Delusions of candor: IRGC political bureau chief sees Satanists among the Greens

The following article is written by a Twitter blogger who goes by Homy Lafayette (http:/.twitter.com/homylafayette). Link to HomyLayette’s Blogspot: http://homylafayette.blogspot.com/.

Delusions of candor: IRGC political bureau chief sees Satanists among the Greens

‘Delusions of candor’ is an ongoing series on the regime’s efforts to spin the news, create disinformation, and spread propaganda.

A publication of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) contended in its latest edition that the Green movement is being controlled by foreign powers and that its supporters are not only rabble-rousing anti-revolutionaries, but also worshipers of Satan. Literally.

Brigadier General Yadollah Javani made the outlandish claim in a front-page editorial in Sobheh Sadegh (True Morning), a weekly news publication of the political bureau of the IRGC. Javani heads the political bureau, a subdivision of Leader Ali Khamenei’s representative staff within the Revolutionary Guards.

Though not in the first tier of the Islamic regime’s power structure, Javani is considered close to the inner circle of IRGC officers and clerics around Khamenei and the views he expresses give an indication of the predominant ideology and tactics within that circle.

He has been a strong proponent of efforts to paint the opposition as an instrument of foreign powers seeking the ‘soft overthrow’ of the regime.

On August 16, he spoke to the Islamic Republic News Agency about Hedayat Aghaie, a jailed senior member of the Executives of Construction Party (Kargozaraneh Sazandegi) which is close to Expediency Council chief and Ahmadinejad rival Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. ‘In his confessions, Hedayat Aghaie […] said that they had conducted polls in the subway, but that when they had submitted the reports to Mir Hossein Mousavi, they had said that the figures reflected the whole country,’ Javani told IRNA. ‘[Aghaie] also confessed that their strategy was to gain power at any cost.’ Javani apparently did not consider it unusual that the IRGC political bureau boss had access to the interrogation reports emanating from the regime’s jails. Aghaie was sentenced to five years in prison in late October, according to his lawyer Alireza Jafarian.

Also in August, a busy month for the indefatigable Javani, he called for the prosecution of opposition leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, the head of the Etemad Melli Party, and former President Mohammad Khatami.

The following in a translation of Javani’s editorial in the Monday, November 9, 2009 issue of Sobheh Sadegh:

Who is pulling the Greens’ strings?

In the name of God, most gracious, most meciful.

The Greens, whatever term is used to describe them, are a part of the reality of Iran’s political landscape. This group, with green as its symbol, found its identity in the campaign rallies of Mir Hossein Mousavi. They showed their support for Mousavi by using in different ways the green color of the scarf he wore over his shoulder because his mother was a descendant of the Prophet Mohammad. Today some people insist on employing this color. Now the question is, Who is pulling these Greens’ strings? (NB The regime has become extremely sensitive about the opposition’s use of the color green, which is associated with Islam. Steps are being taken to create a counter-group, favorable to the regime, called the Sabzhayeh Alavi or greens who support Imam Ali, one of the most beloved figures in Shiism.)

Who is truly guiding the green movement now? Which person or individuals are leading this movement? Is the leadership of this movement in the hands of Mir Hossein Mousavi and is he managing the Greens? Are Seyed Mohammad Khatami or Mehdi Karroubi playing a role in the leadership of this group? Instead of individuals, are parties and groups such as the Mojahedin Organization (NB Javani uses a shortened version of the reformist Organization of the Mojahedin of the Islamic Revolution, making the name resemble that of the Mojahedin Khalgh Organization, a broadly despised armed group which collaborated with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War.), the [Islamic Iran] Participation Front or other 2nd of Khordad groups leading the Greens? (NB The 2nd of Khordad is the date of the election of reformist President Khatami.)

This writer believes that the group which appeared under the color green in just a few streets on days such as Ghods Day and November 4, and acted in a different way from the masses of millions of people, is not controlled by Mousavi or like-minded individuals, but rather by foreign enemies. (NB The regime was particularly shaken by the opposition’s exploitation of official events, such as Ghods Day — in support of Palestinians and against Israel — and November 4 — the anniversary of the seizure of the US embassy — which embody the ideological pillars of the Islamic Republic, to launch counter-demonstrations with counter-slogans. For more on Ghods Day, go here; November 4, go here; regime sensitivity to counter-slogans, go here)

There is no doubt that this movement was created by Mir Hossein Mousavi and his campaign staffs and his supporters. Mousavi appeared among the crowds of his supporters again and again and spoke of the green wave, and after the election called the Greens to the streets, thus paved the way for pockets of rebellion and unrest and public insecurity. It was Mir Hossein Mousavi who, by issuing a statement, founded the Green Path of Hope. On the surface, it looks like Mir Hossein Mousavi is leading this group, but the truth is that not only does Mir Hossein [sic. Javani forgets his manners from this point on.] not control this group, but that he and this movement are being controlled by foreigners.

It is not difficult to prove this point. Mir Hossein claims that he is faithful to the constitution, the Islamic Revolution, the Islamic Republic, and the goals of Imam Khomeini. Does the behavior of this small and seditious green-clad group in the events after the tenth presidential election, particularly on Ghods Day and November 4, correspond to Mir Hossein Mousavi’s claims? If it does not correspond to them, why does Mir Hossein Mousavi not repudiate these actions and chide his supporters? Let us look at examples of such behavior.

1. One of the slogans of the green-clad groupuscule on Ghods Day was ‘Neither eastern, nor western, an Iranian Republic’ instead of ‘Neither eastern, nor western, an Islamic Republic.’ If Mir Hossein claims that he is advancing the ideas of the Imam, why is he silent in the face of this deviation of his supporters? Why does he not issue a statement warning his supporters against this deviation? Did the late Imam, after reflecting on the term to be used to describe the political system of Iran, not say, ‘An Islamic Republic, not one word less, not one word more?’ Does an Iranian Republic represent anything less than the elimination of Islam from the political scene?

2. ‘Neither Gaza, nor Lebanon, my life only for Iran’ was the Greens’ famous slogan on Ghods Day. What is the position of Mousavi, who claims to follow the Imam’s Line, on this slogan? The Imam declared Ghods Day (NB Jerusalem Day) to be the day of Islam and by setting the strategy for the elimination of Israel from the pages of time, he defined Jerusalem and the Palestinian problem to be the most important issues for Muslims. If Mir Hossein is true to the goals of the Imam and he leads the Greens, why did he not condemn this deviant slogan on Ghods Day?

3. Consuming during the Ramadan fast, disregarding Islamic propriety, mixing boys and girls in the worst possible manner, and attacking Friday worshipers with stones were among the actions taken by the Greens on Ghods Day. (NB State media published photos of Ghods Day protesters smoking, which is banned during fasting hours in Ramadan. The news reports failed to mention that the protesters were blowing cigarette smoke into each other’s eyes to counter the effects of tear gas.) Does Mir Hossein condone such behavior? If not, why doesn’t Mir Hossein chide his supporters and condemn such actions?

4. On the national day of struggle against world arrogance (NB World Arrogance generally refers to the United States.) and the day of ‘Death to America’, meaning November 4, the Greens chanted ‘Death to Russia.’ What is Mir Hossein’s position on this slogan of his supporters? In which backroom was this slogan devised? Has Mir Hossein forgotten these words of the Imam: ‘Some chant death to Russia to make us forget America.’ If Mir Hossein does not agree with such slogans and considers them to be a deviation from the path of struggle against world arrogance, why doesn’t he admonish his supporters?

5. From the first days after the election, Mir Hossein’s green supporters were rioting, attacking banks, burning buses, attacking Basij bases, burning Lolagar Mosque, and damaging people’s property.

(NB Many videos show it was actually Basijis and security forces who damaged property. Just one example follows.)

They continued their ugly acts on Ghods Day and November 4, by burning garbage cans in the streets. Does Mir Hossein, who claims to be working within a legal framework, agree with such acts? If he doesn’t agree, does he strongly condemn them?

6. On November 4, some of Mousavi’s supporters, sporting green signs and chanting ‘Ya Hossein, Mir Hossein,’ attacked Majlis representative Marandi’s car with knives and machetes and damaged the automobile. What is Mir Hossein’s position on these actions of his supporters? Why doesn’t he call on his supporters to put aside such actions? (NB Javani would have us believe that on a day with a record number of security forces on the streets cracking down on protesters with such violence that even conservative web sites have voiced complaints, bands of machete-armed protesters with green wristbands were at large.)

7. Mir Hossein Mousavi considers the color green the symbol of the people and their ideals. Does Mir Hossein know that some green-clad young women and men who attended campaign rallies and ceremonies on Ghods day and November 4, wore symbols of deviant groups, including Satan worshipers? If he does know, how does he justify the combination of green and Satanist symbols? If this cannot be justified, why doesn’t he warn his supporters against it? Aren’t these Greens supporters of Mir Hossein?

There are many examples like these. And if Mir Hossein or others like Khatami, Karroubi, or parties such as the Participation Front and the Mojahedin do not react to such actions and do not warn the Greens against such actions and slogans, it is because they know that these Greens are being controlled by others. They know that slogans like ‘Ya Hossein, Mir Hossein’ and ‘Karroubi, Karroubi, we will defend you!’ are only tools which exploit their names to oppose the religious regime.

Mir Hossein knows that the Greens will disregard any admonishment or warning he issues and then it will be even clearer that the Greens and Mir Hossein are both playing in a field designed by foreigners. Mir Hossein spoke of green wisdom and founded the Green Path of Hope, but now this green movement is going in a direction which is warming the hearts of all anti-revolutionary groups.

An example of the hope that the Greens have instilled among exiled anti-revolutionaries can be heard in the words of Reza Pahlavi, the dead Shah’s son. In an article he wrote in an American newspaper, Reza Pahlavi wrote about his meeting with 40 members of Congress and said, ‘I told the members of Congress that if America wants to engage Iran, it must choose the best interlocutor in Iran, and in my opinion the best option is the green movement.’ From America, Reza Pahlavi wants to garner support for the green movement. Does Mir Hossein accept that in Reza Pahlavi’s opinion, he is the best option for advancing the goals and interests of America in Iran. If he doesn’t accept this, he should know and accept that the strings of the green movement that he set in motion are being pulled by others now. This is the very point that the wise Leader of the Revolution [Ali Khamenei] raised: ‘On the day after the election, I sent a message to the gentlemen, that you might start a movement, but others will continue it.’