One that gets me:
That PM Mossadegh, the democratically-elected leader of Iran, was 'couped' in 1953 by the American CIA. It seems to have popped out of the skeevy CIA ops that WERE existing, but then become mythologized into this thing by Ron Paul and company, and all the nuance and historical events get completely lost in a narrative of 'see how bad the thing America did was!'
Mossadegh was elected. That much is true. He then overstepped his authority in a variety of ways, started ruling by fiat, cancelled elections once enough votes had been counted to secure him a parliament that would grant him an okay for fiat-rule, then just completely dissolved the Iranian parliament when even the cabal of his supporters allowed to sit there started to take issue with his decisions and rule. Then the actual operations designed by the US (and the UK--they had a big part in things as well that oft gets glossed-over) to overthrow the guy FAILED, a bunch of conspirators got arrested or chased out of the country...And then a separate, and much more popular revolution sprung up in reaction to a communist 'victory party' in Tehran that, at most, saw tertiary funding coming from some of the sources the CIA had stoked for the first attempt at ousting Mossadegh--and, ironically, had the clerics and religious extremists backing in support of the Shah.
It's just...Such a more complicated picture than is usually portrayed. And the point it's used to demonstrate would be SO much better-served by the CIA activities in South American countries (Guatemala as a big one) which the Iranian operations 'success' inspired.