There are corrupt elements within the Sepah. I mentioned that Ahmadinejad is popular among the "less corrupt elements" in that organization.
The Sepah "corruption", however, takes two different forms. One is personal corruption, which exists and those in that category are not going to be sympathetic to a president who talks too much about "corruption" and rooting out "corruption". Another type of corruption is where money is siphoned off from various projects, or through other means, and diverted to regime sponsored activities outside of the country etc. Those involved with the latter type of "corruption" don't find themselves threatened by Ahmadinejad and indeed the reverse.
The Sepah "corruption", however, takes two different forms. One is personal corruption, which exists and those in that category are not going to be sympathetic to a president who talks too much about "corruption" and rooting out "corruption". Another type of corruption is where money is siphoned off from various projects, or through other means, and diverted to regime sponsored activities outside of the country etc. Those involved with the latter type of "corruption" don't find themselves threatened by Ahmadinejad and indeed the reverse.
Yes, I am sure the Sepah leaders, the ones behind the coup, really really hate AN.
AN truly fought against corruption in his 4 years of presidency.
AN truly fought against corruption in his 4 years of presidency.
2- The top commanders of the Sepah follow the directives of the Supreme Leader, who appoints them to their posts and serves as commander in chief of the armed forces. In fact, the present commander of the Sepah forces, Jaffari, is regarded as personally closer to the Larijani-Qalibaf-Rezaie faction than Ahmadinejad's faction. Indeed, many (including Radio Farda and Radio Free Europe, both US government funded) saw his appointment, replacing Safavi, as a move by the Supreme Leader to limit Ahmadinejad's influence over the Sepah. Rahim Safavi, by contrast, was widely regarded as very close to Ahmadinejad.
3- While the top leadership of the Sepah acts in accordance with the wishes of the Supreme Leader, who has so far sided with Ahmadinejad in this power struggle we are witnessing, among the rank and file and officers in that organization, Ahmadinejad is personally popular, especially among the ideological core of those forces.
4- The main point of my post was not to talk about corruption per se, but the different organs in the regime and how they each line up in the current power struggle that is underway. Otherwise, each side has "corrupt figures" on their sides, except that the corruption of one side is a little bit more glaring and obvious while the corruption on the other side is often about money siphoned for political activities and regime projects outside the country in places like Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan et al.
1- I don't agree there was any "coup", but rather the reverse: there is an attempt underway to instigate such a coup..
.
I heard a different story. Because the switch was made at the same time Rafsanjani became head of Khobregan, Rahbar appointed Jafari as a respomse-who was said to be more right wing and anti-Rafsanjani
I don't know why brother Kianollah is being so coy here about his disdain for the reformist movement.
Here is an excerpt from Kianollah's thoughts on Big Soccer. Please note that it wasn't the news of women and youth being beaten that caused anguish to his gentle soul, but watching the valiant brothers of Special Guards being waved to as they bravely patrolled the streets.
...vojdan kilooee chand, dadash?
"Btw, it may sound corny, but when the convoy of special forces was moving on Niayesh freeway, a couple of cars honked their horns and waived at them and for some reason the scene made me a bit emotional, making me almost choke with tears. I personally hate the fact that after an election that was so open and so vibrant, a bunch of rumor mongers and sore losers have tried to throw this nation into chaos."
Ey la'nat bar in pool ke mardom baraash che kaarha mikonand. Baradar Kianollah, you have a law degree and speak English quite well. There will always be job openings for people like you under a different administration. I promise you. Don't be so nervous.
Here is an excerpt from Kianollah's thoughts on Big Soccer. Please note that it wasn't the news of women and youth being beaten that caused anguish to his gentle soul, but watching the valiant brothers of Special Guards being waved to as they bravely patrolled the streets.
...vojdan kilooee chand, dadash?
"Btw, it may sound corny, but when the convoy of special forces was moving on Niayesh freeway, a couple of cars honked their horns and waived at them and for some reason the scene made me a bit emotional, making me almost choke with tears. I personally hate the fact that after an election that was so open and so vibrant, a bunch of rumor mongers and sore losers have tried to throw this nation into chaos."
Ey la'nat bar in pool ke mardom baraash che kaarha mikonand. Baradar Kianollah, you have a law degree and speak English quite well. There will always be job openings for people like you under a different administration. I promise you. Don't be so nervous.
I am thinking if AN wanted and could destroy rafsanjani why didn't he?
Why should he talk about it during election?
In his small mind he thought he had the complete support of people
on those issue and if he wins the election he could say that is what
people wanted and it is therefor I won.
What people really want is to fish democracy which is why they at the moment support Mosavi.
But if Rafsanjani had no power AN didn't need to win the election first
he could act immidiately. What I think Rafsanjani is doing is to talk with
all godfathers in Qom ask them to bring debate in Sepah so Sepah stays
neutral. This way Mosavi will stand strong against AN.
Why should he talk about it during election?
In his small mind he thought he had the complete support of people
on those issue and if he wins the election he could say that is what
people wanted and it is therefor I won.
What people really want is to fish democracy which is why they at the moment support Mosavi.
But if Rafsanjani had no power AN didn't need to win the election first
he could act immidiately. What I think Rafsanjani is doing is to talk with
all godfathers in Qom ask them to bring debate in Sepah so Sepah stays
neutral. This way Mosavi will stand strong against AN.
Last edited:
Like some of you guys, I too think Rafsanjani's silence is very calculated. He is a shrewed politician and game player.
But that is not necessarily a bad thing. His strong move might prove costly for Khamenei and with that we might have an open society which will eventually be good for us. They will be all bruised after all this and people will be the winners. "In a way", similar to what happened in Moscow when communist defeated by Gorbachev supporters but that resulted in demise of communism, even if that mean the top ranking communist like Yeltsin being president of Russia.
But that is not necessarily a bad thing. His strong move might prove costly for Khamenei and with that we might have an open society which will eventually be good for us. They will be all bruised after all this and people will be the winners. "In a way", similar to what happened in Moscow when communist defeated by Gorbachev supporters but that resulted in demise of communism, even if that mean the top ranking communist like Yeltsin being president of Russia.
What brought tears in my eyes was what I mentioned, which is not what you understood. I saw the faces of the troops being to the streets, and know the faces of the people who they might be confronting. And I hate the fact that we are where we have been taken. Where my countrymen may be put against another in violence.
As for your innuendo and slander, I don't work for any administration in Iran. But my firm does perform services for a state owned company, and its through these contacts that I have learned that most of the government bucreaucy is against Ahmadinejad. If my interest was what you want to suggest, I would take a position very different than the one I have taken.
As for supporting reforms, I did and still do. I still consider Khatami a much needed voice for Iran when he was elected and have no regret supporting him during the 1997-2003 period. I did not support Khatami's stance on Iran's nuclear program after Bush and company, but otherwise I liked the fact that he made "rule of law" and "democracy" and such concepts a central part of the political discouse in Iran. I do believe in those concepts, although if I did rate Ahmadinejad as some might, I might also feel like Abedzadeh. But I don't view him that way. I have not seen him to be a reactionary. The positions that have caused him to be vilified are not ones that earn him such disdain in my book. Indeed, in some cases such as the nuclear issue in particular, the opposite. In fact, anyone who has actually read my manuscript, should know why, since my ambitions for Iran have been to see a democratic government under rule of law, with Iran being a powerful country once again.
So that there is no doubt about my motivations in taking the positions I do, let me say what is well known anyway by whoever wants my services here: I am not religious; I do not pretend to be; I do not pray or fast; I strongly supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, but on most other issues, did not approve the direction my country was taking after the revolution until the rise of the reform movement; I supported Khatami strongly; I have generally supported Ahmadinejad in his confrontation with the West; I was undecided in this election but certainly not because I was not appreciative of Ahmadinejad standing up to those who wanted to throw Iran into chaos and/or rob of its nuclear rights; I support Iran having a vibrant "loyal opposition" in the guise of the reformists, but I strongly oppose the events of the last few days and do not want to have anything to do with them. These are my views and the win me no friends here or elsewhere, because they are NOT calculated to win political friends. They are calculated to express my honest felt viewpoints on what is in our national interest and calculated to insist one one point that matters a lot to me: my right to express my views regardless of what anyone else thinks of them.
As for your innuendo and slander, I don't work for any administration in Iran. But my firm does perform services for a state owned company, and its through these contacts that I have learned that most of the government bucreaucy is against Ahmadinejad. If my interest was what you want to suggest, I would take a position very different than the one I have taken.
As for supporting reforms, I did and still do. I still consider Khatami a much needed voice for Iran when he was elected and have no regret supporting him during the 1997-2003 period. I did not support Khatami's stance on Iran's nuclear program after Bush and company, but otherwise I liked the fact that he made "rule of law" and "democracy" and such concepts a central part of the political discouse in Iran. I do believe in those concepts, although if I did rate Ahmadinejad as some might, I might also feel like Abedzadeh. But I don't view him that way. I have not seen him to be a reactionary. The positions that have caused him to be vilified are not ones that earn him such disdain in my book. Indeed, in some cases such as the nuclear issue in particular, the opposite. In fact, anyone who has actually read my manuscript, should know why, since my ambitions for Iran have been to see a democratic government under rule of law, with Iran being a powerful country once again.
So that there is no doubt about my motivations in taking the positions I do, let me say what is well known anyway by whoever wants my services here: I am not religious; I do not pretend to be; I do not pray or fast; I strongly supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, but on most other issues, did not approve the direction my country was taking after the revolution until the rise of the reform movement; I supported Khatami strongly; I have generally supported Ahmadinejad in his confrontation with the West; I was undecided in this election but certainly not because I was not appreciative of Ahmadinejad standing up to those who wanted to throw Iran into chaos and/or rob of its nuclear rights; I support Iran having a vibrant "loyal opposition" in the guise of the reformists, but I strongly oppose the events of the last few days and do not want to have anything to do with them. These are my views and the win me no friends here or elsewhere, because they are NOT calculated to win political friends. They are calculated to express my honest felt viewpoints on what is in our national interest and calculated to insist one one point that matters a lot to me: my right to express my views regardless of what anyone else thinks of them.
If I believed Ahmadinejad was himself really the extreme right of IRI, then I might feel the way you do. Even though, in general, I believe two things go hand in hand: the minority respecting the choice of the majority as far as who is to lead a nation, while the majority respecting some basic rights for the minority regardless of majoritarian whims.
But I do not see Ahmadinejad the way you do. That is true even though some of his support comes from reactionary elements in IRI.
Anyway, I am not here to convince anyone of what they should think about Ahmadinejad. There are things about him that I do not like, even though I do like certain qualities I have seen in him. Qualities that I feel were particularly important when Iran faced enormous pressures from outside. What is more important to me is to make sure the events we see do not lead us to have a country that is more autocratic, as opposed to more democratic; that we don't see our country weakened as opposed strengthened; that we don't see our nation more divided as opposed to more united. If these events cause us the former as opposed to the latter, then it doesn't matter who was at "fault". These events did us no good.
But I do not see Ahmadinejad the way you do. That is true even though some of his support comes from reactionary elements in IRI.
Anyway, I am not here to convince anyone of what they should think about Ahmadinejad. There are things about him that I do not like, even though I do like certain qualities I have seen in him. Qualities that I feel were particularly important when Iran faced enormous pressures from outside. What is more important to me is to make sure the events we see do not lead us to have a country that is more autocratic, as opposed to more democratic; that we don't see our country weakened as opposed strengthened; that we don't see our nation more divided as opposed to more united. If these events cause us the former as opposed to the latter, then it doesn't matter who was at "fault". These events did us no good.
When the war with Iraq started Iran replied by Ahmadi nejad the man who knew about
how he with help of Sepah could create trouble for American soldiers in Iraq.
Although he was not elected rather appointed he can argue that because of what
he did in Iraq US did not invade Iran.
But remember people of Iran were not happy with him but stayed calm because they didn't want to see a US invation like Iraq. Today the danger seems gone. So when
the saw cheating in election they got mad and protested.
Iranians have lived poor for 30 years now. First the excuse was Iraq war. Then phalestine now this nuclear issue. Every thing is about Islamic foregn policy.
Are we going to devote the whole our lifes for the purpus of Islam should win
this or that part of the world or are we going to start living normal.
This is issue her. Do not listen to all these sophistications. It is not safe.
how he with help of Sepah could create trouble for American soldiers in Iraq.
Although he was not elected rather appointed he can argue that because of what
he did in Iraq US did not invade Iran.
But remember people of Iran were not happy with him but stayed calm because they didn't want to see a US invation like Iraq. Today the danger seems gone. So when
the saw cheating in election they got mad and protested.
Iranians have lived poor for 30 years now. First the excuse was Iraq war. Then phalestine now this nuclear issue. Every thing is about Islamic foregn policy.
Are we going to devote the whole our lifes for the purpus of Islam should win
this or that part of the world or are we going to start living normal.
This is issue her. Do not listen to all these sophistications. It is not safe.
sk, the prob with MA (AN) is that his "internal" policies (and his mannerism) are sectarian, divisive and potentially explosive (as we have seen in the last few days or so)... his social policies are very restrictive & he is far too combative (un-compromising) in his internal policies ... i have no prob with his foreign policies as such.... but he clearly does not care for a large "minority" ... this sort of attitude goes down from the top all the way down to the guys who are meant to protect the nation ! i hope that after this the recent days, he (and others) learn to respect (and be seen to respect) the views/ways of life of other people in society
i agree, it's real complex right now. There's more than one power struggle going on. An important one (which I was thinking about) is Khamenei vs. 'the old guard' i.e. Mousavi, Khatami, Rafsanjani. The thing is, Khamenei is no Khomeini. Khomeini was a strong leader, Khamenei is weak. And a weak leader will always want weaker people below him (e.g. AN). When AN became president he got down and kissed Khamenei's hand. Khatami didn't, Mousavi wouldn't either. Because these guys see themselves as equal with Khamenei. And these are the people who Khamenei doesn't want to have power. He wants weaker people like AN, so he can keep his authority. He wants the 'old generation' out. That's a huge power struggle right now.
No one can claim to believe the above and still have been "undecided" between Mousavi and AN.
AN, regardless of his own financial state, is backed by factions that are equally as corrupt as Rafsanjai but savagely brutal and fiercely ideological. Hezbe mo’talefe, the Jannati/Mesbah gang, and the ideologically driven Sepahis are by far the most virulent and totalitarian elements within this regime and they are behind AN almost unanimously.
If the people backing the reformists are "supposedly progressive/sophisticated urban elites", the ones supporting AN are the primates attacking defenseless women and children on the streets. With all these ties, the notion of AN being some sort of reformist Robin Hood taking on the evil gang of Rafsanjani is a ridiculous hoax. AN's faction is by far the biggest obstacle toward a free and democratic Iran. Period.
Now, how a supposedly objective "patriot" fails -or chooses not- to see all this, aaghelan danand.
AN, regardless of his own financial state, is backed by factions that are equally as corrupt as Rafsanjai but savagely brutal and fiercely ideological. Hezbe mo’talefe, the Jannati/Mesbah gang, and the ideologically driven Sepahis are by far the most virulent and totalitarian elements within this regime and they are behind AN almost unanimously.
If the people backing the reformists are "supposedly progressive/sophisticated urban elites", the ones supporting AN are the primates attacking defenseless women and children on the streets. With all these ties, the notion of AN being some sort of reformist Robin Hood taking on the evil gang of Rafsanjani is a ridiculous hoax. AN's faction is by far the biggest obstacle toward a free and democratic Iran. Period.
Now, how a supposedly objective "patriot" fails -or chooses not- to see all this, aaghelan danand.
Last edited: