The Latest from Iran: Challenge Renewed (19 September)

NEW Iran After Qods Day: What Next for the Green Movement (The Sequel)?
NEW Iran: Another Qods Day Participant Writes
Latest Iran Video: More from Qods Day (18-19 September)
NEW Iran: The Five Lessons of Qods Day
Qods Day Video Special: The Black-and-White Soccer Game
Iran’s Qods Day: The Participants Speak
Qods Day: The Discussion Continues
Iran Qods Day: Snap Analysis and Summary Translation of Ahmadinejad Speech

The Latest from Iran (18 September): Qods Day
NEW Iran Video: Qods Day Protests (18 September)

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

2200 GMT: We took a break tonight to recuperate from the drama of Friday. To be honest, almost all the chatter is a recycling of the events and images of Qods Day.

There are intriguing developments surrounding the clerical opposition to the Government. Mowj-e-Sabz reports that Grand Ayatollah Montazeri was forced to cancel an important annual prayer.

The Green Movement is highlighting the possibility that marjas, the highest-ranking senior clerics, will not declare that Ramadan has ended Sunday and can be celebrated with the feast of Eid al-Fitr. In particular, it is noted that the websites of Ayatollah Montazeri and of Ayatollah Sane'i have not yet declared that the Holy Month is over.

Ayatollahs Mousavi-Ardebili, Safi-Golpaygani, and Bayat-Zanjani are also declaring that they have not seen the crescent of the moon. And now Hojatoleslam Taghdiri, the head of the crescent observation committee of  Tehran Province, has said that there is no way that the crescent can be observed tonight, permitting Eid al-Fitr to proceed tomorrow.

The statements are significant because they defy the declaration of the Supreme Leader that Sunday is the end of Ramadan holiday.

1540 GMT: In his first statement after Qods Day, Mehdi Karroubi has told medical faculty of the great opportunity "to expose in court atrocities which would have made the Shah look good".

1250 GMT: The Quds Day Football Mystery (continued). Two readers continue the tireless effort to sort out what happened with last night's Iranian state TV broadcast of the Esteghlal-Estell Azin match (video in separate entry and see 0740 GMT). Both note that the game was re-broadcast, after the "problems" with live transmission. One notes, "It was in colour and not in black and white as reported. There were many Esteghlal fans in the stadium but almost all of them came in blue. You could see glimpses of green colour among them, but, as I said, about 95% of the came in blue. I also couldn't hear any opposition slogans during the game, to be honest."

The other reader has the possible answer: "They started over from the beginning of the match, in color, with the sound edited from another match (so Green chants could not be heard). Also they cut away several times to another camera on the sideline for showing reaction shots of the bench/coaches, even though they said there was only one camera in Azadi Stadium."

1240 GMT: Maryam at Keeping the Change has taken on the task of sifting through the information to establish "whether Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Mohammad Khatami...took part in the Qods Day demonstrations". Her thoughtful but provocative assessment:

Mousavi and Rafsanjani could have been forced to appear in the protests against their wills or may have been given the choice to either stay away from the demonstrations or attend the government-sponsored rallies. The men may have calculated that failing to appear at the marches would be more damaging than participating in the pro-government demonstrations....The utilitarian calculations of the two men and the propaganda potential of these images aside, the presence of Mousavi, in particular, at the pro-government rally may prove to have undermined his "Opposition"-credentials, giving the impression (whether true or misleading) that he has become less assertive, more prone to succumb to government pressure, and/or is in a weakened position vis vis the government. As for Rafsanjani, a similar analysis may be appropriate, though his historical tendency to walk a fine line between competing interest groups militates against rushing to judgment on his motivations.

1130 GMT: Definitely a lull after the storm of events. We've now completed and posted the analyses of Mr Smith, "What Next for the Green Movement (The Sequel)?", and of Scott Lucas, "Iran: The Five Lessons of Qods Day". We've also got a new account from a participant in the demonstration and a new video thread as well as yesterday's video collection.

0830 GMT: Contrary to our fears at the end of yesterday, it appears that the regime's restrictions on the Internet were more to stifle the Qods Day protests than as a forerunner of an even more intense crackdown of arrests. Some Internet services have been restored in Iran.

0820 GMT: Three of the grandchildren of Ayatollah Montazeri, arrested yesterday, have been released. Three of his grandchildren remain in detention.

0740 GMT: The Qods Day Football Match. Our quirkiest story of the day, complete with video, gets even better. The latest account is that state television's coverage was delayed and limited to one black-and-white camera not because of the fears of Green symbols and chants but because the regime's efforts to limit communications hindered IRIB's technical systems. (I think the Blue team won 2-0 but I can't tell which one was Blue.)

0600 GMT: To be honest, this is a holding entry. For the first time in 24 hours, it is possible to draw breath and take a reflective step back, as the news from Iran is slow this morning, in part because of the Government's attempts to close down information on the scale of its setback yesterday, more because everyone is trying to take in exactly what happened on Qods Day.

The regime will try to regain its balance today. Press TV has a lovely example. Its story just before I went to bed was "Iran's Opposition Marches on Qods Day", a recognition that "supporters of Iran's opposition movement...joined the major annual commemorative rally showing their loyalty to their leaders". This morning the website is back on the proper line: "Iranians March in Solidary with Palestinians".

But, barring a swift crackdown by the Government, with a wave of high-profile arrests, the question of initiative will be with the opposition. What can the leaders and the Green Wave do with the opportunity offered by the tens of thousands who, after all that has been thrown at protest to make it go away, "won" with their defiance --- in anger, sadness, hope, and more than a bit of humour --- yesterday?

That's what EA staff will work on now. The first part of our opening analysis is now posted.

Comments

[yseut]

@ Samuel
The thing with you Samuel is that, amazingly enough for someone
claiming intellectual standards, you seem to be refusing to aknowledge
facts for what they are, such as the relentless stream of evidences proving
the numerous illegal actions and stinking crimes commited in the last months
under the regime's command. Crimes that came to full light even to the well thinking-self righteous-part of the elite who's in charge since decades (and
professes they never knew,no no, and can't believe such a level of dirt and
degrading shame could be committede ever in the IRI etc.) Like Karroubi and
some others among cleric network, like Moussavi and his pairs on the secular
side. But those people only refer to facts/atrocities blatantly commited by
pasdaran-bassij- security (or so labelled) 'forces' against ordinary people of
Iran, either opponents or mere demonstrators picked up in Iran streets.
Whether denouncers in doing so have or not a political agenda that you
reprove, it doesn't change the data nor the numbers of deaths and casualties,
nor the utmost gravity of all this. From stealing votes to stealing lives....
your gentlemen did not hesitate, and it's too late now for you and your lot
to slander, desinformate and distort what is at last, thanks heaven,
becoming public knowledge by the day...
You hate Karroubi just like anyone, Green or not, who's contributing to expose
the lies-corruption-violence of a regime that long ago started to defile its own religious and moral standards, currently shifting from theocracy to military
thugocracy in its ways to govern the country and deal with society at large.
One more point, very relevant as well : it's not the first time in 2009, alas,
that iranian peaceful opponents or dissenters are savagely repressed, jailed,
tortured, raped in IRI's gaols -and murdered as well. IRI's known palmares in
this department, over the last 3 decades of its complex and authoritarian
politics, is more eloquent (because documented) than any
bassij-pasdaran-cleric denial rethorics put together ! As Afshin says
'wake up man, it really happened' !
THAT AGAIN, YES !! and it's only a beginning they say...

[Peter]

@ Afshin wrote:

Think for your self can he stand infront of the S.L disobey him for more then a WEEK, during the last days OPENLY even !!!!!! and still get away with it. He ridiculed the S.L infront of a country and then eventually did not fire his Vice president and only had him resign himself. Then fired 2 of the S.L closest allies in a show of force. DO YOU FOR A SECOND BELIEVE IN A COUNTRY LIKE IRAN ONE CAN DO THAT AND GET AWAY WITHOUT THAT MUCH MUSCLE BEHIND HIM !!!!??? specially a unelected, unpopular president under that much pressure !!!!? dont be naive

—

You're making a lot of big assumptions. The Supreme Leader is an old man who does not read the same information sources that you or I do. Nearly all of his information comes from his "closest advisors" many of whom are close to AN, including the SL’s most politically minded son. Furthermore he's clearly invested a great deal of his own credibility into AN. AN is abusing it. But at worst the Guard only stayed neutral in the altercation over the 1st vice president, and it's not clear to me that the SL asked them to intervene on his behalf against AN. AN's blatant defiance might well have taken the SL by surprise, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Jafari & Co. didn't want to get on AN's bad side knowing that the SL wasn't going to get rid of him any time soon.

It’s like when you see a husband slap his wife and you intervene on her behalf, only to find that she rushes to her husband’s defense against you. Is anyone who saw the altercation going to intervene again on the woman’s behalf, especially when the husband is someone as vengeful as AN? No, you’d have to be stupid to do so. This is the situation that the SL has created for himself. So I’m not surprised the Guard stayed out of the “family dispute”. But that is a far cry from the Guard being ready to move against the SL on AN's orders in the manner that you're characterizing the situation.

-

@ Afshin wrote:

Think again, to save who’s face? A.N or himself ? Infact When did my analyses on that I mentioned the S.L and A.N playing poker, outbluffing each other and I forecasted the S.L losing. A.N is a great poker player and knew there was no way in Hell S.L would allow new elections now. People would hit the street again knowing they had won even in bigger numbers. He could nbever allow new elections. A.N knew that and played that game so well. S.L had to do that. He would lose face after backing A.N so intensly and openly (over Hashemi for example).

-

AN is no political genius. The SL is just a bad judge of character. He took an immediate liking to AN and threw his support behind AN in such an overwhelming manner that now he can't retract it without looking like a fool. The distinction between us is that whereas you characterize the relationship as one between poker players with AN being the superior player, I see it more as a paternal relationship where a father has allowed a favored son to get away with far more than he should have. Unfortunately for Iran, the situation has gone well past the point where the SL can sever the relationship without huge repercussions to his own authority.

-

@Afshin wrote:

Now you are confusing S.L with Mesbah Yazdi. He is nit Gods choice for the S.L and Its not a matter of Regret anymore, its a matter of survival.

-

No, I'm not. You on the other hand are forgetting the Supreme Leader's comments regarding the divine origins of AN's "landslide" victory.

-

@@Peter Wrote:
But the SL values both the appearance of unity and the reputation of the government above nearly everything else.

@Afshin Wrote:

Hence the Multi Million people protests, ALL THE MARJA against him, The Ols stablishment against him !!!?? A illegitimate Goverment !!! Now you are just not making sense !!!

-

Take a deep breath and calm down. The SL is on the record as having said something alone the lines of that while the deaths of some detainees were sad, the real tragedy was in the damage done to the reputation of the government. He is also on the record as having encouraged the Majlis to approve AN’s cabinet in the name of unity regardless of their lack of qualifications or shady pasts. Actions like these give thinking people a sense of the SL’s priorities. If you don’t believe me I can take the time to look up the news articles for you.

-

@@Peter Wrote : I certainly agree that the “dog is growing out of control”……

@Afshin Wrote:

During the last part, basically you are just agreeing with the fact that the Guards are infact preparing a coup which people like “Where is my vote” and I have been saying all along. The only thing you are saying is that they would do it after the S.L death. which again is one of the scenarios we have said many times before. The only addition to that is that the Guards just tolerate the S.L and do their thing. They openly disobey him allready.

-

The guards do not openly disobey him already. He’s letting them play the barking guard dog against the reformists so he can continue playing the benevolent leader who graciously restrains them. It’s a job he himself gave them so I don’t see how they’re disobeying him. I’m still waiting for you to give me one shred of proof that the guards are ready and willing to move against the SL. Instead all you’ve done is attempt to belittle me because I’ve had the audacity to question one of your assumptions. Saying that AN is willing to openly disobey the leader is insufficient as he isn’t currently in the Guard leadership. I’m still waiting for a logical response (instead of an emotional one) from you.

-

@Afshin wrote:

PS. Hashemi is to smart to put his faith in the hands of justthe People.

-

A very interesting reply, and one that I agree with.

-

@Afshin wrote:

A) he has the Marjas and the rest of the clerics

He does not yet have all the Marjas and the rest of the clerics. If he had that sort of overwhelming support then the Assembly of Experts would already slapped the SL down. He has some of them, and he’s gaining more as the days go by. But this is still very much a work in progress on his part. And his opponents have their own clerics (ie. Mesbah-Yazdi, Jannati, Khatami, etc…)

-

@Afshin wrote:

B) he is openly flirting with conservatives (both Larrijanis, and they belong to the fielth of the republis, such opputunists, with A.N atleast there is a ideology, how idiotic it is atleast one can respect that he fights for something, with larrijanis same as Karoubi told Ali, I hope you wont sell your self and your reliogion for a little more power like your brother)

-

Given that he has historically been allied with the conservatives himself, his flirting with conservatives is by no means surprising. He is first and foremost a pragmatist, and the Larrijanis aren’t much different. I don’t disagree there. As far as AN fighting for something is concerned, he’s fighting for himself just as the others are. The only difference is that he’s convinced himself (and for a little while at least, the SL as well) that he’s fighting for something greater. But his actions are even more self-serving than the Larrijanis because where they calculate the repercussions of their actions before engaging in them, he does not. He does what he wants when he feels like and screw anyone who disagrees with him. That to me is an even greater selfishness.

-

@Afshin wrote:

C) he has guns, lots of guns. He is no idiot he knows you can fight bullits with just slogans

-

This is a most interesting conjecture. I don’t put it past him to have a large numbers of firearms at his disposal. His financial empire is immense and he has dealt in weapons in the past (Iran-Contra). But does he have a large trained force at his disposal? I’ve seen no evidence of such. And if he doesn’t, then that would give the government reason to strike first and attempt to seize his assets first before he can bribe military officials with his vast cash reserves or “distribute” his wares to non-military folk. This is extremely dangerous territory for Hashemi to tread, but I suppose if anyone can navigate it, he can.

-

@Afshin wrote:

I advise you to read my analyses of the S.L arsenal of weapons and invite to tell me if I have missed any weapons or underestimate any, when you analyse things at a detailed level like that it becomes easier to understand, assume and even predict things.

-

I'm familiar with your analysis. Clearly the RG is willing to assist AN against the reformists. Our disagreement is primarily over whether or not they’re willing to act against the SL on AN’s behalf. You believe they are, while I haven’t seen any evidence that I find convincing enough to reach the same conclusion. A secondary argument between us regards the nature of the relationship between the SL and AN as the SL sees it. Where you see one poker player outplaying another, I see a father allowing his overly willful son to get away with far too much.

[AM]

Samuel.
I don't know whether you are even an Iranian. I am sure that the survey was not designed by Iranians and certainly not from within Iran.

As part of my job, I have been with all classes of people within in Iran, in various cities, towns and I find this survey absolutely unbelievable, and I am sure it has a major flaw, what I am not sure though.

BTW, Everytime I talk to my mother or my mother in law, as soon as I ask them about the unrest, or anything close to that subject, they hush me and say lets not talk about it on the phone. Such is the fear!

One thought: according to the poll, 52% of those called refused to take part. I wonder which group of people would be more nervous to talk on the phone, to a stranger from abroad!

[Afshin]

@ Peter

Fair enough, I guess you have a diffrent view on what some actions mean then I do. You see a loving relationship between a father and a son. I see a struggle for power where billions of dollars are at stake.

The Iran I know is a Iran where preident can not ridicule the S.L for almost 10 days defying his direct orders and get away with it. its a country where the president can not try and stop the appointment of the head of judicary after the S.L him self has wanted him appointed. Its a country where the president can not fire the intelligence minister because he is a close ally of the S.L because the minister demanded the president obey the S.L. Nothing else just the fact that he demanded the S.L wishes be obeyed. The Iran I know is a country where the president cant get away with righting the S.L a letter with just 10 words in saying something in the line of "your wish has been met" without prasing hes greatness his holiness etc. A letter like that in Iran to S.L is unthinkable.

You see these things as minor issues, my expireance with Iran is very diffrent. I guess on these actions we have diffrent views on what they mean. Also on other moment i see you have complete diffrent take of what actions mean then I do. This is not Math so one can not write a formula and prove it. so it is just a matter of interpertation and logic but to reply to some of the claims u made which are not opinions but facts allow me to humbly reply;

------

S.L is not a old ignorant man who lacks info. Infact Elbaradei called him a very intelligent man, up to date on even the smallest details.

Furthermore saying if Hashemi had all the marjas he would have allready used them in teh assembly is kinda simplistic and naive. Besides Assembly of experts is something else then the Marjas.

Marjas are the grand ayatollahs, (Khatami, Janatti and Yazdi are not a Marja, the last two also very much with the guards not S.L) From all the Grand Ayatollahs NOT EVEN 1 exept for Hamedani acknowledges the illegitemate President A.N. and the one that did do that "Hamedani" has taken back his support and has claimed it was under pressure and that it was a mistake.

[Paleene]

"One thought: according to the poll, 52% of those called refused to take part. I wonder which group of people would be more nervous to talk on the phone, to a stranger from abroad!"

Good point, AM!
52% refusal ... looks as if the group of those finally participating was highly biased!

[Peter]

@ Afshin wrote:

Fair enough, I guess you have a diffrent view on what some actions mean then I do. You see a loving relationship between a father and a son. I see a struggle for power where billions of dollars are at stake.

-

I wouldn't go so far as to call it loving, at least not anymore. I do think the relationship between AN and the Supreme Leader has fractured on a personal level. I just believe that the SL allowed his personal like for AN to cloud his judgment to the point where he threw all his eggs into AN’s basket before realizing what AN really was like. And now he’s reaping the consequences.

-

@ Afshin wrote:

The Iran I know is a Iran where preident can not ridicule the S.L for almost 10 days defying his direct orders and get away with it. its a country where the president can not try and stop the appointment of the head of judicary after the S.L him self has wanted him appointed. Its a country where the president can not fire the intelligence minister because he is a close ally of the S.L because the minister demanded the president obey the S.L. Nothing else just the fact that he demanded the S.L wishes be obeyed. The Iran I know is a country where the president cant get away with righting the S.L a letter with just 10 words in saying something in the line of “your wish has been met” without prasing hes greatness his holiness etc. A letter like that in Iran to S.L is unthinkable.

-

Khamenei has alienated the very pillars of the revolution that installed him into power as a “compromise candidate” after the death of Khomeini. His infallible status has always been more illusion than fact. He lacks either the charisma or the spiritual authority that Khomeini had and has historically avoided picking fights that he wasn’t certain he could win. Until recently he has always been careful to preserve his credibility and increase his authority. He has stacked important bodies with allies and cultivated the image of a wise, benevolent father who mediates between his squabbling children. While it might have been unthinkable for the average Iranian to have challenged his authority, I don’t think Rafsanjani or Moussavi ever considered it unthinkable, merely unwise, given the potential damage to the state that would result.

Things have changed however now that the destabilizing force that is AN has been added to the mix. AN has been raised to power by the SL’s own hand and AN is so certain that God is on his side that he doesn’t stop to consider the repercussions of his actions. By his continuing actions, he is showing to everyone with two eyes that the SL not only can make mistakes but that he also can be defied. You seem certain that it is AN’s intent to weaken the SL. At the moment I’m favoring the idea that AN just wants to have his way. AN does not strike me as the sort to consider the consequences of his actions on others. He’s more of an impulsive cowboy type. Introspection is no more his cup of tea than it was George W. Bush’s. So utilizing Occam’s razor, that seems the most likely explanation.

Nevertheless it isn’t the only possibility. So I’m not totally closing the door on your argument, I’m just unwilling to declare it the one true one as yet. My biggest issue with your argument that he is purposely attempting to weaken the SL is that I don’t see what that gains him. The SL is his single, most important defender. If he weakens the SL he weakens his own legitimacy.

-

@ Afshin wrote:

You see these things as minor issues, my expireance with Iran is very diffrent. I guess on these actions we have diffrent views on what they mean. Also on other moment i see you have complete diffrent take of what actions mean then I do. This is not Math so one can not write a formula and prove it. so it is just a matter of interpertation and logic but to reply to some of the claims u made which are not opinions but facts allow me to humbly reply;

-

Fair enough. Btw, it’s not that I see AN’s flouting of the SL’s will as a minor issue so much that I think the SL has created his own mess. The 1st generation revolutionary powers have lost respect for him while the 2nd generation powers are growing hesitant to intervene on his behalf against Ahmadinejad because he’s allowed AN to crush those who have without repercussions.

-
@ Afshin wrote:

S.L is not a old ignorant man who lacks info. Infact Elbaradei called him a very intelligent man, up to date on even the smallest details.

-

I never said he was ignorant or unintelligent. But he most definitely is old, and men of his advanced age rarely have the same fire they did in their youth. The effects may be subtle, but they have a profound influence on decision-making.

-
@ Afshin wrote:

Furthermore saying if Hashemi had all the marjas he would have allready used them in teh assembly is kinda simplistic and naive. Besides Assembly of experts is something else then the Marjas.

-

You need to go back and reread your exact words and mine instead of twisting them. You referred to the “Marjas and the rest of the clerics”. The Assembly of Experts does contain clerics you see. And by “the rest of the clerics” I thought it safe to assume that you meant exactly what you said, all the clerics aside from the Marjas. And clerics run the Assembly of the Experts. It’s really pretty simple logic really. I don’t see why you find it so hard to follow. It’s probably because you’re too busy being condescending. It’s a pity too because I do enjoy your posts. But you don’t seem to take critique well.

-

@ Afshin wrote:

Marjas are the grand ayatollahs, (Khatami, Janatti and Yazdi are not a Marja, the last two also very much with the guards not S.L)

-

Please reread my words, I never said they were Marjas; I called them clerics. And you were the one who brought up clerics as well as Marjas in the same sentence. They are still Ayatollahs however, and the fact that they receive prominent pulpits, generous funding and favorable press coverage from the government doesn’t help matters any. As GA Montazeri pointed out in his letter (although he neglects to mention names), it is they who have given religious cover to the crimes committed by the government.

-
@ Afshin wrote:

From all the Grand Ayatollahs NOT EVEN 1 exept for Hamedani acknowledges the illegitemate President A.N. and the one that did do that “Hamedani” has taken back his support and has claimed it was under pressure and that it

-

We agree on this at least.

[Afshin]

@ Peter

I think you are not getting the message. Like I said we look at the things on complete diffrent levels. A.N for me is a nobody. This is not a fight of A.N this is a fight between the Guards (new stablishement) and the Clerics (the old stablishment). It is not a fight about Religion or even politics its first and foremost a fight for survival.

As a results you are looking at things as a complete diffrent angle. For me A.N is irrelevent. He is a nobody a puppet same as Mousavi is.

I dont care about individuals, I care about what is for me the bigger picture. For me this war is NOT about A.N or his belief that god is with him or not, it is NOT about Mousavi, it is NOT about the elections, heck it is NOT even about the S.L.

The reason whe we do not understand each other is that you actually see A.N as a player and I dont. I see him as a face/Symbol of a movement. Same as I see Mousavi as nothing more then a face. They are both as a person simply irrelevent. That is were we differ in opinion.

For me this is a War between the OLD vs the NEW. IT is a fight for survival. For me it is as simple as that. And in my logic that fits very well. The so called heros of today are the same players we have seen in the last 3 decades under whos rule we saw Killings, Political murders, crimes against humanity,etc. and I dont believe for a second that all of a sudden they all have seen the light and are fighting for Justice, Freedom of Speech, Political freedom, etc. They are pragmatic and know this is their only path to survival. Karoubi, Hashemi, Mousavi, Khatami, Marja's and yes most clerics they all represent the old....

Again like I have said before you are looking at the situation from a complete diffrent angle and on a totally diffrent level. Which is fine we all look at things diffrently and that makes things intresting. It is not math so there is no formula as to what is right and what is wrong. I do however totally disagree with your view on things as i think you are missing the big picture and looking at puppets instead of the plot. I find it a very simplistic and a Naive look on things on micro level, thats not condescending its just my opinion. So appologies if I have hurt your feelings.

[yseut]

@ Paleene, A.M., Samuel

http://english.mowjcamp.com/article/id/34867

http://kamangir.net/2009/09/20/world-pubic-opinion-poll-ahmadinejad-is-legitimate/

A different light on the WPO 's poll on 'How d'you like to have your A.N. ?'
It seems odd enough this survey's and this WPO... worth to investigate...

[Peter]

@Afshin

Yes we do look at things differently. Since we're being blunt, I feel you're guilty of oversimplification. I suppose people like to divide things into two groups or teams in order to make them easier to understand, and sometimes things work out that way. But all too often it leads to mistaken prognostications based on poorly supported assumptions.

The Iranian clerical establishment is by no means the united monolithic group that you are presenting it to be. The OLD vs NEW distinction may play well on news channels designed for people with short attention spans, and its useful on a more elementary level to give people a very basic idea of what's going on, but it's also an oversimplification in my view that can lead to some incorrect conclusions if used carelessly. It's not just about the younger generation wanting to push the older generation out of power. It can also be looked as a significant chunk of the older generation along with a significant chunk of the younger generation that have fallen out of power wanting to push out the small slice of the younger generation that has been raised to power by the single most influential individual member of the older generation. But that's too complicated, and I haven't even pointed out the previously marginalized members of the 1st generation who have gained some measure of power by providing cover for those 2nd generationers attempting to push out the previously dominant 1st generation. People prefer things simplified to the point of inaccuracy.

Well at least we understand each other better now, including how little we think of each other's views. And there's no need to worry about my feelings. I do try to be diplomatic in the beginning, but when the other side prefers to be more blunt, I don't have any problem with matching their level of tact.

[Afshin]

@ Peter

Fair Enough Peter, you have your ideas and views on things and thats good. I just wished that the part about the News channels was true.

"The OLD vs NEW distinction may play well on news channels designed for people with short attention spans"

I my self have not seen one channel refer to this as a fight between the clerical regime and the Guards. (except EA refering to it at times in the 4 sided chess game" where they include the S.L and the Reformist as well.) so if you have sources in the news that claim this, it would make me very happy. Please share these great News sources. It would make my day if finally more News sites understand the situation in Iran and report about the struggle between the clerics and the guards.

Allthough in my humble opinion you completely have missed the plot and do not understand what is going onj in the country and have missed the events that are leading to this war between the Clerics and the Guards, for me its enough that you feel so passionate about the cause. If more people felt so passionate about what is happening in Iran it would help the country more. Sorry again if I hurt your ego.

[Paleene]

@yseut

Thank you for giving the links!
You're probably right; WPO not worth further consideration.

[Afshin]

@ Peter

Also Videos would be good. In the past I did see a short video on CNN where a former CIA agent referred to the situation as such (Literally said a fight between Guards and the Clerics if i remember correctly) but have not come across alot lately. So any videos or even articles of analysts refering to this as a fight between the Guards vs the Clerics would be most welcome. Specially if from the last weeks.

[Bill Davit]

To Afshin and Peter,

I have to agree with Afshin's analysis. My friend, who's family, is still in Iran has said the same thing. She futher elaborated stating "at times its not old vs new but the old who adopted the new once they saw the opportunity. Many Iranians realize this but are so desperate for change they will latch onto it." It is my belief your finding a "gorbachev" like effect with the reform leaders. I believe Karroubi and Moussavi have been deeply influenced by this and their open defiance shows this. I am not as convinced Khatami and Rafsinjani are doing this entirely for the people. I think part of their motivation is to settle old scores and grap power. To further support Afshin's stance you have to look no further that the clerics in Qom who threw in with the reform. I believe many clerics are troubled by the militarization of the regime and see it as a conflict of interests. They firmly believe this has been in direct opposition to the messege of the Islamic Revolution. They believe the people should have a voice and the regime obviously trully doesn't.

I am not totally sold on the guards angle but the militarization seems to support this. The question is wether the guards are using Ahamadinejad and SL or is it the other way around. The differences Ahamadinejad has with some of the conservatives supports this. There is no doubt the guards were heavily in the election and their statements afterward cleary showed they were. Because the guards tend to work behind the scenes more I don't think we will trully know unitl more time passes.

[Peter]

@Afshin

During the elections the news channels broke things down as young vs. old with young being the reformists. You've simply flipped it around . It all sounds nice, and does have a kernel of truth to it, but it also isn't entirely accurate.

@Bill

Exactly my point, whatever pattern of old vs. new you first see, upon closer examination there are old and new on both sides. And like you "I am not totally sold on the guards angle". I know you've said that you agree with Afshin, but nothing you've said has contradicted my own position. And it's interesting that you take Moussavi into consideration. Afshin does not. In fact he's stated that Moussavi like AN is just a "nobody puppet" and not worth taking into account . So that would make you "naive" like me in his eyes for taking individuals into consideration. :P

[Afshin]

@ Peter,

With your previous note you had me happy for a sec, thinking there was some intresting news out there you were gonna share with us. To analyse the situation Young vs Old is worse then Naive and Simple its just being lazy or blind. Unfortunatly some Media are like that.

From your last few posts it seems that I have realy struck a very sensetive nerve so again, it was not my intention to belittle you or to hurt your feelings, its just that I think your views on the Iran situation is completly missing the plot. I've explained why I think that and have called your views Naieve and Simplystic. Its just an opinion you really should not be so bothered by it. Me and Samuel disagree on almost everything regarding Iran, its just someones look on things. Don't let it get to you.

[Peter]

@Afshin

I think we can both agree that it would be wonderful if the situation in Iran received greater and more insightful coverage in the American news media. The LA Times doesn't seem to be half bad,

[Afshin]

@ Peter
Right now I settle for just Coverage. Even if wrong. Sometimes they dont even report on it.

I read another stupid article just now which unfortunatly is from a european Country and not in English, it brings tears to your eyes. They started with stealing the Roger Cohen piece and actually ended up with their own analyses saying if there was a time to bomb iran it would be now.... !!!!! How blind can one be ?

[Peter]

@Afshin

I think we can both agree that it would be wonderful if the situation in Iran received greater and more insightful coverage in the American news media. The LA Times doesn't seem to be half bad, but the other papers leave a lot to be desired and the cable channels are terrible.

Rather then continuing to go around on what we think of each other's approach, I'm going to get back to something a bit more specific. You've told me that individuals don't matter. But yet you spend considerable time analysing Rafsanjani who happens to be an individual. Isn't that a contradiction?