As alleged by a couple of former hostages today on GOOD MORNING
AMERICA, <www.abc.com>.
My comment:
It's also what briefly & vaguely came to my mind when I saw the face on
tv winning the election between two who were allowed to run by the
religious authority.
There was an article in the WALL STREET JOURNAL, written by a
London-based son/grandson of an eminent mullah, urging
non-cooperation/non-participation in the (allegedly) contrived contest.
It's been 25 years since Jimmy Carter's encouragement about the Shah
oughta exile himself from Iran went so subsequently ugly, but such a
grating tv image obviously stayed in my conscious (or "unconscious")
until the memory cell kicked-in last week.
And how is such relevant to "philosophy?"
Good question.
The hard-nosed winner is allegedly an honest populist type, while the
flexible but losong rival
has a reputation as an alleged cynical grafter.
I suppose that the usual suspect deities wouldn't have reality any
other way.
.
|
