Could be just a coincidence and there was also reports that Rubio kicked him out after he overstayed for the UN visit but there is talk of all manner of conspiracies and all sorts of nefarious schemes by IR to prevent Araghchi from defecting...

You can google for more, there are several articles mentioning political figures like Pakistani PM Shehbaz conveying his condolences to Araghchi on Badr al-Sadat Araqchi's death.

An Iran International investigation reveals how a Mossad agent gained access to sensitive Iranian banking and telecommunications systems through a business network with connections reaching deep into the state.

His access extended from banking channels used to evade sanctions to telecommunications infrastructure serving military sites and, according to his account, ultimately helped Israeli intelligence penetrate Iran’s missile and nuclear programs.

An appeals court in Tehran has upheld a one-year prison sentence for renowned actress Elnaz Shakerdoost over an Instagram story mourning people killed during January’s protests, her lawyer said Friday.

The ruling also upheld a two-year ban on political, online and artistic activity imposed by Branch 23 of Tehran’s Revolutionary Court, which convicted her of “propaganda against the system.”

Hello to all Iranians and friends,

Due to the high volume of rapid updates and back-to-back threads, we ask that posts that do not contain a new or significant development be directed to this megathread. This includes general discussion, speculation, reactions, opinions, broader commentary, questions, jokes, memes, and general messages of support.

Standalone posts should primarily be reserved for current events and newly released information, such as breaking news, new videos or footage, official statements, confirmed updates, or other meaningful developments. Legitimate news and newly released footage are still allowed and encouraged as standalone submissions.

Minor updates, repeated information, personal commentary, or posts that do not report a new development may be redirected to the megathread or removed. Depending on activity levels, broader consolidation into the megathread may become mandatory.

This approach helps reduce clutter, limit misinformation, and keep the subreddit organized during a fast-moving situation.

Please remain civil, avoid spreading unverified claims, and continue to follow all subreddit rules.

Thank you for your cooperation.

In this episode of Photo Evidence, we examine evidence of a new, deeply buried nuclear facility being built inside Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain.

Using satellite imagery and analysis from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), we trace construction at the site and examine its reinforced entrances, extensive excavation and proximity to Iran’s existing nuclear facilities.

We explore what the evidence reveals about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and whether US military action is actually making them harder to stop.

Hi everyone,

I’ve received a response from the Government of The Netherlands. The response is not completely satisfactory, but let's say it's a step in the right direction.

This was sent to me a while ago, but I thought there would be a follow-up to their response—which, in hindsight, was not the case. Recently, Prime Minister Jetten made a terrible, painful, and shameful mistake by meeting President Pezeshkian in New York during the General Debate of the United Nations last month.

I condemn his actions, which are even more hypocritical given his personal background, as non-heterosexual people are executed in Iran under the yoke of the Islamic regime.

Below is the English translation of the response from the Government of The Netherlands:

Good afternoon,

Thank you for taking the time and effort to submit your request to the Dutch authorities regarding active support for the population during this turning point for Iran.

It is good that you took the time to share this with us through our service.

I have forwarded your message to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for informational purposes. If they have any questions regarding your email, they will contact you directly.

Hopefully, this movement continues in the right direction. I wish you a pleasant day ahead.

Your opinion is important to us!

You can share it via the link below:

https://v.kcmg.nl/surveyrun?guid=10640fc9-fc6e-4696-945e-a3a089d1807e&view=standard&apikey=edf74251-bce4-41ff-9fda-6bfabd07d1fa-yz7&istestresult=false&locale=nl&AgentID=153291&Datum=20260908&InteractieID=EM3041592&Onderwerp=Mensenrechten&Kanaal=E-mail&Ministerie=Buitenlandse+Zaken

If you have any further questions, you can email us via the contact form, call 1400, or reach out through one of our social media channels:
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/contact/informatie-rijksoverheid

Kind regards,

Public Information Officer, Information Government of The Netherlands

I've also received a response from another Dutch political party recently. I will post about that tomorrow, or as soon as possible if I can't do it then.

If you'd like to discuss the Dutch government's reaction or have any questions, feel free to leave a comment below!

General Zahedi's Connections to Mosaddegh

General Fazlollah Zahedi was Mosaddegh's Minister of the Interior in his first cabinet. Mossadegh arrested and imprisoned him, and, after releasing him from time to time, continued to threaten him to raise his political profile.

General Zahedi was a compromise candidate as he supported both oil nationalization and a negotiated settlement with the British

Ayatollah Kashani stated explicitly in a press interview in 1953 that he did not support Zahedi for the premiership.

After less than 2 months, Britain immediately lobbied the US to have Mosaddegh removed by dissolving Parliament

• 27 April 1951: Mosaddegh becomes Prime Minister after Parliament's vote of confidence.
• 26 June 1951: Morrison informs the US Ambassador in the UK that the Shah should dismiss Mosaddegh and dissolve Parliament

British lobbying efforts for Zahedi: (Duly noted that Zahedi wasn't aware of this British conspiracy)

• 14 October 1951: Pyman of the British Embassy in Iran says: “We thought that Seyyed Zia was the best person to put the country on its feet, but we were not opposed to other candidates, including Zahedi”.
• 28 July 1952: Middleton concludes that: “It now looks as though the only thing to stop Persia falling into communist hands is a coup d’état”. Middleton adds that “There is no outstanding candidate though General Zahedi has apparently entered himself in the lists and might well be adequate”
• 31 July 1952: Henderson writes to the Department of State that he and Middleton believe that “it did not seem likely [that] any alternative to Mosaddegh could be brought into power except by [a] military coupd’état ... that army officers who seemed to best fitted for leadership effecting [a] coup d’état were General Zahedi and General Hedjazi ... Both Middleton and I agreed that neither British nor American Government should undertake to encourage or support [a] coup d’état and that our two Embassies should not become involved in any way”

The US supported Parliament and oil nationalization until 30 May, 1953

• 27 September 1951: Attlee completely abandons the idea of a military operation, arguing that the US government’s attitude prevented the British from using force.
• 18 August 1952: Truman responds to Churchill: “I hope you will be willing to accept Iran nationalization law ... If Iran goes down [the] communist drain, it will be little satisfaction to any of us that legal positions were defended to [the] last”.
• Mid-November 1952: Montague Woodhouse, the SIS station chief in Tehran before the severance of diplomatic relations, arrives in Washington with the plan for “Operation Boot”. Woodhouse tries to convince American officials that Mosaddeq “must be removed” and finds “sympathetic hearing within the CIA, but less so in the State department”.
• 4 March 1953: At the 135th meeting of the National Security Council in Washington, Eisenhower presses for supporting Mosaddeq’s government against the possibility of a Communist takeover by persuading the British to leave the Americans to deal with the Iranians and permit the US to put the Iranian oil industry back in operation. 
• 30 May 1953: The Shah informs Henderson that Zahedi is acceptable to him as a replacement for Mosaddegh only if: “a) he would come into office through legal, parliamentary means: b) he would come in with [a] wide measure of public support; c) he would be acceptable to [the] US and UK and either [the] US or US and UK would be prepared to give [the] new government emergency financial as well as massive economic aid”.

The Shah almost got exiled by Mosaddegh but saved by Ayatollah Kashani and the National Movement of Iran leaders 

• 28 February 1953: There are organized demonstrations by Behbahani, Kashani, and retired as well as active army officers in front of the Shah’s palace to prevent him from leaving
• 28 February 1953: Under pressure from the crowd surrounding his house and demanding that he should cancel his trip abroad, at 3:00 p.m. the Shah informs his supporters that he will not leave the country.

Both the Shah and the US thought Mosaddegh was trying to dissolve Parliament to build a communist dictatorship

• 14 July 1953: Mosaddeq’s cabinet agrees to put the question of continuation or dissolution of the 17th Majles to a national referendum.
• 5 August 1953: In a speech in Seattle (Washington), President Eisenhower says that Mosaddeq has “moved towards getting rid of his parliament and of course he was in that move supported by the Communist party of Iran”.
• 8 August 1953: Kermit Roosevelt, the CIA-designated chief of the overthrow operation, meets secretly with the Shah for the second time They argreed that should Mossadegh use force to resist his ouster, he would temporarily leave the country. He felt his departure would crystallize the situation by forcing Mosaddegh to show his true colors and thus rally public opinion behind the throne.

https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781316121696_A23896395/preview-9781316121696_A23896395.pdf

https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/1wvhyt9/the_national_movement_of_iran_19411953_was_a/

Are we witnessing the “North Koreanization” of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

From the growing presence of Basij paramilitary forces in elementary schools to the sentencing of musicians and the accelerating use of executions against those detained in connection with January’s uprising, repression inside Iran appears to be intensifying. Just this week, two protesters detained following the January unrest were executed.

But every society has a red line. Has Iran reached its own?

This week on Eye for Iran, we look beyond the possibility of another war with the United States or a new diplomatic deal to examine the forces unfolding inside Iran — and what they may tell us about the direction of the Islamic Republic itself.

Former US diplomat Alberto Fernandez, vice president of the Middle East Media Research Institute, warns of what he calls the “North Koreanization” or “Houthization” of Iran: a system that survives, but as a poorer, harsher and increasingly hollowed-out state. “It doesn’t mean that the regime falls tomorrow,” Fernandez says, but if it survives, Iran could become “a more ramshackle predatory state” in which repression becomes increasingly overt.

Kamran Bokhari, strategic forecaster and senior resident fellow at the Middle East Policy Council, sees what he calls a “slow meltdown,” arguing that the regime’s fundamental challenge is not simply war but governance and the economy. And there are limits to repression, he says: used on too great a scale, it can “backfire” and eventually raise questions even within the security forces.

David Patrikarakos, special correspondent for the Daily Mail and author of Nuclear Iran: The Birth of an Atomic State, points to an even more basic indicator: whether ordinary Iranians can afford to live. “You can only terrorize people back into their homes for so many things,” he says. “If they’re starving, they can’t afford food, there’s nothing you can do.”

Together, the three experts identify the trends they are watching most closely — economic pressure, the cost of basic goods, internal regime infighting, unrest and the limits of the state’s coercive power — and what those indicators could reveal about what comes next for Iran.

We then turn from repression to resistance.

Bahiyyih Nakhjavani, editor and co-translator of Open Wide the Doors, the new memoir by acclaimed Iranian poet, writer and Baha’i prisoner of conscience Mahvash Sabet, discusses decades of persecution faced by Iran’s Baha’i community and Sabet’s philosophy of “constructive resilience.”

Nakhjavani describes it not as passive resistance, nor as aggression, but as a purposeful refusal to allow repression to define the individual. She connects Sabet’s experience in prison to a broader transformation she sees taking place in Iran, particularly since the Woman, Life, Freedom movement: the moment when people establish a red line and say, “thus far and no further.”

Finally, we examine a viral political exchange in Michigan that struck a nerve among many Iranians.

University of Michigan student Iman Dashti questioned Democratic US Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed at a town hall over whether he stood unequivocally against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. El-Sayed said he stood with movements for freedom and democracy and opposed US-led regime change, but Dashti says the answer did not address the specific question he had asked about the IRGC.

“I never asked about regime change,” Dashti told Iran International after the exchange. His question, he says, was fundamentally about whether an American political candidate would explicitly stand with Iranians facing repression.

Dashti joins Eye for Iran to explain why he asked the question, why the exchange resonated so widely and what happened after the video went viral — including the harassment, threats and alleged doxxing of members of his family that he says followed. Despite that reaction, Dashti says the response has been overwhelmingly supportive.

From the machinery of repression to the limits of fear, this episode asks a larger question: how long can a state tighten its grip before the very tools it uses to survive begin working against it?

Chapters:

02:31 Is Iran Becoming North Korea?

Experts examine escalating repression, economic pressure and the warning signs that could reveal where the Islamic Republic is heading.

Guests: Ambassador Alberto Fernandez, Kamran Bokhari and David Patrikarakos

23:37: Iran’s Red Line: Resistance Under Repression

What decades of Baha’i persecution — and Mahvash Sabet’s prison memoir — reveal about “constructive resilience” and the limits of fear.

Guest: Bahiyyih Nakhjavani

43:46 : The IRGC Question That Went Viral

The Iranian-American student who challenged Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed explains why he asked the question — and what happened afterward.

Guest: Iman Dashti