David Rockefeller and deposed Shah of Iran made out like fat rats

David Rockefeller and deposed Shah of Iran made out like fat rats

Around 46 years ago the Shah and his family fled Iran with help of David Rockefeller

By Lynda Carson - December 5, 2025

According to an December 5, 1979, New York Times article, called “Iranians Say Records Show Shah Diverted $1 Billion,” it coincides with numerous diplomatic reports shortly earlier about David Rockefeller, chairman and CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank, helping the Shah of Iran to flee the scene of the crime, to relocate somewhere outside of Iran.

In part, the NYT article says, “Iranian officials charge that documents uncovered in an investigation into the finances of the deposed Shah of Iran show that over $1 billion identifiable funds was diverted or misappropriated by the shah and his family from Iranian banks and other institutions during the past year before they fled Iran.”

That’s right. Reportedly, shortly before the Shah and his family fled Iran around 46 years ago, there were large overseas transfers of money from Iranian banks and other institutions by organizations with ties to the Shah. Some of the banks involved in receiving huge multimillion-dollar transfers shortly before the shah fled Iran include, the Chase Manhattan Bank, City Bank, and Union Bank of Switzerland, according to the NYT’s report.

David Rockefeller was the chairman and chief executive officer of Chase Manhattan Bank from 1969 to 1981, who helped the Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi, flee Iran.

According to an article with Tehran Times, December 30, 2019, in part the report says, “A newly disclosed secret history from the offices of Mr. Rockefeller shows in vivid detail how Chase Manhattan Bank and its well-connected chairman worked behind the scenes to persuade the Carter administration to admit the shah, one of the bank’s most profitable clients.

The shah sought refuge in America. But President Jimmy Carter, hoping to forge ties to the new government rising out of the chaos and concerned about the security of the United States Embassy in Tehran, refused him entry for the first 10 months of his exile. Even then, the White House only begrudgingly let him in for medical treatment.

As Tehran’s coffers swelled with oil revenues in the 1970s, Chase formed a joint venture with an Iranian state bank and earned big fees advising the national oil company.

By 1979, the bank had syndicated more than $1.7 billion in loans for Iranian public projects (the equivalent of about $5.8 billion today). The Chase balance sheet held more than $360 million in loans to Iran and more than $500 million in Iranian deposits.

Mr. Rockefeller’s team called the campaign Project Eagle, after the code name used for the shah. Exploiting clubby networks of power stretching deep into the White House, Mr. Rockefeller mobilized a phalanx of elder statesmen.

They included Henry A. Kissinger, the former secretary of state and the chairman of a Chase advisory board; John J. McCloy, the former commissioner of occupied Germany after World War II and an adviser to eight presidents as well as a future Chase chairman; a Chase executive and former CIA agent, Archibald B. Roosevelt Jr., whose cousin, the CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt Jr., had orchestrated a 1953 coup to keep the shah in power; and Richard M. Helms, a former director of the CIA and former ambassador to Iran.”

On January 16, 1979, the shah fled the country of Iran, and Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini assumed control aftrwards. Although the shah did not abdicate, a referendum resulted in the declaration on April 1, 1979, of an Islamic republic in Iran.

The BBC did a report on the shah fleeing Iran, however it failed to mention that David Rockefeller was instrumental in helping the shah flee the country, in an effort try to find a location for the shah to go to where he would be accepted.

Around a year before the shah fled Iran, the U.S. government saw the writing on the wall, and started to make arrangements for the shah and his family to flee Iran.

A number of reports reveal what was happening behind the veil of diplomacy, and in a January 4, 1979, report called MOMENT OF TRUTH.

It says, “PLEASE SEE THE SHAH AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND CONVEY THE
FOLLOWING MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT:

THE PRESIDENT APPRECIATES YOUR MAJESTY'S DEDICATION TO
THE STABILITY AND WELFARE OF IRAN DURING THESE DIFFICULT
DAYS AND THE GREAT BURDEN THIS HAS IMPOSED ON YOU.

THE U.S. SUPPORTS YOUR MAJESTY'S DECISION TO ESTABLISH
A CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT UNDER PRIME MINISTER-DESIGNATE
BAKHTIAR AND WANTS HIS MAJESTY TO KNOW THAT WE WILL
COOPERATE WITH IT IN ITS EFFORTS TO PRESERVE THE INDEPENDENCE,
STABILITY AND INTEGRITY OF IRAN, AS WELL AS A CLOSE U.S. IRANIAN RELATIONSHIP.

THE PRESIDENT ALSO WANTS YOUR MAJESTY TO KNOW THAT HE
CONCURS WITH THE INTENTION WHICH YOUR MAJESTY DISCUSSED WITH
AMBASSADOR SULLIVAN FOR ESTABLISHING A REGENCY COUNCIL AND,
WHEN THE NEW GOVERNMENT IS INSTALLED, LEAVING THE COUNTRY
FOR A VISIT AND A WELL-DESERVED REST.

THE PRESIDENT WANTS THE SHAH TO KNOW THAT HE WOULD BE
WELCOME IN THE U.S. WALTER ANNENBERG WOULD BE GLAD TO
MAKE AVAILABLE HIS ESTATE IN PALM SPRINGS WHICH HAS GOOD
SECURITY.

YOU SHOULD ALSO TELL THE SHAH THAT WE CONSIDER IT VERY
IMPORTANT THAT THE MILITARY LEADERS REMAIN UNITED AND NOT
LEAVE THE COUNTRY WITH THE SHAH. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THE
MILITARY LEADERSHIP REMAINS COHESIVE AND ASSURES CLOSE
U.S.-IRANIAN TIES. YOU SHOULD MAKE THE SAME POINT
REGARDING THE MILITARY LEADERSHIP DIRECTLY TO KEY IRANIAN
GENERALS, STRESSING THE IMPORTANCE THE U.S. ATTACHES TO THIS
MATTER. VANCE.”

According to a report with Wikipedia, in part it says, “Walter Hubert Annenberg KSG KBE (March 13, 1908 – October 1, 2002) was an American businessman, investor, philanthropist, and diplomat. Annenberg owned and operated Triangle Publications, which included ownership of The Philadelphia Inquirer, TV Guide, the Daily Racing Form and Seventeen magazine. He was appointed by President Richard Nixon as United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom, where he served from 1969 to 1974.”

That’s right. We all made Walter Annenberg rich by buying weekly issues of TV Guide years ago just to see what was going to air on our TV sets, and we didn’t even know it.

As it turned out, things did not quite go as planned when the shah fled Iran. And in a recent June 21, 2025 UN release, in part it says, “The UN Secretary-General António Guterres described the United States’ bombing of three nuclear sites in Iran as a “dangerous escalation” on Saturday following eight days of deadly strikes and counter strikes between Tehran and Tel Aviv.”

David Rockefeller is caught up into scandal with Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

According a report by Wikipedia, in part it says, “In November 1979, while chairman of the Chase Bank, Rockefeller became embroiled in an international incident when he and Henry Kissinger, along with John J. McCloy and Rockefeller aides, persuaded President Jimmy Carter through the United States Department of State to admit the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, into the United States for hospital treatment for lymphoma. This action directly precipitated what is known as the Iran hostage crisis and placed Rockefeller under intense media scrutiny, particularly from The New York Times, for the first time in his public life.”

David Rockefeller and his friend the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Raza Pahlavi.

According to a March 23, 1978, called SHAH OF IRAN.

SHAH OF IRAN

It says, “AT HENRY KISSINGER'S REQUEST DAVID ROCKEFELLER HAS NOW
AGREED TO ASSIST IN LOCATING ALTERNATIVE REFUGE FOR SHAH
AND ENTOURAGE. JOSEPH REED OF ROCKEFELLER'S STAFF HAS
ADVISED UNDER SECRETARY NEWSOM OF THE FOLLOWING.

BY FAMILY AGREEMENT PRINCESS ASHRAF HAS NOW BEEN APPOINTED TO
MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR FUTURE RESIDENCE. SHE IS
TODAY (MARCH 23) IN TOUCH WITH DAVID ROCKEFELLER AND IS
DISCUSSING SPECIFICALLY MEXICO, THE BAHAMAS AND POSSIBLY
ARGENTINA. ROCKEFELLER HAS APPARENTLY AGREED TO MAKE DISCREET
APPROACHES ON PRINCESS ASHRAF'S BEHALF.

FOREGOING IS FOR YOUR INFORMATION. IF KING HASSAN OR
GUEDIRA, HOWEVER, SHOULD ASK ABOUT CURRENT STATUS OF OUR
EFFORTS ON THE SHAH'S BEHALF, YOU MAY SAY THAT YOU UNDERSTAND
PRINCESS ASHRAF HAS BEEN DESIGNATED TO LOCATE A HAVEN AND IS IN
TOUCH WITH VARIOUS PEOPLE IN THE US REGARDING SITES IN CENTRAL
AND SOUTH AMERICA. DAVID ROCKEFELLER WOULD LIKE TO MINIMIZE KNOWLEDGE
OF HIS OWN INVOLVEMENT IN VIEW OF INTERESTS IN IRAN. VANCE.”

Additionally, according to a different report on March 26, 1979, called SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “FOLLOWING ARE FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS AT THIS END IN CONNECTION WITH HAVEN FOR SHAH OF IRAN.

AMBASSADOR BENGELLOUN TELEPHONED UNDER SECRETARY NEWSOM
MARCH 25 TO INFORM HIM OF HASSAN'S DESIRE THAT SHAH LEAVE
MOROCCO BY FRIDAY. BENGELLOUN SAID HE WOULD BE INVESTIGATING
ARGENTINA AND MEXICO THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL ORFILA
OF OAS. BENGELLOUN WAS NOT AWARE OF EFFORTS BEING MADE BY
DAVID ROCKEFELLER.

BENGELLOUN ASKED ABOUT PROVISION BY US OF AIRCRAFT.
NEWSOM SAID IF NECESSARY US WOULD SEEK TO HELP IN ARRANGING
CHARTER. (BENGELLOUN SAID NOTHING ABOUT USE OF MOROCCAN
AIRCRAFT.)

NEWSOM WAS IN TOUCH THIS MORNING WITH JOSEPH REED OF
ROCKEFELLER'S OFFICE. THEY ARE MAKING SOUNDINGS IN MEXICO
AND CANADA. THEY HAVE ALSO ASKED DEPARTMENT TO TAKE FURTHER
SOUNDINGS WITH BAHAMAIANS TO SEE WHETHER BAHAMAIANS WOULD
RECEIVE REPRESENTATIVES OF ROCKEFELLER AND SHAH TOMORROW.
ROCKEFELLER'S OFFICE WILL BE PREPARED ASSIST WITH ARRANGEMENTS
FOR CHARTER IF MOROCCAN AIRCRAFT IS NOT AVAILABLE.

NEWSOM WILL BE SEEKING TO PUT BENGELLOUN DIRECTLY IN
TOUCH WITH ROCKEFELLER'S OFFICE TO BRING THESE THREADS
TOGETHER.

MEANWHILE CAN YOU CONFIRM DIRECTLY WITH MOROCCANS
THAT MOROCCAN AIRCRAFT WILL BE AVAILABLE? VANCE.”


Additional reports below show how complicated things got in trying to find a location for the shah to move to that would accept him. Including the persistence of David Rockefeller of Chase Manhattan Bank and his efforts to help the shah after the shah and his family transferred many multi-millions of dollars from Iran into the coffers of the Chase Manhattan Bank, that the Iranians desperately wanted back after he fled the country.

In a March 29, 1979, report called, SHAH'S TRAVELS.

It says, “LATEST ON PLANS FOR SHAH'S MOVE TO THE BAHAMAS:
BAHAMIANS HAVE OBJECTED FOR THEIR OWN REASONS TO PLACE
KNOWN AS "THE CLUB" ON GREAT HARBOR BAY WHERE ARMAO
HAD MADE ARRANGEMENTS TO LOCATE SHAH AND HIS PARTY.
ALTERNATIVE SITES WITHIN THE BAHAMAS ARE BEING URGENTLY
CONSIDERED THIS MORNING IN NASSAU. WE HAVE NO REASON
TO BELIEVE THE ACCOMMODATION PROBLEM CANNOT BE WORKED
OUT TODAY. OTHERWISE WE KNOW OF NO DIFFICULTIES WHICH
WILL PREVENT MOVE FROM TAKING PLACE FRIDAY.

WE WANT YOU TO BE AWARE OF THIS SINCE WE HAVE BEEN
RECEIVING ANXIOUS CALLS FROM BENGELLOUN AND OTHERS AND
YOU MIGHT RECEIVE STRONG EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN FROM
PALACE OR SHAH'S ENTOURAGE.

FOCAL POINT OF ARRANGEMENTS STILL RESTS WITH JOE
REED OF ROCKEFELLER'S OFFICE WHO IS IN TOUCH WITH
PRINCESS ASHRAF WHO HAS HIRED ARMAO. YOU SHOULD
DIRECT QUERIES TO YOU BACK TO THIS CHANNEL IF POSSIBLE,
MINIMIZING ROLE OF OUR CHARGE. IF THINGS BECOME
CRITICAL, HOWEVER, LET US KNOW AND WE WILL INSTRUCT
CHARGE TO DO WHAT HE CAN. HE IS STAYING INFORMED
BUT IS NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN SELECTING ACCOMMODATIONS.
ARMAO IS WORKING THIS OUT WITH APPROPRIATE LOCAL INTERMEDIARIES.

NEED INFORMATION ON GUNS, DOGS AND AIRCRAFT RON
ASAP. VANCE.”

According to a March 29, 1979, report called, SHAH'S TRAVEL PLANS.

It says, “YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT BERNIE GWERZMAN OF THE NEW
YORK TIMES HAS OBTAINED SOME DETAILS OF THE SHAH'S ONWARD
TRAVEL AND A STORY WILL PROBABLY RUN IN THURSDAY'S TIMES.

GWERTZMAN HAS PICKED UP ACCOUNTS CLAIMING THAT THE US
HAS TURNED DOWN A REQUEST FROM THE SHAH TO COME HERE, THAT
DAVID ROCKEFELLER IS INVOLVED IN ARRANGING TRAVEL AND THAT
SHAH IS GOING TO THE BAHAMAS, PERHAPS THIS THURSDAY. (FYI.
ON DEEP BACKGROUND WE HAVE INFORMED GWERTZMAN THAT THE US
HAD BEEN WILLING FOR THE SHAH TO COME HERE BUT THAT THERE
WERE COMPELLING SECURITY REASONS FOR HIM NOT TO DO SO. WE
HAD ALSO OFFERED TO ASSIST IN FINDING A COUNTRY WHERE HE
COULD GO. HOWEVER, WE HAVE SAID NOTHING TO CONFIRM THE
BAHAMAS OR ANY OTHER POSSIBLE DESTINATION. END FYI.)

JOSEPH REED HAS BEEN INFORMED OF THE GWERTZMAN STORY.
YOU SHOULD SIMILARLY ADVISE ARMAO. AT YOUR DISCRETION,
YOU MAY INFORM ADDERLEY OF FACT OF STORY, DEPENDING ON HOW
YOU FEEL THIS WILL AFFECT COMPLETING ARRANGEMENT FOR
SHAH'S ARRIVAL ON FRIDAY.

ABOVE FYI SECTION FOR YOUR INFORMATION ONLY AND YOU
SHOULD REFRAIN FROM DISCUSSING STORY WITH PRESS LOCALLY.
VANCE.”

In a April 26, 1979, report called, SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “JOE REED INFORMED ME TODAY THAT DAVID ROCKEFELLER RAISED
WITH CHANCELLOR KREISKY POSSIBILITY OF SHAH SETTLING IN
AUSTRIA. KREISKY SAID SHAH COULD SETTLE IN AUSTRIA BUT
KREISKY ADDED THAT HE WOULD PREFER ISSUE NOT BE RAISED
FURTHER UNTIL AFTER AUSTRIAN ELECTIONS.

ROCKEFELLER, HIMSELF, TOLD ME HE WISHED DISCUSS WHOLESECRET.”

Indeed, in a different April 28, 1979, report called, SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “I DISCUSSED SHAH WITH DAVID ROCKEFELLER APRIL 27.
HE RELUCTANTLY ACCEPTED OUR RATIONALE FOR DISCOURAGING
SHAH'S COMING TO U.S. AT THIS TIME, BUT FELT OUR POSITION
WAS NOT WIDELY UNDERSTOOD AND, AS UNDERSTOOD, REFLECTED
BADLY ON VIEW IN EUROPE AND U.S. OF HOW U.S. TREATS
FRIEND.

HE REPEATED INFO IN REFTEL RE KREISKY WILLINGNESS
TO RECEIVE SHAH AND TO DISCUSS MATTER AFTER ELECTION.
KREISKY WOULD AT THAT TIME WISH SHAH TO REQUEST ASYLUM.
ROCKEFELLER IS NOT CERTAIN SHAH WILL DO THIS BUT WILL
RECOMMEND IT TO HIM.

ROCKEFELLER, INCREASINGLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH HIS OWN
ROLE (GIVEN FACT OF MAJOR CHASE INTERESTS IN IRAN) DESIRES
USG TO TAKE MORE ACTIVE ROLE IN PROBLEMS OF SHAH.
SPECIFICALLY HE NOTED THAT:

A. USG REPRESENTATIVE HAD NOT CALLED ON SHAH SINCE
LATTER ARRIVED IN BAHAMAS.

B. SHAD HAD NOT HAD RESPONSE TO TWO MESSAGES SENT TO
PRESIDENT. ROCKEFELLER WAS NOT SURE HOW MESSAGES (GIVEN
BY SHAH TO JOE REED) WERE DELIVERED. HE BELIEVED ONE,
CONCERNING ADMISSION OF SHAH'S CHILDREN INTO U.S., HAD
BEEN GIVEN BY MCCLOY TO ZBIG AND SECOND, CCNCERNING
OBLIGATION OF PRESIDENT TO SHAH, HAD BEEN GIVEN BY MCCLOY
TO SECRETARY.

C. PRINCESS ASHROF WAS STILL UNABLE TO GO TO BAHAMAS
FROM NEW YORK AND RETURN TO U.S.

I TOLD ROCKEFELLER THAT I WOULD SEE WHAT WE COULD DO
ON EACH OF THESE MATTERS. SPECIFICALLY I WOULD SUGGEST
THAT:

A. WE DETERMINE WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO "MESSAGES" AND
WHETHER RESPONSES ARE APPROPRIATE. PERHAPS AS A MINIMUM
WE COULD SEE WHETHER CHILDREN OF SHAH (INCLUDING CROWN
PRINCE) COULD ENTER U.S. (I TOLD ROCKEFELLER THAT, IF
THEY DID, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ARRANGE OWN SECURITY THROUGH
PRIVATE SERVICE).

B. WE ASK OUR AMBASSADOR IN NASSAU TO CALL ON SHAH TO
REITERATE OUR INTEREST AND, IF POSSIBLE, PROVIDE MESSAGE
ON CHILDREN.

C. WE CHECK WITH CA TO SEE WHAT PRINCESS' PROBLEM IS.
I WAS UNDER IMPRESSION THAT SHE COULD LEAVE AND RETURN TO
U.S. BUT APPARENTLY HER LAWYER, WILLIAM JACKSON, HAS
ADVISED HER OTHERWISE AFTER TALKING WITH INS. (JOHN
FORBES HAS SOME BACKGROUND).

I ALSO BRIEFED AMBASSADOR WOLF HERE ON POSSIBLE
MOVEMENT BY SHAH TO AUSTRIA AND OUR GENERAL DESIRE TO BE
HELPFUL. I TOLD ROCKEFELLER THAT, IF KREISKY WAS REELECTED,
WE WOULD BE PREPARED TO HAVE AMBASSADOR WOLF
RAISE MATTER WITH HIM AND PAVE WAY FOR SHAH'S REPRESENTATIVE
TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS.

DESPITE AUSTRIAN OPTION WE SHOULD NOT ABANDON MEXICAN
OPTION, IF IT IS STILL VIABLE AFTER ZAHEDI'S LAST EFFORTS.
HE APPARENTLY BUNGLED HIS INITIAL APPROACH TO MEXICANS.
7. JOE REED WILL BE IN HIS OFFICE IN NEW YORK ON TUESDAY
IN EVENT YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. I HAVE GIVEN
HIM YOUR NAME. WOLF.”

In still another report on May 2, 1979, called, SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO CALL ON THE SHAH ON MAY 5 OR 6
IF AT ALL POSSIBLE TO DISCUSS SEVERAL MATTERS CONCERNING
OUR CONTINUED INTEREST IN HIS RELOCATION. YOU MAY
WISH TO ARRANGE AN APPOINTMENT THROUGH ROBERT
ARMAO. JOSEPH REED OF DAVID ROCKEFELLER'S STAFF
SAW THE SHAH APRIL 20-21 AND HAS BEEN IN REGULAR
TOUCH WITH ARMAO AND OURSELVES.

STRICTLY FYI AND FOR YOUR BACKGROUND: IN MARCH AND
AGAIN ON APRIL 20 WE INFORMED THE SHAH WE HAD HOPED
THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO COME TO
THE U.S. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE UNSETTLED SECURITY
CONDITIONS IN IRAN AND OUR CONCERN FOR THE SAFETY OF
AMERICANS LIVING IN IRAN, WE RELUCTANTLY CONCLUDED
IT WAS IN NEITHER THE SHAH'S INTEREST NOR OURS FOR
HIM TO COME HERE. WHILE THE SHAH STILL WISHES TO
RESETTLE HERE, HE UNDERSTANDS OUR POSITION AND HAS
BEEN EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITY OF MOVING TO MEXICO.
WE UNDERSTAND THE BAHAMAS HOPES HE WILL MOVE ON BY
MAY 26. FORMER IRANIAN AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES
ARDESHIR ZAHEDI HAS BEEN CHARGED BY THE SHAH WITH
MAKING ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE MEXICANS.

THE SHAH RECENTLY INFORMED US THROUGH REED THAT HE
DOES NOT WANT TO CREATE INCONVENIENCES FOR THE U.S.
IF THE TIME IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR HIM AND HIS FAMILY
TO COME HERE. HE ALSO SAID HE FEELS HE SHOULD MAKE
ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE CONTINUED EDUCATION AND WELFARE
OF HIS CHILDREN. WHILE HE HAS NOT SAID HE WANTS TO
SEND THEM TO THE U.S., WE BELIEVE HE IS SOUNDING US
OUT ON THIS WITHOUT APPEARING TO BE ASKING ANY
FAVORS. END FYI.

WHEN YOU SEE THE SHAH, YOU SHOULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING POINTS:
-- THE PRESIDENT HAS RECEIVED YOUR MESSAGES OF
APRIL 20. YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES
WHICH WOULD CREATE A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION FOR
BOTH YOU AND THE U.S. SHOULD YOU COME HERE NOW
IS APPRECIATED. WHEN CONDITIONS ARE MORE SETTLED IN
IRAN, WE WILL BE PREPARED TO RETURN TO THE QUESTION.
-- IN YOUR MESSAGE TO THE PRESIDENT YOU EXPRESSED
CONCERN FOR YOUR CHILDREN'S CONTINUED WELFARE AND
EDUCATION. IF YOU WISH TO HAVE THEM PURSUE THEIR
EDUCATION IN THE U.S., I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THEY
WOULD BE WELCOME TO DO SO. (IF ASKED, YOU SHOULD
INDICATE THAT IT WOULD BE OUR ASSUMPTION THAT
SPECIFIC SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS FOR THEM COULD BE
MADE WITH PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES. WE WOULD,
OF COURSE, BE ABLE TO HELP WITH THEIR DOCUMENTATION.)

PLEASE REPORT YOUR CONVERSATION IN THIS CHANNEL.
VANCE.”

An interestng report on June 1, 1979, called, MEXICAN DECISION TO ADMIT FORMER SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “DURING MAY 31 CONVERSATION WITH FOREIGN MINISTER
CASTANEDA, HE TOLD ME THAT MEXICO HAS MADE DECISION TO
ALLOW FORMER SHAH TO COME TO MEXICO WITH A VISA FROM
THE BAHAMAS. HE SAID A REPRESENTATIVE OF DAVID
ROCKEFELLER IS WORKING OUT THE DETAILS WITH MEXICAN
DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER ROSENZWEIG DIAS. CASTANEDA
ADDED THAT IRAN MAY SEVER RELATIONS IN FACE OF MEXICAN
DECISION, BUT THAT MEXICO WAS WILLING TO ACCEPT THIS.
I EXPRESSED U.S. APPRECIATION FOR MEXICO'S DECISION.

In a different report from September 29, 1979, called SHAH OF IRAN.

It says, “JOE REED OF DAVID ROCKEFELLER'S OFFICE ADVISED UNDER
SECRETARY NEWSOM SEPTEMBER 28 THAT SHAH WAS ILL IN MEXICO
AND THAT ROCKEFELLER HAD SENT HIS PERSONAL PHYSICIAN TO
EXAMINE SHAH. REED SAID THAT IF SHAH'S CONDITION WAS
SERIOUS, THIS MIGHT BE FOLLOWED BY A REQUEST THAT HE BE
ADMITTED TO THE UNITED STATES FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES.
3. WE WILL OF COURSE DETERMINE WHETHER SUCH A STEP IS
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. WE WOULD LIKE YOUR ASSESSMENT OF
POSSIBLE IRANIAN REACTION UNDER PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES. WE
WOULD PLAN, IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES,TO INFORM IRANIAN
GOVERNMENT. WE WOULD PARTICULARLY LEAVE OPEN THE QUESTION
OF THE DURATION OF HIS STAY. Vance.”

In an explosive December 28, 1979, report of a major disagreement called, U.S.-MEXICAN RELATIONS IN WAKE OF LOPEZ PORTILLO'S DECISION ON SHAH.

It says, “SUMMARY: MEXICO'S AMBASSADOR MARGAIN AT HIS REQUEST
MET DECEMBER 26 WITH UNDER SECRETARY NEWSOM (BOWDLER,
BRIGGS AND VARGAS ALSO PRESENT). THE PURPOSE OF MARGAIN'S
CALL WAS TO EXPRESS HIS CONCERN OVER THE STRAIN IN U.S.MEXICAN
RELATIONS IN THE WAKE OF MEXICO'S DECISION NOT
TO READMIT THE SHAH. REFERRING TO THE LEAK OF A SECRET
STATE DEPARTMENT DOCUMENT CONTAINING THE TEXT OF A PURPORTED
LETTER FROM LOPEZ PORTILLO TO THE SHAH, MARGAIN SAID
NO SUCH LETTER EXISTED AND NO COMMITMENT HAD EVER BEEN
MADE ABOUT THE SHAH'S RETURN TO MEXICO. HE WAS DEEPLY
UPSET OVER THE ANTI-MEXICAN CAMPAIGN IN THE U.S. PRESS
AND UNJUSTIFIED CRITICISM FROM SUCH GOOD FRIENDS AS
CONGRESSMAN WRIGHT AND SENATOR BENTSEN, AND WORRIED
ABOUT THE EFFECT ON THE GOM AND LOPEZ PORTILLO. THE
LATTER, HE SAID, WAS BECOMING VERY ANGRY. NEWSOM OUTLINED
FOR MARGAIN IN DETAIL WHY THE USG FELT IT HAD RECEIVED A
FIRM COMMITMENTFROMTHE GOM ON THESHAH, AND PUT THE
GOM ON NOTICE THAT THE FULL STORY IN DUE COURSE WOULD
HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED BECAUSE OF THE SERIOUS CONTROVER-
SY IN THIS COUNTRY OVER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SHAH'S
COMING TO THE U.S. HE FILLED MARGAIN IN ON THE DETAILS
OF THE CASE, SOME OF WHICH MARGAIN CONTESTED, REPEATING
SEVERAL TIMES THAT MEXICO WOULD NOT ACCEPT BLAME WHERE
NONE WAS DUE. THE EXCHANGES WERE FRANK, SOMETIMES BLUNT.

MARGAIN SOUGHT AT TIMES TO BE CONCILIATORY BUT NEWSOM
DID NOT WAVER FROM THE U.S. POSITION. END SUMMARY.

MARGAIN OPENED THE DISCUSSION BY SAYING THAT HE
HAD BEEN SURPRISED TO HEAR NEWSOM AT THEIR DECEMBER
5 MEETING REFER TO A LETTER FROM LOPEZ PORTILLO TO THE
SHAH, PROMISING HIM ASYLUM IN MEXICO. HE SUPPOSED AT
THE TIME THAT IT MUST HAVE BEEN A "PERSONAL LETTER."
HE HAD MENTIONED IT IN HIS REPORT TO THE GOM, AND HAD
BEEN INFORMED THAT NO SUCH LETTER EXISTED. HE HAD NOT
COME TO SEE NEWSOM EARLIER TO CORRECT THE RECORD BECAUSE
THE PRIOR MEETING HAD BEEN ABOUT THE FREEZING OF IRAN'S
ASSETS, NOT MEXICO'S DECISION TO EXCLUDE THE SHAH.
TO HIS GREAT SURPRISE, HOWEVER, THE TEXT OF AN ALLEGED
LETTER FROM LOPEZ PORTILLO TO THE SHAH, CONTAINED IN
A SECRET STATE DEPARTMENT DOCUMENT, HAD BEEN LEAKED
TO THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, AND MEXICO FOUND ITSELF BEING
BLAMED FOR SUPPOSEDLY GOING BACK ON ITS WORD. THE GOM
THEREFORE HAD BEEN OBLIGED TO DENY THE EXISTENCE OF
THE LETTER PUBLICLY. NOW THE DECEMBER 25 ISSUE OF THE
WASHINGTON POST REVEALED THAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT HAD
RECEIVED THE LETTER FROM SOME PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL IN
NEW YORK. THE ENTIRE AFFAIR HAD NATURALLY GREATLY ANGERED
LOPEZ PORTILLO, AND THE REACTION IN MEXICO WAS ONE OF
OUTRAGE. THE POSITION MEXICO NOW FOUND ITSELF IN, THROUGH
NO FAULT OF ITS OWN, WAS INTOLERABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE.

AS SOMEONE DEDICATED TO PROMOTING GOOD RELATIONS WITH
THE U.S., MARGAIN WAS DEEPLY TROUBLED. HE HAD RECEIVED
A GREAT NUMBER OF HOSTILE LETTERS, INCLUDING ONE PARTICULARLY
HARSH LETTER FROM CONGRESSMAN WRIGHT, WHO HAD
SPOKEN OF MEXICO'S "BETRAYAL;" AND ANOTHER EQUALLY GOOD
FRIEND, SENATOR BENTSEN, HAD PUBLICLY DENOUNCED MEXICO
FOR BREAKING ITS "COMMITMENT TO THE USG."

MARGAIN SAID THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT HAD MADE NO
SUCH COMMITMENT, AND THEREFORE IT WOULD NOT ACCEPT ANY
BLAME FOR WHAT HAD HAPPENED. HE CONCLUDED BY SAYING:
"THERE WAS NO LETTER; THERE WAS NO COMMITMENT; AND NOW
A STATE DEPARTMENT TELEGRAM HAS BEEN LEAKED WHICH IS
VERY HARMFUL TO US-MEXICAN RELATIONS."

IN REPLY, NEWSOM SAID IT WAS OUR FIRM BELIEF THAT
WE HAD A COMMITMENT. PROBABLY MARGAIN WAS NOT AWARE
OF ALL THAT HAD TRANSPIRED, WHEN HE PUBLICLY STATED
THAT THERE WAS NO COMMITMENT. THOSE IN THE USG CHARGED
WITH THE PAINFUL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING THE SHAH WERE
FIRMLY CONVINCED THEY HAD A COMMITMENT FROM THE GOM.

HE THEN REVIEWED FOR MARGAIN THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS:
-- THE USG LEARNED THAT THE SHAH'S PHYSICIANS HAD RECOMMENDED
HE GO TO NEW YORK FOR DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT.

BEFORE DECIDING ON WHETHER TO ADMIT THE SHAH, THE USG
HAD WANTED TO KNOW IF HE WOULD BE ABLE TO RETURN TO
MEXICO.

THE USG WAS ASSURED BY JOSEPH REED, A HIGHLY RESPONSIBLE
MEMBER OF CHASE MANHATTAN WHO WAS REPRESENTING DAVID
ROCKEFELLER, HENRY KISSINGER AND JOHN MCCLOY ON BEHALF
OF THE SHAH, THAT LOPEZ PORTILLO HAD PERSONALLY AUTHORIZED
THE SHAH'S RETURN. REED PROVIDED THE DEPARTMENT THE
TEXT OF A MESSAGE FROM LOPEZ PORTILLO TO THE SHAH, PROMISING
HIM SAFE HAVEN IN MEXICO. (NEWSOM READ MARGAIN THE
TEXT OF THE MESSAGE AS IT HAS BEEN RECEIVED.)

THE USG THEN INSTRUCTED ITS CHARGE IN MEXICO TO CONFIRM
THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE LOPEZ PORTILLO MESSAGE. ON
OCTOBER 22 THE CHARGE RAISED THIS WITH ROZENTAL, WHO
SAID HE WAS UNAWARE OF THE MESSAGE OR OF MEXICO'S POSITION,
BUT WOULD CHECK WITH HIS SUPERIORS. LATER THAT DAY
ROZENTAL DID CONFIRM TO THE CHARGE THAT THE SHAH COULD
RETURN TO MEXICO, AND THE CHARGE IN TURN TELEPHONED
THIS INFORMATION TO NEWSOM THAT NIGHT.

A FEW WEEKS LATER, WHEN THE FOREIGN SECRETARIAT ANNOUNCED
THAT THE SHAH WOULD HAVE TO REAPPLY FOR A VISA IF HE
WISHED TO RETURN, THE CHARGE WAS INSTRUCTED TO FIND
OUT IF THIS MEANT A CHANGE IN THE GOM'S POSITION. AN
OFFICIAL OF GOBERNACION WITH WHOM THE EMBASSY
HAD BEEN IN TOUCH ABOUT THE SHAH ASSURED THE EMBASSY
THAT THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN LOPEZ PORTILLO'S COMMITMENT
TO THE SHAH.

THE EVENING BEFORE THE GOM SUDDENLY REVERSED ITS
POSITION, THE CHARGE AGAIN SOUGHT AND RECEIVED ASSURANCES
FROM GOBERNACION THAT THE SHAH WOULD BE ALLOWED TO RETURN.

MARGAIN AT THIS POINT INTERJECTED THAT THERE WAS
NO WRITTEN LETTER (HE EMPHASIZED WRITTEN), AND NO DIRECT
COMMITMENT BETWEEN MEXICO AND THE U.S. REED, HE SAID,
WAS A NICE FELLOW, BUT NOT A USG OFFICIAL. NEWSOM REPLIED
THAT IT MADE NO DIFFERENCE, SINCE THE USG HAD CONFIRMED
REED'S INFORMATION WITH ROZENTAL AND WITH GOBERNACION.

MARGAIN WAS INCREDULOUS. WHILE ALL THIS WAS GOING
ON, HE SAID, HE WAS RECEIVING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SIGNALS
AND INSTRUCTIONS. HE RECALLED INFORMING BOTH VAKY AND
BRIGGS THAT THE GOM WOULD NEED FROM SIX TO TEN DAYS
ADVANCE WARNING OF ANY PLANS BY THE SHAH TO RETURN TO
MEXICO, SO THAT THE GOM COULD DECIDE WHETHER TO ADMIT
HIM. MARGAIN HAD BEEN IN TOUCH WITH MEXICO ABOUT WHAT
TO DO IF THE SHAH'S VISA EXPIRED BEFORE HE COULD TRAVEL,
AND NO DECISION HAD BEEN TAKEN. FURTHERMORE, HE SAID
ROZENTAL WAS HARDLY QUALIFIED TO GIVE ASSURANCES ON
A MATTER OF SUCH IMPORTANCE. NEWSOM REPLIED THAT ROZENTAL
HAD IN FACT NOT DONE SO AT FIRST, BUT ONLY AFTER HE
HAD CONSULTED HIGHER AUTHORITY.

MARGAIN THEN RETURNED TO A POINT HE HAD MADE IN
HIS INITIAL PRESENTATION: THAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE
ALLEGED MESSAGE FROM LOPEZ PORTILLO WAS "TOTALLY ABSURD."
IMAGINE, HE SAID, A MEXICAN PRESIDENT URGING SOMEONE
TO SEEK MEDICAL CARE ABROAD, OR ADDRESSING HIM AS "KING"
WHEN AS EVERY MEXICAN KNOWS, THE SHAH IS NO BETTER THAN
A CAMPESINO. MARGAIN SAID THE MESSAGE COULD NOT BE
GENUINE. HE APOLOGIZED FOR BEING SO FRANK, BUT EMPHASIZED
THAT A GREAT DEAL WAS AT STAKE, AND THIS MATTER MUST
BE RESOLVED.

NEWSOM AGREED THAT THE MATTER WAS VERY SERIOUS,
AND SAID HE WOULD BE EQUALLY FRANK. HE WAS NOT SURE
TO WHAT DEGREE MARGAIN APPRECIATED THE EXTENT TO WHICH
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SHAH'S ARRIVAL IN THE U.S.
WOULD BECOME A MATTER OF CONTROVERSY AND PUBLIC RECORD,
GIVEN THE NUMBER AND PROMINENCE OF THE PEOPLE DIRECTLY
INVOLVED, ALL OF WHOM HE WAS SURE WOULD BE SEEKING IN
GOOD FAITH TO DETERMINE WHAT EXACTLY HAD HAPPENED.

HE SAID THE USG HAD ITSELF ACTED IN GOOD FAITH IN THE
BELIEF THAT THE ASSURANCES IT WAS RECEIVING WERE GIVEN
IN GOOD FAITH BY THE GOM. THE USG ALSO HAD BEEN SURPRISED
BY THE LOPEZ PORTILLO MESSAGE TO THE SHAH, AND SO IT
HAD GONE TO THE TROUBLE OF VERIFYING THAT IT DID REPRESENT
THE POSITION OF THE GOM. UNTIL JUST A FEW HOURS BEFORE
THE GOM REVERSED ITSELF WITHOUT WARNING, THE USG HAD
BEEN LED BY RESPONSIBLE MEXICAN OFFICIALS TO BELIEVE
THAT MEXICO WOULD READMIT THE SHAH.

MARGAIN WITH SOME EMOTION PROTESTED THAT MEXICO
WAS BEING BLAMED FOR SOMETHING IT HAD NOT DONE. IT
WAS NATURAL FOR THOSE IN TROUBLE TO LOOK FOR SCAPEGOATS,
BUT MEXICO WOULD NOT LET THIS HAPPEN. WHY, HE ASKED,
HAD THE U.S. NOT ASKED MEXICO FORMALLY, IN WRITING,
WHAT ITS POSITION WAS? WHY DID THE U.S. NOT AVAIL ITSELF
OF "CLASSICAL DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS" -- I.E., WHY WAS
HE NOT CONSULTED?

NEWSOM EXPLAINED THAT WHEN THE SHAH WAS IN BARBADOS,
SEEKING A HAVEN ELSEWHERE, KISSINGER IN AN ENTIRELY
PRIVATE CAPACITY HAD APPROACHED SOMEONE ON LOPEZ PORTILLO'S
STAFF. THE USG WAS NOT INVOLVED AT THAT POINT. THROUGH
THAT CHANNEL, LOPEZ PORTILLO GAVE HIS PERMISSION FOR
THE SHAH TO ENTER, ON A SIX-MONTHS TOURIST VISA. MARGAIN
INTERRUPTED TO SAY THAT THE DURATION OF THE VISA HAD
BEEN THE SUBJECT OF PROTRACTED NEGOTIATION, ALWAYS WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SHAH WOULD MOVE ON -- TO
THE U.S, CANADA, CHILE, ARGENTINA, OR ELSEWHERE -- ONCE
THE VISA EXPIRED.

NEWSOM REPEATED THAT THE INITIAL CONTACT HAD TAKEN
PLACE IN MEXICO CITY, NOT WASHINGTON, BETWEEN A PRIVATE
U.S. CITIZEN AND SOMEONE IN THE OFFICE OF THE MEXICAN
PRESIDENT. IN DUE COURSE THE U.S. EMBASSY WAS INFORMED,
AND A CHANNEL WAS ESTABLISHED FOR GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT
CONTACTS, THROUGH GOBERNACION. NEWSOM SAID THE USG
WAS MAINTAINING A CAREFUL RECORD OF WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED
BECAUSE IT WOULD IN DUE COURSE HAVE TO MAKE A FULL,
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND UNLESS IT SHOULD LEARN SOMETHING
IT WAS NOT AWARE OF NOW, IT WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT IT
HAD BELIEVED IT HAD A COMMITMENT FROM THE GOM.

PARENTHETICALLY, NEWSOM ASKED MARGAIN WHY MEXICO
HAD CLOSED ITS EMBASSY IN TEHRAN IF IT HAD NOT DECIDED
TO ALLOW THE SHAH TO RETURN. MARGAIN SAID THERE WERE
TWO REASONS: AS A PROTEST AGAINST THE TAKING OF DIPLOMATIC
HOSTAGES, AND IN THE BELIEF THAT NO DIPLOMATS WOULD
BE SAFE IN IRAN. MARGAIN THEN ASKED WHY, IF THE USG
FELT IT HAD A COMMITMENT FROM MEXICO, DID NEWSOM NOT
MAKE THAT THE SUBJECT OF HIS DECEMBER 5 DEMARCHE, INSTEAD
OF THE LESS SERIOUS QUESTION OF FROZEN IRANIAN ASSETS.

NEWSOM SAID THAT AT THEIR LAST MEETING THE IMMEDIATE
ISSUE WAS LOPEZ PORTILLO'S UNWARRANTED CRITICISM OF
A U.S. ACTION. THERE SEEMED TO BE NOTHING TO BE GAINED
IN RAISING THE QUESTION OF THE SHAH WHICH AT THAT POINT
WAS NOT THE SUBJECT OF PUBLIC DEBATE. EVEN SO, WHEN
MARGAIN HAD RAISED THE TOPIC, NEWSOM HAD LEFT HIM IN NO
DOUBT AS TO THE USG SHOCK AND SURPRISE. HE SAID HE
WISHED TO REITERATE IN THE FRANKEST POSSIBLE WAY THAT
WHILE THE USG RECOGNIZED THAT MEXICO, LIKE THE U.S.,
HAD AN HONEST POINT OF VIEW TO DEFEND, THE USG WOULD
TAKE STRONG EXCEPTION TO ANY IMPLICATION THAT IT HAD
NOT ACTED IN GOOD FAITH WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSURANCES
IT HAD RECEIVED FROM THE GOM. THE REVERSAL OF MEXICO'S
POSITION WAS A DISAPPOINTMENT AND A SHOCK TO THE U.S.,
COMING AS IT DID IN THE MIDST OF A HIGHLY CHARGED CRISIS
FOR OUR COUNTRY. THE USG, HE SAID, WOULD NOT, HOWEVER,
SEEK TO AMPLIFY ITS DIFFERENCES WITH MEXICO BEYOND THE
NEED TO DEFEND ITS POINT OF VIEW.

MARGAIN SAID THAT THE PROBLEM ORIGINATED WITH THE
FAILURE OF THE USG TO USE A TRADITIONAL CHANNEL OF DIPLOMACY.
NEWSOM REPLIED THAT THE PROBLEM BETWEEN THE U.S. AND
MEXICO STEMMED FROM THE GOM'S ASSERTION THAT THERE WAS
NO COMMITMENT TO LET THE SHAH RETURN. THE GOM HAD CHALLENGED
THE WORD OF THE USG.

MARGAIN SAID HE COULD NOT ACCEPT THAT. HE HAD
BEEN INFORMED OFFICIALLY BY HIS GOVERNMENT THAT THERE
WAS NO MESSAGE AND NO COMMITMENT. MEXICO SIMPLY WOULD
NOT ACCEPT ANY BLAME FOR WHAT IT HAD NOT DONE. MARGAIN
SAID THE ENTIRE DISPUTE WAS MOST UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE
IT DAMAGED A RELATIONSHIP WHICH SHOULD BE CLOSE. LOPEZ
PORTILLO, HE SAID, WAS NOW VERY ANGRY BECAUSE HE FELT
HE HAD BEEN WRONGED. MARGAIN DID ADMIT, HOWEVER, THAT
EVEN WITHOUT A COMMITMENT, THE DECISION TO BAR THE SHAH
MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE U.S. IN A LESS ABRUPT
MANNER.

NEWSOM SAID THAT THERE WAS NO QUESTION THAT THE
USG HAD AN UNDERSTANDING WITH THE GOM BASED ON ASSURANCES
FROM MEXICAN OFFICIALS. THESE ASSURANCES HAD NOT BEEN
HONORED, WHICH HAD ANGERED HIS PRESIDENT AND OTHERS
IN THE USG AS WELL.

MARGAIN SAID THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN NO
COMMITMENT ABOUT THE SHAH, THE USG NOW DID HAVE A COMMITMENT
FROM THE GOM TO OPPOSE A SPECIAL TRIBUNAL TO TRY THE
HOSTAGES IN IRAN, AND WHILE MEXICO WAS LIMITED IN WHAT
IT COULD DO WITH RESPECT TO PRIVATE CITIZENS, IT WOULD
SEEK TO DISCOURAGE THEIR PARTICIPATION IN ANY TRIBUNAL.
HE REITERATED THAT MEXICO BELIEVED THE FREEDOM OF THE
HOSTAGES WAS IN MEXICO'S OWN INTEREST, THAT MEXICO HAD
CONDEMNED IRAN'S ACTS AT THE UN AND OAS, AND THAT NO
ONE SHOULD EVER THINK MEXICO IN ANY WAY SYMPATHIZED
WITH IRAN. HE SAVD HE WOULD WORK VERY HARD TO TRY TO
RESTORE GOOD RELATIONS BETWEEN MEXICO AND THE U.S.,
IN SPITE OF THE "COLD ATTITUDE" HE HAD ENCOUNTERED AT
THE WHITE HOUSE. HE HIMSELF HAD SUGGESTED LOPEZ PORTILLO
WRITE PRESIDENT CARTER A LETTER AFTER THE DECEMBER 5
MEETING, WHICH MARGAIN HAD HOPED TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER
IN PERSON SO AS TO REESTABLISH AN AURA OF GOOD WILL,
BUT THIS HAD NOT BEEN POSSIBLE.

NEWSOM CLOSED THE DISCUSSION BY EXPRESSING THE HOPE
THAT MARGAIN WOULD EXERCISE GREAT CARE IN REPLYING
TO AMERICAN CRITICS AND AVOID GIVING
ANY IDEA THAT THE USG LACKED ANY BASIS ON WHICH TO BELIEVE
MEXICO HAD BEEN PREPARED TO ALLOW THE SHAH TO RETURN.
MARGAIN THANKED NEWSOM FOR RECEIVING HIM, AND ASKED
IF IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO OBTAIN COPIES OF
ANY OF THE RELEVANT U.S. DOCUMENTS. NEWSOM TOOK THIS
REQUEST UNDER ADVISEMENT. VANCE.”

Reportedly, “The Islamic Republic of Iran brought an action against the Shah and Empress Pahlavi, alleging they accepted bribes and misappropriated $35 billion in Iranian funds. The Appellate Division affirmed, with a dissent arguing that jurisdiction must be assumed because no other forum was available to the plaintiff.”

According to the NYT, “On November 29, 1979, the Government of Iran filed suit in Manhattan yesterday against Shah Mohammed Rizzi Pahlevi and his wife, Farah, asking $56.5 billion in damages.”

David Rockefeller, the patriarch of the Rockefeller family and a former chairman and chief executive of Chase Manhattan Bank, died Monday, March 20, 2017.

Mohammed Reza Pahlevi died in Egypt from lymphoma on July 27, 1980.

Lynda Carson may be reached at newzland2 [at] gmail.com

>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>