• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Khirad On December - 2 - 2009

khamenei

Since the 13 Aban demonstrations nearly a month ago, the international nuclear debate has been ratcheted up, and the domestic scene of the Islamic Republic of Iran keeps lurching further into the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ blood-soaked hands. From Maziar Bahari’s article, written after his experiences of being arrested and interrogated in Evin Prison (for being on The Daily Show),

The Revolutionary Guards are a schizophrenic bunch, plagued by both deep insecurities and a superiority complex.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (henceforth referred to by its common Iranian appellation, Pasdaran) is ramping up its role in internal intelligence and security forces, including an internet unit to monitor the opposition online. Pasdaran Chief Mohammad Ali Jafari said, “Today is the era of soft warfare, and we must be able to carry out our duties in confronting soft threats. This requires organizational and structural changes, and the changes that have taken place in the past one and two years are in connection to this development.” This is all in conjunction with the diminution of the traditional Intelligence Ministry (VEVAK or MOIS), successor to SAVAK, and the alarming consolidation of power into its own ranks, a pattern begun when higher ranking individuals in VEVAK were moved and shielded from Majles investigations into the Serial Murders.

The Serial Murders were a decade ago. This is now. Ramin Pourandarjani was a doctor who had testified to a parliamentary hearing on his experiences while serving his postgraduate requirements as a physician at Kahrizak detention center in Tehran, the site of some of the most horrific rapes, tortures and deaths in the immediate aftermath of the post-election unrest. He was found dead on November 10th. Kahrizak had been shut down (temporarily) on orders of Khamene’i after it had become a total fiasco by August, but still Pourandarjani was arrested following his testimony and warned to keep quiet. There he had been witness to, among others, Mohsen Rouholamini, son of adviser to conservative pragmatist candidate Mohsen Reza’i, who officially died from a case of “meningitis” and not the repeated blows to the head witnessed in his testimony. In a similar response to Pourandarjani’s death, the government announced first that he had committed suicide, then apparently that he had succumbed to a heart attack — at the age of 26. Now I hear off the wires that it was a “delivery salad laced with an overdose of blood pressure medication.”

Once I would have called this sort of thing VEVAK, but the sloppiness of its rollout all bespeaks more the possibility of a transitioning IRGC counter-intelligence, or perhaps the opposite consideration, a VEVAK now partly out of the loop. That is pure conjecture from someone woefully unqualified to make such judgments though — call it me thinking out loud and fumbling for more info. Truth is, ham-handedness is one of the regime’s twistedly endearing qualities. The case of Ebrahim Mehtari, who was beaten, anally raped by a foreign object then dumped on the road in the night bound, did point the finger at Pasdars, though. He has just been reported as seeking asylum in America by Iranian state-run media Press TV as of December 1st. For more cases like this, see this page. Also of note, is the curious case of Ehsan Fattahian.

For those who say that putting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed up for Federal Trial in a civilian court in New York City is “dangerous”, then at least consider the message it would send to the world, Iran in particular, of America standing firm in our founding principles, and not fudging them when it isn’t convenient. Further political detainees from June are being charged with everything from six years in prison, like Omid Lavasani, unaffiliated web designer for MirHosein.com, to a member of the Mousavi campaign, Alireza Aushouri, sentenced to 76 lashes for charges of “propaganda against the regime by participating in June 15 demonstrations, conspiracy against national security and disturbing public order,” according to Kambiz Nowroozi.

On the Rafsanjani front, he has been conspicuously absent from Tehran’s Friday sermon (khutba), most remarkably missing the Eid Qurban (Eid al-Adha) ceremony, or Festival of Sacrifice. He has said this is due to four conditions laid out in his last sermon on July 17th. He called for immediate release of political prisoners, aid for those injured, redress for Grand Ayatollahs and clerics insulted, and differing viewpoints allowed in state media. Needless to say, none have happened. I still don’t trust him though. As Kenneth Pollack put it in The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America,

[I]t would be dangerous to ascribe altruistic motives to a man so famous for his corruption, his political expediency, and his own willingness to condone violence and repression.

Not a decade ago this is the same figure who was on the exact opposite end of the fence (or pulpit, rhetorically) regarding the student protests of that brutal crackdown. Has he found his true moderate self? Perhaps the the pragmatist, through the eyes of his grown children (whom are children of exceeding privilege, make no doubt) realizes the Islamic Republic cannot survive on this self-destructive course any longer, as reflected by him saying: “If we separate people from the system, this will damage it.” But he’s also long been believed to covet the position Supreme Leader for himself, and motivated by better relations with the West, thus greater business opportunities. With a master political strategist and pillar of the IRI ruling élite, it may be a combination of all of these things. He’s not called the shark (kouseh, also meaning ‘beardless’) for nothing. On the other hand, he seems to be trying to frame this absence as his own decision. During the June protests, his former-lawmaker daughter, Faezah, was briefly detained. Alireza Nourizadeh, of the Center for Arab-Iranian Studies in London contends, “They cannot wipe him out, but they are trying to quarantine him.” That he has no longer had his once-weekly meetings with Khamene’i since the initial unrest is another clue it may not have been entirely his decision to make.

Now, to pivot back to the third point of Rafsanjani’s demands. In light that only one Grand Ayatollah sent Ahmadinejad a congratulation letter, and recent squabbling between the clerical establishment and Khamene’i over the Eid-e Fetr date for the breaking of Ramadan (fasting is begun and broken at the sighting of new moons. What would seem to be straightforward is complicated by competing clerics and, in the case of Iran, its resentment with the Saudis for being the protectors of Islam’s holiest sites), the conservative Qom Seminary Scholars Association  is rumored to be preparing a list of new Grand Ayatollahs sympathetic to hard-liner ideology and even hinting at demoting others (a dubious move of questionable validity within the Ulama). Not only this, but 6,000 new Basiji centers are to be set up in elementary schools, to re-instill “Revolutionary” values back into the youth. Mohammad-Saleh Jokar, head of this effort, said, “Students of this age are more open to influence than older students, and for this reason we want to promote and establish the ideas of the revolution and the Basij.” I am reminded of Shah Mohammad Reza’s own favoring of politically sympathetic ayatollahs to the ire of others (like Khomeini), and the White Revolution, when he instituted a “religion corps” to compliment his mission to spread literacy to villages and to spread his new state-sanction brand of Shi’ism. In addition to reinvigorated elementary school indoctrination, there will be (yet another) review and possible purging of any professors left who aren’t entirely rote and whom are quite likely somewhat knowledgeable and qualified in their field, to be replaced with political appointees passing the purity test (and already part of the reason for so many young Iranians with higher education not being able to find employment). For more on what this may look like, refer to Azar Nafisi’s Reading Lolita in Tehran. Yes, this is all part of the Pasdaran’s new campaign, mentioned before, dubbed the “soft war”, where according to Brigadier General Muhammad Bagher-Zolghadr, “the enemy is everywhere” — you know, those sentient beings thinking for themselves and calling bullshit on your rigid, authoritarian and stifling vision of Islam; a skewed view of a mullahtocracy which is distributing free filtering software to citizens out of the kindness of their hearts to protect their impressionable minds from Western lies and decadence (I’m not kidding, I’m paraphrasing state-media propaganda which is that farcically funny).

Perhaps it is in this light that such a puerile act as the seizure of Human Right’s lawyer Shirin Ebadi’s Nobel Peace Prize medal (and Légion d’honneur) was taken from her bank’s safe deposit box. Iranian government spokesmen have denied the charge, but, the government’s line has also long been that it is a tool of the West supporting enemies of the Revolution. In any case, who are you more likely to believe? It would also seem a warning, along with assault on her husband, Javad Tavassolian, freezing his pension and bank account, and other threats to the rest of her family. A TIME article echoes my suspicions to their motives on this:

By censoring newspapers that once carried her articles, blocking news websites that reported on her work and creating a climate of intimidation in which Ebadi would scarcely risk making a public address in Iran, the government had succeeded in reducing her voice to a rare whisper most often heard from abroad.

Indeed, the hard-line government has succeeded largely in silencing Mousavi and Khatami, whom are IRI insiders themselves, let’s never forget. Their current demands of going back to the original draft of the Constitution are indeed dramatic, but they are not small ‘r’ revolutionary leaders (now when Rafsanjani suggested in 1989 that the Constitution had been written too quickly and was incomplete, that did take balls). Khatami already demonstrated a decade earlier he was unfit to mobilize his very healthy, broad movement against a beleaguered hard-line camp in retreat. He was subsequently ham-strung in his second term when they struck back with all the methods they had at their disposal. No, these two are figureheads handpicked by the conservative Guardian Council, vessels through which the movement legitimizes itself within the fickle labyrinth that is political dissent in the Islamic Republic. Karoubi remains the only one from the elections to be undaunted and cross traditional red lines. Him, and longtime thorn in Khamene’i’s side, Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. Posting a collection of both their statements would be an entertaining post in itself.

Most recently, five British yachtsmen were sailing to Dubai on a Bahraini yacht in preparation for a race when en route they allegedly crossed into Iranian waters (which I always find suspect, since they not only take the name of the Persian Gulf very seriously, but sometimes literally in their minds!). Instead of being escorted back into international waters (indeed, I would appreciate a naval expert to fill me in on proper protocol), The Pasdaran Navy (whom I would describe as Basijis in speedboats) took them mainland for questioning. There were usual threats from the Foreign Ministry and implications they might be the newest diplomatic bargaining chips along with the three American hikers still detained. It was my initial reaction that this would fit into a long pattern of hard-line government behavior; considered especially in the wake of the IAEA’s censure over their Fordo site. But, another missed angle is the evidence of the implementation of the Pasdaran Navy’s new strategic restructuring, giving it preference over the conventional Iranian Navy in the gulf, in full display for us. However; pragmatists among the leadership apparently won out on the diplomatic course to take, and the sailors are being released. The Pasdaran issued this statement: “After carrying out an investigation and interrogation of the five British sailors, it became clear that their illegal entry was a mistake.” Oh, well, fair enough, you might argue. But, the day before, several radical voices were demanding the return for trial of Arash Hejazi, the man who had come to Neda Agha-Soltan’s side and tried to save her after she was shot, and whom is now back in England studying at Oxford after surreptitiously fleeing Iran, wisely.  Women sympathetic to hard-liners were also preparing a demonstration outside the British Embassy in Tehran Wednesday, December 2nd. This could have become another international row like back in 2007 with the Royal Navy personnel. I wonder if they weren’t overzealous, got a call from command after returning to port, and issued that statement like a school child castigated and forced to say they’re sorry. Either that, or someone in the ruling circle impressed upon the Supreme Leader, that they may have really overstepped their bounds. The IRI being self-aware of its own tragic absurdity? I know, it does sound loopy, but it does occasionally happen. I also think reigniting tensions with Bahrain may have been a big factor.

Where this maturity still is not happening though is over the nuclear issue (which I might add, is also being transferred into the hands of the Pasdaran – see if you can spot the pattern). Now, it is not my intention to delve too deeply into that here. If you don’t know my position, it is the following. I do not trust the IRI. But the hysteria it induces in the West (Israel in particular) is not constructive either. And the double standards are not lost on the Iranian people. We, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are also the five leading nuclear armed states, with a combined total of warheads at around 23,000. Furthermore, we’ve turned a blind eye to non-NPT nations such as India, Pakistan, and yes, Israel. I’m sure they also took note of North Korea’s breakout, as well. However; my view, along with many others, including Juan Cole, is that they are seeking a Japan option. Whether unfair or not (and it was a fairly minor infraction, not to say the Iranians don’t drag their feet and play coy), they were censured. Part of me thinks this may have been partly to do with their cold feet on the originally proposed Russian deal (which as I said in my first article, is the victim of internal politics as much, if not more, than the international climate). For more on the complexities (which I’ll admit go over my head often), Sharmine Narwani wrote one of the better articles I’ve seen on the situation, at duh-duh-duh, The Huffington Post. It is the histrionic way in which Iran has reacted for a slap on the wrist, threatening to withdraw from the NPT, and build new enrichment facilities (which they don’t have the resources for), that is oh so, IRI. Take this quote from Ahmadinejad,

[Western countries] need us more than we need them. It is psychological warfare and isolating Iran is impossible. Any finger which is about to pull the trigger will be cut off.

And what always happens is that we in the West freak out over such outlandish delusions and they feel validated. My proper response to this acting out? A collective “bitch, please”. But the West is not much better. How many times have I heard the old poorly translated Khomeini line about ” the Zionist regime vanishing from the page of history” conflated with Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denier conference? They are a lot of things, but they are not nihilists. The next line I always hear is, oh, but they could pass it off to Lebanese Hezbollah or HAMAS. Okay, and that changes the scenario how, exactly? As if it won’t possibly kill a lot of Palestinians, or as if we wouldn’t figure out it came from them. Since the Iran-Iraq War, Iran also has had chemical and biological stores and weapon capability, yet has never used them or passed them on to its proxies. As to the common refrain that the US is moving in to invade Iran. Not gonna happen. Pick up a topographical map of Iran sometime. Look up their population. I don’t even need to address the counterproductive affect it would have in unifying the country. And a strike? I remain unconvinced Israel even has the technology, whether with Jericho II payload and accuracy or F-15I’s to perform sustained strikes of numerous heavily fortified targets. Plus, as Gary Sick has observed,

When Israel keeps talking  practically every day of attacking  Iran,  to me, that  is the best evidence that they are not going to do it.  If you look back at almost all the raids and operations they have carried out whether in was in Entebbe, in Syria or in 1982, on Iraq’s nuclear facilities, all of those took place without absolutely any previous warning.  It was maintained as a great state secret.

My main problem with the hue and cry over the nuclear issue and saber rattling is that it overshadows the human rights issue. In Maziar Bahari’s article cited at the top of this page, he pointed out something very interesting, which I had been at a loss to contextualize in my last piece:

The rumor du jour in Iran is that Obama and the Guards are reaching a deal to normalize relations, in exchange for which America will ignore human rights abuses in Iran. Hence, the opposition movement’s slogan “Obama, either with them or with us.”

And you know what? We kind of do have a deal with them and firebrands like Ahmadinejad (or the ‘Persian Palin’, as I like to call him). Every time they crack down on opposition voices, all they have to do is shout a nuclear threat and — ooh, shiny ball — yes it’s that easy. We’re totally trained. Ask yourself a question. What domestically do you think they’d rather the focus from the international community be about?

In closing, I’d like to confess that Iranian politics still bewilders me, and I am still struggling with the Kabuki theater and Byzantine structure of it all. Robin Zaehner, an intelligence officer (and brilliant linguist and religious scholar still noted for his work in the field of Zoroastrianism) was stationed in Tehran during the efforts to undermine and overthrow Mossadegh. It was reported that he would tell newcomers when they asked about Iranian politics to read Lewis Carroll’s Through The Looking Glass. Nice to see some things don’t change. This is one of those characteristics I attribute to a very deeply ingrained culture. One in which every person is a political party unto themselves, and in which words can often have double, if not more meanings.

* A note, Student Day, 16 Azar, December 7th is coming up, and more demonstrations are expected. Preemptive arrests have already been made. In the meantime, enjoy a gallery of what the Green Movement has done to Iranian bank notes.

36 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
    • Khirad says:

      Yup. More from the AP:

      Forensic tests showed that the doctor died of “poisoning by drugs” that matched doses of propranolol found in a salad that was delivered to him, Dowlatabadi [the prosecutor] said Tuesday. “A large number of these pills must be used for a person to pass away from them,” he said.

  1. KQuark says:

    Khirad bravo and another brilliant piece in your Iran series. I think you sell yourself a bit short you probably understand Iranian politics better than 99.99% of Americans including 90% of the State Department and CIA “experts” on Iran.

    I’m fascinated by the complexity of Iranian politics. It sounds allot like Soviet politics towards the end of their empire with all the separate and somewhat contradictory agendas while trying to figure out how to keep control once the genie has started leaking out the bottle.

    • Bernard Marx says:

      I second this!

    • Khirad says:

      Thanks again. I wish I were more knowledgeable of Soviet political history -- I was only really alive maybe 11-12 years before their fall (which is no excuse not to read a book -- my knowledge is pretty much limited to Trotsky’s writings and the History Channel). A comparative look would be very interesting, and you’re not the first whom has suggested the intriguing similarities (People’s Republic of China is another interesting comparison). Fareed Zakaria has made similar comments.

      • KQuark says:

        Yes China is an apropos comparison as well. I just don’t think the Iranian leadership can stem the tide of the modern world. The one thing that took me watching pictures of the demonstrations after elections was how modern Iran looked, far more modern than the Soviet Union or China looked before they started to open up to the world. Unfortunately like Russia and China now many human rights abuses will still exist for years in Iran just manifested in different ways then they are now.

  2. Khirad says:

    I’m goin’ to bed. Early, I know. If there’s a question, comment, criticism, go ahead. I’ll get to it.

  3. bitohistory says:

    Thank You, Khiad, Your posts always are very enlightening. I pulled down a flow chart of the power structure of Iran last week and an explanation of it. It is quite intertwined and I am not sure if it holds from day to day. Seems to be a lot of jockeying for positions and power. I will echo some of javaz questions. Is there a light still burning for a less oppressive government or has it been completely oppressed? Is there much “news” allowed any longer to outside the county and in the country?
    I just don’t know who are the good guys (and are they silenced) and the really bad guys are any more. Thank You again.

    • Khirad says:

      Isn’t the chart fun?! Like chutes and ladders? An overabundance of checks and balances, all of which mean diddly-squat, ’cause they all lead back to one person!

      Completely oppressed, no. Has a wind been taken out of their sail, yeah. Options seem few now. But, the regime still has to tread on eggshells. All it would need is another spark.

      My problem is the lack of news, and that I’m not a Farsi speaker. I pick up as much as I can I know basic phrases, but can’t read a blog or newspaper. Those, though, are also not as widespread, though mowjcamp is still up, as are others from within Iran I read occasionally.

  4. javaz says:

    I’d like to add one more thing, if I may.

    When we lived in Paris, my husband worked with a man that referred to himself as Persian.

    He was young, in his mid to late 30’s, and he told how his family was wealthy for Persians, and they bought their 2 sons way out of the country so that they would not have to serve in the military.
    He told about how the military would kidnap young boys for military service.
    Neither he nor his brother can ever go back for some reason, and his family is okay, and they do talk by phone, but never email.

    He married a German woman, and when the US invaded Iraq, he was overjoyed.
    He hated Saddam.

    We actually still hear from him via email and he did come out here to AZ for work, but only a week and we didn’t have time to see him.

    But the reason I mention this, is because we flew out to Paris the January following 9/11 and then when the US invaded Iraq, the anti-American sentiment soared through all of Europe.
    Part of it was the re-naming of food, you know, Freedom Fries, or Freedom Toast, and then footage of merchants in New York pouring French wine down the gutter.
    That was really embarrassing to be an American over there at that time, but our Persian friend was at that time the only person who praised the United States and Bush for Iraq.

    Btw, the French and all Europeans for that matter, treated us very well and they knew it wasn’t Americans but the American government.
    They disassociated between the two.

    • Khirad says:

      You really need to rent this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0808417/

      It covers everything you said.

      I went to grab a book off the shelf in response to you guys bringing up the Persian vs. Iranian thing, but I forgot that Hooman Majd Spent five pages on it! It gets complicated. Bottom line. Iran has always been ‘Iran’ in Iran. It largely comes down the negative associations with the name in the West now. This sums it up:


      • Kalima says:

        And of course many people’s hate of the Shah or with some, their devotion.

        I have a problem finding things here in Japan but will check out your link instead.

        Thanks a bunch.

        Btw, when I read that the rules for men as written by the Ayatollah Khomeini included the right for men to marry and sexually abuse girls as young as 8 years old, my heart froze, now it just bleeds

        • Khirad says:

          What kind of a guy seriously thinks through having sex with a chicken, rules that it would not be permissible to eat it, or for your neighbors to eat it, but two doors down, now THAT’S fine?!!

          He was also furious with the rights the shah gave to women in family court, in being judges, and there’s some controversy to this, but I think the evidence bears out, at least in the earlier years, that a move for suffrage was purely cynical. At least a woman can theoretically run for president before being disqualified by the Guardian Council, limited to men, right?

          That man was a piece of work. More complex and more shrewd than most people would suspect, but that stern stoicism and brutal literalism in harsh black and white terms. Total Khomeini.

        • javaz says:

          If I understand history, and trust me I do not when it comes to this subject, but it was shame on Jimmy Carter for the Shah being left high and dry, and when he was dying, and he was a man without a country.

          Then again, Carter lost the election because of the Iranian Crisis, whereby they took over the American Embassy and held Americans captive.
          Yet, the day Reagan was sworn in, the Iranian’s released the hostages, and Carter never did get credit for those negotiations.

          ARGGGHHH.

          I hate politics.

          • Khirad says:

            That’s not really the way it happened. That’s more like the Republican version of history. Although, I watched Greta’s special on FOX, and it wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be. Still left out a lot of stuff though, purposefully methinks.

            We had actually relied on Savak for our information within the country, so we didn’t see it coming. By the time we did, there wasn’t a thing we could have done. We even sent a guy over there in case, Huyser, but no. Besides, all were wary of repeating 1953. Carter doesn’t get any credit for actually calling on the shah to improve human rights. Of course, these things were often perfunctory and we looked the other way much of the time. And though some cast doubt on this, an Iranian (who was it Bazargan? aargh! tired!) has said Reagan had people negotiating with the Iranians as a candidate. Funny thing is that once Khomeini and gang had thrown out Carter (thus getting payback for Mossadegh), they all of a sudden realized — hmm — Reagan… what do we do now? Like children and instant gratification they are.

          • Kalima says:

            The Shah was seen as a dictator by many and he led a cruel and violent regime for far too many years.

            The Mullahs are no better and can even escalate the cruelty as witnessed during the “green” demonstration objecting the results of the elections this year.

            6 of one and half a dozen of the other in my opinion.

      • javaz says:

        Now, I wish I could play this, but we have dial-up.

        But, we can try to find the movie.
        It was made in France?

        I’ve bookmarked it and will check at the library.

        Thanks!!!!

    • Kalima says:

      My friend in London and her family, have always referred to themselves as Persians.
      The father managed to get the whole family out safely just a few days before the Islamic Revolution, relatives were left behind.

      True to form the religious extremists never practice what they preach but expect the rest of the population to follow their rules. The same with the Taliban in the red light district of Lahore in Pakistan, who started a clean up of the brothels there, guess who were the most frequent customers?

      A bunch of blood thirsty hypocrites, one and all.

      Great article Khirad!

  5. AdLib says:

    What a brilliant and comprehensive article! Well done and thanks, Khirad!

    Such a terrible mix of ignorance and Orwellian tyranny. It always chills me when governments purge the educated from teaching in order to brainwash the young with “the faithful”.

    What percentage of Iranians do you think either are or support the Pasdaran?

    I have always felt the same way, Iran blustering about attacking or wreaking havoc always struck me as a childish tantrum. The U.S. feeling threatened is proof that understanding a nation is critical for dealing with it. There is a provincial mindset here, that others think like us so if they threaten, they must intend to do what they threaten. Thus, the near invasion of Iran by the ignorant Bush Admin.

    And the way people freak out when Ahmadinejad spouts some ridiculous bullshit, they don’t even understand that he is not much more than a actor, he has no real power on his own.

    I think the use of money to protest is very clever! Does the opposition to the fraudulent election of Ahmadinejad continue to be strong or is it fading?

    Do you see any path or prospect for the people to wrest control of their country away from the Pasdaran?

    Once again, fantastic and very enlightening article!

    • Khirad says:

      If only the world would give him a synchronized eyeroll. Ahmadi is just like an HP troll. Thrives off the attention.

      The Pasdaran is a fraction of the Army, a separate entity. Plus, the regular army has all the “big boys” toys. I had the percentage somewhere once, but it is a very small clique command level consolidating power. The way they bolster their numbers is by claiming Basij reserves: meaning every boy in the city a town or village with a Basiji mosque (i.e. everywhere). I don’t really count these. It’s been described as a sort of nepotistic Freemasonric deal (which would be insulting to them, since they thought the shah’s people were in league with the Freemasons -- I love needling them every chance I get), with vets getting all the good pensions, housing, business deals, etc. How many support them? That’s a tougher call. All those who voted for Ahmadinejad -- and those I believe there to have been massive fraud, he still would have picked up at the least a 1/3 of the population. Incredibly rough guesstimate though. I think many people still respect them as veterans with the war with Iraq and defending the borders against drug smugglers, but many would also rather have nothing to do with them. It’s a bit tricky generalizing the organization. It is up top where the “juntization” is occurring. But for the nepotism I described, and the corruption and embezzlement from charities, there a tad bit of resentment. Of course, the true believers would never believe a bit of my accusations -- and I might put on a good British accent just to get them really paranoid!

      On your last questions. Same answer I gave javaz, I’m working that out and reassessing it myself right now.

    • javaz says:

      The US being frightened by Iran, imho, is a joke and media fear driven so that we’ll want to “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”

      Sort of like the H1N1 flu being a pandemic and it’s going to kill us all, just like West Nile Virus and bird flu, and blah, blah, blah.

      I hate being ruled by fear.

      Whatever did happen to the color alerts?
      Seems that totally disappeared the day after Bush won his 2nd term.

      Is it wrong to think the only threat Iran poses is to Israel, but more so, vice-versa?
      That Israel is the real threat, and from what I read online and see on PBS, Israelis aren’t quite as ginned up for war as much as they used to be.

  6. javaz says:

    Thank you so much for this article, Khirad.

    I cannot even pretend to understand Iran, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Israel or anything when it comes to countries in that region.
    I plead ignorance and it is not an excuse, but it all seems so complicated when it comes to religion combined with politics and government.

    From what I do know about Iran from PBS shows, is that the younger generation does not want religious rule.
    Is that true or is that too simplistic?

    If I recall PBS shows correctly, and forgive me as my memory is not what it used to be, but during the reign of the Shah -- is that the correct term? -- Iranians had more freedom.
    And then when the ayatollah took over, everything went to heck.
    Suddenly women had to cover their heads and faces, yet at the same time, we see footage from Iran during the protests and women were not covered but wearing jeans and western attire, and I don’t mean cowboy western from the US.

    You seem to understand it all so much better and may I ask you if there is hope for freedom in Iran?
    And I suppose freedom to Iranians would not exactly mean the same freedom we speak of here.

    Do you know if there is hope for Iran?
    And is it correct to assume that the younger people want religion out of government?
    Is there a faction of older people that also desire religion be separated from their government?

    And does my post make any sense or is it off topic?

    Thank you again for this article.

    • Khirad says:

      I’m a bit tired, so I’ll do the best that I can by breaking this up.

      Q: From what I do know about Iran from PBS shows, is that the younger generation does not want religious rule.
      Is that true or is that too simplistic?

      A: It is first of all important to know that Ahmadinejad does have a very real base. And many people really do revere Khomeini (for a myriad of reasons). This gets to the trouble. We’re dealing often with anecdotal information, but I’d say it’s safe to say that there’s generally no love lost for the mollahs. Many younger clerics have learned to carry their turbans and robes in a bag so as to hail a cab. ‘Religious rule’ is the key. Many voted for an Islamic Republic, but had no idea this is what they would get.

      Q: during the reign of the Shah

      • escribacat says:

        Hi Khirad, Thanks for the article. As usual, we have such a one-dimensional picture of what’s going on there. I have never had a good impression of Ahmadinejad — primarily because of his grotesque comments about the Holocaust, but my understanding is that our view of him is similar to the average Iranian’s view of George W. Bush (a crazy fanatic). I also recall many rumors that he was one of the students who took the Americans hostage during the revolution.

        I had a number of Iranian friends during the revolution and none of them supported the Shah. They were all pleased with the revolution — but that was the early days and these were all college students living in northern California and smoking a lot of hashish. My closest Iranian friend, Nader, said that his uncle had been tortured and killed by the Shah. He mentioned hot hard boiled eggs being shoved up his uncle’s rectum. In other words, my impression of the Shah is that he wasn’t any better than Ahmadinejad. He was also installed through US meddling.

        More sorry results stemming at least partly from colonialism and imperialism from the west.

      • javaz says:

        Thank you for your reply.
        You did clarify some questions, if not most.

        May I ask you a personal question?

        Are you or your parents from Iran?

        And if you answer yes to one or both questions, I have a slew of questions for you.

        If you do not mind.

        You do live in Arizona, near Tempe, correct?

        I am sorry that you are so tired, and look forward to when you are refreshed, so that we can continue a dialogue.

        Thank you again.
        I am desperately trying to understand the Iranian culture.

        • Khirad says:

          No on both. I’m trying to understand it too. (don’t tell anyone though 😉 )

          Tucson. I was up in Tempe a couple weeks back though.

          • javaz says:

            Okay.
            So you live near bito.

            May I ask why you are so interested then in Iran?

            Just curious.

            • Khirad says:

              Accident. Started out with an obsession with India and Parsis, developed into an appreciation of the poetry, film and food, started following events now and then, but when this happened in June, I started really hitting the books. I started battling trolls on HP, and well, it sorta became my thing. I don’t try to pretend to be something I’m not, but it can all come in handy.

            • javaz says:

              Good morning, B’ito, Khirad, Nellie, Kalima and everyone!

              Isn’t it funny that there’s a meaning for practically every letter combination for the Internet?

              I didn’t believe that you meant that, b’ito.
              ((((hugs)))

              Isn’t that weird though that there’s a slang or urban meaning for so many letter combinations?
              I know the very basic combos but that’s about it.

            • bitohistory says:

              j’avaz, I meant the secret police under the Shah. I would never say what the urban dictionary said, about you.

            • escribacat says:

              Javaz--he probably meant SAVAK. ?

            • javaz says:

              NO!
              You are my friend, and you didn’t mean this?

              http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Svak

              Aw, if so, what did I ever do to you?

              I’m off to bed, and hope you didn’t mean that, and if so, well, please forgive me for whatever you think I did wrong.

              Aw.

              Good night and sweet dreams, and you can’t have meant that.

            • javaz says:

              What does that mean -- SVAK?

              I prefer to think of myself as a MILF.

            • bitohistory says:

              Careful Khriad, J’avaz is SVAK. 😆


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features