The Clerics Lash Back as Iranians question their legitimacy

DEFENSE & FOREIGN AFFAIRS STRATEGIC POLICY 3, 2004 | 2004 | DEFENSE & FOREIGN AFFAIRS STRATEGIC POLICY 3, 2004

[RaceBannon]

Interesting information on the history of Iran recently, and just who Khomeini is!

[RaceBannon]

major bump

[expatpat]

Wow! Not a drop of Iranian blood -- who'd have thunk it!

[RaceBannon]

I find it very interesting!!

The guy who lead the takeover of our embassy isnt even Iranian at all!!

[Shermy]

Um, is this disinfo?

If so, it's creative!

[Valin]

Bump.

[RaceBannon]

big bump for something you might have missed

[Dubya]

bump

[McGavin999]

Absolutely facinating. This would explain a lot, especially when you look at the views of Al Sistani who believes that clerics should never rule because power will corrupt the cleric.

[RaceBannon]

bump for alan

[RaceBannon]

alan bump

[Fiddlstix]

Bump
To read later

[RaceBannon]

bump

[RaceBannon]

bump

[shield]

bump....

[CharlesThe Hammer]

This is an excellent piece and also very informative. It points out what I believe to be a major sticking point for Muslims and that is the intense regional rivalries and factions that resist persistent Arab attempts to dominate the religion. Because the Quran is in Arabic, and the Prophet was Arab, and the Hajj requires a pilgrimage to the Arabian peninsula, they have an inside track on hegemony. This has not prevented substantial sectarian factions such as the Seljuks and Safavid Shi'a from contesting Mecca's supremacy. The whole saga of "Haji" Williamson and his rebellious son, the "fake" Ayatollah, is worthy of an epic film. It sweeps across central Asia into Mogul India, evokes "the Great Game", and includes WWI, the fall of the Ottomans, Islam's flirtation with Fascism, the Shah, Big Oil and a disfunctional family of Dickensian proportion. "Lawrence of Arabia" is but a chapter of this tale. Thanks for the post; it fires the imagination.

[F14 Pilot]

Freedom For Iranians Now

[Dustbunny]

This needs a major BUMP.

[FITZ]

Bump to that!

[AdmSmith]

Did Khomeini Kidnap Musa Al-Sadr in order to take over Iran?

This thread is from 2003:
Grand Ayatollah Mussa Sadr disappeared some 25-years ago, during a visit to Libya.

The Iranian born leader of the Lebanese Shia was revered and respected above all others in the Shia world. He refused to accept Ruhollah Khomeini as an ayatollah and with the influence Mussa Sadr enjoyed, he became an insurmountable obstacle to Khomeini’s political plans, and of those who supported the overthrow of the Shah and needed a despot like Khomeini to be their cat’s paw.

Grand Ayatollah Sadr’s mysterious disappearance in Libya – his body was never found – opened the way for Khomeini to “invade” Iran

According to the German version of the Wikipedia article that is quoting Andrew S. Cooper: The Fall of Heaven. Henry Holt, New York https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_as-Sadr “Palestinian sources claimed that Gaddafi had called Ayatollah Mohammed Beheshti to ask what he should do with “his guest”. Beheshti said that Sadr is a threat to Khomeini. Then Sadr and his two companions were shot and buried in the desert.”
and suggest that the idea was to use Sadr against Khomeini.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Beheshti was one of the founders of the Iranian Regime.

In February 2018 an interesting article was published:
Did Khomeini Kidnap Moussa Al-Sadr?

Last month, a former Iranian parliamentarian made a statement that brought back all the mystery surrounding Moussa Al-Sadr disappearance in 1978, one year before Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution in Iran. Jalal Eddine Al Faresi said that Al-Sadr deserved to be killed because “he called the Christians to pray in mosques, and that’s why he deserved to die,” he stated, adding that Iran “decided that Al-Sadr is worthless and that his killing will have no value. He was then killed by Gadhafi.”

This statement, although not surprising to many in Lebanon, caused serious outrage in both Lebanon and Iran, and led his nephew to call for an appropriate response by the Iranian general prosecutor. This statement was the most significant Iranian statement since Sadr disappeared, considering that it came from someone who was very close to Khomeini. In addition, it opened the door to the most challenging question: Was Khomeini involved in the Sadr disappearance or killing?

Iran might have got rid of Moussa Al-Sadr via Ghaddafi, and this might have helped them build their state in Lebanon via Hezbollah, but that doesn’t mean that Al-Sadr legacy has died with him. If anything, it is growing today in internal Shia debates and concerns.

However, exposing Iran’s involvement in Al-Sadr’s disappearance is a must. Because his legacy and message are still alive in Lebanon, Iran’s involvement would put Hezbollah in a very difficult position, mainly with its ally Amal movement and its leadership. Hezbollah cannot afford to lose more popular support, as the wars in the region still unfold. If people started pointing their fingers at Khomeini and Iran for killing Al-Sadr, many bonds will break, and the Shia in Lebanon will probably start remembering who they were before Hezbollah took over their collective memory. Jalal Eddine Al-Faresi made a mistake, and there is no going back. The challenge is how to take advantage of his mistake.
http://eng.majalla.com/2018/02/article55255520/khomeini-kidnap-moussa-al-sadr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqtada_al-Sadr is a cousin of Musa and the last few years he has become negative about the Iranians.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/20/iraqs-al-sadr-promising-reform-is-constrained-by-iran.html
Perhaps the reason is that he may know something about Musa al-Sadr?