The Muslim Solution

John R. Houk

© May 13, 2015

“Someone is going to Hell: us or them? I say them! I say that because Islam is permanent war and I want peace. Peace cannot coexist with Islam.

Nobody has the political will to off 1.3 BILLION Muslims. Neither do they have the will to wage the ideological war. It’s gonna be a tough sell.” - Dajjal

The above Dajjal quote is how I derived the title for two combined comments made in light of the ISIS beheading of 15 Ethiopian Christians located in Libya: “Islamist genocide in Libya proof Christians must arm themselves: Gun law expert”.

It has taken me awhile to cross post Dajjal’s largely due to the eye for eye concept or worse excising all adherents to Islam that are committed to the belief in the immutability of the Quran and the measured reverence for the Hadith and Sira. Those writings considered holy by even the most nominal of Muslims explicitly call for violence against non-Muslims who at the very refuse to submit to the superiority of Islam. Add this to the fact that Islam teaches that Mohammed is the perfect man to imitate to be a righteous person. The problem imitating Mo is that he seemed to transform from a wise religious philosopher in his early days in Mecca into a lusting blood thirsty maniac after expulsion to Medina, willing to terminate anyone who refused his prophethood or mock his integrity as a holy man.

Purist Muslims (aka Radical Muslim terrorists) today committing atrocities today claim justification for their actions by claiming the example of Mo. Check out these five English translation of the so-called immutable Quran 33: 21:

Sahih International: There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.

Pickthall: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.

Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.

Shakir: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

Muhammad Sarwar: The Messenger of God is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in God and in the Day of Judgment and who remember God very often.

Keeping in mind the Quran is not written in numerical order by date, but rather by size – roughly longest to shortest. (See Also cache PDF) TAKE NOTE that Quran 33:21 was recorded from Medina.

Dajjal’s point is that as long as Muslims are devoted to Islamic writings and Mohammed, they will continue rise up in violence even if they are utterly defeat in a war. It is encoded in the considered holy writings and the perfect man’s example – Mohammed – to be violent in the HERE and NOW until Islam forces global submission. ERGO the only solution to preventing the constant rise of Muslims doing their duty is the eradication of all the adherents to all of Islam as if that religion of divine origin in a revelation to a chosen man.

Dajjal’s thoughts also occurred among European Christian adherents who grew weary of the constant Muslim violence in medieval days. Hence the Crusades began (See Also HERE) with people capable of the same violence as Muslims. The sad truth about the Crusades is that atrocities were committed contrary to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Another sad truth is that Muslims from the days of their prophet Mo right on to the present are committing atrocities IN ACCORDANCE to their Allah’s revelation to Mo.

I’ve had my share of just turn Dar al-Islam into a nuked sea of glass from September 11, 2001 right on through these days of ISIS and Boko Haram and lesser Islamic terrorism of notoriety. BUT after periods of cooling off I have to realize that blanket eradication of all Muslim devoted to their belief of the immutability of Islamic theopolitical Islamic doctrine is contrary to the Great Commission of Jesus Christ. Here are four Gospel (Good News) examples of it being God’s will that all humanity are Saved in Christ if they only believe in the Risen Savior:

Matthew 28:18-20 (NKJV)

¹⁸ And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. ¹⁹ Go therefore^[a] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.^[b]

Mark 16:15-16 (NKJV)

¹⁵ And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. ¹⁶ He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Luke 24:46-49 (NKJV)

⁴⁶ Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise^[a] from the dead the third day, ⁴⁷ and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. ⁴⁸ And you are witnesses of these things. ⁴⁹ Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem^[b]until you are endued with power from on high.”

John 20:21-23; 30-31 (NKJV)

²¹ So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” ²² And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. ²³ If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

³⁰ And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; ³¹ but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (New King James Version)

That rules out the Muslim Solution a la Hitler’s Jewish Solution.

So how in the world does Western Civilization eliminate Muslim lunacy without committing genocide? There is an idea that Dajjal also propagates, yet that idea might still be a bit distasteful to Americans who correctly take a stand with America’s Constitutional Bill of Rights. In particular the First Amendment’s proclamation as basic human right to Religious Freedom (See Also HERE), Free Press, a Free Press, Right to Assemble and to petition government with grievances without fear reprisals. Dajjal’s idea is a full scale government assault on the reality of Islam with psychological warfare.

A psychological warfare assault on Islam goes against the grain of Religious Freedom and Free Speech among Americans. HOWEVER, beginning such an assault would be a great secular path that Biblical Christians can support that is not outright genocide.

For sure as soon as a psych-assault begins, Western Civilization will receive the traditional Muslim pushback that will include the cry, “die kafir” (infidel non-Muslim). If America remains sincere about exposing Islam with psych-warfare, the Muslim response will also lead to military action in turn. Such military action should lead to a WWII-style rules of engagement (ROE). Those ROE should lead to the utter defeat of any Muslim military capability followed by psychological warfare in a now occupied land. This means the inclusion of the suppression of the theopolitical nature of Islam even if it means arresting every mullah, imam, mufti and/or any religious title that refuses to denounce the Quran-Medina inspired theopolitical ideology including in the Hadith and Sira.

As a Christian I am no fan of the entirety of Islam. It is my opinion that the Quran is an antichrist promoting religious book. I haven’t read enough the Quran to know if the antichrist surahs are in both the Mecca and Medina portions of the Quran. I am not going to take the time now to make that exploration. As an American I am willing to tolerate a transformed (as opposed to Islamic purist reform) Islam in which the peaceful allah-searching components of the Quran, Hadith and Sira become preeminent. As long as Islam demands a death to the kafir mentality, especially Americans and Jews, I support harsh suppression.

Well, that’s my two-cents. Below are the sentiments of Dajjal – that I must remind you comes shortly after the mass beheading of Christians – which I do have a tough time agreeing with completely, but perhaps partially.

JRH 5/13/15

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

**************************

Destroy Islam for Western Culture’s Survival

By Dajjal

Derived from Comment Dates:

April 20, 2015 at 7:15 PM and April 20, 2015 at 9:28 PM

Isdamnic genocide is not soluble by individual armed resistance. Where Allah’s writ runs and Muslimes outnumber Christians; the mob will prevail.

Where Allah’s writ does not run, the laws generally preclude individual ownership and carrying of firearms. Jews and Christians are sitting ducks in Europe; forbidden by law to defend themselves.

While some American States issue concealed carry permits, those incidents are rare here in the USA. Most of the plots have involved suicide bombings, in which cases a pistol would not be useful.

Collective action is required: our government, in alliance with other free nations, must eradicate Islam from the face of the earth.

When the impatient zealots of ISIS swarm Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, Iran gets their own or the Chechens take over Russia’s arsenal, it will be too late and all hope will be lost.

Kinetics alone will not solve the problem. The war of ideas alone will not solve the problem. A combination is required.

Our government must wage psychological warfare by creating a docudrama based on the Sira. The docudrama must be backed up with shorter productions detailing individual incidents. Those must be distributed globally in multiple languages.

By exposing the Ummah to the awful truth about Moe the seeds of doubt will be planted to sprout into apostasy.

The hard line true believers who will not apostatize must be ushered into Hell. Off the Imam or Mullah, then bomb and strafe his funeral procession.

Wholesale slaughter is needed. Wherever ISIS and like groups are gathered, drop ordinance of sufficient magnitude to wipe them out without regard to collateral damage. Be proactive: do it to them before they do you in. We see videos with long armored columns which should have been strafed by A10s. Kill one fly and one hundred will come to his funeral.

Someone is going to Hell: us or them? I say them! I say that because Islam is permanent war and I want peace. Peace cannot coexist with Islam.

Nobody has the political will to off 1.3 BILLION Muslims. Neither do they have the will to wage the ideological war. It’s gonna be a tough sell.

Islam is like a wasp hive: swat one and they all come after you. Offensive jihad is fard al-kifaya. When we retaliate, its fard al-ayn [Blog Editor: I didn’t have clue what the heck these two fards meant. HERE is a simple explanation from OU of all places and HERE is an explanation a purist Islamic website.]; including Muslimas [Blog Editor: Muslim women – typically younger, hip and/or socially outgoing – Urban Dictionary, wiseGEEK and WhatIsIslamAbout.com], children and sheikhs.

Muslims cannot be defeated without destroying their iman. While they [i.e. the Muslim dedication to the concept of **Iman] believe in Allah, his imperatives, threat & promise, they will never cease attacking for long.

[** Blog Editor: “Iman” as a concept - Iman is generally outlined using the six articles of faith:

1.   Belief in Allah

2.   Belief in the Angels

3.   Belief in Divine Books

4.   Belief in the Prophets

5.   Belief in the Day of Judgment

6.   Belief in Allah's predestination

Of these, the first five are mentioned together in the Qur'an^[9] and by Muhammad, while including a corollary of belief in Allah – the good and evil of fate ordained by God – has referred to all six together in the following manner in the Hadith of Gabriel:

"Iman is that you believe in God and His Angels and His Books and His Messengers and the Hereafter and the good and evil fate [ordained by your God]."^[10] (Iman (concept): The Six articles of Islamic faith; Wikipedia; page was last modified on 18 April 2015, at 16:38.)]

They think Allah is God and Moe was Al-Insan al-kamil [Blog Editor: “al-insan al-kamil” is the Islamic doctrine of the perfect man of which Mohammed is the highest example – HERE and HERE] Unless someone shows them that Allah is Satan and Moe was a murdering, lecherous pedophile and false prophet, we cannot win this war.

_____________________________

The Muslim Solution

John R. Houk

© May 13, 2015

____________________________

Destroy Islam for Western Culture’s Survival

Dajjal’s post is edited. Some by spellcheck and some by common sense. Slang humorously created by Dajjal remains intact. Any text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

© Dajjal

Regime Change in Iran?

Here is an interesting look inside Iranian politics and Shia Islamism.

JRH 5/4/12

Please Support SlantRight 2.0 - Donations are not tax deductible but are appreciated to help with the bills.

*****************************

Regime Change in Iran?

By Brendan Daly
Middle East QuarterlySpring 2012, pp. 81-86

There is every reason to believe that the Islamic Republic's days are numbered. The current government, lorded over by the religious supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, and his Guardian Council of aging mullahs, who can overrule any policy change by the pseudo-elected president, seem wildly out of touch with the general populace. Not only are the youth of Iran—some 70 percent of whom are under the age of thirty—chaffing under the "guardianship of the Islamic jurists" (velayet-e-faqih)—but so is the economy, due to sanctions imposed by the West in response to the regime's insistence on pursuing its nuclear program.[1] Inflation has long been out of control and trade and tourism a tiny fraction of what it could be, and yet the establishment has on the whole shown little interest in sacrificing militant, revolutionary principles for economic, and indeed, political expediency. Can this approach be sustained in view of the tightening economic noose around Tehran, and at what cost?

Background

The replacement of a relentlessly Islamist regime—emerging as it is in competition with Turkey as the primary regional superpower—with a liberal, secular, democratic government that will eschew domestic repression and international subversion is certainly attractive.[2] And it is not unprecedented, for Iran long struggled for constitutional and democratic rule. The constitutional revolution of 1905 was the first of its kind in the Middle East. Even the 1979 revolution, customarily referred to as the "Islamic Revolution," was in fact, initially, the result of a confluence of agitators: republican, nationalist, Marxist, and Islamist. But in the months and years following the flight of the shah and Khomeini's triumphant return, the ayatollah wrest control from the liberals and progressives, and through a brutal campaign of street violence, assassination, intimidation, and expert propaganda, crushed any opposition to his totalitarian ideology.[3]

Any visitor who spends significant time in the country will find ample justification for the Iranians' reputation for open-mindedness, artistry, intellectualism, and an almost fanatical reverence for culture. The most popular poet in Iran is Hafez, a national hero who is more readily quoted by most Iranians than the Qur'an. His poetry is full of wine-soaked revelry, unrequited and requited love, and a palpable hatred of religious hypocrisy and austerity.

Indeed, even after decades of repressive Islamist rule, Iran is still full of apparent contradictions. It is run by a highly moralistic, puritanical clergy, yet cannabis and heroin are more freely available than in most Western countries;[4] a country where producing music with a lone female voice is illegal, yet relatively early-term abortion is not;[5] where most people are constantly on guard against expressing true political opinions, yet one will find an old woman who will loudly shout "Long live the shah!"; where nepotism reigns at almost every level of society and wealth and power go hand in hand, yet many of its most powerful political figures were three decades ago "riding donkeys in the provinces" as one Tehran resident put it.[6]

Advocates of the Islamic Republic's imminent demise point to the small semi-nationalist, Zoroastrian revival burgeoning among the youth of Iran. The Faravahar, the symbol of the religion, is a common sight on key-rings and hanging from rearview mirrors. For some it simply represents Iran and its past glory. But for others, it is a real spiritual alternative to Islam. As Ali-Reza, a construction worker in his fifties from south Tehran told me: "My grandparents were Zoroastrian, but my parents were forced to convert. … We are still Zoroastrian in our hearts, but in Islam, if you change your religion, they kill you," he adds, followed by several expletives.

But one must be careful not to get carried away with this narrative. For every Zoroastrian revivalist, for every youth in north Tehran who spits at a passing bearded militiaman; for every exile who speaks in glowing terms of the shah; for every student in Shiraz who visits the bathroom with the words "I need to say hello to our President (Ahmadinejad)"— it is hard to escape the conclusion while travelling around the country that those who demand nothing less than the total abolition of the Islamic Republic are in a clear minority. Still, it is a minority that history and demographics would suggest is steadily growing.

Why No "Iranian Spring"?

With the ostensibly pro-democratic upheavals in the Arab world in 2011, many were asking why there were no equivalent mass protests in Iran. In fact, in the earliest days of the Arab uprisings, Tehran witnessed a series of sizeable demonstrations. Two protesters, Sane Jaleh and Mohammed Mokhtari, were killed on February 14-15, 2011. Amazingly, the state-run media tried to claim that they were in fact pro-government activists and that they were killed by either anti-regime terrorists or supporters of Green Movement leaders Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi—a quite ludicrous notion that was conclusively refuted by interviews carried out with the men's friends and family.[7]

However, the bulk of the Iranian population did not back these February-April protests. Even among north Tehran's educated middle-class, the stronghold of the opposition movement, the prevailing feeling since the failed 2009 anti-government "Green Movement" demonstrations is one of cynicism and despair. Shokoufeh, 27, is an artist and veteran of antigovernment activity. When I asked her in March 2011 of her estimated time-frame for the collapse of the regime, she said,

Twenty, thirty years. If we all protest now, and don't give up, they will kill thousands of us. They don't care. They have all the power, all the guns, and they consider us traitors. They will kill as many of us as they want; they will win easily.

There is a hard-line element of the Iranian population, estimated at anywhere between 10 to 25 percent, that is willing to die and kill for the Islamic Republic. Furthermore, this militant minority has a monopoly on political and military power. The genius of the Islamic Republic is that for every state and civic institution—parliament, judiciary, military—there is a parallel, unaccountable religious body to either mirror it or police it. The on-the-ground authority of the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and Basij militia exceeds that of the official Iranian military and police respectively.[8]

In short, the regime is strong and dynamic. Its byzantine political structure provides fundamental veto powers to any attempt at systemic, democratic change from within, and its sophisticated security and military apparatus dwarfs anything that could conceivably be mustered by the opposition. And there is no indication that the supreme leader and his circle of ayatollahs have any intention of "giving up one iota"[9] of control over the reins of power. Indeed, just the opposite is true.

Ahmadinejad Down, Ayatollahs Rising

In 2009, Ayatollah Khamene'i took the unprecedented step of publicly backing incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election victory against the reformist opposition and its claims of electoral fraud, declaring the victory a "divine assessment."[10] Several days later, as protests continued to escalate, the supreme leader appeared to backtrack somewhat, announcing that he had ordered the Guardian Council to investigate the claims of fraud—who, of course, denied the claims.[11]

Virtually all serious commentators have alleged some degree of fraud in the elections. The accusations came not only from every opposition candidate but from numerous nongovernment clerics and from foreign journalists.[12] Some results, such as Mousavi's loss in his own home province of East Azerbaijan, were too hard for many to swallow.[13] But to what extent Ahmadinejad's victory reflected, or failed to reflect, the majority's genuine preference has been hotly debated. Polls conducted by Western organizations both before and after the June 2009 elections, showed anywhere between a 12 percent to 39 percent[14] margin in favor of Ahmadinejad. However, such polls are themselves subject to a myriad of weaknesses, not least self-censorship.

Still, the Guardian Council's alliance with the president turned out to be ephemeral. Ahmadinejad and his circle have never been true orthodox conservatives. Instead, he is a part of a "religious nationalist" current within the broader conservative milieu. Ayatollah Khomeini was famous for his anti-nationalism: "Those who say that we want nationality, they are standing against Islam... We have no use for the nationalists. … Islam is against nationality."[15] In a Machiavellian twist, the president is now being derided as a "deviant" by the conservative establishment, accusing him and his inner circle of having messianic aspirations[16] and of trying to usurp the supreme leader and the velayet-e-faqih.

Ahmadinejad's closest friend and confidant Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, whose daughter is married to the president's son, is particularly loathed by the orthodox conservatives and has even been jeered at by hardliners in the streets. It was the general opinion, both within and outside Iran, that Ahmadinejad was grooming Mashaei to be his successor (the presidency has a two-term limit).[17] This now seems impossible. When Ahmadinejad caused outrage by appointing Mashaei as first vice president (one of twelve VPs), Khamene'i quickly ordered Mashaei to resign from the cabinet, forcing Ahmadinejad to appoint him his chief of staff instead.[18] After being relentlessly slandered in the conservative state-run press, Mashaei has now been implicated in the largest corruption scandal in the republic's history—as have several of Ahmadinejad's other close associates.[19]

The antipathy does not end there. On November 21, 2011, Ahmadinejad's top media advisor and chief of the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), Ali Akbar Javanfekr, was arrested and handcuffed by security services in his own office. Reportedly, only a personal telephone call from the president secured Javanfekr's release.[20]

In the ultimate affront to what semblance of democracy the country has, in mid-October, the supreme leader casually remarked that the position of a popularly-elected president may be abolished "someday in the distant future" and replaced with a prime minister appointed by the parliament.[21]

These events mark a high point in Khamene'i's involvement in politics from which he is traditionally supposed to be aloof. With Mousavi under indefinite house arrest,[22] and Ahmadinejad's faction despised if not decisively discredited in the eyes of the Guardian Council, it is hard to imagine what kind of reformist candidate might be allowed to run—let alone succeed—in the upcoming 2013 presidential elections.

Regime Change and the Pitfalls of Intervention

It has been a busy few months in Washington-Tehran diplomacy. First there was the FBI's revelation of a plot by Iranian nationals to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States (and possibly bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies),[23] followed by a damning International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report[24] and Washington's promise of increased sanctions,[25] then by the downing of a U.S. spy drone,[26] and now, according to some reports, by placing the Revolutionary Guards "on a war footing" in anticipation of further escalation.[27]

Keeping all these recent developments in mind, it is easy to understand why the rhetoric in favor of regime change and confrontation has escalated in the United States. At a recent Republican Party presidential debate, Newt Gingrich argued that not only was regime change in Iran possible but that it could be accomplished within a year.[28] Indeed, some of the Republican presidential candidates seem to have been trying to outdo each other in their willingness to use the "military option" to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The problem with this kind of posturing, and any possible campaigns of solidarity with the opposition, is the strengthening of the regime's already dominant "siege-mentality"—thereby forfeiting more credibility, in a domestic political sense, to the hard-line conservatives. The success of the elites running the Islamic Republic depends heavily on their ability to assume the moral high-ground for their domestic audience—regardless of how twisted their moral compass might seem to outside observers. Events like the seizure of the U.S. drone or presidential candidates hinting at invasion are huge propaganda coups for the regime.

In the words of the pro-Western, antigovernment Parisa, a 28-year-old teacher from Shiraz: "I hate the government, but I hate more that [John] McCain would come over here and attack our country... Also, it would be a disaster. It would make Iraq look like nothing."

The Waiting Game

Some argue that sanctions have the same effect of rallying the Iranian people behind the regime, but conversations with Iranians have not borne this out. Whether an Iranian is likely to place the blame for the sanctions on Ahmadinejad's hostile statements or U.S. and European hawkishness tends to depend on their preexisting political views. It is true that sanctions cannot do much to hinder the activities of the likes of the Qods Force, the external Iranian intelligence agency, or the "millionaire mullahs,"[29] but their loosening or tightening can be an invaluable pressure card against the regime.

For all the ayatollahs' political maneuverings, there is no doubt about the regime's "protracted crisis of legitimacy"[30] since the 1990s. So much so that, in sharp contrast to the Islamist surge elsewhere, Iran may be the world's only sizeable Muslim-majority nation where Islamism is on the decline. Whether this makes the regime's collapse both inevitable and unpredictable, as suggested by Carnegie Endowment scholar Karim Sadjadpour, remains to be seen.[31] For now, all eyes are on the 2013 elections

Brendan Daly is a journalist with extensive experience in the Middle East and conflict and post-conflict zones.

[1] BBC News, Nov. 8, 2011.

[2] Melik Kaylan, "How a Regime Change in Iran Would Transform the World," Forbes, July 24, 2010.

[3] Ervand Abrahamian, A History of Modern Iran (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2008), chap. 6.

[4] Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, July 18, 2005.

[5] BBC News, Apr. 12, 2005.

[6] Author interview, Mar. 2011.

[7] The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 17, 2011; Frontline, Public Broadcasting Service, Tehran Bureau, Feb. 16, 2011.

[8] Harold Rhode, "How Iran's Rulers Think about the Nuclear Program," Hudson New York, Dec. 15, 2011.

[9] Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, Oct. 9, 2011.

[10] Time Magazine, June 15, 2009.

[11] Press TV (Tehran), June 29, 2009.

[12] See, for example, Agence France-Presse, July 7, 2009; Reuters, June 13, 2009.

[13] Ynet News (Tel Aviv), June 13, 2009.

[14] "Iran: Public Opinion on Foreign, Nuclear and Domestic Issues," International Peace Institute, New York, Dec. 8, 2010; "Iranian Opinion on Current Issues," WorldPublicOpinion.org, Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2009.

[15] Mehregan Magazine (Washington, D.C.), Spring and Summer 2003, p. 16.

[16] Mohebat Ahdiyyih, "Ahmadinejad and the Mahdi," Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2008, pp. 27-36.

[17] The Guardian (London), Apr. 21, 2011.

[18] Reza Molavi and K. Luisa Gandolfo, "Who Rules Iran?" Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2010, pp. 61-8.

[19] Newsweek, Nov. 21, 2011.

[20] The New York Times, Nov. 22, 2011.

[21] insideIRAN (New York), Nov. 1, 2011.

[22] Amnesty International, London, Sept. 29, 2011.

[23] ABC News, Oct. 11, 2011; al-Jazeera TV (Doha), Nov. 19, 2011.

[24] Voice of America News, Nov. 10, 2011.

[25] BBC News, Dec. 1, 2011.

[26] The Scotsman (Edinburgh), Dec. 14, 2011.

[27] The Daily Telegraph (London), Dec. 5, 2011.

[28] The Wall Street Journal, Nov. 24, 2011.

[29] Paul Klebnikov, "Millionaire Mullahs," Forbes, July 21, 2003.

[30] Danny Postel, "The Specter Haunting Iran," Frontline, Public Broadcasting Service, Tehran, Feb. 21, 2010.

[31] Paul R. Pillar, "Inevitable and Unpredictable Regime Change in Iran," The National Interest, May 14, 2011.

_________________________________

Receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free MEF mailing list

To receive the full, printed version of the Middle East Quarterly, please see details about an affordable subscription.

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

©1994-2012 The Middle East Forum

Donate to MEF