You understand, of course, that Mousavi's career is as a hardline regime architect?

[JackRiddler]

If it were up to me, I would reject both Ahmedinejad and the theocratic regime of Iran. If I were an Iranian voter, I probably would have voted for Mousavi as the better alternative, as I did for Obama here.

Nevertheless:

I don't know if there was election fraud in Iran, and I can believe it as easily as I can believe that we are now witnessing a propaganda-by-Twitter "color revolution" aimed to engineer the perception that the election was fraudulent.

Even if the announced election results were not fraudulent, we can all probably give reasons why we think Ahmedinejad is very, very bad.

But what do you know about Mousavi?

The following is not to take sides, but to show that the situation is a lot more complex and may be a lot more depressing than the simple narrative we are being presented of hardliner Ahmedinejad vs. reformer Mousavi.

The Ayatollah Khomeini selected Mousavi to be prime minister of the revolutionary government of Iran, a position he held from 1981 to 1989.

That would the period of the theocratic consolidation of what had started as a far broader-based revolution against the Shah. A time of great repression and executions of tens of thousands of political opponents, with bloody crackdowns in both 1981 and 1989. The period, in fact, when the present system that Mousavi supposedly wants to reform was set up and constitutionalized, under Mousavi as prime minister. He was an architect of the theocratic regime!

This was also the era of the Iran-Iraq war and the Iran-Contra machinations, the hostage-for-arms trading, secret negotiations with the Bush mob, etc. I don't know what to think about the various accusations about Mousavi's involvement with those dealings and the likes of Ghorbanifar.

The point is that even if he wasn't the most powerful man in Iran as a mere prime minister, his hands can hardly be clean of the regime's many excesses and atrocities. He was the highest official of the secular government.

So this looks like a conflict first of all within the theocratic revolutionary set, Ahmedinejad's generation against the originals like Rafsanjani and Mousavi. The Rafsanjani campaign it turns out provided much of the Mousavi campaign's base by mobilizing the students at its hundreds of privately-owned colleges.

I am reminded that the ayatollahs exercise control of elections first of all by vetting candidates and strictly controlling who is allowed to appear on the ballot. Beyond that, they get to shoot down legislation they don't like. So what was the choice?

If Mousavi's a reformer, it appears this may be opportunist, at a time when profiling himself as a reformer is the best chance to win against Ahmedinejad.

And the people in the street on either side of this conflict may both be fighting for a fraud.

There is also evidence that his current "free market" positions are the late opportunistic adoptions of someone who was once at least ideologically a committed socialist.

Very interesting reading by an Indian career diplomat, goes into the Iranian power politics of the last 20 years:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF16Ak05.html

This was what Mousavi had to say in a 1981 interview about the 444-day hostage crisis when young Iranian revolutionaries kept American diplomats in custody: "It was the beginning of the second stage of our revolution. It was after this that we discovered our true Islamic identity. After this we felt the sense that we could look Western policy in the eye and analyze it the way they had been evaluating us for many years."

Most likely, he had a hand in the creation of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Ali Akbar Mohtashami, Hezbollah's patron saint, served as his interior minister. He was involved in the Iran-Contra deal in 1985, which was a trade-off with the Ronald Reagan administration whereby the US would supply arms to Iran and as quid pro quo Tehran would facilitate the release of the Hezbollah-held American hostages in Beirut. The irony is, Mousavi was the very anti-thesis of Rafsanjani and one of the first things the latter did in 1989 after taking over as president was to show Mousavi the door. Rafsanjani had no time for Mousavi's anti-"Westernism" or his visceral dislike of the market.

Mousavi's electoral platform has been a curious mix of contradictory political lines and vested interests but united in one maniacal mission, namely, to seize the presidential levers of power in Iran. It brought together so-called reformists who support former president Mohammad Khatami and ultra-conservatives of the regime. Rafsanjani is the only politician in Iran who could have brought together such dissimilar factions. He assiduously worked hand-in-glove with Khatami towards this end.

If we are to leave out the largely inconsequential "Gucci crowd" of north Tehran, who no doubt imparted a lot of color, verve and mirth to Mousavi's campaign, the hardcore of his political platform comprised powerful vested interests who were making a last-ditch attempt to grab power from the Khamenei-led regime. On the one hand, these interest groups were severely opposed to the economic policies under Ahmadinejad, which threatened their control of key sectors such as foreign trade, private education and agriculture.

[Oregone]

1. All the more reason to sit this one out

Let those people decide. Don't be a Twitt

[malaise]

18. Ding ding

We have a winner.

[truedelphi]

22. Hi Oregone.

Why am I not surprised to see yr name on such a sensible post?

:hi:

[Lisa0825]

62. Yeah, I have been hesitant to jump on the bandwagon.

I just felt I didn't know enough about it all. I am amazed by the people's reaction, and I hope eventually youth will bring change, but I don't know if this is it.

[spoony]

2. "the people in the street on either side of this conflict may both be fighting for a fraud."

Indeed. I hate the idea that the people who're risking, and maybe losing, their lives protesting are doing so at the behest of a candidate who may not be any better. And more and more it seems like that's the case.

[EFerrari]

3. Yep. People need to read your post before they swoon over green things.

[KittyWampus]

10. Actually, you and the OP need to read post #7.

[EFerrari]

14. There is a power struggle going on and that adds to the complexity

of a situation that can't be romanticized away. The PTB have an opportunity to repair their cred. Hopefully, they will use it.

[readmoreoften]

27. And you should read the replies to it. /nt

[Teaser]

4. whateva

.

[anonymous171]

5. I just don't like Ahmedinejad.

I could care less who his opponent is. Not like it matters though.

[Warpy]

6. Bloggers are making a few things clear

First of all, Mousavi is not the leader of a cult of personality. This is more than outrage that he lost a job or belief that a savior was thwarted.

This is a fight to re establish the rule of law there pertaining to elections. Most people say the vote is so suspicious that they doubt it was counted at all, just fictionalized by the Ahmedinejad government.

This is also a fight to liberalize the repressive social conditions there.

This is not a fight to overturn the Islamic Republic. It's a fight to realize it, finally, the way it was meant to be realized 30 years ago.

There's more, of course, but this is the gist of it.

[WeDidIt]

7. Uh, dude. You know how somebody becomes a candidate in Iran, don't you?

Candidates for the presidency are hand picked by the Assembly of Experts.

You knew that, didn't you?

What's so striking about this is the fact that for the first time in thirty years, we see the cracks in the facade of unity wihtin the Assembly of Experts.

This has less to do with Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and much more to do with Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hoseyni Khāmene’i and Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (with Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Mohsen Aqa Mir Mohammad Ali as another big player).

[KittyWampus]

11. PLEASE start an OP with your statement.

[JackRiddler]

12. I should hope so, since that's what the article I link to is about...

the emerging conflict between factions and generations of the clerical and revolutionary elite as fronted respectively by Rafsanjani (Mousavi - Khatami) and Khamenei (Ahmedinejad).

Which, however, may have little relation to the narrative of hardliners vs. democracy now being cooked up by Mousavi's supporters and the Western media.

[EFerrari]

15. And endorsed by no less a personage than Shah Jr. n/t

[WeDidIt]

17. There have been rivalries and clashes in the Assembly of Experts before

This is the first time it has spilled out into the public at large.

Khamene'i thought he had it all under control. Khatami thought that he could force an issue with the public.

Both underestimated the underlying dissatisfaction of the polity.

They have unleashed the Djinn. The Djinn will NOT go back in the bottle now.

And neither side is pulling strings for real any longer. Mousavi thinks he's got the people in his hands. He's actually got a tiger by the tail.

[JackRiddler]

26. I very much hope you're right.

[ProgressIn2008]

32. This is interesting -- will have to ponder. The tiger by the tail part could be a key truth

indeed, though there are so many strings and people trying to pull them, it's hard to tell.

One thing that caught my eye was that the students themselves (or at least the ones cited below) are very much concerned of Mousavi's role in the 1980s.

Iran: Students grill Moussavi about the 1988 massacre of political prisoners
http://ncr-iran.org/content/view/6314/1/

I haven't heard much about protests beyond Tehran and universities -- I'll search around a little tonight to see what's being reported/tweeted/whathaveyou.

[nichomachus]

21. So basically the same process we have in the US -- except more open

In the US, people don't become serious candidates for president unless they are approved by the corporatocracy.

That's how we ended up having to decide between McStain and Barack Hoover Obama.

[truedelphi]

24. In both nations, the populace is absolutely

Positively and totally FREE to do as TOLD!

Good music and video here
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK7DRPyNAHA

[bertman]

49. "Barack Hoover Obama". I've never heard that one before. Very creative, nicho.

:applause:

[Demoiselle]

38. I second Kitty Wampus' suggestion, WeDidIt. Open a new thread. (eom)

[liberalmuse]

8. This is not about Mousavi.

It's about the people's votes being counted. It is probably true that Ahmadinejad won by a small margin, but he would rather burn votes than face the truth, even if it is in his best interest. Isn't that incredible? The outcome really doesn't matter anymore. The fact is that the "unwashed masses" around the world are fed up with the bullshit, and some of them are even willing to die for truth, even if it isn't in their favor. As every liberal should know by now, it's about THE COUNTING OF THE VOTES. I'm going to paraphrase an Irani who said, 'They don't even consider us human because our votes don't matter.' We are alive, and we matter, and if you refuse to face that fact, we will get in your face. In my 45 years on this planet, I've never seen anything like this. Some may laugh at the 2012'ers, but this is a conscious as well as a physical revolution. This is proof that we are one and that some schmuck in Seattle can feel the pain of someone fighting for their freedom in 'the axis of evil', Iran. I am not a 'Twitter' fan, but this is exactly what 'Twitter' was created for.

[villager]

9. that's the thing, is that the released energies are becoming bigger than the machinations

of the various theocratic factions...

and will hopefully lead to a more democratic outcome.

But we'll have to see...

[JackRiddler]

16. I sure hope you're right!

I agree entirely: COUNT THE VOTES.

Consider this, however: Mousavi was the first to declare himself the winner, by a wide margin, before the counting had begun. Is this what prompted the unusually early call by the election authorities (normally they wait two days) on Ahmedinejad's behalf? Was it all along the plan of the Mousavi side to engineer the appearance of election fraud and get huge demonstrations in the cities (where they know they have millions of committed supporters who can't stand the regime anymore)? In that case, it's they who are overturning the real election results.

That being said, I don't doubt the Khamenei side has the ability and stated willingness to practice election fraud if they judge it necessary.

In short, don't be sure you know who is practicing which fraud on whom. I DON'T KNOW and it's best to be aware of that if you don't, either.

[bertman]

51. Liberalmuse,I find it amazing that you can come up with some crap about Ahmadinejad

probably winning by a small margin. Are you an expert on Iranian election return counts? Are you there and privy to the events on the ground?

I'll excuse your ignorance of the Czech and Hungarian revolts of 1956 since you were only two then, but you must not have been paying attention when the people of the Philippines threw out their U.S. backed dictator in 1986. Or how about in 1990 when the Czechs rose up and threw out their overlords? This has been happening all over the world for years.

And they did it all without cell phones or twitter. "This is exactly what Twitter was created for." Really?? Amazing.

[Old and In the Way]

13. Thanks for posting this...

In the end, it's what the people of Iraq want and it may not necessarily be a better outcome for the West. I honestly don't know enough about the social/political dynamics in Iran to have an opinion on the outcome, except that the vast majority of people there are not accepting the official results. If Mousavi reflects a moderating change in the State theocracy, I think that would be a very good thing for the entire ME.

[MidwestTransplant]

19. What I think is important to keep in mind is that the Iranian people are standing up

They obviously don't like Amanutjob anymore. His America baiting isn't possible anymore because Bush is out of the WH so a seemingly reform minded individual is a viable candidate. The Iranian theocratic and political establishment are now on notice that the Iranian people expect better and want better. Those politicians (and that's what they are) are going to have to walk the walk if they are to keep their jobs (assuming the election results are reversed, etc.).

Also this is an Obama effect. Just like Lebanon was. No 2 ways about it.

[EFerrari]

23. Lebanon was about a Saudi effect as much as Obama.

I heard on the news last night that the Saudis spent more money on that election than Obama did on his!

[MidwestTransplant]

41. That can't really be possible.

Consider the size of Lebanon and the length of the campaign.

[EFerrari]

42. That was the report on Mosaic yesterday. n/t

[Duende azul]

44. Gosh, it's not the Iranian people standing up. It's a certain demographic.

May we call it the CalvinKlein-demographic? I guess you saw the much cherished photo of a resister with his face hidden but his underwear exposed?
But people, please stay honest. I suppose, the american public in general doesn't know shit about Iran, much less who really won this thing. Remember the not so distant times when quite a lot of DU posters saw the Iranians all as arabs?
So there seems to be every reason, to watch this one from the sidelines. We definitely don't know all the players involved.
And the candidates involved? If you follow the OP and some other posts in this regard, you may conclude that the good guy has more blood on his hands, due to his longer involvement in the game than the much vilified Ahmadinejad. Sure, Ahmadinejad may lead in nutty or unwise talk (although not always translated correctly). So could you really recommend the Iranians take the streets for either one of these fine candidates?
There may be no good guy in this one.

Who stands to benefit most from a break-up or civil war in Iran? The usual suspects who animated Saddam Hussein to wage war against Iran come to mind.

And probably this demographic DIDN'T win the election - if you can talk about an election at all with the prescreened candidacies.
They only manage better to be present on international media. All the journalists hang around in Teheran getting the perception only this young urban educated and wealthier folks voted.
Yet they start mocking the support Ahmadinejad got from poorer suburbs and rural areas, because for their rallies they had to be brought to the center. Hell - you may not like how they voted - they are also Iranians.

Btw, prescreened candidates: Is that really so different to US elections? Do you honestly believe there is a chance to finally elect someone President who isn't approved by the corporate owners of your country? Different criteria, different kind of nuttiness but in it's ultimate consequences no less deadly.

Obama effect in Lebanon? Jebus, the anti Syrian alliance only won because of a messed up election system, favouring christians and Sunni. The difference was in the undervaluation of the shia vote. And above all heavily bought by the Saudis.
The Anti-Western alliance drew more than 50 % of the vote. But couldn't obtain the corresponding number of seats.
There you go. Obama effect my ass.

[bertman]

53. Thank you for some rational, insightful, and politically astute observations, Duende azul.

The American superpatriots are starting to go off the deep end on this one.

[girl gone mad]

20. Propaganda and Twitter..

seem to be going hand in hand lately. It's getting creepy.

[EFerrari]

25. Creepy and efficient with a dash of novelty. n/t

[ProgressIn2008]

28. I'm on the same page. Ahmadinejad is odious but the insta-reinvention of Mousavi is bad flashbacks

to Ahmed Chalabi. There's much complex social history here and it's hard to know who's playing what game, at this point. The immediate narrative of color revolution a la Twitter seemed like an Edward Bernays special. Not to mention the rumors of other forces aligned against the Mousavi's crowds (if you want to call them that): I've heard Venezuelan, Lebanese, Palestinian, and Saudi batted about so far. Plus Hezbollah. It's a Where's Waldo of a choose-your-enemy adventure.

And to be honest, I just don't know what to make of the Iran-Contra angle.

In the end, this may be the nearest we can come right now: "And the people in the street on either side of this conflict may both be fighting for a fraud." Simple narratives are not going to work and as usual, they only serve to obscure the situation.

[nomaco-10]

29. I see the pics and vids coming out of Tehran...

and I see mostly young people, both men and women, passionate in their outrage over a fraudulent election and looking and dressing much like any young person you'd see in most western cultures. A few women without hijabs, middle aged men and women looking very much like scholars, attorneys and doctors marching in the streets.

Whatever is going on, it's a rare glimpse into Iranian culture and I am quite impressed with the courageous crowds filling the streets clamoring for justice and fair elections.

[JackRiddler]

30. Absolutely.

The underlying dynamic is of a large number of the Iranian people righteously and courageously demanding reform and the natural rights of all people, against a stifling, patriarchal theocracy.

The problem is, to what degree are they being played on behalf of another agenda? Is Mousavi even remotely the champion of democracy? Most importantly, was the election really faked? That is unclear.

[nomaco-10]

33. It could be as simple as Mousavi was allowed to run because....

the ayatollahs and the mullahs deemed he was no threat and had no chance to beat ahmadinejad. That's plausible to me because i think the theocracy that runs Iran and ahmadinejad's ego are that out of touch. But, the one thing I do know for certain, is that the people in the streets of Tehran are real and their motives are genuine.

[EFerrari]

35. The Saudis backed him. They poured money into that campaign.

And there are likely multiple entities -- US, SA, Israel, other domestic political factions -- conducting ops in and around this election. It's probably pretty crowded in Tehran right now.

If these people can get election monitors out of this, that would be a great outcome all by itself.

[JackRiddler]

36. Not really...

Rafsanjani, who was defeated by Ahmedinejad in the last election, lined up his substantial material base and elite connections behind Mousavi's bid. Just learned that the Rafsanjani family owns several hundred private colleges with 3 million students around the country. Mousavi had to profile himself as the anti-Ahmedinejad, of course.

Which isn't to say it didn't stir a genuine yearning among the people.

Keep in mind, however, that in 2005 it was Rafsanjani in the role of the old-guard asshole no one could stand anymore, who inspired a majority to vote for Ahmedinejad.

[nomaco-10]

37. We all knew Iran would not elect a version of Dennis Kucinich as...

their next president, but this guy may have represented enough change, that some were willing to take a chance on Mousavi in hopes it would open the door for more change in the future.

And we don't actually know a whole lot about Mousavi. He's been out of the limelight since the early eighties. People can change a lot in nearly 30 years. I'm sure he was swept away with the same kind of passion his supporters are showing for him now, when he helped to run the corrupt shah out of Iran in 1979. I'm also not quite so sure he may be happy with how Iran ended up after all these years and maybe he's trying to effect some sort of change again. I don't know.

[nomaco-10]

39. delete dupe post from me. sorry. n/t

[JackRiddler]

40. Correction.

He's been out of the limelight since 1989, after nearly 10 years as the prime minister hand-picked by Ayatollah Khomeini. While his role is not always clear, that means he was the highest official (though not the most important player) in the secular government during the following events:

Creation of the theocratic state and system.

1981 mass executions of opposition and non-theocratic revoloutionaries

1981-88 Iran-Iraq war, including the multiple "final offensives" of the final three years during which time Iran refused to accept an end to it (in the belief that Iraq was on the brink).

1981-89 variety of Iran-Contra machinations and covert deals with White House and Israel.

1988 mass executions / purges.

See the OP, follow that link.

[Hannah Bell]

31. kick

[ButterflyBlood]

34. So he's similar to Kostunica in Serbia

The guy who ousted Milosevic. He's also an extreme nationalist and reactionary. But Serbia saw him as the best chance to oust an odious, murderous regime which also drove the country into the ground.

Now Serbia is a healthy democracy with a liberal pro-Western government. Baby steps.

[Hannah Bell]

58. and a 25% unemployment rate. who are you kidding, "healthy democracy"?

Belgrade - Simmering discontent among Serbian workers threatens to explode into "chaos" in the coming autumn, a labour leader warned in an interview published Monday. "Serbia faces an escalation of discontent," the head of the Nezavisnost labour union, Branislav Canak, told the daily Press. "The situation is tense and may lead to total chaos."

With much of Serbia's economy still in state ownership and in poor shape and simple labour stoppages ineffective, workers have resorted to road blockades, hunger strikes and even self-mutilation. A labour protest leader chopped off his own finger in April.

Desperate workers would in future "not cut their own fingers, but somebody else's," Canak warned. "They will turn their anger against those responsible for their humiliating position."

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/273204,serbian-labour-leader-warns-of-total-chaos-as-strikes-loom.html



...Registered unemployment rate rises to 24.9% in April.
ISI - Emerging Markets - ‎Jun 5, 2009‎

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=serbia+unemployment&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn

[robertpaulsen]

43. My fear is that the genuine desire for change we see in the people protesting will be exploited.

The exploitation I refer to is that of the Milton Friedman worshipping-Chicago School bankster-radical capitalist-"shock therapy" privateers swooping in on the wings of chaos to make the country safe to sell to the highest bidders. Have you read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein? This statement you wrote made me think of it:


If Mousavi's a reformer, it appears this may be opportunist, at a time when profiling himself as a reformer is the best chance to win against Ahmedinejad.

And the people in the street on either side of this conflict may both be fighting for a fraud.

There is also evidence that his current "free market" positions are the late opportunistic adoptions of someone who was once at least ideologically a committed socialist.


JackRiddler, this is a fairly close description of Victor Paz Estenssoro of Bolivia in 1985 right before he put his country in the hands of Jeffrey Sach's "shock therapy" treatment which was conspiratorially conceived behind the closed doors, then bulldozed through Congress as a single executive degree containing 220 separate laws that had to be accepted or rejected; it couldn't be amended. Considering Mousavi was the first to claim victory, it makes me wonder what's really going on behind the scenes. I wouldn't be surprised to see a privatization sell-off sweep across Iran, we may be witnessing Disaster Capitalism in action once again.

[JackRiddler]

45. bump for evening readers

[wildeyed]

46. I stand in solidarity with the people who want their votes counted.

I do not know for sure if there was election fraud, but it is clear that there were some serious irregularities and that the government refused to address them. People wanted those issues addressed before the vote is certified. I can relate.

[JackRiddler]

47. Rightly so - anything against knowing the situation as a whole?

And the problem is this: what if, despite some initial signs of possible fraud, it's not a fixed election after all? What if it's Mousavi's side who did the fixing - of the reaction, that is?

I'm not pretending to know - that's the point.

[liberalpragmatist]

50. Juan Cole puts together some good evidence of why it was probably fixed

Check out his take on things:

http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/stealing-iranian-election.html

Moreover, I would add that the regime's actions certainly suggest a cover-up or rigging. Votes in Iran are tabulated on paper, counted by hand, and there are no exit polls. In all previous elections, it has taken 2-3 days for the results to be announced. Instead, the regime announced Ahmadinejad's "victory" with 3 hours of polls closing. And the crackdown suggests they have something to hide.

I'd also add that at a certain point, it no longer even matters whether there is fraud or not. Clearly, a very large proportion of Iranians believe very strongly that there is, and that means the Iranian regime has an enormous crisis of credibility - huge portions of the public simply don't think they're legitimately in power any more. And that makes things very unsettled.

[JackRiddler]

56. I've read it, and it's "good evidence" for "probably" (possibly, plausibly)

Nevertheless, it's not proof of anything. The unprecedented announcement of the election results just hours after polls closed is of course suspicious, except that Mousavi's unprecedented announcement of his landslide victory claim preceded the government's, possibly making them feel they had to react before Mousavi's story settled in. So the first question becomes this: Was Mousavi right and honest about the claim? The claim is he had insiders in the interior ministry who told him he was ahead, so he announced victory to establish his case. However, there's "good evidence" that these insiders were "probably" Rafsanjani people, or the like.

Rafsanjani was established as an incredibly corrupt factor in Iranian politics already more than 10 years ago. Even if one side stands for genuine and necessary reform more than the other, it doesn't mean that both can't be corrupt and play a deceptive game. In fact, they both have very ugly track records in their times in power.

Once again, though I expect and hope the real story will become more clear as we go, I am left with both scenarios seeming entirely plausible: that Ahmedinejad/Khamenei forces faked the election in the face of a possible Mousavi victory, but also that Mousavi's victory claim was intentionally premature to create the impression of a stolen election.

[Prometheus Bound]

48. This doesn't sound like the "reform" the people are fighting for.

What a shitty choice they were given.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

52. Good post Jack

Here is a bit from an article by Time magazine that shows Ghorbanifar's circle of associates; it is from a January 1987 cover story (The Murky World of Weapons Dealers; January 19, 1987):

"By own account he was a refugee from the revolutionary government of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, which confiscated his businesses in Iran, yet he later became a trusted friend and kitchen adviser to Mir Hussein Mousavi, Prime Minister in the Khomeini government. Some U.S. officials who have dealt with Ghorbanifar praise him highly. Says Michael Ledeen, adviser to the Pentagon on counterterrorism: " is one of the most honest, educated, honorable men I have ever known." Others call him a liar who, as one puts it, could not tell the truth about the clothes he is wearing," (emphasis added).

This second bit is from Chapter 1 of Walsh Iran/Contra Report: (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_01.htm)

"On or about November 25, 1985, Ledeen received a frantic phone call from Ghorbanifar, asking him to relay a message from the prime minister of Iran to President Reagan regarding the shipment of the wrong type of HAWKs. Ledeen said the message essentially was "we've been holding up our part of the bargain, and here you people are now cheating us and tricking us and deceiving us and you had better correct this situation right away.''

...

http://revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com/2009/06/mir-hossein-mousavis-irancontra.html

[wan]

54. Very likely, yet building the expectation of reform has consequences.

The more reform is expected the more likely the conditions will ripen for real reform, regardless of the cost to those that built those expectations on a lie.

[JackRiddler]

55. Understood. I pray this doesn't backfire into a Tiananmen Square.

[eridani]

57. Just because there are no good choices here (from a progressive standpoint)--

--doesn't mean we shouln't be standing up for fair elections.

[Hannah Bell]

59. no point in standing up for them here i suppose, the legislators just get bought anyway.

New York billionaire engineers legislative “coup”
The New York State Legislature was thrown into chaos this past Monday when two of the State Senate’s Democratic members suddenly announced they were joining with the Republican minority to reestablish de facto Republican control, less than six months after the Republicans lost their majority for the first time in 40 years...

Perhaps the most significant aspect of the whole sordid business is the role of Tom Golisano, a billionaire businessman... who apparently orchestrated the so-called revolt. Golisano has used his money to buy influence in state government for some years...in last November’s election, he backed several Democrats in state races and then took credit for the Democrats’ success in winning a narrow majority...

According to the New York Times, when Golisano met with Senate Majority Leader Smith a few months ago to demand that the new majority drop its plans for modest tax increases for the wealthy, the billionaire was not treated with sufficient deference.

After the taxes were enacted, Golisano changed his primary residence to Florida to avoid paying them and began meeting secretly with Republicans and with the two dissident Democrats...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/nyss-j13.shtm...



300 posts on iran where no one's opinion matters, where no one can do jack to affect the outcome, one post on the corruption of the US political process by one billionaire where people could conceivably do something.

yea! hooray for freedom!

[PVnRT]

60. Maybe you should tell us what to care about

Since, you know, people can only think about one solitary thing at a time.

[Hannah Bell]

63. straw man. one post to what, hundreds now? no one here's thinking about one billionaire

buying the ny legislature.

cause no one wrapped in up in a nice story about "freedom" & waved it in front of their faces for them to salivate on cue.

stimulus-response.

[JackRiddler]

61. Larry Everett of NAF "Iran Project" says it was Ahmedinejad's majority, no doubt...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5860924&mesg_id=5860924