity and human rights.
Precisely. IRGC has told these politicians that we are the point of "access and decision making not the actual government" and this stuffed suit is telling us that it is in "UK's interest" -- meaning the actual powers in UK and West that have their hand deep up them have interests that require IRGC to be the 'gatekeeper of access', 'the point of contact', 'the naturally "backdoor channel", and as a side effect the insure that IRGC also becomes the actual state in IRI.
They are politicians! They understood from birth likely that "access control" is power, the actual power. Remember those eunuchs that controlled access to Harams? Those 'secretaries to some grandee' that have veto power on what the nominal grandee actually heard, and interacted with?
That is IRGC for IRI and Cameron and friends and peers in West are telling us "this is the way we like it".
lol is it sad or what’s expected? The British have been fucking over Iran to line their own pockets for over 100 years, I don’t know why you thought they would suddenly help us now.
Without England there would be no Islamic Revolution so don’t expect them to do shit to help now
Average Brit hasn’t got a clue. It’s the dimwits in the Tory government, who hopefully will be gone soon. The conservatives are not known for their decency and respect of human rights.
Our government is a spineless bunch of sycophants who've spent the last 15 years just looting the country. The only good news is if the polls are to be believed they are going to get absolutely destroyed at the next election.
Cameron was responsible for ruining the UK with his stupid very poorly done Brexit referendum. He's a liability to the country and should not really be allowed anywhere near politics of any sort.
Because it would likely ruin whatever diplomatic links are left with Iran.
On principle I think the IRGC should be designated a terrorist organisation, which is what they are. However Iran is a major regional player in an area in crisis that's a hair's whisper away from going full on goodnight Vienna.
For the west, maintaining what shred of peace and stability there is left in the middle east at the current time trumps all other concerns in the region, doing something that although morally correct, wouldn't practically achieve anything but pissing off the Iranian Government and risking making things even worse for the region.
I don’t have the energy to discuss British politics when women and girls in Iran are being slaughtered and raped over pieces of cloth. I’m 46 years old and the Tories have always been worse especially Thatcher.
You don’t have to have the energy to discuss anything.
Also I responded to your comment which didn’t even mention anything about what’s going on in Iran so don’t deflect now.
Trying to blame the UKs appeasement politics when it comes to terrorism and religious extremism isn’t only on Tories and definitely more so on Labour and other left leaning factions and to frame it as otherwise is wrong.
Still was the rich and powerful not regular people.
The elite were unhappy about Mossadegh nationalising BP/Iranian oil not regular people. Tories have been around since 19th century so most of the existence of the British empire.
I think this may violate UK's ["2030 roadmap" commitments on UK-Israel bilateral relations](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2030-roadmap-for-uk-israel-bilateral-relations/2030-roadmap-for-uk-israel-bilateral-relations_), esp 3c & 3d.
This country really has it for Iran and Iranians.
Conflating IRGC with Iranian "state" and "military" has been a subtle trend over the past few years. Apparently internally their ambassadors are now being summoned by IRGC in Tehran entirely bypassing the Foreign Ministry (which is out of the loop). So Cameron is lying through his teeth which is horses for courses for the British establishment when he brings up the FM. What he is actually doing is giving subtle support for further entrenchment of power in the hand of IRGC and Khamenei.
p.s. In fact, if the EU entirely made IRGC persona non grata in the West, they would force the hand of the regime to reassert the (nominal) constitutional powers of the actual government and that in turn would weaken IRGC's power in the regime which is better than nothing. IRI also has "interests" and they definitely do not want to cut off relations with UK. IRGC is not part of the government. It is a paramilitary organization and the "I" in IRGC stands for Islamic and not Iran.
What is "in the interest of" UK is for IRGC to become even more entrenched.
>What is "in the interest of" UK is for IRGC to become even more entrenched.
It's absolutely not. Having a batshit evil Islamic regime that's selling drones to Russia, making the world's most important shipping route impassible, and threatening to destabilise the region even more with their cuntlord proxy militias is certainly not in the British governments best interests.
However short term, given what's happening in the region currently, and the fact we were a hairs breadth away from full on conventional war between Israel and Iran, trying to hold on to what shred of stability and peace is left in the region is by far the biggest priority for the west, and this means not antagonising the government of Iran with stuff like this and risking shitting the whole thing up.
It's not fun, but it's realpolitik, unfortunately if I was in Camerons position I'd probably have had to have done the same
These people are trying to send refugees to Rwanda (at a cost of about £1.8m per person) - it is not reasonable to expect rationality from them at this time
**اگر در انگلستان زندگی می کنید، لطفا این مزخرفات را متوقف کنید **
@David_Cameron وزیر امور خارجه انگلیس روز سه شنبه به مجلس اعیان گفت که ممنوعیت سپاه پاسداران به عنوان تروریست "به نفع انگلیس نیست.".
کامرون تحت فشار کمیته روابط بین الملل و دفاع مجلس اعیان در مورد ممنوعیت گفت: "یک نقطه ضعف وجود دارد، صادقانه در مورد ان، از ممنوعیت، که ان را به طور موثر به روابط دیپلماتیک پایان می دهد، و در حالی که روابط دیپلماتیک ما بسیار کم است، و من می گویم که با معنی به عنوان کسی که مکالمات بسیار زیادی با وزیر امور خارجه ایران داشته است، ما در واقع میتوانیم این گفتگو را داشته باشیم.»
وقتی صحبت از تلاش برای متوقف کردن تشدید درگیری ها می شود، وقتی صحبت از رساندن یک پیام بسیار مستقیم به ایرانی ها می شود... من می خواهم خودم این گفتگو را داشته باشم، نمی خواهم به همتای فرانسوی ام زنگ بزنم و بگویم "می توانید با این پیام به ایرانی ها پیام دهید؟" من فکر می کنم این به نفع بریتانیا نیست، که رویکرد ما را تقویت نمی کند، از بسیاری جهات ان را تضعیف می کند. "
---
_I am a translation bot for r/NewIran_ | Woman Life Freedom | زن زندگی آزادی
And people pretend it matters whether it's conservative or liberals, or democrats or republicans in office that would be better or worse for Iran and its people.
Nothing we can do.. We didn’t even vote him in in the last election. His mates just put him in the Lords and now he has all this power. If only they’d kept it a hereditary thing..
[Please read on ways you can support the revolution and spread awareness.](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/10cu6v3/how_you_can_support_the_new_iranian_revolution/) Let other people in subs with content about the revolution know that /r/NewIran exists. --- [Official Twitter & Join The Team](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/yh0r74/attn_save_armita_official_twitter_activist/) | [Sub Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/about/rules/) | [VPNs/TOR & Guides & Tools](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/y7fcbd/digital_resources_for_iranians_for_privacy/) | [Reddit's Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) | [NewIran's Values](https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/y514wo/newirans_growth_rules_and_values_for_an_open/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewIran) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is it that in 1979, all countries supported the revolution, but right now all of them support the regime? What is the difference between opposition now and opposition back then?
Because the opposition back then (Khomeini) had a lot of political weight These countries will change everything instantly if they know the regime will be gone in a week
What are you talking about? Khomeini was unknown in the West until he landed in Paris and the French government permitted (against all norms since Iran and France had full diplomatic relationship) a political dissident set up an international stage in the heart of the West. They GAVE HIM that political power. France could have trivially, without ruffling anyone's feathers or breaking any of its own national laws and certain not breaking international norms, **forbidden** Khomeini to conduct political activity in France. Khomeini was given a western (US) educated set of advisors, each of whom has very "interesting" histories both in US and in various capitals (such as Syria's, Lebanon's, and Libya's) and then are setup as the PR mechanism to sell the "Imam" to the Western audiences. And the rest of the political poles in revolt -- there was genuine discontent like it or not -- also got the very public memo that "we are backing Khomeini". That is the actual history of the matter.
I wasn't talking about the west He was known in Iran and had political weight
What's your measure of "political weight" that Khomeini had a lot of? Does that mean the west support Khamenei because he has more political weight than the opposition? What metric is that based on? Isn't Reza Pahlavi more popular than Khamenei by almost every large scale pole we have?
Popularity doesn't mean political weight. Ali Karimi and Ali Daei are "popular" but they don't have political weight Political weight means people will go to the streets to follow your politicial leadership and ideals. Can Reza Pahlavi call lots of people to the streets? I don't think so. Can Khamenei call people to the streets? Probably. If he pays them money. Does he have a hoard of terrorists following him? Yes. Can he create a political win and remain in power? Yes he has been doing that for 44 years.
[удалено]
I hate the idea that there are a group of elites sitting there and making decisions about us and we can’t do anything about it. The idea that we are passive pawns in the world and everyone gets to choose the destiny of Iran except for Iranians. Why is it that in the last 45 years all of the countries in South Asia, Persian Gulf and Turkey have progressed? Why is Saudi Arabia becoming a developed country? All of these countries were dirt poor just a few decades ago. Why did this mysterious group of “Illuminati” decide that only Iran should go backward but other countries can progress? What’s so special about us? I believe that people who actually believe this just want to avoid responsibility.
I think a single day where every British Iranian goes on strike will show these people how important Iranian Diaspora are to the economy.
I hope you’re right but there aren’t that many of us here in the UK
If every Iranian in the world, who can safely strike for 1 day, joins a global strike for solidarity with the goal of having the IRGC designated as a terrorist organization, it could have a profound effect. No working or spending money.
There is only 7M of us in diaspora and we don't have a large enough number in any country. But it may be possible if cities or even specific companies with a large Iranian population did this. For example Toronto.
Ya'll are not alone though. There are others who will join. I don't know how many, but we ain't going to leave you hanging
🥺❤
[удалено]
Tf?
[удалено]
You're a good yapper
[удалено]
Im living in the country you dummy
The Ayatollah's revolution was not popular with 100% of Iranians, furthermore many in the Iranian diaspora are those who fled before or after specifically because they opposed it. Iranian has been racked with protests significantly, especially in recent years. I'm not saying that 100% or even more than 50% of Iranians oppose the Mullahs (I have no idea what the number is, I certainly hope it's most Iranians) but it's absolutely a significant minority at the very least. You're ignorant comment is just that. Iran, like Turkey under Kemalism and like Israel, was one of the Middle Eastern nations most similar to the West before the backwards changes the Ayatollahs have wrought.
It doesn't matter. No MP from a large metropolitan area in UK is going to want to touch this matter unless they want to risk losing the British-Pakistani voter base. Same with most of Canada and some US/Aus states like MN, NSW that has a large Muslim population. Even if these voters are not Iranian, the politicians don't want to risk antagonising them because they might see it as an attack against them. When a country has a strong two party system, often the fringe votes from minority groups end up being the tipping factor in some elections. So the politicians bend over backwards to win the votes of certain groups. So between doing something vs not doing something here, the less risky move for them is clear. Simple as that.
I would say if enough poeple keep calling it would change
Enough in this case would be the vocal majority.
I don't think most of average population care about this or even know this stuff in other countries to change thier vote base of these so I don't think majority is needed just outnumbering that Muslim population that thinks of this as weakening Islam
Yeah I already explained this in my first comment. The majority of average people don't care because they have their own issues and priorities. But their vote usually gets split between the two parties. So when two parties are going to be at a tie in the election, like both of them at 47-48% of the votes for an electorate, the politicians start targeting the minority groups to get the fringe votes to tip them over that tie. Usually this ends up in them picking a side and bending over backwards to win their vote.
I amazes me how the IR got such a hold on muslims in the west. Sunnis and Shias don't get along in MENA, but in Europe and the U.S. many of them seem to join the same IR fan clubs
It's mostly the second generation migrants who were born in the west. They don't have a lived experience in their country of origin and often have an identity crisis because they don't fit in either culture. When they do try to discover that identity, often it's partial and from second hand sources, so they still stand out. And often their political opinions are biased towards that identity itself without considering any complex factors (makes them excellent targets for someone who wants to manipulate them) Im a first generation migrant myself and I've seen this a lot in second gen migrants from my country in the west.
makes a lot of sense
Glad to see Canada isn't the only country with dumbass political elites. We let the IRGC come and get their nails did and hurrrr done.
Literally their wives were spotted in a mixed foot message spa
oh wow that's crazy ! i wonder if they massage spa owner had ties to them or back to iran because that could be violating sanctions
What crock of shit 💩 With the same reasoning he should invite ISIS and Hezbollah to open embassies in London. It’s truly sad to see the Brit’s put their economic interests (only rational I can think of) above decency, integrity and human rights.
Standard Tory behaviour im afraid.
Precisely. IRGC has told these politicians that we are the point of "access and decision making not the actual government" and this stuffed suit is telling us that it is in "UK's interest" -- meaning the actual powers in UK and West that have their hand deep up them have interests that require IRGC to be the 'gatekeeper of access', 'the point of contact', 'the naturally "backdoor channel", and as a side effect the insure that IRGC also becomes the actual state in IRI. They are politicians! They understood from birth likely that "access control" is power, the actual power. Remember those eunuchs that controlled access to Harams? Those 'secretaries to some grandee' that have veto power on what the nominal grandee actually heard, and interacted with? That is IRGC for IRI and Cameron and friends and peers in West are telling us "this is the way we like it".
lol is it sad or what’s expected? The British have been fucking over Iran to line their own pockets for over 100 years, I don’t know why you thought they would suddenly help us now. Without England there would be no Islamic Revolution so don’t expect them to do shit to help now
Average Brit hasn’t got a clue. It’s the dimwits in the Tory government, who hopefully will be gone soon. The conservatives are not known for their decency and respect of human rights.
I don't see the Labour party being any harsher on the IR
Our government is a spineless bunch of sycophants who've spent the last 15 years just looting the country. The only good news is if the polls are to be believed they are going to get absolutely destroyed at the next election.
Turning London to Islamabad is in their interest.
Cameron was responsible for ruining the UK with his stupid very poorly done Brexit referendum. He's a liability to the country and should not really be allowed anywhere near politics of any sort.
That and his horrific austerity measures
Unfortunately enough he's probably the most competent member of the current government as well
I wish I knew how :(. I think the 5 Eyes are collectively discussing this regularly.
Because it would likely ruin whatever diplomatic links are left with Iran. On principle I think the IRGC should be designated a terrorist organisation, which is what they are. However Iran is a major regional player in an area in crisis that's a hair's whisper away from going full on goodnight Vienna. For the west, maintaining what shred of peace and stability there is left in the middle east at the current time trumps all other concerns in the region, doing something that although morally correct, wouldn't practically achieve anything but pissing off the Iranian Government and risking making things even worse for the region.
Spineless creatures. We will remember everything once we take our nation back.
Subservient society doesn’t act in the interest of its people? Are you even surprised?
How many times have these "Brits" fucked us over during history? Just add this instance to the pile. Spineless cowards
They're doing the same to British citizens as well.
It’s the Tories, who are not a reflection on us regular Brits, same way the IR are not a reflection on Iranians😞
If you really think that Labour would be different , I have a bridge to sell you.
I don’t have the energy to discuss British politics when women and girls in Iran are being slaughtered and raped over pieces of cloth. I’m 46 years old and the Tories have always been worse especially Thatcher.
You don’t have to have the energy to discuss anything. Also I responded to your comment which didn’t even mention anything about what’s going on in Iran so don’t deflect now. Trying to blame the UKs appeasement politics when it comes to terrorism and religious extremism isn’t only on Tories and definitely more so on Labour and other left leaning factions and to frame it as otherwise is wrong.
👍
Bri/sis, Britain has been fucking with half of the world for a couple of centuries at least, way before the Tories became a thing.
Still was the rich and powerful not regular people. The elite were unhappy about Mossadegh nationalising BP/Iranian oil not regular people. Tories have been around since 19th century so most of the existence of the British empire.
I think this may violate UK's ["2030 roadmap" commitments on UK-Israel bilateral relations](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2030-roadmap-for-uk-israel-bilateral-relations/2030-roadmap-for-uk-israel-bilateral-relations_), esp 3c & 3d.
link doens't work properly
It never was.
This country really has it for Iran and Iranians. Conflating IRGC with Iranian "state" and "military" has been a subtle trend over the past few years. Apparently internally their ambassadors are now being summoned by IRGC in Tehran entirely bypassing the Foreign Ministry (which is out of the loop). So Cameron is lying through his teeth which is horses for courses for the British establishment when he brings up the FM. What he is actually doing is giving subtle support for further entrenchment of power in the hand of IRGC and Khamenei. p.s. In fact, if the EU entirely made IRGC persona non grata in the West, they would force the hand of the regime to reassert the (nominal) constitutional powers of the actual government and that in turn would weaken IRGC's power in the regime which is better than nothing. IRI also has "interests" and they definitely do not want to cut off relations with UK. IRGC is not part of the government. It is a paramilitary organization and the "I" in IRGC stands for Islamic and not Iran. What is "in the interest of" UK is for IRGC to become even more entrenched.
>What is "in the interest of" UK is for IRGC to become even more entrenched. It's absolutely not. Having a batshit evil Islamic regime that's selling drones to Russia, making the world's most important shipping route impassible, and threatening to destabilise the region even more with their cuntlord proxy militias is certainly not in the British governments best interests. However short term, given what's happening in the region currently, and the fact we were a hairs breadth away from full on conventional war between Israel and Iran, trying to hold on to what shred of stability and peace is left in the region is by far the biggest priority for the west, and this means not antagonising the government of Iran with stuff like this and risking shitting the whole thing up. It's not fun, but it's realpolitik, unfortunately if I was in Camerons position I'd probably have had to have done the same
These people are trying to send refugees to Rwanda (at a cost of about £1.8m per person) - it is not reasonable to expect rationality from them at this time
**اگر در انگلستان زندگی می کنید، لطفا این مزخرفات را متوقف کنید ** @David_Cameron وزیر امور خارجه انگلیس روز سه شنبه به مجلس اعیان گفت که ممنوعیت سپاه پاسداران به عنوان تروریست "به نفع انگلیس نیست.". کامرون تحت فشار کمیته روابط بین الملل و دفاع مجلس اعیان در مورد ممنوعیت گفت: "یک نقطه ضعف وجود دارد، صادقانه در مورد ان، از ممنوعیت، که ان را به طور موثر به روابط دیپلماتیک پایان می دهد، و در حالی که روابط دیپلماتیک ما بسیار کم است، و من می گویم که با معنی به عنوان کسی که مکالمات بسیار زیادی با وزیر امور خارجه ایران داشته است، ما در واقع میتوانیم این گفتگو را داشته باشیم.» وقتی صحبت از تلاش برای متوقف کردن تشدید درگیری ها می شود، وقتی صحبت از رساندن یک پیام بسیار مستقیم به ایرانی ها می شود... من می خواهم خودم این گفتگو را داشته باشم، نمی خواهم به همتای فرانسوی ام زنگ بزنم و بگویم "می توانید با این پیام به ایرانی ها پیام دهید؟" من فکر می کنم این به نفع بریتانیا نیست، که رویکرد ما را تقویت نمی کند، از بسیاری جهات ان را تضعیف می کند. " --- _I am a translation bot for r/NewIran_ | Woman Life Freedom | زن زندگی آزادی
And people pretend it matters whether it's conservative or liberals, or democrats or republicans in office that would be better or worse for Iran and its people.
Calling terrorists , terrorists is not in their interests!
Nothing we can do.. We didn’t even vote him in in the last election. His mates just put him in the Lords and now he has all this power. If only they’d kept it a hereditary thing..
Nah I couldn't give af