EAGELS-OF-USA1-  

Show Notes

• Featured Episode

  INTERVIEW WITH MR FREEMAN ?One way or another, freedom will prevail.

  EAGELS-OF-USA1-

  Date / Time: 7/9/2009 1:00 AM UTC

  Category: Paranormal

  
  

  YOU DO NOT WANT MISS IT?WHEN OPEN LINE YOU CAN CALL ME 1-347-884-9191 PRESS 1
  
  Create

  <embed src="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/BTRPlayer.swf?displayheight=&file=http://www.blogtalkradio.com%2fEAGELS-OF-USA1-%2fplay_list.xml?show_id=601324&autostart=false&shuffle=false&volume=80&corner=rounded&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=215&height=108" width="215" height="108" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" wmode="transparent" menu="false"></embed>

  Set Reminder

  EAGELS-OF-USA1-
  INTERVIEW WITH MR FREEMAN ?One way or another, freedom will prevail.

  
  

  To receive your reminder via Email

  
  

  Enter an email address:

  Please notify me 5 Minutes 10 Minutes 15 Minutes 20 Minutes 30 Minutes 45 Minutes 1 Hour 1 1/2 Hours 2 Hours 1 Day before the show.

  
  

  
  
  

  Add Reminder to Your Calendar

• On Demand Episodes           33083          

  Date / Time: 7/9/2009 7:19 PM UTC

  U.S. frees 5 Iranian diplomats held since 2007?WHY TERRORISTS GETS FREE TODAY?

  The release was part of a previous agreement. But the detention had been a source of friction between Iran and the U.S., whose relations have been strained further by recent violent protests in Iran. Reporting from Baghdad - The U.S. military has freed five Iranian diplomats held since 2007, handing them over to the Iraqi government prior to their planned departure for Tehran, Iranian and Iraqi officials said today. "The American government has handed over the [Iranian] hostages and prisoners to the Iraqi government," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi told Iranian state TV. He said the prisoners had been received in person by Prime Minister Nouri Maliki at his office in Baghdad. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said he had met with the diplomats and that they are "happy and safe."
  
  An Iranian Embassy spokesman in Baghdad said the five would be handed over to the Baghdad embassy later in the day. The U.S. military refused to confirm or deny the report, saying it had a policy of not commenting on individual releases.
  
  According to Zebari, the five were freed under the terms of the security agreement between the U.S. and Iraq signed in December, under which the U.S. is to hand over all detainees to the Iraqi government by the end of the year.
  
  
  "There wasn't any deal," he said. "This has been there for some time that this would happen. It was part of the agreement for the Americans, part of withdrawing and handing over security responsibilities."
  
  The diplomats had been detained in January 2007 in the northern city of Irbil in the autonomous region of Kurdistan at the height of what amounted to a cold war raging between the U.S. and Iran over influence in Iraq. The U.S. military subsequently said they were not diplomats but members of the elite Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guard and accused them of arming, funding and training Shiite militias in Iraq.
  
  Relations between the U.S. and Iran improved somewhat following a series of talks between the two sides in Baghdad, and two other diplomats detained in Baghdad were freed. But the continued detention of the five remained a source of friction between Tehran and Washington.
  
  President Obama has promised to improve relations further with Tehran by pursuing dialogue, but the prospects of a thaw have been diminished by Iran's harsh crackdown against demonstrators protesting the disputed results of last month's election

  • Tags:
  • OBAMA BETRAYED IRANI
  No Comments

• Date / Time: 7/9/2009 7:16 PM UTC

  A defector from the hardline camp tells his story

  It started out as a frantic Facebook message plea for help about a tense confrontation at an airport in Istanbul between Amir Farshad Ebrahimi (above, right) and Turkish security officials in March 2008. Over the course of more than a year's worth of phone conversations with Ebrahimi, 33, and a visit to his Berlin home a few months ago, his amazing story, detailed in Thursday's Times, emerged: from pre-adolescent Basiji warrior on the front lines of the Iran-Iraq war to hardline militia member who hobnobbed with the likes of Mojataba Khamenei (above, left), the son of Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, to jailed dissident, to exiled blogger. “His story does really crystallize the disillusionment of the children of the revolution,” said Pooya Dayanim, a Los Angeles-based Iranian opposition activist who befriended Ebrahimi over the years. Some elements of his extraordinary story are difficult to confirm. But much is verifiable through documents and photographs he provided, including rare 1990s photo of Mojataba above, and accounts in the Iranian press. As a onetime member of the Revolutionary Guard, he says his military superiors were impressed by his enthusiasm and writing skills and one day, they recommended him for the Quds Force, the unit described by U.S. officials as the Islamic Republic’s elite branch for overseas subterfuge. The 19-year-old readily agreed.
  
  Ebrahimi’s claim of having been a Quds Force member is difficult to verify. Iran has never officially acknowledged that the unit even exists.
  
  
  
  Though ostensibly in charge of photocopying press clips for the ambassador in Beirut in 1997 to 1998, he says he had a weightier portfolio: helping oversee Hezbollah’s procurement of medium-range missiles transported via buses from Syria, and sending Shiite militiamen to Iran for training.
  
  
  Ebrahimi offers evidence of his work, including a document he says was the equivalent of his discharge papers (at right), evidence that he lived in Beirut and training manuals he designed.
  
  
  But he says many of his records and personal effects were lost in several raids on his parents’ home in Tehran.
  
  
  His time abroad, he says, showed him how Iran funds and supports allies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon or Hamas in the Gaza Strip. He believes Iranians wanted to ensure maximum deniability while building up long-term loyalty.
  
  
  “Iranians don’t send the weapons directly,” he said. “We give you money. You want to build hospitals, or buy missiles? If you want to build missiles, here’s a contact that will help.”
  One day, he recalled, an argument had broke out between the Beirut Quds force commander and Iran’s ambassador to Lebanon, some minor point about domestic Iranian politics.
  
  He watched as his boss humiliated the ambassador, who apologized and gave way to the military man.
  
  
  Repeatedly he said he saw how Iran’s secret organizations lord over its visible institutions.
  
  
  Repeatedly, the patrician ambassador in Beirut told him and his Quds Force colleagues to keep his dealings with Hezbollah out of the embassy walls. And repeatedly the 20-something men ignored and laughed at him.
  
  
  From the beginning, the Quds Force worked to tap Ebrahimi’s communications gifts. He claims he was placed in the directorate of intelligence and operations and quickly sent off to North Korea for six months of training in counter-intelligence and propaganda.
  
  
  His instruction centered on "soft power": interrogation techniques, crowd control and media strategies.
  
  
  Ebrahimi snickered at some of the lessons. “For example there’s a war and there’s no food and the people are getting angry. What should you say?” he recalled. “They suggested announcing falsely that there are 10 boats full of food coming. But I don’t think this would work. People are too sophisticated.”
  
  
  Based on his lessons in North Korea, he was asked to design a course to train recruits in Iran. He authored course materials on subjects such as “psychological operations” or “propaganda and its role in foreign affairs,” copies of which he provided to the Times (at right).
  
  
  His says trainees included other members of the Quds Force and Revolutionary Guards, as well as officers in the foreign affairs ministry and intelligence services.
  
  
  Before he headed back to Tehran, he befriended Ali-Reza Asghari, a commander in the Revolutionary Guards, who by day tried to find components such as rocket fuses for weapons and by night eagerly took part in Beirut’s nightlife, despite the Islamic Republic’s puritanical image.
  
  
  “There was a lot of womanizing and drinking” in Beirut, Ebrahimi said. “Not everyone. But a lot of us would.”
  
  
  
  Asghari would later defect to the West, taking all his secrets with him.
  
  
  

  • Tags:
  • NEW STORY EVRY ONE N
  No Comments

• Date / Time: 7/9/2009 7:05 PM UTC

  Protesters in Iran met with tear gas, batons

  

  

  

  TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian pro-government Basij militia members dispersed crowds of protesters in Tehran Thursday -- sometimes with force -- according to a journalist on the scene.

  

  Protests by Iranians, such as this one on June 15, have been defended by the reformist figures.

  

  The demonstration is taking place on the 10th anniversary of a student uprising that, at the time, posed the biggest threat to the Islamic regime since its inception in 1979.

  The protesters are using the anniversary to resume demonstrations against the outcome of the June 12 presidential election.

  An estimated 2,000 to 3,000 people crowded the streets and headed toward Tehran University, the site of the 1999 student uprising.

  Several protesters were hit on the arms and backs by the Basij, the journalist reported. The militia tried to persuade one man, whose face was bleeding, to get into an ambulance, but he refused.

  Some of the protesters shouted "Allah u Akbar," or "God is Great" and "Ya Hussein, Mir Hussein" referring to opposition candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi. Watch scenes of protesters and street clashes »

  Police blocked other roads leading to Tehran University, while some protesters set trash cans on fire to counter the effects of the tear gas. See the protests and violence through Iranians' own photos

  Earlier, the commander of Iran's security forces warned that police would "strongly confront" anyone planning to protest on the anniversary of a pivotal point in Iran's reformist movement.

  In an interview with the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), Maj. Gen. Esmaeel Ahmadi Moghadam said authorities would confront protesters and that no demonstration permit had been issued for Thursday.

  Don't Miss

  • Iran frees embassy worker, 1 still jailed
  • Clerics dispute election results
  • Moussavi said to be planning new party
  • iReport.com: Send us your stories, videos, photos

  On July 9, 1999, known as the 18th of Tir in the Iranian calendar, 200 students protested the closing of a reformist newspaper, Salaam, which supported moderate President Mohammed Khatami. Hard-line activists entered dormitories in Tehran University, broke windows, set fires and attacked the students.

  Tehran's governor, Morteza Tamaddon, issued a warning as the police chief, Maj. Seyed Hadi Hashemi, told IRNA that authorities are trying to encourage people to leave the capital before Thursday because of severe haze.

  Hashemi "urged the citizens to consider Tehran's heavy pollution and travel outside of the capital for the weekend in order to help reduce traffic," IRNA reported.

  Iranian-American journalist Jason Rezaian said Iranians were frightened after a brutal crackdown on those who protested the outcome of the June 12 presidential elections. Hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner over reformist candidate Moussavi, his chief rival.

  Moussavi's supporters took to the streets by the thousands in the aftermath of the vote until the protests turned bloody as security forces cracked down.

  Buzz of protests Thursday swirled on social networking sites but Rezaian said it was difficult to predict how such a landmark day might unfold.

  He said he had heard something "big" would take place but no one wanted to talk about it for fear of tipping off the security forces.

  Six days of protests erupted. According to Human Rights Watch, more than 25,000 people eventually participated, making the demonstrations the biggest threat to the Islamic regime since its inception in 1979.

  "Obviously, there has been a crackdown and people are scared, said Rezaian, who covered the June elections and reported from Tehran for about 12 days afterward. He was forced to leave because of restrictions placed on international media outlets.

  He said he had been in Iran in previous years on July 9 and had seen firsthand that security was heightened for the anniversary. Iranians, he said, have a penchant for marking all sorts of anniversaries and this one, this year, could not be more relevant.

  

  "There is no fathomable way that after everything we've seen in the last 30 days that they wouldn't take this opportunity," Rezaian said.

  Ultimately, he said, "it's one more important day in a succession of important days."
  • Tags:
  • I told you so
  • i knew it ahead?
  No Comments

• Date / Time: 7/9/2009 2:13 AM UTC

  From profits to ethics: pope calls for a new political and financial world order

  Economic crisis is 'clear proof of effects of sin'

  • Comments (…)
  • Buzz up!
  • Digg it
  • John Hooper in Rome
  • guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 7 July 2009 21.05 BST

  

  Pope Benedict. Photograph: Chris Helgren/Reuters

  Pope Benedict today pinned responsibility for the worldwide recession squarely on greed and an amoral fascination with technological progress for its own sake.

  This must be tackled, he said, by the creation of a global political authority and financial order based not just on the search for ever greater profits, but on ethics and a sense of the common good.

  The pontiff made the appeal in a 144-page encyclical – a reflection on doctrine that is the highest form of papal writing – three days before he was due to discuss the global downturn with Barack Obama.

  Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth) is Benedict's third encyclical and the first to deal exclusively with economic and social issues. In one section, he says the current economic crisis is "clear proof" of the "pernicious effects of sin".

  The pope's analysis echoed some of the criticisms made by the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, of government policies that target growth to the exclusion of wider social considerations. But, as its title suggests, the papal encyclical is a primarily theological discourse which takes as its point of departure the argument that only a belief in the truth as proclaimed by Christianity can offer the necessary answers.

  "A Christianity of charity without truth would be more or less interchangeable with a pool of good sentiments," Benedict writes. His reflection – delayed by more than a year by the world economic crisis – nevertheless contains numerous specific criticisms and recommendations. Though the pontiff does not use the word "capitalism" in the encyclical, there are lengthy reflections on morality in economics.

  In a key passage, the encyclical says: "The conviction that the economy must be autonomous, that it must be shielded from 'influences' of a moral character, has led man to abuse the economic process in a thoroughly destructive way. In the long term, these convictions have led to economic, social and political systems that trample upon personal and social freedom, and are therefore unable to deliver the justice that they promise."

  Then in an unequivocal critique of unbridled markets, the pope writes that "grave imbalances are produced when economic action, conceived merely as an engine for wealth creation, is detached from political action, conceived as a means for pursuing justice through redistribution."

  At a press conference in the Vatican, the pope's technical consultant, Stefano Zamagni, an economics professor at the University of Bologna, denied the encyclical was anti-capitalist, but added that it "views capitalism in its historical dimension and goes beyond it".

  He noted that "the market economy is broader than just capitalism", which was merely one variant. In another section of the reflection, Benedict argues that "financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity … right intention, transparency, and the search for positive results are mutually compatible and must never be detached from one another."

  Then, in a passage that builds on ideas first voiced by his predecessor, John Paul II, the pope argues that globalisation has made necessary a "reform of the United Nations Organisation and likewise of economic institutions and international finance so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth".

  One of his most senior advisers, cardinal Renato Martino, said: "The encyclical is not asking for a super- or world government." But it comes very close to doing so. It proposes a "true world political authority" that "would need to be universally recognised and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice and respect for rights." It would be asked to "manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis [and] to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis."

  But its responsibilities would be more than just economic. They would include securing "timely disarmament, food security and peace". The new body, a reformed UN, would also be called upon "to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration".

  Often regarded as the first "green" pope, Benedict also took advantage of his encyclical to make clearer his ideas on the importance of respecting the environment. But Zamagni said the document implicitly rejected forms of environmental thinking that put other forms of creation on a par with humankind.

  • Tags:
  • SATANIC NEW CATHOLI
  No Comments

• Original Air Date: 7/9/2009 1:00 AM UTC

  INTERVIEW WITH MR FREEMAN ?One way or another, freedom will prevail.

  YOU DO NOT WANT MISS IT?WHEN OPEN LINE YOU CAN CALL ME 1-347-884-9191 PRESS 1
  
  Create

  <embed src="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/BTRPlayer.swf?displayheight=&file=http://www.blogtalkradio.com%2fEAGELS-OF-USA1-%2fplay_list.xml?show_id=601324&autostart=false&shuffle=false&volume=80&corner=rounded&callback=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/FlashPlayerCallback.aspx&width=215&height=108" width="215" height="108" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" wmode="transparent" menu="false"></embed>
  • Tags:
  • NEW WORLD ORDER
  • SUN STORM RISING
  • RUSSIAN ORDERED JETS TAKE DIFFERENT ROUTES
  • AIR FRANCE WAS BROUGHT BY SUN STORM OR UFO
  • WILL PLANET X HIT OUR PLANET 2012?
  Comments (5)

• Date / Time: 7/8/2009 10:59 PM UTC

  Obama Cannot Afford to Get Iran Wrong

  President Barack Obama has come under withering criticism from neoconservatives and liberal internationalists for not speaking out more quickly and forcefully in support of the pro-democracy demonstrators in Iran. But now that the initial crisis is past, and Teheran has settled in for a behind-the-scenes struggle among the Shiite clergy, it is apparent that Obama's instinct has been pitch-perfect. The last time an American president was criticized for not coming out forcefully enough in support of pro-democracy demonstrators was twenty years ago, when George H. W. Bush took a publicly reticent stance as the Soviet Empire collapsed in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states. In A World Transformed, the 1998 memoir he coauthored with his national security advisor Brent Scowcroft, one of the finest and under-rated of political memoirs written in recent decades, Bush recalled that he felt it important to “step carefully in Poland and Hungary and … avoid aggravating the Soviets, whose military presence still loomed there.” If the U.S. had taken overt action to encourage democracy, he explained, “I understood that the pressure on Gorbachev from hard-liners to intervene would grow...there could be more Tiananmens." In other words, he recognized that Ronald Reagan's aggressive policies had set history in Eastern Europe in motion, and that it was now his own task to slow it down – to allow liberal change to settle in with minimal bloodshed. Tiananmen was fresh in his memory—a bloody repression by another communist regime against its democratic opponents. His fear of instigating another such event governed his decisions in Europe.
  
  Obama now faces a similar challenge.
  
  History has been set in motion in Iran. Though only dozens have been killed so far, the possibility of hundreds or more dying in a bloody upheaval is not out of the question. One ayatollah has even called for executions. Obama's goal must be political change and liberation in Teheran with minimal bloodshed. And he simply cannot accomplish that by putting America's fingerprints all over the democracy movement there. How he handles this could mean the difference between a massive crackdown by a terror-promoting, radical regime (who would likely retain complete control for years to come), and a gradual behind-the-scenes transformation, as the clerisy moves delicately away from the "Death to America" mantra of previous decades. In that regard, like the elder Bush vis-à-vis Eastern Europe, the less Obama says about Iran these days the better. It's not about winning an argument, as some commentators appear to believe; it's about effecting change, indirectly, in a complex society half-a-world away.
  
  The fact is that various scenarios are possible for Iran, and the United States must prepare for all of them by not rhetorically boxing itself in. It is very possible that the hardliners in Iran will win the immediate power struggle, and seek, months down the road, to engage the U.S. as a way to take some of the wind out of the sails of the democratic opposition. With a nuclear Iran a not-so-distant reality, America's national interest dictates that it set itself up properly for such a circumstance. If the democrats eventually win the power struggle, the U.S. will be in an optimum position in any case. It is the less-than-optimum scenario that the U.S. has to prepare for. Recall that the elder Bush's muted rhetoric did not harm the democracy movements in Eastern Europe one bit; in fact, it might have helped them, by reducing the threat of a Soviet military response.
  
  Iran, because of its size, its well-educated population, its geographical logic - there is relatively little artificial about its frontiers - and its position straddling the oil-rich Caspian Sea and the oil-rich Persian Gulf, is the most powerful and influential nation in the Moslem world. It retains the ability to destabilize Iraq—and even a small shift in its foreign policy could promote stability in Lebanon or further Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. Obama cannot afford to get Iran wrong.
  
  And he is not. His temperament can't be improved upon. In his Cairo speech, he talked in broad terms about liberal change in the Muslim world. That may have been a factor in the election in Lebanon in June, in which the pro-western anti-Hezbollah faction won. And who knows, it may also have helped spur the democracy demonstrations in Iran. But he has been careful not to insert himself into Iran’s domestic debate, except in the vaguest terms.
  
  Iran will likely soon develop enough weapons-grade material to make a bomb, even as it may not eventually do so. Moreover, a few years hence, a nuclear Iran may be a very different ideological animal than the country we know today. Thus, the idea that the clock is ticking and someone - the U.S. or Israel - must bomb Iran now is simplistic. Vice President Joseph Biden’s remark over the weekend, on This Week With George Stephanopoulos, that Israel has Washington’s go-ahead to attack Iran was unwise and undisciplined. It is the only blemish in the Administration's performance thus far.
  
  In a postscript to A World Transformed, Brent Scowcroft writes that he felt a sense of pride when the Soviet flag was lowered from the Kremlin one last time—pride in having helped the Soviet Union to reach a relatively peaceful dissolution, even as he admits that Mikhail Gorbachev deserved most of the credit. When it comes to Iran, at the rate Obama is going—treading carefully, helping liberal-minded Iranians where we can (in the shadows mostly), he may one day be able to feel a similar degree of accomplishment

  • Tags:
  • OBAMA LOVES AHMADI N
  No Comments

• Date / Time: 7/8/2009 10:57 PM UTC

  Khamenei's son takes control of Iran's anti-protest militia

  The son of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has taken control of the militia being used to crush the protest movement, according to a senior Iranian source. The source, a politician with strong connections to the security apparatus, said that the leading role being played by Mojtaba Khamenei had dismayed many of the country's senior clerics, conservative politicians and Revolutionary Guard generals. But these conservatives are reluctant to challenge the Khameneis openly out of fear that any conflict would destabilise the Islamic Republic and weaken Iran in the region. Instead they will use their positions in the organs of state to make it hard for the supreme leader and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to govern. "This game has not finished. The game has only just started," the source said, on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of his own position in Iran.
  
  He said Mojtaba had played a leading role in orchestrating Ahmadinejad's disputed election victory on 12 June and had led the backlash against protests through direct control of street militias, known as basiji.
  
  The official death toll from that backlash is less than 20 but, according to a Tehran doctor who has given his account to the Guardian, the actual number is much higher – 38 in the first week at his hospital alone. He said the basiji covered up the deaths and pressured doctors not to talk.
  
  "Mojtaba is the commander of this coup d'etat. The basiji are operating on Mojtaba's orders, but his name is always hidden in all of this. The government never mentions him," the Iranian politician said. "Everyone is angry about this. The maraji [Iran's most senior ayatollahs] and the clerics are angry, the conservatives are very angry and strongly critical of Mojtaba. This situation cannot continue with so many people on the top against it."
  
  Very little is known about Mojtaba Khamenei. He is the supreme leader's second son, reportedly being groomed to succeed his father. Such a dynastic succession would be very hard under present circumstances as the leader is supposed to be chosen by a clerical assembly of experts on the basis of the candidate's religious standing. Mojtaba wears clerical robes but by no means has the theological status to rise to the top job. A major upheaval in the clerical establishment would be required to arrange it.
  
  Within Iran, Mojtaba is widely believed to control huge financial assets. There are claims on Iranian dissident websites that the current anti-British campaign in Tehran is motivated in part by Britain's announcement on 18 June that it had frozen nearly £1bn in Iranian assets, in accordance with UN and EU sanctions. The frozen funds included a lot of Mojtaba's money, it is claimed.
  
  Mojtaba's name does not appear on the Treasury's list of targets of those sanctions, but one British official said the supreme leader's son may operate through state-run enterprises that are listed. "I'd be amazed if some of the money wasn't his," the official said.
  
  The Iranian politician who spoke to the Guardian said the supreme leader had long been leaking support among the religious hierarchy on which his powerbase was once built and had now virtually lost it altogether. Among the roughly 20 maraji ("sources of emulation", from whose ranks the supreme leader is supposed to be chosen), he said Khamenei could only rely on the support of a handful.
  
  He said that an axis of lay conservatives in important positions would also try to hinder Ahmadinejad's efforts to wield power. That axis includes Ali Larijani, the parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, the Tehran mayor, and Mohsen Rezai, one of the defeated presidential candidates and the secretary of the expediency council, which mediates disputes between the clerical and lay state institutions. They would be supported by the opposition's most powerful backer behind the scenes, former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, head of the expediency council and the assembly of experts.
  
  The Iranian source also claimed there were splits in another pillar of the Islamic Republic, the Revolutionary Guard. The overall commander, General Ali Jafari, and the Tehran province commander, General Ali Fazli, were opposed to Mojtaba's power grab.
  
  He said the hardline statements issued in the Revolutionary Guard's name, threatening a "decisive confrontation" with protesters, were the work of the political and public relations departments, which are under the direct control of Ahmadinejad, and did not represent a united position. That is a controversial claim. Most analyses have presented the Revolutionary Guard as monolithic and entirely behind the regime.
  
  For revolutionary stalwarts uneasy over the direction of the regime, open rebellion was unthinkable, the politician said. "For them, the red line is the stability of the country," he said. "They will continue softly."
  
  He said this hidden internecine struggle would last a considerable period and the outcome was far from clear. The only certainty was that the Khameneis and Ahmadinejad had not yet won. "They control things on the surface," he said. "But Iranians are not sheep

  • Tags:
  • DEATH TO TERRORIST M
  No Comments

• < Previous Episodes