Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Talking With Iran

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

Some time back, I posted this at Infidel Bloggers Alliance. That particular June 3, 2006 article from the Washington Post details how Ahmadinejad is "A Man of the People's Needs and Wants." The slant of the piece is utopian, with lots of good feelings pertaining to promises never kept.

In a comment to my posting at IBA, Epaminondas dropped this Google-search link about Hojatieh, referred to here as the Iranian Taliban. The Google-search link also listed a March 30, 2004 essay written by Amir Taheri before the election which brought Ahmadinejad to power in Iran:
"Westerners often meet with assorted officials who, they are led to believe, run Islamist Iran. They don't....

"At the center of the oligarchy stands the 'Office of the Leader,' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the 'Supreme Guide.' Under the Khomeinist Constitution, the 'Supreme Guide' represents Allah's sovereignty on earth and has unlimited powers. The opening articles of the Khomeinist Constitution, approved in 1979, make it clear that the 'Supreme Guide' is also the leader of all Muslims throughout the world, whether they like it or not. Thus, theoretically at least, the Khomeinist 'Supreme Guide' can decide what Islam is and is not at any given time.....

"Teheran 'revolutionary' oligarchy uses the Iranian state structures, including the parliament, as instruments for implementing policies that are decided by a small group of mullahs and their advisers behind closed doors and without the slightest accountability. This is one reason foreign, especially Western diplomats and politicians, are often led up the garden path by Iranian interlocutors playing the role of ministers or other senior officials...."
It is worth your time to read all of Amir Taheri's essay.

40 Comments:

At 6/18/2006 10:18 PM, Blogger MissingLink said...

One of the reasons I personally never get too excited when the current Iranian 'president' goes into his 'goofy' mode and starts talking utter nonsense.
Nothing and I mean nothing he says doesn't get approved by those perverted old men.
He's just a disposable puppet.

 
At 6/18/2006 11:42 PM, Anonymous Mustang said...

It is common in Asian cultures to disguise the real power. Japan is like that, too. The real power in Japan isn’t the present Prime Minister; it is his predecessor. Now if anyone in our government thinks that they are dealing with a secular head of state in the Iranian presidency, they are sadly mistaken. Let’s all say it together. IRAN IS A THEOCRACY.

 
At 6/19/2006 1:32 AM, Blogger kevin said...

Tehran Bob?

 
At 6/19/2006 6:45 AM, Anonymous the merry widow said...

ML- Before that it was the previous emperor, who usually retired to monastary, but because he was a revered elder he wielded considerable power.
Note too the implications of the califate in that essay! The supreme guide is laying claim to it, wonder how the sunni's feel about that?
Good morning and G*D bless!

tmw

 
At 6/19/2006 8:29 AM, Blogger kev said...

This kind of reminds me of our own country's democratic party (not to be confused with democracy). Act as though you really care, and that you're listening to the people, promise that you have a plan that's good for the people, twist the words of the opposition. All the while, what you really care about is getting elected, and your plan either never was or never develops, and all your energy is spent twisting and spinning the words of the other party because you really have nothing else.

 
At 6/19/2006 10:19 AM, Blogger Brooke said...

Missing Link Said,"He's just a disposable puppet."

I think of him as a target. If we do decide to lower the boom on Iran, the mullahs will shrug their shoulders and say, "It was him, not us! Don't attack us!"

 
At 6/19/2006 10:21 AM, Blogger Gayle said...

I didn't know this, AOW. I'm not surprised by it, but I didn't know it. So thank you for posting it.

Kev makes a good point about not confusing the democratic party with democracy. They really need a new name, because I think some may be confused about that. Course they won't call themselves what they really should be called:
"The Socialist Party."

 
At 6/19/2006 10:30 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Can we call a moratorium on the Benodar Associates "articles".

Not that they can't be valuable but you really need more than one source of information, unless you count Coulter as a valid source.

 
At 6/19/2006 11:22 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Note variant spelling of "Hojatieh," which can also be spelled "Hojjatieh."

Information from two other sources. The first is from Wikipedia; the second from the Northeast Intelligence Network...

1.: Hojjatieh is a semi-clandestine Iranian organization which is radically anti-Bahá'í and anti-Sunni. The group flourished during the 1979 revolution that ousted the Shah and installed an Islamic government in his place. However it was banned in 1983 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the revolution.

They believe that chaos must be created to hasten the return of the Mahdi, the 12th Shi'ite Imam. Only then, they argue, can a genuine Islamic republic be established.

The current president of Iran Mahmud Ahmadinejad is rumored to be an advocate of this group. Since the president took office in August 2005 almost all of his major speeches contain some reference to the return of the 12th Imam. A September address to the U.N. General Assembly contained long passages on the Mahdi which confused Western diplomats and irked those from Sunni Muslim countries who believe in a different line of succession from Mohammed.


2.: June 19, 2006

A more complete understanding of the issues facing the United States, the EU and Israel, as well as other nations and organizations in the world (such as the UN Security Council and the IAEA) in dealing with Iran must be based upon a more complete assessment of the theological group which has achieved preeminence within the Islamic Republic of Iran. The current President of Iran, Mahmud Ahmadi-Nejad has long been a member of this group, as is his close spiritual advisor Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi. The sect or belief system to which they belong is known as “Hojjatieh”.

The “Hojjatieh” is widely unknown to most people in the West....

Understanding this new Iranian leadership means understanding how Hojjatieh have reformed from their former position regarding an Islamic government in Iran. This is best captured by Ahmadi-Nejad’s spiritual mentor Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi who said, “It doesn’t matter what the people think. The people are ignorant sheep”. Ahmadi-Nejad also evidenced this poltical transformation of Hojjatieh by stating that the main continuing mission of the Iranian revolution is to “pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam… We should define economic, cultural and political policies based upon the policy (Islamic eschatological theology) of Imam Mahdi’s return"....

According to an Iranian expatriate known as Azarmehr, these Hojjatieh holding the reigns of power in Iran “believe he (Imam Mahdi) will reappear again when the world has become full of oppression and tyranny.” Azarhehr goes on to say that the “Hojjatieh… actually believe in the spread of tyranny and oppression” as a means to hasten to the return of the Imam Mahdi. “If you stand in the way of tyranny and oppression then you delay the coming of the Lord of All Ages.” This taken in consideration with the overall context of statements from the Iranian government regarding the existence of Israel, and holocaust denial (Mahmud Ahmadi-Nejad) and the Iranian plan for “the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization” is critical to our national survival and preparations for military action against this Iranian regime.

...The new IRGC Air Force Commander is Brigadier General Hossein Salami. He is the architect of Iranian asymmetrical warfare doctrine. General Salami is in lock-step with the current Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei (who is ultimately responsible for the ascension of Mahmud Ahmadi-Nejad to the presidency) and his Chief Advisor, Hassan Abbasi. Hassan Abassi is the originator of Iranian plans for war with the US, the West and Israel. Both are adherents, along with President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad of the Hojjatieh ideology making them hard-core Shi’a Islamic apocalyptics....


Of course, numerous expats from Iran speak of Hojatieh. Biased sources? Maybe. Or perhaps sources with information that is often overlooked.

In any event, Ahmadinejad's imam Khameini was banned by Khomeini as being "too radical." And imams and mullahs exert great influence over Islamic governments.

 
At 6/19/2006 11:25 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

A brief mention--quite recent, I think--at Amnesty International's web site. Not terribly pertinent to this particular blog article, however.

 
At 6/19/2006 12:21 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

The point that Iran has been a theocracy since the 1979 coup will always be lost on leftists. All puppetheads. Same government.

The mullahs behind the mosque curtains decided the current mouthpiece Ahmadinejad should be hollering about exterminating Israelis with a peaceful but secret nuclear energy program to bring electricity to rural Iran as soon as they figure out how to build power lines. So that's what he's doing.

But, under the allegedly "prior government," Iran routinely executed females who accused others of rape.

This being the "government" Bill Clinton praised as the closest, politically, to his own views.

I don't know what scares me more about the left. Their seeming ignorance of evil, or their eager complicity with it?

 
At 6/19/2006 1:24 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

The "leftists" don't know hat Iran is a theocracy?

Are you insane, Beamish?

I'm amused that you think iran doesn't know how to build power lines but they can build an nuclear weapon.

Clinton praised iran as the government being closest to his own views? That's the pure stinky cheese, beamish. You know it and you also know that Raygun sold them critical parts for hostages.

 
At 6/19/2006 1:43 PM, Blogger David Schantz said...

I'm thinking our own president is also a puppet. The puppet master in this case would be the CFR and the Trilateral Commission.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic

 
At 6/19/2006 1:46 PM, Blogger David Schantz said...

The Internet Goblins just ate my comment. I'm thinking our own President is also a puppet. In this case the puppet masters would be the CFR and the Trilateral Commission.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

 
At 6/19/2006 2:38 PM, Blogger WomanHonorThyself said...

Of course theocratic govts disguise the Powers that Be..we'd b foolish to think otherwise.
Great post AOW. :)

 
At 6/19/2006 4:20 PM, Blogger G_in_AL said...

I don't know what scares me more about the left. Their seeming ignorance of evil, or their eager complicity with it?

you are giving them too much credit... it's which ever is more politically expediant... thats the one they side with... after all, evil is such a 'relative' term

 
At 6/19/2006 6:13 PM, Blogger Elmer's Brother said...

Note to readers: if the president of Iran were a puppet he would be Crazy Harry

 
At 6/19/2006 8:15 PM, Blogger MissingLink said...

Clinton (at a meeting on the margins of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland):
“Iran today is, in a sense, the only country where progressive ideas enjoy a vast constituency. It is there that the ideas that I subscribe to are defended by a majority.”

Clinton (at a television interview with Charlie Rose):
“Iran is the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami (in 1997). (It is) the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: Two for president; two for the Parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralties. In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own.”
Source: http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=59952&d=5&m=3&y=2005

 
At 6/19/2006 11:14 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Ducky,

I realize your leftist commitments to convincing everyone you meet that you're an idiot take precedence over acquiring new information, but yes The "leftists" don't know hat Iran is a theocracy...

Not to tax the upper limits of your stunted short-term memory, but over 30 seconds ago (around a month ago, really) you were arguing that the Iranian government's allowance of letting a "filmmaker" squeeze off an inferior knockoff of Taxicab Confessions was the apex of freedom in pre-Ahmadinejad Iran.

Aside from that memorable argument's productive gain you must have felt in the soul-wrenching need leftists have to give voice to the inane, that argument indicated to me at least a bizarre belief on your part that the Presidency of Iran is a meaningful office within Iran's borders.

Given my growing difficulties in distinguishing leftists from mindless simpletons, please forgive if I have misattributed the cause.

 
At 6/20/2006 12:05 AM, Anonymous Debbie said...

I'm not sure exactly who has the power in Iran. Ahmadinejad is the 'front man' and the mullahs think they are pulling the strings. But I'm afraid the puppet has been cutting the strings one by one, and is now operating on his own.

 
At 6/20/2006 7:00 AM, Blogger Elmer's Brother said...

you're so well spoken Beamish. Do you have a campaign manager yet and could I have a bumper sticker?

 
At 6/20/2006 7:19 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

EB,
Wait until you see Beamish's type sketch of a leftist. I've got one on file to post.

 
At 6/20/2006 7:30 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Thanks to all who have commented here. I apologize for the inconvenience of comment moderation, but that step has become necessary because of one particularly vile individual at whose sites I have never commented. Having to blogsit is an inconvenience for me, but I try to keep up on as timely a basis as possible.

Iran is, of course, a theocracy, with all the dangers which that particular form of government can pose. But other Islamic nations are close to the same, particularly if shari'a law is in place or written into the constitution. But even if shari'a law is not written into the nation's constitution, the mullahs often call the shots. This has been a tradition in modern times, not just during the Middle Ages.

What makes Iran particularly dangerous right now is the mahdi-complex. To promote the return of that "messiah," Shi'ites will endanger the entire Middle East, if not the world.

IMO, nothing is more dangerous than religious zealots with the military at their disposal. Their having nuclear weapons at their disposal is particularly frightening.

 
At 6/20/2006 7:58 AM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

AOW, excellent article and a great comment stream.

We had difficulties during the Cold War because of differences in terms. Peace to the USSR meant the world under communism; whereas peace to us meant individual freedom under some form of democracy.

Islam presents a totally different challenge in that doctrinally Muslims are encouraged, indeed required, to do whatever it takes to advance Islam. False treaties would be of no significance to Muslims who perceive it is in the name and will of Allah. The religion itself exonerates those Muslims who lie, murder, etc. If we used their set of values against them, Isreal would be surrounded by a giant sheet of glass. Unfortunately, they don't have the capacity to percieve that truth.

 
At 6/20/2006 10:13 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

I notice that "Old Soldier" conflates muslim and arab. Does he care to comment?

I also notice that he mentions israel and apparently tips his hand that this is an "endtimers" struggle with both sides slaves to fairy tales.

In the second half of the twentieth century where did America bring peace? Vietna? Angola? Guatemala? I'm curious.

 
At 6/20/2006 2:11 PM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

Ducky, I did not conflate Muslim and Arab. I was very succinct in what I wrote. I would therefore appreciate you not attempting to interpolate my words. Should you desire a civil exchange with me, then you must agree that I am just as entitled to my opinions and beliefs, as you are to yours. Because we do not agree ideologically does not place either in an inferior or superior position.

 
At 6/20/2006 4:27 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

I'm sorry "Old Soldier" but the old "you're entitled to your opinion" dodge is not adequate.

We are spending a half trillion+, we are killing iraqi civilians and we have lost 2500 soldiers (some because we were too cheap to give them proper equipment).

Under the circumstances I think it is important to try to understand why the right thinks dogma and aphorisms is sufficient justification for this choas and moral slackness.

It does amaze me that we became a nation of Islamic scholars in a couple of years when previously we really didn't care about muslims as long as the Saudis were pumping oil.

If you are going to fall back on "freedom isn't free" and expect others to pay the price then it is not unreasonable to ask where we have brought freedom in the last half century.

 
At 6/20/2006 8:29 PM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

"I'm sorry "Old Soldier" but the old "you're entitled to your opinion" dodge is not adequate."

Ducky, I'll decide what is "adequate" for me, not you. You've made it clear that I should consider your opinion "inadequate" in reciprocation.

"...we have lost 2500 soldiers (some because we were too cheap to give them proper equipment)."

And how many firefights and wars have you fought in to make you an expert in this area?

"Under the circumstances I think it is important to try to understand why the right thinks dogma and aphorisms is sufficient justification for this choas and moral slackness."

Nice try, but I am not the slightest bit tempted to take the gobbledygook bait.

"It does amaze me that we became a nation of Islamic scholars in a couple of years when previously we really didn't care about muslims as long as the Saudis were pumping oil."

Compare it to the gay/lesbian issues, Ducky. In the 50's and 60's no one knew much about it; but the constant publicity of the last few years has educated a great many people who really had no interest a few years ago. The significant difference is that Radical Islam has declared war upon the West (us); therefore we must learn about them.

"If you are going to fall back on "freedom isn't free" and expect others to pay the price then it is not unreasonable to ask where we have brought freedom in the last half century."

I don't have to fall back on anything, Ducky. I voluntarily walked the walk, just like our current young voluntary heroes. I understood my mission and our young military understands their mission today. If all you look for is negativism, Ducky, that's all you will find.

 
At 6/21/2006 8:13 AM, Blogger kev said...

Duck, it's a sad fact that we've lost 2500 good Americans in Iraq, even sadder, they were mostly the very young. But we lost that many in a very few minutes in New York City, and that was because we refused to take a stand against terorism. I know you say Iraq was the wrong place, but many of us disagree. President Bush declared war on TERRORISM, wherever it might be, and Iraq was part of that terrism network, and as good a place to start as any. By the way, we're still stuck in that quagmire that clinton got us into. Let me head you off before you say, "Yeah, but you can't compare the loss of life." Even more despicable, because that war was for absolutely nothing, and has gained us absolutely nothing. It's just costing us money and manpower. You want to rail against a war, there's one. Vietnam proved nothing because radical leftists and our home-grown communists, including john "i have a plan" kerry, helped pull us out of there in the middle of it. The terrorists now point to that war as a sign of our weakness. Finally, the fact that you're entitled to your opinions, even though the majority on this board think some of them border-line insane, is proof enough that old soldier is entitled to his. By the way, I'm waiting patiently for john kerry, john murtha, ted kennedy, algore, and some of the other terrorists friends to comment on REAL torture, committed by terrorist animals on our troops. Kinda puts our amateurish "torture" to shame, huh?

 
At 6/21/2006 9:38 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Congratulations, Old Soldier. I enjoyed your invocation of the gay/lesbian issue (never far from the exreme right's heart, is it).

You don't know any more about the gay lifestyle than you did in the 50's and nothing coming out of the right indicates you have a grip now.
Catching a few hate pieces on the Daniel Pipes site isn't going to keep you similarly ignorant about islam.

Let it go on record that when I asked where we have brought freedom in the last half century (Grenada, Panama?) you didn't answer. 'll leave it to you to figure out why.

 
At 6/21/2006 9:44 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Excuse me kev, but why do you assume Clinton is a leftist? He isn't.

I assume you are referring to Bosnia as the quagmire. Well, no one pays much attention to that. The killing has stopped and the effort did increase our reputation and image in Europe. It has hardly been mishandled like the current Iraq fiasco.

kev, the opinion of the board regulars toward me is not a matter of concern. I try to talk to far right wingers because I don't know any. My family is left, my co-workers are left, my friends are left, my community is left and my church is left. So I try to understand. I must say that I find little more than aphorisms and cliches .

 
At 6/21/2006 10:29 AM, Blogger Brooke said...

"Excuse me kev, but why do you assume Clinton is a leftist? He isn't."

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 
At 6/21/2006 11:50 AM, Blogger kev said...

Duck, where in my post did I claim clinton was a leftist, other than my claim to that right here and now? Why do I now claim he's a leftist? Look to the cabinet he (or hillary) appointed, look to the supreme court justices he (or hillary) nominated, he was the darling of left-wing (liberal)hollywood, I can go on and on. So. let me try to get this straight. Our reputation went up in Europe because we engaged in a war with a people who could not have hurt us if they tried, a people who were engaged in a REAL civil war, the war itself was completely useless, and it still is a waste of time and money. But our reputation went down (I assume your claim) because we got rid of a brutal dictator and his murdering family, who very well could have posed a threat to us, we are trying to give human beings a say in THEIR OWN government, we are actually fighting terrorists on their own soil, etc. Will they like us then if we only engage in SAFE, NO ACCOUNT wars? Perhaps we can lob a few missiles at an aspirin factory, and make them love us. Perhaps you need to periodically leave your "left" world and mix in with the real world.

 
At 6/21/2006 12:29 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Brooke, would you care to describe what you think was leftist in Clinton's administration?

Other than gays in the military.

 
At 6/21/2006 1:29 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Ducky,

I know plenty of leftists, both online and offline, and I've explored the writings of prominent leftists throughout history.

The one thing I have not been able to find among leftists is someone who wasn't a moron.

Why is that?

 
At 6/22/2006 9:56 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Beamish, if I'm a "moron" why can I buy and sell your sorry butt several times over?

 
At 6/22/2006 11:42 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Duck,
Beamish, if I'm a "moron" why can I buy and sell your sorry butt several times over?

Wealth = intelligence??? Wealth is an outcome of intelligence???

Not to mention Howard Gardner.

 
At 6/22/2006 12:43 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Well, AOW, my true beliefs on the topic will remain unwritten.

In the case of Beamish I would ask< since you bring up multiple intelligences, just what form of intelligence is represented by his one trick pony tag line?

Has he ever put together a well written paragraph?

 
At 6/22/2006 1:38 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Duck,
Beamish aside for the moment...Lots of people who are intelligent cannot write a paragraph (Not that I'm saying that Beamish can't). I rather imagine that the fellow who repairs your car (if you have a car) cannot do any expository writing. But he CAN swing a wrench.

Does something similar exist in other lines of work? Of course. Automotive repair pops into my mind because of the many mechanics I know. I've also seem some computer geeks who can't write a paragraph or even interact socially, but they can still get my machine up and running.

Of course, as a composition teacher, I put great stock in writing paragraphs.

I don't have a Gardner book handy at the moment. I know that he speaks of musical intelligence. Does he also speak of sense-of-humor intelligence? Maybe Beamish's sense of humor doesn't appeal to you. That's okay. Humor can be a matter of personal preference.

Hey, as long as we're chatting....Do you have any interest in comedy? Any favorites? Just curious.

You and I are about the same age, I think. Do you remember George Carlin's early days? Wasn't Carlin originally more or less run-of-the-mill until he switched over to satire?

 
At 6/23/2006 2:09 AM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Ducky,

Beamish, if I'm a "moron" why can I buy and sell your sorry butt several times over?

Just scratching the surface, I'd say you're a moron on the basis of believing you could buy or sell "my sorry butt" even once, no matter how much money you think you have.

But the more clear basis of identifying you as a moron has been that your leftist statements.

Again, I ask, if there is such a critter as an "intelligent leftist," what zoo is it kept in?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home