A couple of days ago I posted a Fox News interview of Iranian human rights activist Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi, who gave an intelligent and informed report on Mousavi. She indicated that he had seemed to have had a change of heart since his days as part of the Khomeini regime.
One certainly hopes so because today it has come out that he played a leading role in the 1983 attack in Lebanon that killed more than 240 US Marines.
He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran’s ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.
The ambassador in turn hosted several meetings of the cell that would carry out the Beirut attacks, which were overheard by the National Security Agency.
Ed Morrissey notes:
Mousavi and his allies, perhaps cognizant that this history would surface eventually, tried applying a little proactive balm on his reputation earlier this week. In a Guardian article defending himself against criticisms that there were few differences between himself and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mousavi’s spokesman Mohsen Makhmalbaf said that Mousavi previously “knew only Che Guevara,” but now “he knows Gandhi.” It does confirm that the government of Iran has waged war by proxy against the United States as well as Israel for three decades, and that Mousavi participated in that war.
That is consistent with what Bonazzi told Fox News.
Of course it remains to be seen how he would rule, but anything would be an improvement over the current fanatic, (but not loon) Ahmadinejad.
See The Jawas for Ahmadinejad and clerics caught on tape conspiring to eliminate Iranian democracy immediately after the election. And be sure to take note of their translator’s unsettling commentary of what transpired on the tape.
There is nothing “unhinged” about Ahamadinejad’s thinking, statements and actions. They are internally consistent. He is simply a fanatic who is wedded to an extremely dangerous exclusionary system of belief. Humanity must learn that dismissing a fanatic as lunatic or unhinged rather than squarely facing the likes of Ahmadinejad and Hitler will result in great suffering. And in the age of Weapons of Mass Destruction a man with huge sums of petrodollar can indeed serve as the catalyst of total annihilation. It is by far more prudent to err on the side of being an alarmist than a complacent dismissive. Humanity cannot afford to ignore the emergence of the final thereat to its very existence on this planet.