Rafsanjani slams Iran president

I agree with former president Rafsanjani, ever since this monkey came into election he did nothing but to make more enemies for us and ruin everything!!! I have a feeling were going to kick him out by this year, he got so many tips from Khatami and Khomeini but did he listen? my god what was he thinkin!!!!!!!!!!!


Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has implicitly criticised the new president for conducting a purge of government officials.



[edit on 17-11-2005 by NR]

Nice to see an alternate voice out there NR.
It makes a nice change for the 'they are all mindless evil zombie zealots' some want to portray.

Personally I think the one thing certain people want more than anything is an Iranian 'threat' of some sort (no matter how lacking in credibility) and an element of that scary Iranian conservative fundamentalism to reassert itself.
Especially after the last few years of moderates and progressives gaining ground.

How to do this?

Start intimidating and threatening.
Then look surprised as low and behold the people start to turn to the conservative elements and you get people like the current Pres elected.
No surprises there.

Afterall if you are gouging the tax-payer and kidding the US people that they 'need' to spend as much or more than they spent during the cold war you have to have at least some kind of scary threat to point to as some kind of justification, right?

North Korea is/was laughable as that 'threat' and Iran, sadly, accords with the current prejudices (and is handy as it is easily confused by the uncaring with Iraq when it comes to tales about UN/IAEA inspectors being throw out, refused access etc etc).


[edit on 17-11-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Any body red the thread?
Did even go through the link?

All that it is about "The president has replaced a number of high-ranking officials since he was elected, including the directors of all of Iran's state-run banks and 40 of Iran's most senior diplomats."

It is internal issue of Iranian politics.

Not about Al-Quaeda or nukes.........!

The problem with Iran is that the office of President doesn't have any real 'powers'. The Iranian President is the mouthpiece for the religious Imans (?) who really control the power. That is why the last President was not able to do alot of what the people wanted, it was never approved.

Originally posted by ferretman
The problem with Iran is that the office of President doesn't have any real 'powers'.

- You think that's a problem?!

Lots of countries neither have nor want a US style President......and consider that, by far, the best choice too.

The Iranian President is the mouthpiece for the religious Imans (?) who really control the power.

- I don't think that is wholly true, obviously they have 'power' and 'influence' but IIRC it is the council of ministers that is the real powerbase.

That is why the last President was not able to do alot of what the people wanted, it was never approved.

- Hmmm, I don't think that is the whole story at all.
It is undeniable that there were progressive moves made under the last Iranian Pres.

However if you mean that he wasn't able to take power from and throw out the Imans then I think your expectations are unrealistic for now.

No matter who is President Iran is not going to 'westernise' quickly (and threats and intimidation only play into the hands of their conservative elements who claim they are the only ones capable and willing of standing up to such threats and intimidation whilst protecting the Iranian identity and sovereignty........and will point to the experience of last time they were close to the 'west', not that long ago, to make their point).

[edit on 17-11-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

sminkeypinkey says


No matter who is President Iran is not going to 'westernise' quickly (and threats and intimidation only play into the hands of their conservative elements who claim they are the only ones capable and willing of standing up to such threats and intimidation whilst protecting the Iranian identity and sovereignty........and will point to the experience of last time they were close to the 'west', not that long ago, to make their point).

Is not it fanaticism?
I mean to 'westernise' any nation (in the tune of 'Isalmise' any nation).
Read history, these easterns 9including Iran) have thousands of year's history and, of course, that old civilisation incoorporated into their genes and behavior.
However, west has the viable option of 'Nukes', then occupy and dwell there for the prosperity of 'that country'.


[edit on 17/11/2005 by chaudri]