dand
-
[profile]
|
Thu Jun 30th 17:52 2005 / #1 |
You mean this guy?
Iran Focus
London, Jun. 29 - Iran Focus has learnt that the photograph of Iran’s newly-elected president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, holding the arm of a blindfolded American hostage on the premises of the United States embassy in Tehran was taken by an Associated Press photographer in November 1979.
Prior to the first round of the presidential elections on June 17, Iran Focus was the first news service to reveal Ahmadinejad’s role in the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran.
The identity of Ahmadinejad in the photograph was revealed to Iran Focus by a source in Tehran, whose identity could not be revealed for fear of persecution.
Soon after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Ahmadinejad, who was studying in Tehran’s University of Science and Technology, became a member of the central council of the Office for Strengthening of Unity Between Universities and Theological Seminaries, the main pro-Khomeini student body.
The OSU played a central role in the seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran in November 1979. Members of the OSU central council, who included Ahmadinejad as well as Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Hashem Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi, were regularly received by Khomeini himself.
Former OSU officials involved in the takeover of the U.S. embassy said Ahmadinejad was in charge of security during the occupation, a key role that put him in direct contact with the nascent security organizations of the clerical regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, which he later joined.
After the 444-day occupation of the U.S. embassy, Ahmadinejad joined the special forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office, based in Evin Prison. The �Revolutionary Prosecutor� was Assadollah Lajevardi, who earned the nickname the Butcher of Evin after the execution of thousands of political dissidents in the 1980s.
Defectors from the clerical regime’s security forces have revealed that Ahmadinejad led the firing squads that carried out many of the executions. He personally fired coup de grace shots at the heads of prisoners after their execution and became known as �Tir Khalas Zan� (literally, the Terminator).
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=26 77 |
|
Tinsel
|
Thu Jun 30th 17:57 2005 / #2 |
Found the reuters:
Iranian leader linked to 1979 hostage crisis
Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:57 AM ET
By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Several Americans held hostage in the 1979 U.S. Embassy takeover in Tehran said on Thursday they recognized Iran's president-elect as a ringleader from the drama, a claim that raised concern in the White House but was denied in Iran.
In interviews with U.S. television networks, retired Navy Capt. Donald Sharer and Bill Daugherty said they were convinced Iran's ultra-conservative President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of their Iranian captors.
"He wasn't a very nice fellow at the time. He called us pigs and dogs. He's very hard-line, he's a guy we are not going to get along with," said Sharer in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America" show.
The White House said it was concerned about the implications of the former hostages' statements and was looking into the claims.
"I think the news reports and statements from several former American hostages raise many questions about his past," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "We take them very seriously and we are looking into them to better understand the facts."
The Bush administration has said little about Ahmadinejad, Tehran's hard-line mayor, since his election as president on Friday in a landslide victory, but U.S. officials have criticized the election itself as flawed and unfair.
Daugherty said he had "no doubts at all" that Ahmadinejad was one of his hostage-takers.
"When your country is being humiliated and being embarrassed, the individuals that do that really stick in your mind. You don't forget people who do things like that to you and your family and your country," said Daugherty.
In Iran, two leading figures in the seizure of the U.S. Embassy denied Ahmadinejad took part in the hostage drama that led Washington to break ties with Tehran.
"Ahmadinejad was not among those who occupied the American Embassy after the revolution," said Abbas Abdi, who helped to orchestrate the raid and the seizure of embassy staff nine months after the Islamic revolution.
STRONG DENIALS
Mohsen Mirdamadi, another ringleader of the hostage-taking drama in Tehran, also rejected the reports.
"I deny such reports. Ahmadinejad was not a member of the radical students' group who seized the embassy," said Mirdamadi, a former lawmaker.
The young militants involved in the embassy takeover have followed different career paths in the past 25 years. Some were appointed to government jobs or elected to parliament. Some turned into radical reformers and challenged the ruling Shi'ite clerics, and a number of them, including Abdi, have spent several years in prison.
Fifty-two Americans were held for 444 days. Washington severed ties with Tehran in 1980 and has since branded Iran as part of an "axis of evil" for allegedly pursuing nuclear arms and sponsoring terrorism. Iran denies the charges.
Asked to comment on denials from Iran, Sharer told NBC's "Today" show he remembered the new president as one of the "cruel" ringleaders.
"All I can say is I remember the fellow being very cruel-like, stern, a very narrow beady-eyed character. I can't comment on what they are saying politically now. They are probably trying to cover their tracks and make the rest of the world think he was not involved," said Sharer.
Another ex-hostage, retired Army Col. Charles Scott, 73, told The Washington Times the president-elect was one of two or three top leaders involved in the hostage crisis.
"As soon as I saw his picture in the paper, I knew that was the bastard," said Scott, of Jonesboro, Georgia. "The new president of Iran is a terrorist."
Kevin Hermening of Mosinee, Wisconsin, a 20-year-old Marine security guard when the embassy was stormed, told the paper he had contact with Ahmadinejad right after the takeover.
"He was involved in interrogating me the day we were taken captive," Hermening was quoted as saying. He said interrogators sought the combinations for "safes and other things that were locked."
(Additional reporting by Joanne Allen and Caren Bohan in Washington and Parisa Hafezi in Tehran)
© Reuters 2005. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. |
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Thu Jun 30th 18:19 2005 / #3 |
Dan, from the BBC article:
"But the man in the photograph appears much taller than Mr Ahmadinejad, and looks nothing like other pictures of him as a student which can be found on his website, Frances Harrison says."
Also, what possible reason could this guy have to disguise his involvement? It doesn't make sense. If anything, his hardline image would probably benefit from having taken part in the hostage-taking. |
|
dand
-
[profile]
|
Thu Jun 30th 18:28 2005 / #4 |
Yes, you're right of course, having the position of head executioner is a great thing to have on your resume. World leaders will be jockeying for position to sit next to him at the next UN banquet. Of course these allegations could be untrue, but then again….
Here's what I don't understand: This guy is a religious hard-liner and not a democrat. You are against American religious hard-liners that aren't democrats. So do you support this guy and the utopia of the Islamic Republic? It has an exploding population of young people, 11% unemployment, soaring hard drug use and the risk of an AIDS epidemic. Additionally he faces EU and US opposition to their nuclear development. Do you think this is the man to confront these problems? |
|
SoCalInPrague
-
[anonymous]
|
Thu Jun 30th 19:02 2005 / #5 |
Yeah he seems like a real well balanced guy. Gotta love anybody whose campaign slogan is the standard "Death to America" crap. And the Americans are the ones being worked up for a war?
Can you imagine the reaction of the world if an American pres ran with a death to the Arabs slogan? Your double standard of conduct for the US is beyond sickening. Maybe we should just act the same way as they do. Wouldn't that be fun...
I would certaintly be much more likely to believe an Islamist hardliner over an American citizen held captive for 14 Months. Sure your lovely Islamic hardliner is telling the truth and the American citizen/former hostage is lying. Obviously. |
butthead
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 09:33 2005 / #6 |
If it is him, PAYBACK TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Those idiots got reagan elected. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 09:56 2005 / #7 |
No Dan, I don't think he's the man at all. Never said that, did I? My concern, at this particular point, is only with the portrayal of this story in the media. Is it true? If it's not true, why is it so prominently featured in the media? Who put it there, and why? If it is true, why is an admitted hardline religious fanatic denying it, when it should ostensibly be a feather in his cap? The other guys who took part in the student revolution don't seem to be ashamed of the fact. Buttheads' reaction is pretty typical of what most Americans think, seeing this unsubstantiated story. Any chance that is coincidental, Dan?
American intransigence and diplomatic stupidity supported the abuses of the Shah and led directly to the hostage taking, led to the idiotic rise of religious fascism in Iran and continues to favor religious nutballs over reformers. Khatami was ready to offer a more open face to the world, but that's not acceptable to Bush and his neo-con puppeteers. They'll only be happy when Iran is wallowing in filth, starvation and chaos - just like every other Arab nation ought to be... except they aren't Arabs... but whatever. They're brown, sort of. And they support Hizbollah terrorists... Islam is bad. Period. Iran making trade deals with China and Russia is bad. Period. Fixing intelligence to fit the desired outcome is good. Period.
You're clever to twist the argument here - clever enough to have fooled SloCal (on par with winning a spelling bee, that intellectual task) - but admit it: I never once said that this guy is a positive thing for Iran, for the world, for anyone. Did I? All I said is that it is strange that this story pops up, only to be refuted by everyone involved except for two ex-military guys who were hostages at the time and probably flinch every time they see a Persian walk down the street. I am willing to guess that their memory of people and events could be a bit dusty. It doesn't make sense to me, is all. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 10:45 2005 / #8 |
SloCal, it might comfort you to know that although they talk the talk, we walk the walk. Let's do some conservative guesswork. Since the first Gulf War, we've directly and indirectly been responsible for the deaths of about a million people in the Arab world - that sound ok to you? That's our government - the central command, the voice of the people. It's also not including the madness in Indonesia/East Timor, which we are also indirectly responsible for.
"They", represented by a lunatic fringe of religious warriors, have managed to kill what, 6,000 American people, maximum? That's giving them the 3,000 in the WTC, which was probably planned or at least allowed to happen by the Bush administration anyway. That's even taking into consideration the Hizbollah bombings of the Marines in Lebanon - a military target on foreign soil during a civil war.
You've got such a big mouth, and I know something stupid is just waiting to drop out of it, but READ THIS POST first. Read it twice. Is it so terribly hard to imagine that some people in the Arab/Muslim world are ready to see some Americans dead? Is it impossible to understand that the causes of this situation are many, but our own greed and stupidity is certainly on the list? Is it impossible for you to grasp the fact that we can't do anything about who is elected in Iran, but we can certainly try to do something about how our own nations treat the rest of the world?
1,000,000 to 6,000
Who is killing who?
Who has the right to be afraid of who? |
|
butthead
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 10:14 2005 / #9 |
|
Read the first word in my post Micah! (you liberal stinky hippy, you! Serve your country before you critize it! I served in the Marines for 85 years and fought in both WW's Korea and Vietnam! How dare you challange me!) |
|
Saint Juste
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 11:41 2005 / #10 |
Another reason rather to live in Israel than in Iran (unless you are president of Iran of course). Even your choice for Dubya does not look so bad anymore: rather a reformed boozing slow thinking frat boy than Mr. Fanatic student drop out. I rather trust presidents with droopy eyes than with a mad glister in their eyes. Who do you rather have an Independence Day BBQ with ? By the way a great (only great) moment in Spielbergs War of the Worlds (boy can Tom run - at his age !) is when a fugitive somewhere in Connecticut starts complaining about these bastard Europeans being spared by the killing Tripods - just before he will be zapped out of his Jockeys. What a line, what a movie moment ! Trust Chirac and Schroder to quote this to Bushes face in Edingburgh this weekend (I wish).
Have a nice weekend you all. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 11:54 2005 / #11 |
|
Steve Jobs is a fanatic drop-out. I'd rather have a beer with him than a benefit dinner with David Lesar. Happy weekend! |
|
Pacman
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 12:44 2005 / #12 |
|
The pictures are pretty undeniably similar, but in terms of him coming to power amidst the sloganeering of the typical "death to america" chants, did we forget that Iran actually let the us use their airspace to bomb the hell out of Iraq. They're bending over just like veryone else is, they may come to power by using populist sentiment, but when it comes time to actually somehow stand up to america, theyll just keep letting those f-16s flying over their country as they go to bomb Iraq. |
|
dand
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 12:59 2005 / #13 |
Do you have a link to back up the assertion that Iran allowed US warplanes overflight rights, Pacman? I've never heard that.
It shouldn't come as a suprise that states that supposedly 'hate' one another do deals all the time. think back to Iran-Contra. The U.S. and Israel working with the mullahs to get them TOW's and spare parts for their F-14's. The same ayatollahs who are committed to the destruction of the Great and Little Satan. Doesn't make sense to me either. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 13:39 2005 / #14 |
Pacman, I don't know how similar the pictures are. The guy in the hostage picture has a widow's peak and a very flat brow. Compare that picture with a picture of Ahmadinejad in his student days.
Or you could write him an email and ask: drahmadinejad (at) gmail.com
That was on his website, anyway... |
|
dand
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 13:48 2005 / #15 |
NBC Nightly News had a retired FBI photagraphy expert on last nite and he concluded that the photos are NOT the same man. It's also been announced that although Ahmadinejad was part of the group resonsible for the embassy takeover he did not personally participate.
I don't think that's the big issue. That was a long time ago at the height of the revolution. What's more important is what has he done for Iran since then and where will he lead it in the future.
I personally believe that Iran has huge potential. A vibrant, educated, sophisticated people with a rich culture and history. Unfortunately a group of non-elected leaders that take their cue from a religious tract and have overriding veto power over any legislation the elected government passes is ill-suited to take on the myriad problems facing the Islamic Republic. |
|
Saint Juste
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 14:11 2005 / #16 |
Ahum, the new president was elected with a landslide.
No hanging chads in central Mesopotamia this time. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 14:24 2005 / #17 |
An interesting comparison of the two candidates before the election:
CHAMELEON VS. MONGOOSE?
by Amir Taheri
Arab News
June 25, 2005
By the time this column appears the second round of Iran's presidential election will already be over and the results known.
But was the exercise, dismissed by much of the Western media as a sham and by the regime's opponents as irrelevant worthy of any attention at all?
I think it was. Here is why.
The election was not a sham if we compare like with like.
This was an election in the same ideological establishment with the aim of allowing the various factions within the regime to sort out their power struggle through poling stations rather than bloody purges and mass executions as has often been the case in similar systems.
It is as if Stalin and Mao Zedong, rather than executing their rivals within the regime, were to eliminate them from positions of power through a simulacrum of elections.
At the same time, the election was not irrelevant because it offers a fairly reliable picture of the balance of forces within the regime.
One reason for the evident lack of public interest was the perception that the candidates, referred to as "The Seven Dwarfs", seemed to offer no real choice in the first round. In the second round, however, there is a real choice, albeit within the limits of the ruling establishment.
We now know that divisions within the Khomeinist establishment go beyond issues of exercising power and concern two conflicting visions of the country's future.
It would be foolish to claim that Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad, the two candidates in the second round, are interchangeable. This would be like saying that Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping were the same because both belonged to the Chinese Communist Party.
The chief difference between the two is that with Ahamdinezhad you get what you see while with Rafsanjani you can never be sure. You cannot imagine Ahamdinezhad as something other than he appears to be. In a sense this is a contest between the chameleon and the mongoose.
A natural shape-shifter, Rafsanjani is a man for all seasons: He can be hard-liner, soft-liner, or no-liner according to circumstances. Ahamdinezhad, however, is a radical Khomeinist who means what he says even if that is impolite or impolitic.
Rafsanjani says he may, one day, nuke Israel out of existence, but does not really mean it. Ahmadinezhad has never spoken of the destruction of Israel but gives every indication of dreaming about it every night. Rafsanjani boasts that Iran is at war with the United States and would end up humbling the "Great Satan", but is already putting feelers to Washington through British intermediaries. Ahmadinezhad seldom talks of the United States and even denies that there is a crisis in relations. But it is almost certain that he believes that the Khomeinist regime can lead an Islamist uprising to drive the United States out of the Middle East.
Rafsanjani says men and women are equal but does not believe it. Ahmadinezhad says they are unequal and believes what he says. Rafsanjani promises democracy but is remembered for eight years of despotism when he was last president. Ahmadinezhad, however, states publicly that there can be no democracy in Islam and that the "pure Islamic rule" he promises to establish would bear no relationship to the globally adopted Western pluralist model.
To Ahamdinezhad power is a means to the idealistic goals of the Khomeinist revolution. To Rafsanjani power is an end in itself.
There are other differences between the two.
Rafsanjani is reputedly the richest man in Iran, and the 46th fortune of the world, while Ahmadinezhad is still paying mortgage on his modest home. During his two terms as president Rafsanjani showed that he regarded corruption as the lubricant of an oppressive system. Ahmadinezhad, on the other hand, has purged the notoriously corrupt gang leaders from the Tehran Municipality, which he heads as mayor, and promises to clean the stables throughout the government. One of his specific pledges is to disband the 30 or so, often fictitious, companies, set up by powerful mullas to siphon off a good part of Iran's oil revenues.
Rafsanjani is many things in one. He is a businessman, a mulla, and a politician. Ahamdinezhad, however, has been a professional revolutionary all his adult life. Gun in hand, he has fought Kurdish and Turcoman separatists in person. Rafsanjani, on the other hand, has never taken personal risks. When he wanted Kurdish dissident leaders eliminated in 1992 he just sent a hit squad to Berlin to do the job.
Ahamdinezhad fought in the eight-year war against Saddam Hussein in person while Rafsanjani was 1000 km away in Tehran making speeches.
There is also a generational difference between the two.
Ahmadinezhad, 22 years younger than Rafsanjani, is a child of the revolution, having spent his formative years under the Khomeinist regime. Rafsanjani, however, was a successful contractor and pistachio merchant during the Shah's regime.
Not only are the two candidates poles apart in terms of their personalities. They also represent different social strata.
Rafsanjani represents big business, the various foundations that dominate the economy, the top echelons of the civil service, much of it deeply corrupt, and the networks of influential mullas engaged in business and politics. Ahmadinezhad represents the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Baseej Mustadhafeen (Mobilization of the Dispossessed), largely recruited from among the poorest peasants. He also reflects the interests of small shopkeepers, low-ranking civil servants, and the poorer mullas.
These class differences are reflected in the rival economic policies of the two.
Rafsanjani promises a Chinese model, that is to say a capitalist system with an authoritarian political regime. For the past days Rafsanjani's main theme has been prosperity for all, which means an opportunity to make money for those who happen to be in the right place at the right time. Ahamdinezhad, on the other hand, promises a North Korean model aimed at economic self-sufficiency, minimum dependence on foreign trade, and the mobilization of national energies for fostering the revolutionary spirit rather than making money.
Rafsanjani wants to take Iran into the World Trader Organization as quickly as the US allows. Ahmadinezhad, on the other hand, wants to avoid WTO like a pest.
The US and other major powers might wish Rafsanjani to win because, as a rich businessman with dollar assets that could be frozen in foreign banks, he would not dream of provoking a revolutionary confrontation with anybody. Ahamdinezhad, however, may try to build walls around Iran in the hope of preparing it for a spectacular comeback.
All in all Ahmadinezhad offered a more logical construct while Rafsanjani's platform was designed around the concept of politics as the art of the possible.
As already noted, by the time this column appears the result of the run-off may well be known. My guess is that, if the "Supreme Guide" does not intervene to fix the result, Rafsanjani will win.
Many of those who didn't vote in the first round may hold their noses and vote for Rafsanjani if only to avoid the prospect of Ahmadinezhad who takes Khomeini's adolescent diatribes seriously. But if Ahamdinezhad is declared the winner we shall know that the "Supreme Guide" has decided to abandon all pretence of reform and compromise with the outside world in order to put the Islamic Republic on a war path. |
|
dand
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 15:49 2005 / #18 |
|
Like I've been asking, is this the best man to lead Iran? North Korea as a model, I'm not sure that the 'juche' model is the best to adopt. I think he was elected due to pressure from the U.S. and his reputation of getting things done in Tehran. Let's see what he does with his first 100 days. |
|
Saint Juste
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 1st 20:50 2005 / #19 |
|
Jesus, all these threads about Iran, Iraq or Israel. Not one mention or post about Live8 (only 2 billion people will be watching tomorrow), African debt relief or global warming. You guys really live in a bubble here. |
|
Micah
-
[profile]
|
Fri Jul 8th 10:51 2005 / #20 |
Here's an excellent analysis of the Iranian president photo thing from bagNotes.
http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/2005/07/move_over_za rqa.html |
|
Lime&Tonic Prague
Anno Domini 1471...
Grabmüller...
Duhovka Preschool...
ABL movers
Feedback Form