The Rise of the Ancient Persian Empire with the
Pahlavi Dictator, the Shah of Iran
Daniel's Vision of the Ram and the He-Goat
By Robert Mock MD
The globalist empire to arise in the Middle East at the time of the end will be the ancient Persian Empire. It came first with the Pahlavi dictator, the Shah of Iran. With the fall of the last Shah, the vestige of the Khan of the Mongolian Empire precipitated the rise of the Shi’ite theocratic Islamic State of Iran. The birth of theocracy in the modern world did not come from the Jewish people, it came with the Muslims. Yet, the return of the messiah will usher in a theocratic government by the God of Israel.
The concept of Islamic theocracy arose at the Shia Pilgrimage Center at Samarra, the home in exile for the Ayatollah Khomeini for several years. Here is also the Sirdab, the place of the last recorded appearance of the Mahdi or Messiah of the Shi’a Muslim. Here is where they expect their next messiah will return. It will not be the Mahdi that will bring an era of peace but the Islam’s final messiah, Isis ben Mariyam (Jesus son of Mary).
The polarity between the Sunnis and the Shi’ites of the Islamic faith is similar to the polarity between the Roman based Christian religions and the Hebrew Nazarenes, the original followers of the Jewish messiah called Yahshua ben Yosef. The former based its succession upon the companions of Muhammad and Jesus, latter upon their family.
As the reign of the resurrected empire of the ancient peoples of Babylon collapsed, the rise of the second Persian Empire came. First it was a secular monarchy but soon it became the Islamic theocratic Nation of Iran. With the visions of the soon return of the messiah to Islam, the Mahdi, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, carries in his heart what he feels is a divine mandate, to bring chaos to this earth so that the Mahdi will arrive sooner.
The Rise of the Ancient Persian Empire with the Pahlavi Dictator, the Shah of Iran
In 1925, the rise of the ancient Persian Empire became a global reality when Reza Pahlavi toppled the Qajar Islamic dynasty and set up the globalist Pahlavi dynasty of Persia. Removed from power by both the British and the Soviet Union in 1941 as he was not responsive to the urging of the globalist forces, the son of Reza, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi became the new Shah of Iran.
In a power struggle with the Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq, the Iranian oil industry was nationalized in 1951 and the Shah fled Iran. Two years later, with the assistance of the merging globalist powers of America with Britain, the pro-Shah forces reinstate the Shah back in to national power and returned the huge oil fields of Iran into the hands of the international western globalist oil brokers.
With introduction of the social and economic reforms in his “White Revolution”, the opponents of the Shah, both secular and religious, were imprisoned. The major religious opponent, the Ayatollah Khomeini was sent into prison and a year later sent into exile in Turkey for his opposition in granting the American military personnel diplomatic immunity.
At this moment the bitter struggle for the hearts and souls of the Persian public began. It was a battle between the western globalist ideals and Islamic ideals. Moving to live in Iraq between the years of 1965 to 1978, the Ayatollah presented the emerging embryonic development of the nature of a future Islamic Republic of Iran. There at the Shia Islam pilgrimage center of An Najaf in Iraq the inspiration of Ayatollah Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini gave the Shi’ite followers in Iraq the nature of future Islamic states under the guardianship of the Islamic clergy, trained in both Islamic theology and jurisprudence. In his official lectures in 1969, he spelled out the Islamic ideal government that was called the velayat-e fagih or the “guardianship of the religious jurist.”
Ayatollah Khomeini and the Shia Pilgrimage Center at Samarra
The Shia Pilgrimage Center at Samarra in the Islamic holy city of Samarra may not be the most archeologically significant center of Islam but it is one of the most spiritually influential shrines for the millions of Shiite Muslim that are about 20% of the Muslim world. Built in 944 CE and rebuilt many times, the golden dome complex made it one of the most beautiful mosques in Iraq. Little remembered today, but the spiritual center where the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini developed the Islamic ideal for a theocratic state was built just before the onset of the Christian crusades into Palestine in the 10th and 11th centuries. Gilded in 1905 with 72,000 gold pieces, the golden domed landmark, measuring about 20 m. x 89 m. in size, was an Iraqi and Samarra landmark. It was to be remembered by the Shiites not only as the spiritual retreat of their “Imam” but as the site for the return of their Messiah (Mahdi) where they claim last lived.
To the right of the golden dome in the above picture is a second blue-domed shrine. Deep below the shrine is a cave where Shiite pilgrim believes the “sirdab” occurred, the place where the 12th Imam, Mohammed al-Madhi disappeared. Known as the “hidden Imam,” the Islamic faithful believe the Mahdi will return as their first messiah in preparation for the coming of the final messiah, Isis ben Mariyam (Jesus son of Mary).
Also at the Askariyya Mosque (“Dwellers in the Camp”) are two other shrines of great spiritual significance to the Shiite Muslims living in a predominately Sunni Muslim city sixty miles north of Baghdad. These are the sacred tombs of Ali al-Hadi and al-Hasan al-Askari, the 10th and 11th Imams of the Shiite Islam. Al-Hadi (`Alī l-Hādī), the 10th Imam was born in 827 in the sacred city of Medina in Saudi Arabia. Assuming the religious mantle of Imam at the age of six, he and his son were arrested and taken to the city of Samarra, the capital of the Abbasid Empire, for house arrest at the military camp of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil. Twenty years later in 868, it is believed that Imam al-Hadi was poisoned near the original mosque at al-Mutasim.
Hassan al-Askari the son of al-Hadi (Hassan al-`Askarī), now the new Imam, remained in Samarra still under house arrest until he died four years later in 872. Together their tombs lay in the al-Askari shrine along with aunt, Hakima Khatun, the sister of Ali al-Hadi and Narjis Khatun, the mother of Muhammad al-Maddi. Altogether the Askariyya Shrine is known to the Islamic faithful as the “Tomb or Mausoleum of the Two Imams.”
On February 22, 2006 from five to seven men dressed as personnel of the Iraqi Special Forces tied up the guards and set up explosives that demolished the golden dome of the Askariyya Mosque. In twenty four hours over one hundred bodies were found with bullet holes and reprisals against the dominant Sunni population began with over 90 attacks on Sunni mosques. Within five days, the country of Iraq was recognized by all political and intelligence observers to be teetering on the brink of civil war as 379 people were killed and 479 wounded. Even the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who with his Mahdi Militia began the first insurgent rebellion against the coalition forces at Passover 2004 called for calm and ordered his Shiite militia to protect Sunni mosques in Shia dominated areas.
The current ruling Iranian Head of State, the Ayatollah of Iran, Ayatollah Khameini published this statement in the wake of the March bomb destruction of the Golden Domes Shrine at Samarra:
Ayatollah Khameini - “This is a political crime and its roots have to be traced in the intelligence organizations of the Iraqi occupiers and the Zionists. The aggressive powers that perceive the political and social conditions in Iraq as contrary to their objectives devise ominous plans in their heads, some of which to intensify insecurity and create sectarian strife… The holy shrines in Samarra will once again rise with even greater magnificence than before through the efforts of those who respect the holy Imams, but this criminal act has left a dark stain on the foreheads of the enemies of Islam and Muslims which will not be wiped off for a long time.”
The agents who caused the bombings were not known but Sunni and Shiite mullahs alike stated that the purpose of the destruction was to divide the Islamic faithful; Sunnis and the Shias. As such the globalist forces of predominately America, Britain and Israel are blamed for the cause of the destruction.
This national jockeying for political and social control in Iraq is only a vignette or a shadow picture of the mini-battles that are waged around the globe between global and religious forces. They seek power blocs to assert their desire for international control. Some are seeking to harness the natural resources of this planet by a central international political coalition while other forces are seeking to wage religious hegemony over the lives of all the people on this earth.
The forces of globalism that have been the driving force behind two World Wars and dozens of regional conflicts have now succeeded for the astute student of prophecy to behold that a division is occurring on every continent, national and religious body on earth. The dividing of the “sheep and the goats” or the “tares and the wheat” have become struggle for the final battle for the soul of all mankind in the days before the coming of the Messiah.
Shia and Sunni Islam – the Polarities of the Islamic Faith
The Shia Muslim holds a fundamental difference in their beliefs from the other Muslims particularly the Sunni religion of Saddam Hussein. The most distinctive institution within Shi’ite Islam is what is called the Imamate. This is the exalted spiritual leadership of the Shi’ite Imam, the leader of all Shi’ite Islamic faithful. This view of religious leadership is also somewhat akin to the exalted spiritual leadership of the righteous sages of Judaism who in their holiness and elevated spiritual status it is felt also elevates the spirituality of all of Judaism.
The Sunni “Imams” on the other hand are recognized as religious leaders or teachers in Islam. Sometimes the “Imams” have been sited as the founding scholars of the four Sunni Madhhabs or the schools of religious jurisprudence called the figh. While the Shi’ite has one school of law founded by the sixth Imam Ja’afar as-Sadiq, there are four Sunni schools of Islamic law, though distinct there is great harmony amongst their scholars. These Imams include:
1. Imam Abu Hanifa was the founder of the Hanafi School in Iraq. He founded his school soon after the death of Muhammad the Prophet. A student of many Islamic scholars including Imam Jafar Sadiq, the sixth Imam who founded the Shi’ite School of Law. Since he was a follower of one of the Companions of Muhammed the Prophet, he is recognized as a Tabi’een for living a life of righteousness after being rightly guided and accepted by both Shi’ites and Sunni Muslims.
2. Imam Malik was born in Medina shortly later and was a younger contemporary of Hanifa and even shared pupils
3. Imam Shafi’I was a student of both Imams Abu Hanifa and Malik.
4. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was a student of Imam Shafi’i.
Between these four Islamic schools whose mentors were contemporaries within one generation of the Prophet Muhammad, all the fundamentals of Islamic faith rested.
The Shi’I believed that their Imam should lead all mankind in every aspects of global cultural life. He was to be a perfect example in every aspect of ones personal life. With such idealism of personal perfectionism, since the Imam is appointed by Allah, every Muslim must follow every aspect of his dictates and life.
To the Shi’ite Moslem, the Imam’s knowledge must include a complete knowledge of the general world around them, the religious duties and rituals of the Islamic religion but more important, to have the walayat or spiritual guidance to understand and interpret the inner mysteries of the Quran and the fundamentals of Islamic Sharia law. To do so, those leaders who have “walayat” are in fact free from sin and error. With such idealism of personal perfectionism, since the Imam is appointed by Allah, every Muslim must follow every aspect of his dictates and life.
With such a view by the Shi’ite Moslem, the Prophet Muhammad and the following Imams could be stated by Christians to have usurped the “perfect” life of Jesus the Messiah and the Torah concept that all men are sinful. With the transfer of this concept of perfectionism to each of the lives of the Imams, it gave each of Imams power and control that this elevated status could command in the population around them.
In as much as the Imams were to have been “chosen” by Allah, their God, through Mohammed their Prophet, the succession of the Islamic leadership to the Shi’ite, each Imam were to designate his successor who in succession would have the same temporal and spiritual powers. In their succession to the time of the end, there would be only twelve Imams. This succession is noted as follows:
The Twelve Shi’ite Imams recognized by the Shi’a Twelvers
1. Ali ibn Abu Talib (600-661), also known as Ali Amir al Mo’mineen
2. Hasan ibn Ali (625-669), also known as Hasan al Mujtaba
3. Husayn ibn Ali (626-680), also known as Husayn al Shaheed
4. Ali ibn Husayn (658-713), also known as Zainul Abideen
5. Muhammad ibn Ali (676-743), also known as Muhammad al Baqir
6. Jafar ibn Muhammad (703-765), also known as Jafar as Sadia
7. Musa ibn Jafar (745-799), also known as Musa al Kazim
8. Ali ibn Musa (765-818), also known as Ali ar Ridha
9. Muhammad ibn Ali (810-835), also known as Muhammad al Jawad or Muhammad at Taqi
10. Ali ibn Muhammad (827-868), also known as Ali al-Hadi
11. Hasan ibn Ali (846-874), also known as Hasan al Askari
12. Muhammad ibn Hasan (868–?), also known as Muhammad al Mahdi
The polarity of beliefs between the Shi’ite and the Sunni Moslem is centered not on fundamental differences of doctrine but on the type of succession of each of the Imans. It is also centered on what is expected of an Imam in terms of rigorous righteousness of his life. The Shi’as do not accept the Islamic rule of the first three Sunni Caliphs that arose after the death of Mohammad as they were not part of the family of Mohammad. At the same time, the Sunnis do not accept the concept of the elevated stature of the Imamate of the Shi’a Imams.
The Shi’a believed that the family of Muhammad was the best repository of the knowledge about the Quran, the successor to them should come from the family lineage of the Prophet. They were to be responsible for the preserving fundamentals of Islam, who were to be the most qualified to be teachers of Islam (Emulation) and who would become the most trusted guardians of the traditions of Muhammad especially of the Hadiths, the reputed sayings of the Prophet.
It was Ali ibn Abu Talib, recognized by the Shi’a “Twelvers” as the First Imam and the rightful successor as he was Muhammad’s cousin, his son-in-law, the patriarchal father of Muhammad’s only descendants and the male head or patriarch of the Ahlut Mayt (people of the house or his family). When the Prophet died on June 8, 632 CE, the legitimate heir of the Prophet in his family dynasty would have been Ali ibn Abu Talib.
Yet while Ali, Fatima and the relatives of Muhammad were preparing for the funeral, the Ansar, the people of Medina who originally welcomed and protected the Prophet early in his career, gathered at the Bani Sa’ida’s home (saqifah) to discuss the future of the Islamic community. This meeting was organized without any of Muhammad’s family or his Companions who were called the Muhajirun that originally fled from Mecca with Muhammed in his formative years. When two of Muhammad’s companions, Abu Bakr and Umar heard of the gathering, they hurried over to join the gathering and there Abu Bakr addressed the gathering.
It was the position of Abu Bakr that the rightful successor of Muhammed must come from a leader of Muhammad’s family clan at Mecca called the Quraysh rather than limiting it to the family succession. He then recommended that Umar or Abu Ubayda become their new Islamic leader. A tumultuous meeting was about to disband with discord when Umar lifted the hand of Abu Bakr, declared his fealty to Bakr, and with the rush of Muhammad’s companions to his side, he became the new Imam of Islam.
Those who believed that the successor of the Prophet should have come from his family rather than from his tribe alone, refused to accept the nomination of Abu Bakr. The family and followers, refusing to accept the initial three Sunni Caliphs, calling them illegitimate and inferior, eventually set the stage for the rise of the Shi’ite sect of Islam and their fundamental dispute with their Sunni Islamic brethren over – who will be their leader over Islam.
As with Christianity which started with the Nazarene Ecclesia, it was also led by the family of Jesus for over 150 years. It would be the Roman Christian Church to set up its “Apostolic Succession” claiming that the nomination of the Roman Papacy would come from the followers of the Companions (Apostles) of Jesus rather than the family of Jesus. As such, the first leader of the Christian Church according to the Roman Catholic Church was the Apostle Peter rather than the historical fact that the first leader of the Hebrew Nazarene Ecclesia, the mother synagogue of the later Christian communities was James the Just the brother of Jesus.
As the Islamic religion ultimately led to the separation of the Muslim community into the Sunni and the Shi’a traditions, so also the followers of “The Way” led into the separation of the Jewish Nazarenes and the Roman Christian traditions.
The Struggle for Religious and Political Autonomy in a World of Globalist Control
Armed struggle between the Islamic warriors and the western backed government of the Pahlavi government began in earnest in 1971. In spite of the American military support for his government and possibly with the western globalists approval, the Shah of Iran became the leading Middle Eastern leader to prod OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) to raise the price of oil leading to the first international oil crisis and the long lines of cars waiting to fill up with gasoline in the spring of 1974.
What has been long forgotten was that in 1973 and 1974, all the Arab oil producing nations imposed an embargo against the United States and Netherlands for their pro-Israeli position. While we as the public remember the rationing of gasoline and the long lines at the gas pump while the country was in an atmosphere of a crisis, the Jewish Secretary of State Henry Kissinger stated that “the Arab embargo was a symbolic gesture of limited practical impact.”
The international oil companies, while they did not have a monopoly of the source of oil, did in fact have a monopoly of petroleum distribution and marketing. The final result was that the shortfall of oil supplies was spread out around the globe by their pooled oil reserves. The result was that the source of Arab anger to the monopoly on their own natural oil resources predominately by the United States only cut it oil consumption by 5 percent while central Europe with France and Germany were down 15 percent.
This international oil crisis soon changed as the major Arab suppliers for oil soon turned on themselves. The long border dispute between Iraq and Iran ended in 1975 with the signing of the Algiers Agreement by the Shah and Saddam Hussein. Instead of producing peace and harmony between two nations that were recognized as Arab brothers, instead it raised resentment for the Algiers Agreement that gave the Iranian government of the Pahlavian Shah control over the pivotal export waterway of the Shatt al-Arab near Bosrah. It flamed the resentment of the Iraqi people against the Shah who was seen by many as a puppet of the United States
With the specter of peace, the Iranian government was led from one protest and riot to another for economic liberalization and democratic reform. The nation soon became inflamed with Islamic activists and mullahs when the Pahlavi government supported a national article critical of Ayatollah Khomeini. The streets of Qom and other Iranian cities were aflame with passion while silently Ayatollah Khomeini, who was living quietly in the country of Iraq, moved to Paris. Now he had international access to the media of the globalist’s press.
In the midst of domestic turmoil, the upsurge in opposition to the Pahlavian rule and especially the SAVAK, the hated intelligence service and internal security forces of the Shah, along with the progressive and declining health of the Shah, the chaos erupted throughout the ancient land of Persia. Seeking western medical attention, the Shah of Iran left Iran in January 1979 and one month later on February 1, 1979, the exiled religious leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned to Iran from France. The birth of a new and first theocratic Islamic nation had begun.
With the death of the Shah in Cairo in 1980, the last of the Persian monarchies collapsed. An Ayatollah led power struggle watched as the last traces of the western global powers vanished from Iranian soil. By November 1980, Iranian students in revolt took control of the American Embassy and held the fifty two diplomats there as hostage for 444 days.
By December 1980 a new democratic nation under Islamic power ratified its constitution by a national referendum with the Ayatollah as the Supreme Leader and Mehdi Bazargan as the Prime Minister.
Ayatollah Khomeini returned to an ecstatic welcome
The next seven years, from September 20, 1980 to July 18, 1988, the Middle East was again aflame in war when the Iraqi forces of Saddam Hussein attacked Iran. Portrayed in the international press as a war of border disputes, the retrospective historical analysis paints a different story. Out of the inferno and catastrophes of the First Gulf War, the Iran-Iraqi War of 1980-1988 we find the following links that affect our prophetic studies today.
"In your name, brothers, and on behalf of the Iraqis and Arabs everywhere we tell those (Persian) cowards and dwarfs who try to avenge Al-Qadisiyah that the spirit of Al-Qadisiyah as well as the blood and honor of the people of Al-Qadisiyah who carried the message on their spearheads are greater than their attempts." (See Saddām, E3)
The dimensions of human tragedy in this conflict only highlighted one fact; the “interests” of the international community did not match the “interest” for the preservation of human life and the dignity of all mankind. While the facts of this war rested with the heads of state between these two Moslem countries that were accepted by the world community as being ruthless military or clerical regimens, the international community played its own “cards” for the “interests” of their own political states. France at the time was the major supplier of Iraq’s high-tech weaponry and Russia the supplier of Iraq’s large military weapon systems. Israel was providing arms to Iran in hopes to bleed the combatants of both sides.
Ever since the end of World War II when the United States was extracted from her self-imposed isolationism into a global super-power, she has played a consistent policy of fighting all national regimes in Third World countries that seek to control their own national resources. It made no difference of whether this was land, valuable industrial minerals or oil. The countries affected were scattered all across the globe; Iran, Guatemala, across the continent of Africa, many countries in Asia especially oil rich Indonesia and today Iraq.
Prior to the Iran-Iraq War, in Iran in the 50’s, the United States for the first time used oil as a political weapon. The Prime Minister for Reza Shah, Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq, nationalized the British owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company who had refused to share its immense profits with the government of Iran. In concert, London and Washington boycotted the Iran and its oil industry and the economy of the country of Iran went spiraling downward. The CIA in turn, in an almost failed coup because of the indecisive Shah of Iram, was able to firmly plant the Shah back in Iranian power. When the Iranian oil industry was then un-nationalized, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company that was 100 percent owned by the British was now 40% owned by the American. Even the friends of America paid the price.
Prior to the Iran-Iraqi War, in the 60s and 70s, the United States was paying heavily battling the encroaching Russian influence into the Middle East. With the finale of the Iran-Iraqi War the influence and globalist power of the United States rapidly grew and the influence of Russia and China went into retreat. We can today see this as the feigning covert battle tactics between the globalist forces of the Golden Internationale of the He-Goat against the Red Internationale’s Great Two-Horned Ram in the prophetic battles in Daniel 8.
While many prophecy watchers interpret apocalyptic prophecy in both in the Books of Daniel and Revelation with the visual prism of large scale military warfare, it may be time to re-consider that military wars are not engaged today as battles on the battlefield but are waged more by covert war games and psychological war for geo-political control.
Case in point for those waiting in anticipation for the “Shock and Awe” aerial attacks on the city of Baghdad were stunned and to some disappointed when after the limited fireworks on March 19, 2003, the coalition forces of predominately America and Britain began the uninterrupted road into Baghdad. The feared forces of Saddam Hussein melted into the landscape. Why? Special Ops and covert military battles plus intense psychological warfare demoralized the country and even the feared Revolutionary Guard became impotent. It is interesting that the Iran-Iraq 1980-88 War, the Gulf War of 1991 and the Gulf War of 2003 are actually called the three Persian Gulf Wars, even though Iran was never invaded in the latter two. These were battles for the control of the Middle East.
Islamic Shiite Theocratic State of Iran in the Gulf War Era
As the post-war Iran emerged from the travails of the Iran-Iraq war, the eyes of the world were again riveted when Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa in February 1989 against the British author Salman Rushdie for writing his “blasphemous” novel called “The Satanic Verses.” The next month the Ayatollah Hosseine Ali Montazeri was removed as the potential successor to Ayatollah Khomeini, three months before the death of the Supreme Leader. By June, Ayatollah Khomeini became the new Supreme Leader of the Shiite Muslims. By August, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani is elected as the President of Iran, serving his country for two terms between the years of 1989-1997.
President Rafsanjani, born to a family of pistachio farmers in 1934, was early associated with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 60s and since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, has become the second most powerful leader in Iran, second to the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Using considerable skill in repairing the relationship between the erupting radical cleric in Iraq, Muqtada al-Sadr and the Iranian-supported Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), he cemented his guiding role in Iran’s involvement in the bid to return Iraq eventually into an Islamic Sharia guided nation with Iran as a Greater Islamic Persian Empire.
In 1997, the former minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance and director of the National Library, Mohammad Khatami, was elected in a landslide victory predominately by women and youth to the office of the Iranian Presidency. His campaign remained focused on the rule of law, democracy and the inclusion of all Iranians. Blending the ancient rule of law of the Persians with the democratic values of the Greeks, his policies of reform kept him clashing with the powerful Guardian Council of the Constitution.
The twelve members of clerics and lawyers that served on the Guardian Council serve as the Constitutional Court of Iran. Having power over the Iranian parliament, the Guardian Council was able to change and then “allow” the Iranian parliament to vote on their changes in order to comply with its imposed Islamic sharia law upon people of this ancient Persian land.
As president of Iran, he turned its foreign policy to one of conciliation instead of confrontation. His view of foreign policy was not as a “clash of civilization” but as a “dialogue among civilization.” In spite of his détente policy, the United States remained suspicious as it foresaw Iran expanding its influence into the Middle East.
One year ago at the funeral of Pope John Paul II in Rome on April 8, 2005, President Khatami sat next to Iranian born Israeli President Moshe Katsav because their seating was placed in alphabetical order by the Vatican. Due to political expediency, even though Israeli President Katsav claimed that he shook hands with Iranian President Khatami, this fact was strongly denied by the Iranian press. Yet it still marked the first political contact between Iran and Israel since the Iranian Revolution in 1979.
The forces of Islamic fundamentalism began to weigh upon the control of Khatami. Within two years the pro-Khatami newspapers were closed. Their editors were put on public trial and many liberal reformers were murdered. As President Khatami made the first official visit to any western country in March, 1999, a new revolution of pro-reform in massive protests waged a physical and ideological war against the Islamic activists that were assisted by the Iranian police. The Khatami ally, the former interior minister Abdollah Nouri, by November was jailed in an Islamic cleric court for five years for “anti-Islamic propaganda” in his newspaper called the Khordad. His closest ally, Saeed Hajjarian, considered to be his mastermind as well as his strategist for the Iranian reform movement, was assassinated. Retiring fully from political office in 2005, he was appointed by the United Nations to be a member of its Alliance of Nations.
President Ahmadinejad and the Shi’ite Movement towards
Confrontation with the Western Globalist Powers
In the democratic elections of 2005, the political landscape of Iran made a radical change. In a surprising upset, the dark-horse former mayor of Tehran was elected by the populous to the presidency of Iran. Born in Garmsar near the capital city of Tehran, this son of a blacksmith became the Governor of the Iranian province of Ardabil for three consecutive terms and then the Mayor of Tehran before being swept into power by the poor and the popular vote. It was reported that Ahmadinejad di not spend any money on his presidential campaign, yet he did have the full support of the Guardian Council of Iran.
Known for his integrity, his thrifty lifestyle and for his particular piety, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is an ardent devotee to the literal interpretations of Quran and the belief that Islamic messiah, the Mahdi (Islamic Messiah) is set to reveal himself within the next two years. One of his missions as Mayor of Tehran was to make preparations in Tehran for the return of the Mahdi. His apocalyptic view of this age set apart his agenda for the former successor of the former Persian Empire and as stated, “Our revolutions’ main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam.”
In his confirmation speech when his four year presidential term was confirmed by Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, he proclaimed that his new government would become a guardian of the Islamic Sharia as interpreted by the Shi’ite Law. He would stress his principles of governance: the promotion of justice, peace for his country, the defense of the rights and needs of the Iranian people, a servant of the masses and the push to bring material and moral progress to his country. As he spoke:
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - "As a servant of the people, I am duty bound to safeguard the independence and national interest of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Islamic culture and aspirations and also to defend rights of all Iranians inside and outside the country"
As President Ahmadinejad began to thrust the Iranian agenda before the international press, he came nose to nose in confrontation with the Western globalist powers over whether Iran had the right to obtain or to produce nuclear power. Carefully citing that it was a path of peace and security for his nation, he coupled his remarks with the thrust of his political intent, the dream of a Greater Shia Islam state that will cover all the Middle East and eventually the whole world.
The messianic fervor of the rising Islamic nationalism coupled with the rising fervor of Zionist Israel’s dream of a greater Israel was set to plant the stage for a future confrontation of Iran with the Nation of Israel. A believer in the future “historic war” between Islam and the West, the integral part of this war is the “annihilation of Israel.” As quoted at the Tehran al-Quds Day conference on October 26, 2005 called “A World without Zionism”, President Ahmadinejad spoke these words:
Aljazeera – “The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world. The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.”
With the rise of the modern Islamic nation of Iran as the resurrection of the ancient empire of Persia, as BibleSearchers, we must ask, if the Great Ram with Two Horns in Daniel’s vision seen to the north of Shushan is the epitomized by the modern nations of Russia and China, how is the mini-drama of the ancient empire of Persia in the ancient war with the Grecian nation of Alexander the Great related to the Iran and the international globalist’s war with each other to control this earth as a One World Order?
Here we will turn back the leaves of the history of Russia and China and see the powers and forces that shaped their ancestral destiny by Sartaq Khan, the leader of the Golden Horde’s Kipchak Khanate in Russia and Hulagu Khan, the leader of the Il-Khanate in Persia.
Go to Part One –
Go to Part Two –
Go to Part Three –
Go to Part Four –
Go to Part Five –
Go to Part Six –
Go to Part Seven –
Go to Part Eight –
Go to Part Nine –
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Historical Background courtesy of Wikipedia online
Jerusalem, Capital of Israel by Jerusalem Archives
British Relationship with Iraq by British Broadcasting Co