it shows unfortunately, american and cannot be an island unto itself economically, politically, and culturally. it is related to the world outside. if you have dictatorships in other countries, those affect you directly and indirectly. from oil to terrorists who destroy the homes. the more democratic countries become the safer and more prosperous america becomes. remember the role in south africa. that was a change that came from within. other countries should not have intervened, but american people

need to support those who are fighting for the same aspirations not out of philanthropy but out of pragmatism. host: we began this hour by telling you that mousavi and his backers are doing a march today. public anger has pushed the country toward a wrecking. according to this reporter at "the washington times." it is in response to the death of 32 citizens. the government has only acknowledged seven deaths in the protests. we are following the site on twitter and this post confirms friday prayers in tehran. what is that significance? guest: it shows the crisis is important enough.

the fact that ahmadinejad has not been able to quell the voice of the protesters, that khamenei as the supreme leader has to intervene himself. we will see demonstrations and counter-demonstrations tomorrow. even ahmadinejad supporters will flood the streets. host: our next phone call is from bridgeport, conn. on our republican line. are you there? my fault, here's the button. caller: hello, a professor. my question, in 1953 the u.s. try to set up a dummy corporation in iran. they used the influence of the british to obtain their objectives. there was an assassination during that time and ever since then iran has had trouble.

currently, ahmadinejad has a statement that a standing strong and conveying the needs of the nation to be recognized as a super power [unintelligible] however, the conservatives seem to keep us focused in the need to have war. weather through loss of life or through israel whom we directly support. would it be better to assume that it is better for them to use a stronghold to keep him in office to preserve the potential for them to rise to be a super power rather than to open a dialogue that could result in their being attacked?

host: in the short form a think his suggestion is that having ahmadinejad continue in office allows them to continue their desire to become a superpower. guest: the whole point is that being a superpower does not mean using violent rhetoric against the rest of the world, intervening in the affairs of other countries in the region. and repressing your own people. you also need to have a growing and thriving economy. iran is an oil-rich country and could be very prosperous. yet the state of the economy has never been in such a shambles.

i think the healthiest thing to do is to allow peaceful, non- violent changes from within. also change the face of this regime, not a regime change, but a change in mind-set. then it would be difficult for repressive it regimes to preserve themselves. host: you are up next. caller: i do not really believe anything she is saying, number one. the news has been following ahmadinejad for years and have been turned to get him out of power for years.

we all know america is behind those jews. this was their chance to get him out of power through this election and though jews put up money in america along with them sent people to iran to overthrow this election. this was all plot from those jews. they could not get all the people involved in so they went to the young people with innocent minds to get them to overthrow ahmadinejad. everyone knows george bush has never won an election yet, yet we did not take it to the streets. that was a plot that came from israel to finally get ahmadinejad out of there.

host: before you answer, there is a story about is really a strategic interest from a different perspective this morning in "the wall street journal." it says some is release price ahmadinejad's road. its says he has gained unlikely supporters. officials in israel, a country he wants to eliminate. the chief of israel's intelligence agency told a closed committee hearing that his reputation as a holocaust- denying troublemaker makes it easier to enlist international support against iran's nuclear program. a new leader will mousavi would have posed a more serious

problem for israel's interests against iran. guest: some think it is to their advantage that ahmadinejad should be in power, but you must really be having a terrible view of the iranian people to think that they like the oppressive laws against women, that they like to be deprived of their rights to freedom of expression, free choice, and free religion. that they do not come into the streets against mr. ahmadinejad who has been the instrument of harassing, torturing, arresting, depriving not just iranian middle-class, women, or

minorities, but also quelling route delete the demonstrations of transportation workers who were only asking for a raise. if you think that the iranian people are sort of motivated from outside you are really under estimating a nation that has achieved great pluralism and openness over 100 years ago. i have to really, really disagree with you. host: here are two views from people commenting on twitter. erstryan says he is frustrated with claims that the iran election is not important to the usa, stability is crucial in this most important diplomatic relations. here is another which is a very different point of view -- i agree said kay that we need to

solve our problems first. the u.s. needs to be neutral and what is going on in iran. the next. is from ohio on our democrats' line. caller: i want to encourage listeners to read scott ridder's book. one professor you have had as a guest has a website called " informed comment" where he speaks five languages and has directly translated what ahmadinejad has said it about israel, instead of having the warmongers misinterpret purposely what ahmadinejad has said about israel. it is interesting to read the exact translation. for my intermission i go to the international atomic agency website instead of looking atspin on the major newscasts.

i want to ask your guest, you have been dismissing u.s.' madeleine and iran's situation in the past as would coup and 1953. then apax pushed -- the u.s. has meddled plenty in iranian's' political world. you said that iran has a desire for nuclear-weapons as if that was the fact come susan. host: i was interpreting of your skull. caller: no, you said that directly a few moments ago. guest: it is amazing that you can interpret the history and

the written history and facts about the country by going to the site of the international atomic energy. you talk to the iranian people the majority of whom do not like up in the morning word about whether iran should have nuclear power -- they are worried about their next day's bread, whether it's the go into the streets there will be arrested. of course i do not be little. if you read my book, in my latest i do talk about the 1953 coup. by the way, the 1953 coup could not have happened without the machinations and collaboration of the clerics, especially one

who was the mentor to the ayatollah khamenei with u.s. forces who took the side of the u.s.-led coup against mous-- so the u.s. does not need to apologize concerning this, but maybe rather to the iranian people. the u. s up till now has done nothing but express concern for the safety of the iranian people and has said the change should come from within. so, i think you should give iranian people some credit. after role, america as a country that has been constantly

criticizing itself from within and changing from the war of independence to the civil war to the civil rights movement just 40 years ago. the same desires and aspirations go on in this country. some have been saying it is not in the u.s. tradition to have women have the right to vote to or have the african-americans become a cohesive part of the society. it goes on with the iranian people who are just asking for the rights to lead a good, normal life. host: tennessee on our republican line. caller: good morning, you say that america should tell iranians what the situation is

that they are experiencing their in iran. how should america help palestinians? what about them compared to israel with all of a beararms oppressing palestinians? i have visited with iranian people here in the united states and those in iran. i have no problem with them and they have none with me. the took me to meet americans who have left america to experience the freedom of their religion in iran. what is your opinion of the palestinians' issue? how can the people of iran use pressure to help those in palestine? guest: i do not understand iranian understan-- why is the r

the freedom should not lead to the desire for freedom in other parts of the world. to say we need to support just one of the for democracy does not mean the we should deny another movement, especially the plight of the palestinian people. they have been desiring freedom and to have a happy and independent life for a long time in the same manner. i am not talking about intervention. i do not know where war- mongering comes in. i was against the war in iraq and thought it gave excuse to the warmongers in the region, including those like ahmadinejad. it created a mistrust of the

possibility of any form of democracy in the region, including in palestine. so, you have to understand that our own cry for freedom implies allowing other people to be free. they go hand in hand. freedom is not an american entity. it is a universal entity and the same way that the tortures and abu ghraib for not the products of certain people, but a tragedy that belonged to america. host: this is an e-mailed question.

guest: i believe that democratization in one area will lead to that in another area. i do not believe we can bring about democratization by foreign invasion. that has a danger of bringing all the violent elements, not only within the country, but within the region. i hope in coming years we see change were both iraq and iran as well as other areas will become more democratic. host: mike is next on our independent line from kentucky. caller: yes, i just want to say that i am ex-military and have been all over the world and seen a lot of bad things in my time.

from what i have seen here lately in the news concerning iran, i think it is great that internally their uprising against their regime. that they can hopefully become a democracy and have the same freedoms that anyone should have in the world. and i hope that other countries who have the same type of problems with regime, that one day those regimes will also be overthrown monday. that is all i wanted to say. thank you. host: let me move on to a call from virginia on our democrats' line. caller: 01 to mention an issue that i have not heard in any of the coverage. beginning in 2002 and coming

together in 2006, iran signed a deal with china to not only develop the oil fields but spend over 90 -- send over 90% of their credit to china. i did a quick googled search while i was waiting here and they said that a french company has been turned out for not doing the job quickly enough. china is now moving in to develop the oil fields. basically, this has made it iran a vital interest of china. in has been going on throughout the previous administration. it also tells you that despite all the saber-rattling from the last administration and all the other things: on here no one is what to do anything to threaten the vital interests of china. it would make china the 500- pound gorilla in the background watching. we will not invade the vital interests of our number one banker. you will not see anyone else bother china with their economic

power right now. i keep watching cnn coverage andmsnbc and c-span and no one has mentioned this. i would argue this is probably what is powering the situation in the whole background. i would imagine also that the current leaders -- i have been to the middle east and corruption is rife through most of those countries in the area. i am sure you'll find most of the current administration who supposedly lost this election is also making a lot of money out of the deal. it is in china's interest to keep the old group in. that is what i would argue is powering this. would you please comment? guest: i agree to an extent, to the extent that china does have great interests in iran and the more iran pushes elk western

countries such as with the french company total, that the chinese will gain footholds. western countries will be cautious because of that and at the same time in competition with china. and with russia. host: iran is a country of 70 million people. guest: 70% are under 25 years old. host: guest: well, yes, i appreciate

your mentioning the significance of the young people in iran and the media the seems to be damned if it does, damned if it does not who has not been paying much attention to them lately. as of last week they have been mainly focused on ahmadinejad and reflecting his views. this young population wants so much and having been deprived so much has many idealistic views. it has the same drive and motivation that the obama supporters have and the same idealistic views and some of them might be actualized and some, unfortunately, will not be. host: about six minutes left in our discussion with azar.

caller: good morning, and thank you. i would like to let the professor known that i am in complete support of the people who are risking their lives, going out into the streets and iran for freedom and democracy and i think all americans should include it our president -- this is an incredible thing going on over there and it to our country's benefit if iran achieves democracy. it is discouraging to me to hear the number of calls you are receiving that are critical. i want you to know how much i have been watching daily to see what is going on over there. i am very supportive of the people who are trying so hard to make change there. i have children college-aged, and that is who might think of

when i see those kids in the streets. i think there are incredibly brave. i do not know if i would have the courage to do what they're doing. host: that is lisa from rhode island. earlier this week we heard that twitter was asked to postpone planned maintenance. the state department as i read confirmed there had been an e- mail sent and that is being used as one way to observe events on the ground. this morning from " i the " itmes" it's about youtube, youtube says it has relaxed its image as to allow the images to reach the rest of the world. it says in general it does not allow graphics or violence, but makes exceptions for those that have certain kinds of values of education, or scientific observations. it is important that citizens in iran can use it to capture their

experiences for the world to see. how are you staying in guest: touch i am twitter-challenged. i stay in touch by with your phone calls and many true e- mailed. i have received dozens of e- mails. host: here is a question from twitter. guest: the ayatollah khomeini when elected as supreme leader did not have the religious credentials that were bestowed upon him in order to make him into this supreme leader. for that he has lost the respect of many of the respected clerics. he does not have the religious

wait that in the grand ayatollah in iran should have. because of that he relies heavily on a group of conservative, hard-line clerics and partly also on the instruments of power like the military guards. mr. ahmadinejad also belongs or is affiliated with the same hard-line circles. in one sense they seem to be very closely associated. host: on the flip side, this person for brooklyn and asks if we know what will happen to relations if mr. mousavi comes to power? guest: not being a policy maker i hate to make predictions. the hope is that iran will be

more flexible and relaxed in its response and dialogue. but the conflicts that ruled the society right now and have rolled during mr. ahmadinejad's time will not go away. until now mr. mousavi has not been in a position of power since he was prime minister to show whether he would act any differently in regards to the nuclear issue, among others. we will wait and see. host: raleigh, n.c. on our end of the line. caller: good morning. i want to thank the program about the iranian people. i have a message. iranian are not asking americans to intervene. it is just because their turn to get their intention -- the

united nations is in the united states. -- they're trying to get their attention. they do not realizrecognize ahmadinejad's government as iranian government. when the time comes for him to come to speak to the american people we hope that americans do not give him a visa. he is the one who claims to have democracy and freedom of speech. i want americans to know that iranians are just looking at the united states and try to get their voice out