This presentation juxtaposes the dominant and alternative discourses of English language education in Iran in the post-1979 years. Archives from religious and political sermons and lectures, parliamentary plans, and curricular policies are categorized for their restrictive role in teaching English, identified as the language of the West. The rationale for most of the political discourse takes the form of concern against “Western Cultural Invasion” on the part of the politics in Iran. Between 2015 to 2019, the media based in the diaspora published some interpretations of the sermons of Ayatollah Khamenei, the Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and made predictions about the future of English language education in Iran. These predictions ranged from a ban in government-controlled curriculums to a surge on learning English on the part of the nation as a reaction. Interpretations of the news from Iran have reacted differently, some naming such advice of Khamenei as tactful and alert against the cunning games of the colonialists and superpowers, while others identify him as a paranoid, old, and illiterate mullah. Among the alternative discourses, this study includes voices from social media groups by English language teachers and in-depth interviews with teachers and learners from private language schools in Mashhad, Iran. Based on the results from juxtaposing the dominant and alternative discourses of the archives, the media from Iran and abroad, social media, and the in-depth interviews, I argue that compared to the needs analysis of the learners and the practical direction of English language education in Iran, the dominant discourses are arbitrary and isolated, and their attempts to project the old-fashioned conspiracy theory has proven as failed. Positioning English language textbooks and private language schools as the locus of the “Velvet Revolution” has not reduced the popularity of these schools or the English Language. Also, unlike the predictions of the media in diaspora, learners do not attend extra-curricular English language education centers as a reaction to the dominant discourses. Although the educators and learners follow news about such concerns on the part of the leaders of the Islamic Republic, their activities in English language education cannot count as resistance to the local government and its warnings against the West, but as a response to the globalization movement and the necessity of English language as a key to science and commerce among others.