Posted on 12/16/2006 11:18:21 AM PST by HAL9000
Excerpt -
TEHRAN (AFP) - Centrist cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was running well ahead of his ultra-conservative rival Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi in elections for Iran's Assembly of Experts, with half the votes counted, state television said.Both clerics were standing to be one of the 16 men who will represent Tehran province in the Assembly of Experts, the body which chooses and supervises the supreme leader.
~ snip ~
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I find it a little odd that Rafsanjani is being portrayed as the moderate here.
Most everything I've read about Rafsanjani over the years spoke of anything but moderation.
Guess something like this speaks volumes about messed up Iran is right now.
Our media call Clinton a moderate.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
The Assembly of Experts is not a one man win situation - as for President. The Assembly majority itself - I forget the number of people - is the key as they then appoint the Supreme Ruler, which is what Mesbah Yazdi wants to become.
Whoever gets more followers onto the Assembly is the real winner. Somewhat like the Dems winning and choosing all the Committee heads from amongst themselves.
Thus putting the looney Hojatieh sect of Islam, even Khomeini could not stomach, formally in power and in charge instead of being the power behind the throne as it is today through accolyte Ahjmadi-Nejad being President.
True, very true.
Rafsanjani is committed in the long run only to Rafsanjani. That means he'll hardly be a friend of the US, but at least he isn't interested in suicide either.
Yet more proof that for the media, "conservative" = bad, and "ultraconservative" = Very Bad. In reality, none of these nuts is conservative in any sense - they're radical fanatics who want to destroy civilization, not conserve anything.
These elections are a lose-lose scenario - Rafsanjani was the key driver for Iran seeking nuclear weapons in the 80s. He wants to destroy Israel and the West just as much.
Rafsanjani, however, survived, presumably by going chameleon. I suspect that's what's afoot here. But he's still better than Khameini or Ahmadinejad.
Rafsanjani doesn't give a damn about Israel beyond being able to use it for domestic political purposes. He does not think of himself in Messianic terms, unlike Ahmadinejad, nor is he a religious fanatic. He's power hungry, and in Iran power comes from railing against Israel and (to a much lesser degree) the United States. But he isn't stupid and he isn't suicidal. I'll take a pragmatist any day over a madman.
No, he's not suicidal, but he does want Nukes as "insurance" against Israel. And that's dangerous.
http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm
"And if anything the younger generation is even far more radical than the generation that founded the regime."
Then why are people posting the pro-Americanism of students, on this website?
Why are we being informed that Iranians detest the mullah government, and that they boycott elections, to protest the lack of real choices?
Why are we being told they have frequent protests and demonstrations at universities?
Which portrayal of the "younger generation" is correct?
There is no difference between him and the rest. They are all evil
Thanks.
Bump
THanks.
well put.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1754509/posts?page=8#8
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1754509/posts?page=9#9
But they have no qualms about using proxy groups to attack Israel or us. That remains a real threat.
"And if anything the younger generation is even far more radical than the generation that founded the regime."
Wow did somebody lie to you.
I believe the statement was about the younger generation of clerics. The population represented by the clerics would be a mixed bag.
Suicide bombing or luring others to blow them up is not the goal - controlling the region and beyond is. In other words, they will only seek that which allows them to be the ruling power of the entire region, not just get themselves blown up for nothing. It's a vicious strategy, but it's still old-fashioned preparing for conquesting.
Nobody -- not even Ahmadinejad -- wants Iran to go conquering their neighbors. That's messy and counter-productive. I think all rulers of Iran want to increase Iran's relative power in the region. That's inevitable, and not necessarily a bad thing. In theory, all leaders everywhere should want to increase the power of their countries.
The Assembly of Experts provides advice to the Department of Certainty and schedules the semi-annual Death to America rally.
They want the Saudi regime toppled and replace with extremist militants. They want Egypt on their side. Algeria, Libya, Morroco, all of North Africa.
Assymetric - build a critical mass of a proxy force within your neighbors and watch them do your dirty work. We will see a Hezbollah-type group in Saudis very, very shortly.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.