|
July 01, 2005
Holding hostages and influencing people
Speculation over whether the newly "elected" Iranian president might be the same Iranian student hostage taker (photographed repeatedly during the 444 day seige) made it into yesterday's and today's Philadelphia Inquirer, and is raging its way through the blogosphere. (See InstaPundit, Gateway Pundit, Little Green Footballs, Rusty Shackleford, Captain Ed for starters.) The evidence presented by Gateway Pundit looks damningly impressive to me. 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.Surely whoever this man was, the government must know where he is now. Ahmadinejad, for his part, denies being the same man, although he admits he would have liked to have been there. (Another student is quoted as saying Ahmadinejad played no role, although he "had wanted to." So what stopped him?) There is a very simple solution. Iran being a totalitarian-style government which keeps track of people, considering that the "student leader" is a hero (as well as former hostage-taker security chief), why don't they simply produce the real guy? That could clear the whole thing up, although either way, Ahmadinejad remains a committed, nuke-seeking enemy of the United States. He's more dangerous now than in 1979. posted by Eric on 07.01.05 at 08:44 AM
Comments
I cannot fathom why we haven't bombed Iran yet. John · July 1, 2005 11:48 AM John: Exactly what I was thinking. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · July 1, 2005 02:01 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I agree with those who view Ahmadinejad as an ultra-conservative who will (if anything) accelerate Iran's nuclear ambitions. For a slightly different "analysis" read yesterday's New York Times editorial, which treats Ahmadinejad's victory as a simple electoral preference by Iran's voters:
"Mr. Rafsanjani lost because he was too closely associated with the recent economic failures and political inertia. Mr. Ahmadinejad, in contrast, offered a populist economic platform that implicitly challenged the cronyism and corruption of more than a quarter-century of clerical rule. We wish him luck."