40 Comments

1. Ira Zad:

One cannot and will not catch a fish fishing from a toilet bowl. To expect “fundamental change” fom this regime is rooted in pure fantasy, and is akin to wishing Hitler were a bit kinder and gentler to the Jews in Poland.

Hellooo??! Anybody home?

The whole of the regime must be eradicated.

Pinning false hopes on this or that “candidate” is an excercise in futility, if not intent for deception.
This regime is incapable of reform, period.
Even discussing the candidates and ther suppoused differences gives credence to the regime’s game of the “The Election Show” as Iranians sarcastically call it.

Also, there should be an explanation here that the “culture that loves to deceive” is not the Persian culture but the shiite mullah regime culture. I am sure that’s what was meant here, otherwise many secular Persians who despise this regime en masse may take offense to this phrase.

Jun 2, 2009 - 10:21 pm 2. Pajamas Media » The Iranian Election Circus:

[...] Read the entire piece here. [...]

Jun 3, 2009 - 1:35 am 3. IranPhd:

You should try to get the basic facts right before you move onto your fanciful theories. You wrote that “most” people don’t vote in Iranian elections. Curious understanding of “most” you have when presidential elections have always had a turnout of higher than 60% in Iran, far higher than in the United States. What a joke.

Jun 3, 2009 - 1:46 am 4. David Thomson:

It’s time for Dick Cheney to get out in front on this issue. That’s the only realistic way of putting a stop to Barack Obama’s naive Iranian policies. Most Americans will be receptive to Cheney’s moral and intellectual leadership. A few months ago, it could be legitimately argued that the former vice president should remain in the shadows. No longer. Barack Obama does not have much of an education. Harvard University is grossly overrated. He is not even close to being ready for prime time. A majority of the citizenry may continue to find a reason to like President Obama—but on a gut level they also sense his inadequacies.

Jun 3, 2009 - 5:37 am 5. Bohemond:

“Curious understanding of “most” you have when presidential elections have always had a turnout of higher than 60% in Iran”

And we should believe the Iranian government figures, why?

Jun 3, 2009 - 7:08 am 6. ella:

IranPhd

Get your facts right. Iranian vote in the last presidential elections were 48% (second round) according to the goverment of Iran. It hovered around 60% in the first round.
US turnout was 61% last year, so where is your “far higher” turnout in Iran?
Also, the governmental figures concerning elections in Iran are not necessarily true. There are large discrepancies in the number of voters registered and the ballots of actual voters, particularly in case of 2005 elections second round in which Ahmadinejad got 61% of votes as opposed to the first round when he got around 19%.

And the most important thing – Iran is governed by non-elected leader, mr. Khamenei, and not by its president who has to acknowledge Khamenei’s primacy.

Jun 3, 2009 - 8:37 am 7. Ran:

“It would be taken as a clear sign that the Iranians are ready to deal with the West, thereby buying considerable time for the regime to pretend to negotiate with Obama and his myriad special czars and envoys.”

Yeah… while the Obama administration pretends to negotiate in return.

Question for IranPhD: 60%! Amazing, yes? Then again, “most” people voted for Saddam, too. “Most” vote for Mugabe still. History shows time and again that “most” subjects “vote” for the tyrants in office… it’s one of the odd conditions of evil. So… What’s that thing you were saying about jokes?

Jun 3, 2009 - 9:02 am 8. Nick G.:

Might Khamenei use a Mousavi presidency as a ploy to fool the world into believing Iran has turned a positive corner — all the while, the mullahs will simply be buying time to ascertain nuclear weaponry? It would be far easier, far likelier, and much more politically expedient for President Obama to invite a ‘fresh face’ like Mousavi to the White House Rose Garden, than to be seen shaking hands with the inflammatory Ahmadinejad. Likewise, it would be much harder for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to convince Europe to increase international pressure on Iran’s nuclear program with a new, smiling, ‘reformist’ Iranian president, juxtaposed to his rabble-rousing predecessor.

By theoretically deceiving the West with Mousavi, the mullahs mullahs would make Israel’s warnings seem hollow and unfounded — or at least, less founded than during Ahmadinejad’s presidency. Everyone would be saying to Bibi: “Let’s give this new guy a chance to change Iranian behavior.”

There’s no telling who will win, but if it is Mousavi, the White House and State Department should ignore the conventional wisdom and remember the lessons of Khatami. For whatever ‘happy’ image Mousavi may exude in public, in reality, the man behind the curtain will probably be up to his usual tricks, just as you mentioned.

Jun 3, 2009 - 10:18 am 9. David W. Lincoln:

Michael, what about this: The Iranians are getting scared about the Mid East coalition forming against them. For the Saudis, Egypt, and the Gulf States, as well as Israel don’t want to put too many eggs into the basket of
which country is most powerful.

Either way, those the Mullahs oppress will be
calling the shots, preferably sooner rather than later.

Jun 3, 2009 - 10:34 am 10. Saahle Manesh:

IranPhD is neither Iran nor PhD He is obviously in kahoots with the regime– Perhaps his real name is Trita Treason Parsi, or perhaps Vali Nasr? or Ray Takyeh, or hell maybe he is our own Bob Kerry! 60% my ass, The joke is on you Baby!

Jun 3, 2009 - 11:11 am 11. Saahle Manesh:

The leading contender of the “reformist” camp in Iran’s presidential elections, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, was a founder of Hezbollah and a key architect of the Islamic Republic
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Iran_elections_Hezbollah/2009/06/03/221083.html

So much for Iran being on the verge of “fundamental change”, let’s get real here please!!

Jun 3, 2009 - 11:21 am 12. Saahle Manesh:

More good news for the mullah regime:

“Israel will not bomb Iran”, said FM Lieberman in Moscow today.

Ahh, those pesky Russians…

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/israel_wont_bomb_iran/2009/06/03/220920.html

Jun 3, 2009 - 11:23 am 13. Gary Ogletree:

I recall that several of the “moderate” leaders in the past have stated that they did not fear a retaliatory nuclear strike from Israel because they felt millions of Iranian dead was a small price to pay for destroying Israel. Reaching out to Iran is best done with a large number of “fast movers” and Tomahawks.

Jun 3, 2009 - 11:25 am 14. Aryajet:

Voting in Iran at this time resembles a double edged sward, if I vote it seems that I’m legitimizing IRI as a democratic Gov. and if I don’t vote it will be another 4 years for this apocalyptic man to remain in the office which will result in disastrous consequences.
Looking at available info., news, blogs and contact with many Iranians I came up with this conclusion that many Iranians are not really concerned about who they are voting IN but more concerned about about WHO they are voting OUT.
Dr. Ledeen: Mousavi was former Prime Minister before that position was removed from cabinet not Iranian Prez.
Iranphd: 60% is over exaggerated #, some thing like 45% of eligible voters makes more sense. Except for this time around when majority of Iranians want A-jad OUT.

Jun 3, 2009 - 12:35 pm 15. j green:

I agree in part and disagree in part with Irazad. To give credibility to Iran’s elections is undesirable, given the truth about them actually being non-elections.

However, Dr. Ledeen is, in a refreshingly funny way, showing us what a farce the elections really are. I’ve argued in the past, also, that even keeping track of the candidates’ names is a waste. Nonetheless, the humor one derives from the exposing of this mirage as the circus it is also is a valuable teaching tool.

Therefore, Dr. Ledeen’s piece is well-taken and he is perhaps predicting another mullah shell game for us–women’s rights.

Jun 3, 2009 - 1:41 pm 16. Instapundit » Blog Archive » THE IRANIAN ELECTION CIRCUS….:

[...] THE IRANIAN ELECTION CIRCUS. [...]

Jun 3, 2009 - 5:44 pm 17. Benjamin Makdisi:

Circus?

Historically, a larger percentage of citizens vote in Iran than in the United States.

In addition, the differences among the top candidates are far greater than those in the U.S.

You’re speaking out of ignorance.

Benjamin

Jun 3, 2009 - 5:55 pm 18. IranPhd:

yawwwn…no I am not in Iran, but I was there for a year recently and would not let myself be blinded by my preferences (which are in line with many your’s). Most Iranians support a reformed Islamic Republic. Anyone not wearing blinders can see this and anyone who steps outside of the north of Tehran can see this. That is why I trust the electoral numbers. As far as Ahmadinejad’s numbers in the first round are concerned relative to the second round, anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of Iranian politics knows that Hashemi Rafsanjani is one of the country’s most despised figures. He has his base of voters who are mostly upper middle class business owners, but that’s about it. It should’ve come as no surprise that Ah.N. pummeled him in the second round.

Jun 3, 2009 - 5:57 pm 19. Cyrus:

Who writes this crap? More people vote (as a percentage of the population) in the Iranian presidential election than in its American counterpart.

Jun 3, 2009 - 6:01 pm 20. Alireza:

Of course the 2nd scenario is at play. It would be a retarded and scary idea not to believe that the new generation of Iranians gives a damn about God, religion and anything to do with non-material things.

Regime knows well if this generation decides to pee all at once in Tehran, there will be flood all over the city. This generation doesn’t see ANYTHING holly, spiritual about this regime or anything to do with God.

This generation is the same people that after Martin Luther wrote a readable bible, and they kept burning churches one after the other.

Regime knows this so well. And that makes the point that the leadership in Iran is much more advanced and able to anticipate the future and how to protect itself and Iranian national interest in the long run.

I watched the debate between the two, and I could not imagine such conversation take place under this A. hole regime.

It is obvious, after watching the debate, Ahmadinejad is the one Israel wants so hard to have as Iranian president. Yet, Mousavi is the one who might build a Holocaust memorial in Tehran, and yet keeps sending arms to Hezbolah in Lebanon. The power holders in Iran know well that Ahmadinejad is indeed working as a double agent for and in favor of Israel, as he makes sure to cause Iran losses and destruction. Regime knows this and showing such a debate is one part of making the difference more clear.

On the other hand, I sensed Mousavi might have a heart attack in the debate, given his breathing was noticeable to be hard, and for sure he needed few cups of Starbucks to give him more exciting. He talked very boringly and that’s not good for him, while Ahmadinejad looked like he just wants to lash out and trash and bite anyone he could put his teeth in it.

Jun 3, 2009 - 7:01 pm 21. Kurt:

I must say, this sort of reminds me of the newly-developed processes for electing alumni trustees and alumni council representatives at my undergraduate alma mater, Dartmouth College.

Jun 3, 2009 - 7:31 pm 22. Cyrus:

Dr. Ledeen
Kindly clarify what you mean by a “culture that loves to deceive.” Iranians are decent people overall and some Iranians are fans of yours.

Jun 3, 2009 - 8:17 pm 23. mza330:

Ira Zad…..you are such a poser. you are truly a despicable person. What is it you have against Iran?? do you want Iran to be a client state of the United States and Israel just like Egypt, and Jordan, and the UAE??

Please tell me… you’re an idiot who posts on this blog and claims to be Iranian, your name is not even Iranian, please tell us more about yourself Ira…..hahaha…loser.

And for your information, the Iranian elections are at least more than what countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE and your other client states can say they have. The Iranian elections may not be perfect, but at least women, and men can vote. Go to hell.

Jun 3, 2009 - 8:22 pm 24. John K.:

It really pains me to say this, but I hope Ahmadinejad wins re-election. The victory of a so-called “reformer” will only give false confidence to and political cover for those willing to apologize for the Islamic Republic of Iran’s conduct. The international community cannot wait any longer as peril advances, and must not call for more “talks” or for more European-led diplomacy. Call President Bush a “cowboy” or a “unilateralist,” but his conduct vis-a-vis Iran was as accommodating as any other U.S. administration or European counterpart. Let Ahmadinejad win, and then, maybe, just maybe, the world will see that few viable options (outside real, coercive sanctions or military force) remain. Continue to support Iranian political dissidents (who bravely serve jail sentences or even die for their beliefs) and the burgeoning women’s women (the forefront of the Iranian popular resistance), and maybe the Iranian people will see the writing on the wall and collectively partake of their own hezb-e-baad (party of the winds).

Jun 3, 2009 - 8:24 pm 25. Saahle Manesh:

Cyrus, Irazad (Commnet #1 above) also had the same point to make as you did on that line you refer to.
I have to admit that line leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation by an uninformed reader.
I am sure Dr. Ledeen meant the culture of the regime(not Iranians) “loves to deceive”. Right Dr.?

IranPhd–You are a “Maa’loom-ol-Haal”(Obvious pawn) Euro-mullah freemason proponent. This is not the right forum for you since we all want regime’s total destruction and its replacement with a secular democracy free of Islamic fascism that you love to “reform”. Like Irazad said this regime is un-reformable, you get that moron?
Go join your friends in Tudeh Party, or Tahkeem Vahdat, or lick Hajieh Shirin Ebadi-eh Khaa’en’s boots, and be the new “boy” for freaking European lap dog Mohammad Khatami in Iran, why are you here in the west then??Living off the fat of the land and yawning like you do? and plotting on western soil?– Go back to Iran and “reform” your beloved regime to which you are a lap dog! Evin prison would love to host you under the next president A.Nejad :)
No one cares what you do, believe me! so quit and go back home.

Jun 3, 2009 - 8:45 pm 26. Nick G.:

Cyrus, he meant the mullahs con the world time in and time out. They’ve been doing it for decades. He didn’t mean all Iranians were deceptive, I assure you that.

It’s been said that the Persians invented chess, and the mullahs act like it. They view the entire Mideast as their personal strategic chess match.

Jun 3, 2009 - 9:01 pm 27. Afshin:

Iranians are decent people overall

Who are you kidding? If that were true, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Real Persians are generally good, decent people. The filthy cultists occupying our land not so much…

Nick: There is no such thing as a Persian mullah. No Persian would worship an arab god.

Jun 3, 2009 - 9:13 pm 28. IranPhd:

“No one cares what you do, believe me! so quit and go back home.”

I’m not here to please you, but to share my views. If you don’t care about me, feel free not to respond and/not to read. But to deny my right to respond would be to act in the way that IRI often does with its opponents.

The sad truth is that I–like you–would like a different regime. But the reality is that the Iranian people don’t. Go to Iran. Visit the poor areas and talk to the people. Remember, the average salary is something like 400 dollars a month there. Your friends and family who travel there and back are not representative of the majority of Iranians. And the sad fact is that the majority of Iranians want an Islamic regime, regardless of what you and/or I prefer. As such, reform is the best option for change.

Jun 3, 2009 - 10:19 pm 29. JFM:

Ira Zad said:

Also, there should be an explanation here that the “culture that loves to deceive” is not the Persian culture but the shiite mullah regime culture.

Greeks ((I know, I know) told that young Persians in Achemenid times (I am aware that many things can change in over 2,00 years) were teached only three things: ride horses, fire bows and tell the truth. On the opther hand Takiyah is centric to the imported culture of Islam.

Ran said:

Then again, “most” people voted for Saddamw

In fact 100% people voted for Sadam. Even people in death row voted for him. \tongue__cheek_on Neither Stalin nor Hitler ever came close to such rates of approval \tongue_in_cheek_off

Gary said

recall that several of the “moderate” leaders in the past have stated that they did not fear a retaliatory nuclear strike from Israel because they felt millions of Iranian dead was a small price to pay for destroying Israel.

I remind about it. They would get millions of their own people (supposedly own people) killed in order to further the cause of Palestinians who, according to a post in “the Iranian” website, hate and despise Iranians. Can you say “bowing in front of their Arab masters”?

Jun 4, 2009 - 5:42 am 30. njcommuter:

Another possibility: they are using the elections to judge just how badly they are out of synch with their subjects, and how much resistance they are likely to face. With that information, they can decide to quash it or accomodate it (however temporarily).

Jun 4, 2009 - 7:27 am 31. Going To The Candidates Debate « Around The Sphere:

[...] Michael Ledeen: I’ve been asking Iranian friends, and they offer two theories.

Jun 4, 2009 - 8:58 am 32. TallDave:

Iran doesn’t have real elections, the mullahs decide who gets to run.

This is why Iranian elections are boycotted by many reformers. Otherwise, the country’s huge problems would probably result in 80%-90% turnout.

I–like you–would like a different regime But the reality is that the Iranian people don’t.

The reality is the mullahs don’t give them the chance to vote for real reform. There are definite indications they would vote for reform if allowed.

Jun 4, 2009 - 10:59 am 33. tioedong:

Moussavi’s wife has a PhD in art and once got in hot water for asking a feminist to talk at a local university. link

And if the election is a sham, why did the government termporarily shut down Facebook (used by Moussavi’s supporters to drum up support)?

Jun 4, 2009 - 3:26 pm 34. Marie Claude:

participation : 5% to 10%, though the TV channels will show a lot more, up to some 60%, the mullahs are in use of making mise-en-scenes

Jun 4, 2009 - 6:10 pm 35. ella:

IranPhd
It’s because you are not in Iran that you have these kind of views. Most of people who think majority of Iranians support Ahmadinejad are either abroad or in Iran with Pasdaran & Co..
You are right that not many Iranians like Rafsanjani but Ahmadinejad is hated as well. You are also forgetting the fact that it is Ahmadinejad fault that economic situation is worse now than it was before and more people are poorer than ever before.
Where are Ahmadinejad’ promises of money for newly wed couples, his talks about new appartments for young people and promises of more jobs for people finishing university? Where are they?
To repeat your sentence ” anyone not wearing blinders can see this and anyone who steps outside of the north of Tehran can see this”

Alireza

Neither Mousavi nor Ahmadinejad direct Iranian foreign policy, furthermore power holders in Iran do have a power to remove current president from his position. If, like you claim, Ahmadinejad works for Israel why Khamenei does not remove Mr. A, have you ever thought that perhaps he too works for Israel, hmm…………..?

Cyrus

Taroof anyone?

Jun 4, 2009 - 9:26 pm 36. ella:

tioedong

I have a theory too
Election is a sham but it allows people to blow out a steam. If there were no elections people would think that government do not listen do them, that they have control over nothing so they would get very angry and that might lead to radical change. On the other hand allowing for some choice in elections Iranians have some control over who is the president therefore they have some control over the government – or they think they have. Therefore there is minimal chance of violent overthrow of government and much less chance of major non-violent change.

Jun 4, 2009 - 9:40 pm 37. Alireza:

I have never seen Iran situation this sensitive and at the point of inflection, as we near the presidential election in less than a week.

On one hand Ahmadinejad, Israel’s favorite candidate, basically has blown up fuses and he practically bite anyone that he could reach. In his debate he huffed and puffed that Tony Blair has sent him “PERSONAL letter” of apology. Few days later the English and Farsi version of the letter came out and it turned out the letter was from UK embassy in Tehran and there were NO SINGLE word that says anything about apology to Iran!!!! This is shocking, embarrassing and another huge spit on Ahmadinejad’s face. I read the letter in English and that makes Ahmadinejad a total retard to shoot himself in the foot, balls and brain.

Majority of people are tired of him regardless of how A. hole is Rafsanjani and his gang. So he did his best to connect Mousavi to Rafsanjani.

There is a possibility of riots and very possibly RG getting involved. But I think at the end, people’s side will win, which hopefully is one X-small step toward real democracy in Iran. So it is possible that Israel and other who drool to have Ahmadinejad in power do things that makes the situation more favorable to him. We’ll see.

Already physical fights are taking place in Tehran and other cities between the two sides. Ahmadinejad has unleashed the Basiji people to go after Mousavi’s supporters, but I think this will reverse side as millions and millions of people will synchronized their pissing to flood the city with their unhappiness. So all Iranians need to do is drink more tea! And I have not even included the bonus points if Iran loses or lower its chance of World Cup few days before the election.

Jun 6, 2009 - 1:58 pm 38. Worte der Woche (25) « Zeitung für Schland:

[...] bringt Michael Ledeen alles, was über die “Wahlen” im Iran zu wissen ist, auf den Punkt: Of course Iran [...]

Jun 7, 2009 - 12:03 am 39. Saahle Manesh:

What is increasingly obvious is that Anglo-saxon media is trumpeting Moussavi and how ‘good and democratic’ he is, and his Akhoond wife who looks like a black crow in veil as a revolutionary heroin of women’s lib!! — Ayatollah BBC is doing its best to get Moussavi “elected” by glorifying him, painting a pig and selling it as a parrot. Moussavi is a double servant for British and Russian interest, and has always been in the service of both countries intelligent services.

The west is vehemently against Nejad’s becoming president for second term, and most likely they will have their guy, Moussavi, into office which will mean another decade of life insurance for the Tehran regime since Moussavi will start dealing and wheeling with the west. Or, altenratively, to show what a good lap dog he is for the west, he will set the stage by preparing a good event for the beginnings of the break-up of Iran into little “Iranestans”– This is an 80-year old plan by western intelligence services and IRI has been doing its best to make it come true.
We are seeing the beginnings of it in Baluchestan and Azerbaijan. Khuzestan’s cessation will then be a she-in after those…

However: and this is a big ‘however’, Nejad will not sit still even if he loses the election. He will most likely form a group or faction of his own and start throwing all he got on the ‘Europeans mullahs’ corruption and will reveal all he knows on them. Baseej may follow Nejad and choose him as their de-facto leader, this may culminate into a coup against Moussavi ‘to save the revolution’s values’ if Moussavi or Karrubi’s names are pulled out of the voting booths.

Nejad is backed by China and Russia, and so is Khamenei, and it is highly unlikley that they will just sit on their hands and let the anglo-saxon-owned mullah lap dogs and their cohorts take over.

I agree, chance of riots and civil war, even a coup d’etats by Baseej and/or Pasdaran will increase daily from this point on if Nejad does not get re-elected.

Add to that the chance of assassinations of the top guns on each side of the battle, while the various Islamic Mafias go after each others throats. Mohammad Khatami(EU’s favorite lap dog mullah), Rafsanjani(Corrupt anglo-saxon-owned mullah-in-chief), Khamenei(Russia), and Nejad himself(Cino-Russian tool) are top on the assassination target list from the 2 factions.

Let the shooting begin!

Israel under Netnyahu(NOT your previous Netnayahu anymore, he is now a dog without teeth) has been pretty much neutered by Hussein Obama gang and will be no threat to the Tehran regime henceforth. Hussein Obama saw to that. So the chance of Israelis doing much about this is pretty near nill.

France, on the other hand, may be another story since they have a free hand to act in the Persian gulf without any political angst — something US cannot do anymore. France wants to become a neo-colonialist-Imperialist again and has chosen Iran and Persian Gulf as its new territory to do so. France may potentially play a big role in the break-up of Iran when the time comes, and of course claim a piece for itself like other rabid dogs gathering around in the region for the event.

But in the end, if people of Iran do not eradicate the WHOLE of this regime themselves(highly doubtful judging by street dancing taking place unde re guise of elections, they will be even bigger losers than they have been in the last 30-years.

And that’s no matter how much Dr. Ledeen likes Moussavi to become the next president of Islamic Republic of Terror in Iran , too!
BBC has aposition for anyone who loves Moussavi, by the way.

p.s.

Dr Ledeen, you have not yet clarified yourself on the “Culture that loves to deceive” comment referring to Iranaians; and that is despite many objections to that statement in this forum.
How should we take your silence to mean??

Jun 7, 2009 - 10:21 pm 40. Ironheadz:

What Motivates Ahmadinejad?
The president of Iran appears intent on developing nuclear weapons and has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. In the West he is at times portrayed as a madman, but few realize the real motivating force behind his dream of triumphant Islam.
by Melvin Rhodes
It’s difficult to comprehend, but could a 5-year-old boy who went missing more than 11 centuries ago be the cause of the world’s next nuclear conflict?

Adherents of Shia Islam believe that leadership of the Muslim religion was transferred from Muhammad to his son-in-law and then down through a series of descendants. Shiites refer to each of these successors as an “imam”—Arabic for “leader.”

The 12th of these imams was born in 868 or 869. A few years later, in 874, he disappeared without a trace, bringing an end to Muhammad’s lineage. The Shiites believe that this boy, the 12th imam, survived, “that he merely withdrew from public view when he was five and that he will sooner or later emerge . . . to liberate the world from evil” (Matthias Kuntzel, “A Child of the Revolution Takes Over: Ahmadinejad’s Demons,” The New Republic, April 24).

Some refer to him as the Mahdi, meaning “divinely guided one.” In Shiite ideology—dominant in Iran and Iraq —”legitimate Islamic rule can only be established following the reappearance of the Twelfth Imam” (ibid.). As Christians wait for the second coming of Jesus Christ to establish the Kingdom of God over the earth, Shiite Muslims await the Mahdi’s return to make Islam the dominant—and eventually only— religion throughout the world.

Shiite beliefs shape Iran

Because most people in the West do not take religion seriously, it’s almost impossible for Westerners to understand the power of religion in the Middle East. In Islamic countries, politics and religion are inseparable.

The Shiites have been waiting patiently for the 12th imam for more than a thousand years, but that patience has run out, at least in Iran. In 1979 the overthrow of the pro-Western shah of Iran led to the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a theocratic state where the clerics held supreme power under the Ayatollah Khomeini.

“Khomeini . . . had no intention of waiting. He vested the myth with an entirely new sense: The Twelfth Imam will only emerge when the believers have vanquished evil. To speed up the Mahdi’s return, Muslims had to shake off their torpor and fight” (ibid.).

Influenced by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood of the 1930s, Khomeini “agreed with the Brothers’ conception of what had to be considered ‘evil’: namely, all the achievements of modernity that replaced divine providence with individual self-determination, blind faith with doubt, and the stern morality of sharia [law] with sensual pleasures” (ibid.).

Khomeini believed that all that is bad in the world comes from the West, especially America, which he designated “the Great Satan.”

“Twelvers,” as this largest group of Shiite Muslims are sometimes called, believe Islam must triumph over the West before the 12th imam will appear. They feel it their duty to bring chaos to the world. Out of this chaos will come a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West that will then lead directly to the return of the 12th imam.

Thus the Tehran regime is clearly not about to enter into any agreement of substance with the West. Any treaty is only going to be used by the Iranian leadership to play for time, as President Ahmadinejad has openly boasted of doing in his drawn-out negotiations with the European Union.

As the New Republic writer Matthias Kuntzel asks, “Why should an Iranian president engage in pragmatic politics when his assumption is that, in three or four years, the savior will appear?” (ibid.).

Iranian threats to eliminate Israel

One of President Ahmadinejad’s stated goals is the total destruction of the Jewish state of Israel. Yet this isn’t new in Iranian thinking.

“In December 2001, former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani explained that ‘the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything.’ On the other hand, if Israel responded with its own nuclear weapons, it ‘will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.’

“Rafsanjani thus spelled out a macabre cost-benefit analysis. It might not be possible to destroy Israel without suffering retaliation. But, for Islam, the level of damage Israel could inflict is bearable—only 100,000 or so additional martyrs for Islam” (ibid.).

Israel is a small country that could be essentially wiped out with just one nuclear missile, whereas the Islamic world is spread across many countries on three continents. Even if Israel retaliated with its entire nuclear arsenal, it would merely harm the Islamic community of nations, not destroy them. This was the thinking of Iran’s former “moderate” president.

The new Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is even more radical. At a November 2005 theology conference he emphasized that “the most important task of our Revolution is to prepare the way for the return of the Twelfth Imam” (ibid.).

An ancient failed attempt to exterminate the Jews

This is not the first time that a powerful leader has tried to exterminate the Jews. Seventy years ago Adolf Hitler succeeded in exterminating 6 million Jews. If Iran succeeds in a nuclear strike against Israel, once again the world could see 6 million Jews wiped out!

This is not even the first time an Iranian leader has tried to wipe out the Jews. Almost 2,500 years ago many Jews lived in the ancient Persian Empire, whose modern successor state was renamed Iran after World War II. In the Old Testament book of Esther we read an account of an attempt to totally annihilate the Jews.

The story takes place in 484 B.C. during the reign of the Persian king Xerxes I, who was king from 486-465 B.C. The biblical name for Xerxes was Ahaseurus.

One of his predecessors, Cyrus the Great, had defeated Babylon, where the Jews had been taken as captives, in 539 B.C. Soon afterward he gave the Jews permission to return to Judah, which was within his empire. Many returned, but many did not. (In fact, as a result of the Babylonian captivity around 2,600 years ago, some Jews still live in Iran though many have left under the present fundamentalist Islamic regime.)

When Xerxes’ wife, Queen Vashti, refused to honor him, he divorced her and later chose Esther, a Jewess, as her successor. Esther had been brought up by her uncle, Mordecai. According to the biblical account, the king appointed a man named Haman to the second-highest position in the land, what we today would call prime minister.

Esther 3:2 states that “all the king’s servants who were within the king’s gate bowed and paid homage to Haman, for so the king had commanded concerning him. But Mordecai would not bow down or pay homage.” Haman realized that it wasn’t just Mordecai who was a problem, but that all the Jews would do as he did (verse 6). So he devised a plot to wipe them out.

After things started to unravel, Haman’s family warned him not to tackle the Jews: “When Haman told his wife Zeresh and all his friends everything that had happened to him, his wise men and his wife Zeresh said to him, ‘If Mordecai, before whom you have begun to fall, is of Jewish descent, you will not prevail against him but will surely fall before him’” (Esther 6:13).

They might have been aware of God’s promise to Abraham regarding him and his descendants: “I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you” (Genesis 12:3). Through Mordecai and Queen Esther, God delivered the Jewish people from genocide.

Haman failed to exterminate the Jews. Hitler, though he did kill vast numbers, also failed in his genocidal efforts. Similarly, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s stated goal of wiping out the Jews of Israel will also fail. God will ultimately deliver the Jewish people from this as He has delivered them many times before.

In Matthew 24:22 we read the words of Jesus Christ, the real Messiah who is soon to return to this world: “And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.”

Jesus Christ will intervene in world affairs to stop humanity from destroying itself in the kind of nuclear conflict that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is threatening. Not only is the Iranian president intent on destroying Israel, but he also wants to rid the world of America and Britain, the leading infidel countries, so Islam can triumph over all nations.

Islam on the rise, the West in decline

Amir Taheri, a former executive editor of Kayhan, Iran’s largest daily newspaper, who now lives in Europe, wrote in Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper April 16: “In Ahmadinejad’s analysis, the rising Islamic ’superpower’ has decisive advantages over the infidel. Islam has four times as many young men of fighting age as the West, with its aging populations.”

He notes that young Shiite boys are taught to develop two qualities. “The first is entezar, the capacity patiently to wait for the Imam to return. The second is taajil, the actions needed to hasten the return.”

Mr. Taheri goes on to explain that, in President Ahmadenijad’s thinking, “the Imam’s return will coincide with an apocalyptic battle between the forces of evil and righteousness, with evil ultimately routed. If the infidel loses its nuclear advantage, it could be worn down in a long, low-intensity war at the end of which surrender to Islam would appear the least bad of options. And that could be a signal for the Imam to appear.”

He had this to say about Iran’s nuclear program: “Moments after Ahmadinejad announced ‘the atomic miracle’, the head of the Iranian nuclear project, Ghulamreza Aghazadeh, unveiled plans for manufacturing 54,000 centrifuges, to enrich enough uranium for hundreds of nuclear warheads. ‘We are going into mass production,’ he boasted.

“The Iranian plan is simple: playing the diplomatic game for another two years until Bush becomes a ‘lame-duck,’ unable to take military action against the mullahs, while continuing to develop nuclear weapons . . .”

“While waiting Bush out, the Islamic Republic is intent on doing all it can to consolidate its gains in the region. Regime changes in Kabul and Baghdad have altered the status quo in the Middle East. While Bush is determined to create a Middle East that is democratic and pro-Western, Ahmadinejad is equally determined that the region should remain Islamic but pro-Iranian.

“Iran is now the strongest presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, after the US. It has turned Syria and Lebanon into its outer defenses, which means that, for the first time since the 7th century, Iran is militarily present on the coast of the Mediterranean. In a massive political jamboree in Tehran [in April], Ahmadinejad also assumed control of the ‘Jerusalem Cause’, which includes annihilating Israel ‘in one storm’, while launching a take-over bid for the cash-starved Hamas government in the West Bank and Gaza.”

Mr. Taheri also points out that Tehran has “reactivated Iran’s network of Shia organizations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen, while resuming contact with Sunni fundamentalist groups in Turkey, Egypt, Algeria and Morocco.”

Islamic fundamentalism in a variety of forms is spreading from country to country with no successful reverses. The latest country to come under the control of fundamentalists is Somalia, whose capital city, Mogadishu, fell to militants in early June.

Militant Islam is a powerful force that seems destined to grow greater and to bring increasing turmoil around the world. Among the adherents of Shia Islam the expectation of the Mahdi is feeding their zeal toward the fulfillment of apocalyptic events.

The Shiites expect a messiah. One will come, but not the one they think they are preparing for! GN

Jun 17, 2009 - 6:57 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: