Now, all of a sudden, Mrs. Mousavi becomes a national political figure. Other women have emerged from time to time to play public roles in political melodramas, but nothing like this has happened in the history of the Islamic Republic. The very fact of her political role is explosive. In many ways, it threatens the foundations of the system, for if women are granted equality with men (and this is one very clear message of the Mousavi campaign, it is demonstrated by her presence, by the words she uses, and by the enthusiasm she has inspired), the whole structure of the Khomeinist regime can be called into doubt.
Everybody in Iran recognizes this. The mystery is why she has been permitted to do it. To put the matter bluntly, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei could have put a stop to it at the very outset of the campaign, but did not. Why? Does he secretly support a serious challenge to the Islamic Republic? Is this some diabolical trick, to once again lure the dissidents into the streets so that they can be crushed yet again by a crafty, murderous regime?
Many months ago I was told that Khamenei was gravely concerned about the future of the regime, that he had concluded that there was so much hatred by so many people that it was impossible to continue to govern by repression, and that Ahmadinezhad’s aggressive domestic and foreign policy threatened everything that had been constructed over the course of the past thirty years. The people telling me these things were friends of Mousavi, and they accurately predicted that Mousavi was going to run, and that he would have surprising public support, something I would not have expected. They also said that Khamenei had encouraged Mousavi to run, precisely because he, the Supreme Leader, was prepared to grant greater freedom to the Iranian people and to normalize relations with the West.
It sounded unlikely to me, but then Khamenei is gravely ill and reportedly uses large quantities of opium to ease the pain of an incurable cancer. Under such circumstances, surprising behavior becomes rather more conceivable than it would under “normal” circumstances (I put “normal” in quotation marks because there is very little about the Islamic Republic that any of us would consider normal). Thus far, Khamenei has not endorsed a candidate, and time is short (the elections are on Friday). He has limited himself to saying that candidates should mind their manners, that everyone should vote, and that they should vote for the candidate they think best embodies Islamic virtues.
One possible indicator that Khamenei favors Mousavi is the absence of the security forces in the streets of Tehran. Normally, demonstrators chanting “Death to the regime of lies” would be clubbed and beaten on the spot. That is not happening these days.
On the other hand, it is hard to imagine that the regime will simply step back and let Mrs. Mousavi transform it into a tolerant country with friendly relations with us and the rest of the Western world. There are powerful forces–the hoodlums known as the Basij, and significant chunks of the Revolutionary Guards–whose religious fervor is genuine, and who are undoubtedly prepared to fight for its survival, no matter how many people demonstrate in the cities. And they have a lot going for them, not least of all the control of ballot boxes. As Mehdi Khalaji has helpfully detailed, it is very easy to cheat in Iranian “elections,” and the hard-liners (Ahmadinezhad’s supporters, for the most part, although some of them are working on behalf of Rezai, the former commander of the Guards) are very much in control of the mechanics of voting and vote counting. Khalaji carefully tells us that “Iran’s election procedures leave ample opportunity for massive voter fraud.”
Is it all some kind of trick? This “explanation” is favored by those who think the mullahs are so cunning, and so much in control of things, that whatever happens is to be explained by the desires and schemes of the beturbaned rulers (never mind that a lot of mullahs, and many ayatollahs, are openly opposed to Ahmadinezhad). The trouble with the explanation is that it explains too much. Indeed, it “explains” everything, and is akin to another “explanation” much favored by Iranians, both in the country and in the diaspora, namely that the CIA (aided sometimes by the Queen of England in this view of the world) makes everything happen. It totally rejects the notion that the mullahs have simply made a mistake, or don’t really know what they’re doing after all.
Yet the mullahs make countless mistakes. They were defeated by the United States and its allies in Iraq. They have just been humiliated by the Lebanese people in an election most smart people thought Hezbollah was going to win. And somehow they seem not to have developed an atomic bomb just yet, after a good twenty years of trying, and despite the best efforts of friends in Pakistan, Russia, Georgia, China, North Korea and even Germany. And they’ve wrecked the national economy, despite a tsunami of petrodollars. That’s quite an impressive record of incompetence.
The Iranian people have suffered from the effects of that incompetence, and they want an end to it. And this explains, I think, why Mousavi–who has been totally out of power for two decades–is the most attractive of the four candidates running for the presidency. I do not think Ahmadinezhad can win this thing, nor does Mehdi Karrubi, a constant fixture of the regime from the get-go. Mousavi is clearly the favorite, but if you’re looking for a dark horse, bet on Mohsen Rezai, from the Revolutionary Guards. If there’s a runoff, he might patch together a coalition to block Mousavi.
There is a further question, on which the future of Iran may well hinge: what will happen after the elections? The hatred for the regime has returned to the streets, in significant numbers, and the defenders of the regime are numerous and well armed. Is either side prepared to accept the verdict of an election that will be widely viewed as corrupt? Will those who today chant “Death to the dictator” quietly go home if Mousavi is “defeated”? On the other hand, will those who have invested their lives and their religious convictions in hatred of the West, quietly go home if Mousavi is “elected”? Or is Iran headed for open internal conflict, whoever “wins”? And in that case, what should the West do?
I think there’s a good chance of violence, starting Friday night. I don’t think either side is likely to take defeat gracefully. At that point, those security forces who have been so notably absent in recent days will almost certainly reappear, and attempt to reimpose “order” of the sort the demonstrations have been aimed against. The security forces have the guns, the chains, and the torture cells on their side. In a showdown in the streets, the anti-regime forces have only numbers. But that might be enough. Gorbachev had the KGB on his side, lest we forget. And yet, Soviet Communism ended feebly.
Iran has a revolutionary tradition (three, perhaps four revolutions in the twentieth century), and the country is certainly in a revolutionary condition. It is always surprising when a revolution occurs, but it would be less surprising in today’s Iran. I think that a successful non-violent revolution was all ready to go in 2003, when the Bush Administration, in the person of Secretary of State Powell, told the Iranians we would do nothing to help them. The air went out of the balloon.
But things are different now. The Iranians do not expect any help from the outside world. Bush did not help them, to his shame, and nobody thinks Obama would lift a finger for Iranian dissidents. They’re on their own, just as the Lebanese voters were a few days ago. I think many Lebanese decided that they’d better take a stand against Hezbollah before all hope for freedom was lost. Many Iranians may well reason the same way.
If violence breaks out, what will the West do? Probably nothing, except express concern, and call for sweet reasonableness. Good luck with that! What should the West do? Support freedom in Iran. Nothing would so transform the region as a free government, dedicated to good relations with the West. Such a government would end the profligate spending on terrorism and devote the country’s resources to domestic concerns. Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Taliban, and the other jihadis, would be dramatically weakened. Syria’s Bashar Assad would suddenly find himself without his big brother in Tehran. If you want to dream of peace in the Middle East, a free Iran is at the heart of your Utopia.
Finally, for those who unaccountably continue to believe that the most important thing in the Middle East is the Arab-Israeli conflict, the best chance is once again a free Iran that worries about Iranians instead of Palestinians. There is no chance of peace so long as Tehran runs the terror movements. But if the terrorists have to raise their own money, find their own weapons, and train their own killers, things might get a lot easier.
Of course, life is full of surprises. Khamenei might endorse the sitting president, Ahmadinezhad might yet be “reelected,” and he might put down the protests quickly and efficiently. But I doubt it.
Ledeen’s guarded optimism has merit but I don’t believe that the notion that all candidates are connected to the regime is out of the question. Given that Rahnavard is Mousavi’s wife one is entitled to be suspicious. Khatami, indeed, was a stalking horse for the regime in the late 1990s and he, in fact, was the head of terror operations in the 80s when he was minister of cultural guidance ( see my article in Midstream April 1999 The New Russia and Iranian Moderates). Rafsanjani over the years has played both the extremist and the moderate in the internal dramas of Iranian politics as broadcast to the West. Also, one wonders what role the KGB is playing in Iran at the moment. Under Primakov hundreds of agents were sent to Iran and the KGB itself played a role in the Iranian revolution. As to the Gorbachev example, I think Ledeen is mistaken in saying Soviet Communism ended feebly. All that happened was the Soviet elite, with KGB in charge, transferred authority from the Party to a multiparty system represented by a variety of open communist and formerly communist leaders. There were name changes and some liberalization but Yeltsin carried out most of Soviet Russia’s foreign connections with clients such as Iran, continued to build new nuclear missiles and once his liberal appearance had brought Russia into the G-7 and other western economic institutions, Yeltsin resigned, appointed Putin and now we are back to the Cold War in essence. I hope Michael is correct for surely the benefits he lists would emerge if Iran takes a new turn but it would be quite surprising. By the way, what is happening with the labor unionists at this time, the heart and soul of the Iranian dissident movement?
It seems as if a firm push would topple this house of cards, yet the president and this administration welcomes and gives diplomatic credance to the Islamic Republic of Iran. I don’t get it.
Michael,I hear President Obama had sent somebody to Iran for Roxanna’s freedom, promising the release of Iranians held in Iraq and also that great things to come if Ahmadinejad is gone. The reason is that the West and Israel have mistakenly focused on Ahmadinejad as the main evil and if he is gone, again mistakenly West would sell the idea that Iran has changed and Israel will no longer be able to claim threat from the new administration in Iran. As for the people of Iran, they are using the opportunity to vent their anger against the regime which they hate so much and if Mousavi is not elected, it will provide them an opportunity for likely clashes against the regime. The question is would the mullahs choose to show a different face to buy more time and have the world fooled one more time and give the Israelis more heartburn where they can no longer think about attacking Iran, at least in the near future, or would the mullahs keep Ahmadinejad in place and play tough knowing Obama’s weakness. One thing is for certain and that is the regime will be the same as has been for the past thirty years regardless of this election and the best policy would be to support the aspiration of the Iranian people in ridding themselves from the cancerous tumor “mullahs” forever.
One thing comes to mind, Michael. Why not a coalition of Jews and Christians to allow Jews
and Christians, with full rights as Muslims
to live in the area around the tomb of Daniel the Prophet.
Not just within 200 metres of the tomb, but within the immediate vicinity.
I think it is reasonable to presume that this is a project to “liberalize” the image of the regime in order to neutralize or greatly reduce the islamist-revolutionary public image of the regime. Ahmadinejad’s work is done; he has now become a liability. His “liberal” successor will underwrite Obama & the West’s decision to countenance the “nuclear energy” development. Anyone who challenges this project will become an aggressor and condemned accordingly. Meanwhile, as under the previous “liberalizers,” the nuclear work will go on.
Possible strategy. A woman allowed to lead the charge? In Iran? With no response from the clergy – that is, with their tacit assent? Doesn’t this seem a little too conveniently consistent with the basic demands of the West – more democracy and women’s rights? And in the context of elections – not as the result of some signal event within Iran – say, the stoning of an adultress? It all seems a little too convenient. Such a thing as this woman’s speeches and the students’ reactions could actualy be the demonstration of the strength of a regime that believes itself sufficiently in control of its basic requirements that it can “allow” such a phenomenon and use it to provide substantial cover for its true ambitions: nuclear armament.
Could also be genuine revolt in Iran as Mr. Ledeen graciously hopes, but personally – given the “allowance” for Mrs. Mouzai or whoever – it seems more like an elaborate show to me. I hope that I am wrong.
Well this is good news. But by “supporting freedom in Iran,” what do you mean? I know what you mean, usually: support regime change, support the fall of the mullahs. But now you’re saying Mousavi might win, and he and his wife might be the real deal. So if they won, and if an opium-induced Khamanei is for them, would supporting freedom in Iran then mean reaching out for Mousavi in a Gorbachev manner?
Or would we still in “Let’s find the Walesas and support them” mode?
I think there might be some truth to both of your scenarios, and the mullahs are hedging their bets. It’s almost as if Mousavi’s own personality is meaningless, because should he win or lose, the mullahs will respond accordingly. If he loses, they’ll go after the dissidents, as you noted. And if he wins, they might strong-arm him the way they did Khatami. And they might use Mousavi to “fool” the world into thinking Iran’s turned a corner.
Is it possible that Khamenei might be willing to make that “deal” everyone’s been (wrongly) saying Iran was willing to make in 2003, whereby Iran promises to “be good” in Iraq (too late for that) and Lebanon (see Iraq), and maybe even ease up a little bit on the brutality, if only we turn a blind eye to their nuke program? And then, presto, 2010, 2011, 2012 comes along, they finally get the bomb, and they go back to their old ways?
Dr Ledeen, your description of what Khatami was(and is) is accurate, an ‘empty vessel’ indeed. But I cannot support your conclusion that Moussavi is “different”.
Khatami was(and is) a European elite agent, he and Ay. Beheshti(who was blown up in a bombing some 25 years ago)both studied(read: were indoctrinated) in Hamburg Islamic Institute in Germany. These are mullah microbes cultivated in elitist and pro-Islamist European laboratories pietry dishes.
And they were injected into Iranian peoples’ veins in 1979.
Moussavi is not different at all. Except that he also belongs to the Russians(Tudeh Party ally when he was PM as history testifies) in addition to being a British elite(read Ayatollah Jack Straw and company) operative. His wife is a pig painted as a parrot to be shoved down peoples’ throats when they aspire freedom. She is also a hollow drum, as Hajieh Shirin Ebadi(half bahai half ? anglo-saxon operative) is.
These “Doctors” and characters like Ebadi and Rahnavard are created in mullah intelligence service ‘intellectual factory’ to deceive the masses and divert revolution back within the system itself. I am surprised you do not mention this very important fact.
Moussavi and his wife are the latest ploy by a regime that sees itself dying of a cancer so to add a few more days to its nasty life. Nothing more.
To think that Moussavi and his phony wife are ‘different’ is a delusion at best, and deception at worst…
The only way freedom and secular democracy will return to Iran(I say ‘return’ since Iran had a budding secular democracy in early 50s under Dr. Mossadegh’s PM-ship), is by a genuine mass revolt against the “whole” of the regime, so-called reformist included.
In fact the ‘reformists’ should be the first ones tried for treason since they knowingly fooled people and diverted their revolutionary passion to the toilet bowl, and the end result being that the regime survives albeit with a new(old?) make up.
Is this what you want?
Look, this regime cannot produce democracy from within itself –its core is rotting and as such whatever this dying and ill animal spews out of its gut as “new and different” –Moussavi & wife included– are stinky corpses of 25 years ago recycled for mass consumption and deception.
The only way we can have a genuine revolt in Iran is for Ahmadinejad to be re-elected — Lenin believed in ‘intensification of antagonisms’ within a society to push it to the verge of true revolution fatser(faster please?!)– Nejad will deliver that just fine.
Moussavi & his phony wife will delay revolution, not advance it!
Dr. Ledeen, I sense a dizzying feeling in your post!!! You already feel lost and confused.
“There is a further question, on which the future of Iran may well hinge: what will happen after the elections?”
Based on what I’m hearing Mousavi will win with a big margin in the first round. It appears Iranians are voting NOT for Mousavi’s sake but for punishing Ahmadinejad to serving Israel’s interest and damaging Iran for the last 4 years. Iranians vote while still being sick and tired of this regime. They will fight until they have true democratic system in place, and now they are voting for someone less evil and damaging than Ahmadinejad.
P.S.
Lawrence Kohn, Reza Kahlili, Dan, and Nick G– I agree with both of you all.
Moussavi, a real Bassiji Falange,
See video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9UTF2lzXNQ&feature
Here’s an article about Mousavi’s wife. http://www.newsweek.com/id/201654
Consider all this as a broken clock which stays stuck at 8:05. When it is actually 12:00 noon it is obvious the clock is wrong or broken. If one continues to observe as time passes it becomes evident the clock is broken. Now you arrive at around 8:05 and observe the same clock. Those with prior experience already know the clock is broken but you have no clue because it shows the correct time. Most of us here already know the Iranian government is broken but new “guests” i.e. Obama believe it’s working. Ledeen’s reports are but a few ticks on a secondless clock and not enough evidence is there to lead us to believe the clock is working. We must wait and see if indeed the clock has suddenly begun to move on its own. I say the clock is broken and will be until they throw it out and get a new one.
excellent analysis as always!
Everytime the Iranian regime senses a gathering storm of rebellion, discontent and revoultion in the country–like now–it resorts to the oldest social control mechanism of all. The way that’s done is that the regime creates its own outlets for “revolution” conducted by its own elements to fool people into believing it’s for real. Invariably people do get fooled –like they did when Khatami was acting out the same scenario as Mousavi is now–and vote for the “reformist”. Khatami and now Mousavi are fake head reformists but in reality ‘safety valves’ for the regime’s pressure cooker.
As Ira Zad said, they divert the revolution back into the system itself to be absorbed, contained, and dissapated so it will not endnager the regime.
In this manner, this abominable, medieval, and barbaric regime has stopped at least 1 genuine revolution to topple the regime from happening just before Khatami came in. And it is doing it again now. The forces of revolution are fraudulently pulled into a “head fake” reform and revolution (ie Mousavi & black crow witch wife) to avert the real revolt that will certainly topple the whole regime; i.e., throw away the clock’, as harry alluded to above.
What’s really surprising here is the people in the west who claim to be experts on Iran regime and event also fall into the same trap that the regime has set for Iranians!
:)
Which goes to show that the mullahs are way more sophisticated than all of the western Iran ‘experts’ put together.
Oh, I forgot, this way(by getting Mousavi in), the regime will also disarm Israel so they can never attack Iran regime militarily–at least not anytime soon– and by the time Mousavi leaves office in 4 years, presto! the regime already has the bomb(s)!
Now go yell :Hooray” for the joint KGB/MI5 agent named Mousavi.
I think Amadinejad will be reappointed.
Of course, whomever is pres. will have to deal with the aftermath of Israel’s attack. That won’t be easy.
Based on my math, 80% of eligible 46 Million Iranian voters should participate in this Friday’s election for Mousavi to win by 51% . That is unlikely but not impossible. The same math shows me that Ahmadinejad has no chance of winning on the first round either.
Short of large attendance the election can extend to second round and if another miracle for Ahmadinejad doesn’t happen like it did 4 years ago (His votes jumped from 19% to 62% from 1st round to 2nd in 2005!) then Mousavi gaining most of Karoobi votes will win the elections.
As supporters of Mousavi have been accurately chanting, if there are no cheatings Mousavi will win this Friday or next!
Will large majority of eligible Iranian voters participate in election? Will there not be more major cheating?
Time will tell soon!
This is a glimpse of Mousavi’s foreign policy. Much more moderate that Ahmadinejad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlYK2bRv9bg
I just read an article by an Iranian reporter (Mitra Farahmand) living in Israel about how little Israeli people, its media and political figures know about Iran.
She also mentions that important Israeli leaders STILL are unable to pronounce Ahmadinejad name and only mention him as “nejad”!!!!!! She also mentions the same lack of in-depth understanding of Iran is among the top media outlets in Israel, where most of their news sources comes from Arabic language outlets like Aljazeera!!!!
Based on the same profile of uninformed news sources, it is said that most of 25000 Iranian Jews will possibly vote for Ahmadinejad, since they ALREADY know about his position!!!
In one instance she mentions that new Foreign Minister was also amazed as to how widespread Iranian youth use Internet!!!! And I mean he is the foreign minister!!!!
In one recent university conference about Iran in Israel one Israeli presenter stated the depth and scope of not knowing about Iran is so deep that we are better off not to cause more confusion for Israelis politicians!!!!!
And in the last part she mentions about a recent Iranian immigrant to Israel that she is confident as soon as Iran situation improves many Iranian Jews plan to go back for visit.
“Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Taliban, and the other jihadis, would be dramatically weakened”
I don’t argue about the others, but Taliban?! are you sure iran helped Taliban?
Alireza, I have some comments please.
1. I never heard any Israeli politician or pundit mention Ahmadinejad as nejud. That kind of makes the whole argument very suspicious. Are you sure about this?
2. The same about our foreighn ministers (Liberman’s) remark. Why would he be amazed and what does it matter how many Iranians use interner or not?
As to the issue, people generaly don’t understand each other in depth and so are nations. That shouldn’t prevent us from deducing logical conclusions about people and their motives and acting on them. For example if I’m (god forbid) about to be raped I’ll better do something about it and not try to understand the rapist inner state.
It is the Khomeini doctrines that inspire them which is lethal in Iran, not whoever is President. In a regime noted for its fight against the competing ideology of nationalism, they use nationalism to build wide support for their nuclear program.
Yes, one person can make a difference, but what candidate for President is strong enough to change the entire philosophy of the ‘learned jurisprudent’ which inspires Iranian governance?
Well, the news at the moment is standoff — both sides claim victory. That could set up a real bloodbath.
Ahmadinejad ahead by 68% of the “vote” at this moment according to both BBC and VOA–
So long anglo-saxon candidate Mousavi
Landslide by Ahmadinejad! –VOA
Now, sit back and enjoy the next 4-years–It’s gonan be a great show!
Well, now we know. The cote-counters and the rural voting sheep have swept Ass4ahead back into power. Proving the Iranian electorate is almost as stupid and gullible as the American one was last fall.
At this time Dr. Ledeen is laughing and he keeps laughing. He says: I told you so!!! You cannot trust IR. He is not writing right now because he wants to dump as much salt as he can on those who were hoping for some sign of light at the end of Iran tunnel.
This cannot stand. This is the most insulting, the most visible and clear dictatorship this regime could show. I wish so many others and I did not have the “fear”, so we ALL could walk the streets and bring this regime down. I wish “fear” of guns, torture was not part of human senses. I wish we did not know what pain and fear is, so we could rise and stand up to evil forces. It is all about fear and I admit I’m loaded with it. If it was not the fear, Iranians were all out on street.
I cannot imagine and vision this man to stay president of Iran and talk on behalf of Iranians. I don’t know what is going on in Iran right at this moment, but I wish the concept of fear could have stopped working just for 48 hours and that is all is needed to make things right and clear of these darkness worshippers.
Tell me when mullahs are being slaughtered in the streets, when they’re running for their lives ahead of mobs intent on ripping them limb from limb. Tell me about the judges who impose the will of the mu8llahs being surreptitiously killed while they’re homeward bound.
Tell me of the lives of those who support the regime ending violently.
I don’t care about the ritual street theater in Iran, or anywhere else throughout islam for that matter.
Street theater is cheap.
Slaughtering the evildoers, slaughtering tyrants, slaughtering those who are dragging them towards a nuclear exchange would be real evidence.
So every city in Iran is seeing unrest. That’s nothing new. If they wanted a new government, then I’d say that it’s long past time to start killing people, in addition to street theater.
The Iranians, willingly or unwillingly, are letting their government move forwards on a genocidal and annihlationist course, {notice I didn’t say “knowingly or unknowingly,” because there’s no doubt anymore about what direction that government is going}. Which means the Iranians are about in the same boat as the Germans circa 1930s. As the Germans let their government move forwards on a policy of global war, so today the Iranians are allowing their government move forwards on a course of untold horrors.
So forgive me if I don’t get all excited about lame street theater, which given Iran’s history over the last 20 years, will likely lead nowhere. The Iranians don’t need our help ripping that regime apart, and going after their tormentors with knives and their bare hands. Within 24 hours every “religious leader” throughout that country could either be dead or under the personal protection of Hezbollah operatives. They could make that regime exist like hunted animals if they wanted to, if they REALLY and TRULY wanted to join the West.
When the choice becomes islam or the West, what we’ve seen time and time again, is that muslims invariably choose islam.
I expect the same this time.
I don’t have any faith in a people who allowed themselves to be governed for decades by religious lunatics. Which means I don’t have any faith in Iranians.
Time’s up.
It’s time for hell to be unleashed on that regime, on their Manhattan Project, on their terror camps, on their intelligence headquarters. It’s time for Iran to be hit like they’ve never been hit before.
At the start of GW’s tenure, Ledeen’s policy proposals should have been acted on.
As late as 2003 there were still real chances for Ledeen’s policy proposals working, had they been given half a chance by our government.
But now? Too late.
They’re closing in on the bomb. We’ve less than a year to take that Manhattan project down and out.
We don’t have any time for sending in operatives and working to “destabilize” that regime. AND THAT’S ASSUMING our present-day CIA has any such capacity. After the years and years of political correctness, who here thinks that the CIA has the sophistication and the tradecraft to pull off such a thing?
I know I don’t. I’m pretty sure the CIA is a joke.
It’s time for for Professor Ledeen to stop whipping himself into a lather beating and whipping that dead horse into a canter. Street theater isn’t going to cut it.
It’s time for Iran to be thoroughly pounded, and made an example of.
Dan, you sound a little Jack Bauer-ish, and I like it. Hurrah! I really support and believe in the people’s desire for some sort of freedom in Iran. But history agrees with your statement: “When the choice becomes islam or the West, what we’ve seen time and time again, is that muslims invariably choose islam.” Its like an abused child who won’t run away from the abuser because the familiar, no matter how bad, is often perceived to be more comforting, more safe, than the unknown. The Iranian people need courage to go WAY beyond what you call “street theater” and make some real change that isn’t orchestrated by the mullahs. “Tell me when mullahs are being slaughtered in the streets, when they’re running for their lives ahead of mobs intent on ripping them limb from limb.”