Letter from Iran

(The better informed everybody becomes the greater the chance that war can be prevented and propaganda can not distort reality. With a couple of clicks you can do your part by simply forwarding this to others.)

________________________________________________________________________________

(Note: The above graph is from Juan Cole's site, Informed Comment, which is the first article for today.)

US Public to Israel's Likud: On Iran, Negotiate or you are on Your Own

By Juan Cole

//www.juancole.com/2012/03/us-public-to-israe...

"A new poll shows that the US public, showing a broad consensus across parties, wants the Iran nuclear enrichment issue dealt with through negotiations. They even want to entrust the issue to the UN security council. They think that the US should discourage Israel from attacking Iran. They are convinced that an attack would be a disaster and lead to a long-term conflict. And they hold that if Israel goes it alone and does strike Iran the United States should remain neutral."

"All of these attitudes are the diametrical opposite of those held in the US Congress."

"This poll, if it is accurate, shows the resistance of the US public to the barrage of propaganda they have faced on the Iran nuclear issue. They don’t want a war, they don’t want the Likud Party initiating one, and they don’t want to get involved if Netanyahu goes off the reservation."

(I find this poll to be a bit of a surprise given the level of demonization of Iran that has taken place and that somewhere in the region of 65% of Americans have falsely been led to believe Iran possesses a nuclear weapon.)

(If you are wondering where one of the roots of this demonization originates here is a good outline entitled "Iran: Israel's Concocted World Threat": )

//www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/...

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

It is Israel's fears, not a nuclear Iran, that we must tame.

By David Grossman

//www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/1...

"Is it advisable for Israel, on its own, to enter into a war with Iran, a war whose consequences cannot be foreseen, in order to prevent a future situation that is dangerous indeed but that no one can be sure will ever come to pass?

"In other words, in order to block a possible disaster in the future, will Israel be driven to initiate a certain disaster in the present?"

"Even if the infrastructure of Iran's nuclear project were destroyed, it is impossible to destroy Iranian knowledge. And knowledge, and those who possess it, will rise from the dust – and this time fuelled by the insult of humiliation, and unbridled hatred, and a thirst for vengeance on the part of the whole Iranian people."

(This is ONE outcome that most certainly WILL happen.)

"Iran, as we know, is not just a radical fundamentalist state. There are wide sectors of the population that are secular, educated and enlightened. There is a broad middle class, including many people who risked their lives in brave demonstrations against the dictatorial religious regime they despise. I am not claiming that the Iranian nation feels any sympathy for Israel, but that same part of the Iranian public, at some point in the future, might be the ones who will lead Iran, and might even warm to Israel. An Israeli attack on Iran would eliminate that possibility for many years; in the eyes even of moderate Iranians, Israel will be permanently perceived as a haughty, megalomaniacal nation, a historic enemy to be fought indefinitely. Is this possibility more or less dangerous than a nuclear Iran?"

(A couple of points: The radical fundamentalists are less than 10% and 98% of Iranians don't give a hoot about Israel and would prefer that the regime focused on economic problems and not shovel tons of money to Hezbollah. I don't have poll numbers to back up these estimates but I don't think they are far off. If anybody has actual numbers based on some study please leave the info in the comment section. Thanks.)

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

Why Iranian Public Opinion Is Turning Against the Nuclear Program

By Dina Esfandiary

//www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2...

"A much more recent poll, from just one month ago shows that most Iranians polled still approved of a civilian nuclear program, but by a significantly narrower margin."

"Many Iranians now consider pursuit of the nuclear program as too costly."

"The nuclear program is still closely tied to national pride in Iran, but the decreasing support for it could present two possible opportunities for the West."

"The first is to play the waiting game: maintain the status quo and wait for public opinion to keep dropping."

"The second opportunity is to 'befriend' the Iranian public and drive a wedge between the people and their government. If Iranians believe their country is being denied a nuclear energy program it's entitled to, then the West should emphasize that it's OK with a peaceful program. In 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton articulated Iran's right to enrich, as long as the process is conducted under full IAEA supervision. If the regime still refuses to talk, they will be further discredited in the eyes of an already wary Iranian public. The regime's alleged weapons program, which the West opposes, has less than half of the public's support. Perhaps Iranians are coming to accept the idea that it's the regime -- not the West -- that's preventing them from developing a peaceful nuclear program."

(Personally I think Iran's nuclear program, except for medical treatment, should be mothballed until after a democratically elected government has been installed and a referendum has been conducted on the continuation of the nuclear program or not. Prior to the referendum the Iranian people should be educated on the dangers and problems associated with nuclear energy.)

( Facts about the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters should constantly be published, in Farsi, along with photographs of children that are being born with heart breaking deformities because of the radiation exposure from Chernobyl. Most Iranians don't have these facts, including the problems with storing nuclear waste, and the fact that Bushhehr nuclear plant has been built near an earthquake zone, or the cost effectiveness of alternatives to nuclear energy…..the list goes on…)

(Simply do an image search on Google for "Chernobyl" and see for yourself the horrific images of children that are deformed. Is that what Iranians want for their children? Solar energy does not cause deformities and genetic damage -- unless you are one of those people that sunbathes to the point of being well done.)

(It should also be added that a military strike on Iran's nuclear sites will most likely release radioactive material and create multiple Chernobyl's extending all the way to India.)

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

Iran Official Offers 'Permanent Human Monitoring' of Nuclear Sites
By Christiane Amanpour

//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/iran-official-offers...

"A high-level advisor to Iran's supreme leader said his country is ready to allow "permanent human monitoring" of its nuclear program in exchange for Western cooperation but also warned Iran is prepared to defend itself against military strikes."

"Asked about an often-quoted statement by Iranian President Ahmadinejad about "wiping Israel from the face of the map", Larijani said it was "definitely not" Iran's intent to militarily obliterate Israel, adding that "neither the president meant that nor is it a policy of Iran."

(The three Larijani brothers all hold powerful posts; Chief Justice, speaker of Parliament (Majlis), and the third Larijani, quoted above, is a key foreign policy advisor to Ayatollah Khamenei and therefore can be assumed to be conveying official regime positions. Westerns observers need to be able to discern who is who and if they are just some hot head blurting out his own opinion or if he is stating official policy.)

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

Iran's Censors Tighten Grip

By Farnaz Fassihi

//online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527023037...

Iran hasn't been shy about its bids to monitor, filter and block content on the Internet. Now it has taken the next leap, turning online censorship into an institution.

The Supreme Council of Cyberspace, created by decree last week by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, includes heads of intelligence, militia, security and the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, as well as media chiefs. Charged with supervising all cyberactivity, it will have the power to enact laws, according to state media.

"We are worried about a portion of cyberspace that is used for exchanging information and conducting espionage,"

("We are worried about "exchanging information"……well, gosh, isn't that what the Internet is for?!? But then again these types of words of wisdom can always be expected to be uttered by Iranian clerics.)

"These "cybersoldiers" monitor online activity of opposition sites and dissidents, bombarding websites with comments and producing blog content in support of the regime and hacking emails and computers, according to a computer programmer in Iran employed by the telecommunication ministry."

(Well that makes me feel just real secure using the Internet here in Iran, though I should mention that I would not at all be surprised if Homeland Security does not monitor activity on Iranian.com)

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

(Make sure to visit Lobe Log as they have lots of good links and articles today.)

//www.lobelog.com/

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

Iran's Sanctions Payoff: Real Estate Is Hot

By Ladane Nasseri

//www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-03-15/ir...

"Iranians are turning to real estate to protect their savings as beefed-up international sanctions weaken the Rial. The first reaction of Iranians to the new sanctions was to buy more gold, dollars, and euros as a hedge. Then the government restricted currency trades to government-run exchange bureaus, which offered unfavorable rates. Officials also made investors wait months to buy gold."

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

Iran’s Threat To The Dollar

By Marcus Goncalves

//www.wbjournal.com/news50939.html

"Ever since President Obama signed one of the most severe sanction bills against Iran, that country appears determined to phase out the dollar as a form of payment for its oil and derived products. If Iran follows through with its decision, it may trigger intense reaction from Washington, especially for the dollar-reserve currency, mainly supported by Saudi Arabia’s determination to accept only dollars for oil."

"Despite the U.S.-Iran conflicts, the de-dollarization debate has heated up around the world. Is it a realistic global goal? Can Iran and other countries trigger a chain of events that would threaten the dollar’s status as the world's premiere reserve currency? What would be the consequences to the U.S. and the world economy if the dollar were no longer OPEC’s measure of pricing oil? Certainly, we would no longer be able to brag about having the lowest gasoline prices. They would likely skyrocket, essentially increasing the prices of all other commodities, making life on Main Street more arduous."

(Many have argued that the central reason that Saddam was deposed was because he stopped selling Iraqi oil in dollars. And many have argued that the same will happen to Iran because it is shifting away from the dollar, and if this snowballs it will be the end of the American Empire. The All Mighty Dollar Rules.)

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

Former Iran captain Daei critically injured in car accident

Press TV

//www.presstv.ir/detail/232252.html

(Hopefully he will fully recover. Driving in Iran is considered taking part in a stock car race with the objective being to swerve around pedestrians, avoiding cars that are coming at you in the wrong direction, ignoring stop signs, being totally inconsiderate, honking before the light turns green, rarely staying in your own lane, never using turn signals or looking in the rear view mirror, and being convinced that you are definitely the best driver in the world.)

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

Dealing With Iran

by ISMAEL HOSSEIN-ZADEH

//www.counterpunch.org/2012/03/16/dealing-wit...

(I have posted Prof. Hossein-Zadeh's entire article because I think it's an important article and a must read. However, there are some aspects of his article I want to focus on as I think he paints a too rosy picture of how things are in Iran. See comments at the end.)

""Dr. James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute and brother of the well-known pollster John Zogby, recently published an article on “Dealing with Iran” in Huffingto Post that is problematic on a number of grounds.

To begin with, Dr. Zogby claims that Iran harbors “aspirations for regional hegemony,” and it is therefore a “threat” to its neighbors: “Make no mistake, the regime in Tehran is a meddlesome menace and their aspirations for regional hegemony do pose a threat, not to Israel . . . but to the Arab Gulf States.” Dr. Zogby goes even one step further, arguing that Iran is more than just a threat; it is “the real danger to its … its neighbors.”

Israel’s Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently admitted (boastfully) that the Israeli government had succeeded in distracting the attention of the entire world away from the Palestinians to the Iranians. Dr. Zogby’s argument that Iran is “the real danger to its neighbors” shows that Mr. Sa’ar is, indeed, justified in boasting about the fantastic success of Israel’s policy of distraction. Instead of blaming the US-Israeli axis of aggression for the never-ending and escalating turbulence in the Middle East, Dr. Zogby blames Iran!

But let us examine Dr. Zogby’s allegation in light of reality: (1) Iran has not invaded (or threatened invasion of) any country for over 250 years. (2) Iran was invaded in 1980 by Saddam Hussein, which culminated in the devastating 8-year war—a war that was instigated, supported and sustained by Western powers and their proxy regimes in the Persian Gulf region. (3) The “Arab Gulf States,” headed by the Saudi kingdom, are collaborating with the US-Israeli axis of aggression in their efforts to destabilize and overthrow the Iranian government. (4) The “Arab Gulf States,” not Iran, serve (literally) as military bases of Western powers that support Israel and its policies of settlements and occupation.

Against this background, Dr. Zogby’s claim that Iran is a “meddlesome menace” is obviously counterfactual and preposterous.

Ironically, Dr. Zogby’s claim that Iran poses “the real danger to its neighbors” is flatly rejected by the Arab people. Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the overwhelming majority of the Arab neighbors of Iran view the U.S. and Israel as the real threats, not Iran. For example, the most recent recent (2011) and most comprehensive public opinion survey to date, which covered 12 Arab/Muslim counties and 16,731 face-to-face interviews, and which was conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS), found that “by a 15-1 ratio, Israel and the US are seen as more threatening than Iran.”

Since Dr. Zogby does not tell his readers why or how Iran is “the real danger to its neighbors,” let me offer an explanation for his allegation. The “threat” he is talking about is not a military threat. Nor is it a threat to Arab people or their territory—Iran has no territorial ambitions. It is, rather, the threat to the autocratic Arab rulers; a threat that results from Iran’s example or model of national sovereignty, not its “aspirations for regional hegemony,” as Dr. Zogby claims. As Iran’s policies of national independence and resistance to external pressure make the client Arab regimes look bad in the eyes of the Arab people, they tend to discredit and threaten their dictatorial rulers. And as those policies earn respect from the Arab people, they also earn the wrath of the Arab leaders. This means that Dr. Zogby’s arguments against the Iranian government reflect the views of the dictatorial Arab leaders, and their imperialist backers, not those of the Arab people.

One salutary point in Dr. Zogby’s article seems to be his advice against military threats against Iran. Unfortunately, he does so for the wrong reasons; he opposes military actions against Iran not because such actions would be unlawful and immoral, but because (a) military threats “only serve to embolden Iran,” which is not clear why or how; and (b) “continued targeted sanctions…are having a real impact.”

Dr. Zogby is either uniformed about the sanctions on Iran, or uses a peculiar definition of targeted sanctions. The brutal sanctions imposed on Iran are way beyond targeted sanctions; they are a most comprehensive sanctions, designed to be “crippling” as they include Iran’s oil exports and its banks, which, in effect, means its international trade. Targeted sanctions are almost always expanded to broader, comprehensive sanctions, as has been the case with Iran. Furthermore, sanctions are essentially a disguised and an insidious form of war whose primary victims are the poor, the children, the elderly, and the infirm. And when sanctions fail to bring about “regime change,” military actions follow logically “to do the job.”

In his article Dr. Zogby also writes (with a dash of sarcasm): “What, one might ask the leaders of Iran, will they do with their nuclear program and their provocation? Can it feed their people, rebuild their neglected and decayed infrastructure, give hope to their unemployed young, or secure their role in the community of nations? . . . As the Gulf States make significant progress, providing a model for development and growth, Iran remains trapped in an archaic system which feeds off of fear and anger, and goes nowhere.”

It is only fair to ask Dr. Zogby: how can “Arab Gulf States provide a model of development for Iran” when they are essentially consumers markets for foreign products? What product line, manufacturing process or technological know-how can Iran learn from these states? Dr. Zogby seems to confuse financial services, extravagant consumerism (made possible by abundant oil and smaller populations), unrestricted import of luxury goods from abroad, glossy shopping malls, ballooning skyscrapers, and man-made islands with manufacturing, industrialization, labor productivity and real development. With the exception of oil, which is produced, processed and managed largely with the help foreign experts, Persian Gulf kingdoms do not produce much of what they consume.

By contrast, Iran produces much of what it needs or consumes. It has made considerable progress in scientific research and technological know-how. It has taken advantage of the imperialist sanctions and boycotts to become self-reliant in many technological areas.
For example, Iran is now self-sufficient in producing many of its industrial products such as home and electric appliances (television sets, washers and dryers, refrigerators, washing machines, and the like), textiles, leather products, pharmaceuticals, agricultural products, processed food, and beverage products. The country has also made considerable progress in manufacturing steel, copper products, paper, rubber products, telecommunications equipment, cement, and industrial machinery. Iran has the largest operational stock of industrial robots in West Asia.

Iran’s progress in automobile and other motor vehicle production has especially been impressive. Motor vehicles, including farming equipment, now count among Iran’s exports. Most remarkable of Iran’s industrial progress, however, can be seen in the manufacture of various types of its armaments needs. Iran’s defense industry has taken great strides in the past few decades, and now manufactures many types of arms and equipment. Iran’s Defense Industries Organization (DIO) now produces its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, guided missiles, radar systems, military vessels, submarines, fighter planes, and more. Despite these achievements, Iran’s military spending is relatively modest. For example, while Iran’s military spending is currently about $7 billion, or nearly 2% of its GDP, that of Saudi Arabia is about $43 billion, or nearly 11.2% of its GDP, and that of Israel is about $13 billion, or 6.3% of its GDP. And while Iran produces most of its military equipment at home, Saudi Arabia imports its military hardware (source).

Contrary to Dr. Zogby’s claims, Iran’s military preparedness and its nuclear program, have not meant neglect of its infrastructure. Iran has, indeed, invested considerably in both physical infrastructures (such as transportation and communication) and soft/social infrastructures (such as education and healthcare services). Health care is free for those who can’t pay. All public education, including university, is free.

Although women are required to comply with the official dress code, they are encouraged (both by their families and the government) to excel in educational and professional pursuits. The results have been quite impressive. Women now constitute the majority of university students. Despite the very high level of unemployment, which is largely due to the criminal economic sanctions and military threats from abroad, more and more women are joining the workforce. They are doctors, engineers, teachers, scientists, writers, artists, business owners, salespersons, firefighters and taxi drivers. Working women in Iran are entitled to 90 days of maternity leave at two-thirds pay, with the right to return to their previous jobs. Women in the US do not have these benefits. Sex change operations and abortion under certain circumstances (and before the ensoulment, i.e. during the first four months of pregnancy) are legal.

In a number of the “Arab Gulf States,” by contrast, women can’t hold public office, are denied the right to vote, cannot get a university education, drive a car, or even leave home without a chaperone. How or why Dr. Zogby thinks that these states can “provide a model of development and progress for Iran” is unfathomable.

Dr. Zogby also chides Iran for not supporting the ongoing efforts by the US and its allies, including the “Arab Gulf States,” to overthrow the Syrian regime. Yet, there is undeniable evidence that the Syrian opposition is hatched largely by NATO, Israel and their cringing allies in the Arab League. “The Free Syria Army (FSA) fighting against Assad inside Syria is a creation of NATO. Sources indicate 600 to 1,500 fighters from the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya, now known as al-Qaeda in Libya, are working with the FSA to topple the Assad regime. An Arab League report revealed last month that Mossad, MI6, the CIA, and British SAS are in Syria working with the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council.” It is a shame that Dr. Zogby would allow himself to support this orgy of mercenary forces, benignly called the “Syrian opposition.”

In his Article Dr. Zogby refers to the Persian Gulf simply as the “Gulf,” without the word “Persian.” I suspect this omission is not fortuitous. Let me explain why. As mentioned earlier, Iran’s resistance to US-Israeli axis of aggression infuriates the autocratic Arab rulers as such resistance to injustice, which Dr. Zogby calls Iran’s “provocations,” exposes the complicity of these rulers with the imperialist-Zionist powers in the occupation and militarization of their lands. To counter this “problem” and to turn the Arab public opinion against Iran, the Arab client regimes (with the help of their imperialist patrons) have in recent years cooked up a scheme that is based on a harebrained idea that the word “Persian” should be dropped from the name of Persian Gulf and replaced with the word “Arab,” that is, it should be the Arab Gulf, not the Persian Gulf! The scheme is, obviously, part of an insidious strategy that is designed to pit the Persians/Iranians against the Arabs and the Shias against the Sunnis. Regrettably, Dr. Zogby seems to have fallen for this age-old divide-and-conquer ploy."

Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave – Macmillan 2007) and the Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser’s Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989). He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press.

(1. Yes, Iran does make home appliances but most Iranians, if they can afford it, will buy an imported item rather than an Iranian one due to poor quality and durability. The washing machine I bought for 160,000 tomans works well but it's fully manual and you have to show up every few minutes to turn the dials so as for it go through its various functions.)

(2. Pharmaceuticals are very cheap in Iran and that is very positive but for some unknown reason doctors usually advise buying the foreign version which is much more expensive even though the formula is exactly the same. Go figure.)

(3. Processed food. Yes, we are now almost on par with America in churning out junk food and already fat kids and overweight people are evident and soon diabetes, heart disease, and all the other wonderful symptoms of eating non-nutritious but profitable "food" will afflict us and soon a majority of us will start to look just like fat ugly Americans. Fast Food Nation II: The Sequel.)

(4. Agricultural products. We still produce very tasty fruit but more and more it's getting soaked in deadly pesticides and for some crazy reason it's possible to find apples from South America on the shelves and sometimes very expensive grapes. E.F. Schumacher had some wise words about this kind of "economics" in "Small is Beautiful", a book that should be translated into Farsi. So should "Silent Spring". Any good translators out there?)

(5. Beverage Products. Pepsi, coke, Sprite, and 7-up, are in abundance here and their poisonous contents will cause the same health problems that it has caused in America. Ironically I've heard some big wig cleric owns majority shares in one of these poison factories, and symbol of American culture. Marg Baar American Poisons!)

(6. Automobile Production. Yes, we have proudly reached over one and half million cars a year in production and our traffic jams are proof of our progress as are our wheezing lungs. The quality has far to go to be able to compete on the world market so they are sold for less than what they sell for in Iran. Importing America's car culture is not exactly an achievement but a sign of repeating the mistakes of others.)

(7. Military Equipment. Being self-sufficient in military equipment is important but does this really represent progress and development?

(8. Education. Yes, we have well educated young people, but for the brightest and best the Iran of today does not offer them an attractive future so they leave in a massive brain drain numbering 200,000 a year.)

(9. Healthcare. Here I would say we have a far better healthcare system than America which serves most Iranians, even those in remote villages. But recently it is starting to become like America; doctors demanding cash upfront before they operate.)

(10. Women. Yes, everything that has been mentioned is true except for the fact that young women are still expected to get married and start a family, which for some is not what they want or are suited for. And the question needs to be asked why during the protests of 2009 were women often leading the protests and were often the most vocal?

Now, what I really wanted to say is that much is left unmentioned in Prof. Hossien-Zadeh's article and if I may I'd like to attempt to fill in the blanks.)

(Iran's economy is still 70% to 80% state owned and operated, mostly through very rich and powerful "bonyads", or Revolutionary Guard business enterprises, and interlocking state investment companies and conglomerates. Privatization that was to take place is happening slowly and ending up in the hands of "insiders", or those referred to as "khodi".)

(Those companies in the private sector that are doing well almost always have some cozy relationship with some state enterprise or have some special "party" (connection) that takes care of their needs. Today almost every private business owner I know is owed money by some government agency. And this has had a multiplier effect through out the Iranian economy.)

(Almost all state run companies are extremely inefficient, poorly managed, and rarely profitable. Oil revenues cover up the red ink.)

(But what is glaringly blatant is the incompetence that permeates every state run organization. With work starting around nine most staff start to disappear around noon for "Namaz" (prayer) and return around 1.30-2.00 p.m. and given that office hours end at 2.30, the total hours of productive work is less than four hours. Very often those in management are bureaucrats that have moved up the ladder over the years or are war veterans or somehow connected to the Revolutionary Guard.)

(Rarely is anybody actually qualified for the position they hold. I know one chap running a provincial office for managing a government agency who was an "aabdarchi", (tea maker) and when the last time I attempted to discuss the ABC's of economics with him his eyes glazed over as if I was discussing the inner workings of the Space Shuttle.)

(One other time ELEVEN engineers flew across the country to do the job of one local engineer that could have done it in less than one hour instead it took this team one whole day. At first I could not understand why. Then I realized their plane fare, meals, hotel rooms, and taxi service was all free, plus they were getting double wages as they were on "mammoriyaat"(out of office duties).)

(Landing such a government job requires connections and the ability to pass a very rigorous test of Shiite religious teachings. Once hired some actually want to do a good job and serve the country but most are aiming for their retirement check or to play musical chairs to higher office which will allow them to be in a position to receive bribes. Others will find ways to create obstacles for private contractors doing business with that agency so as to "solve" those "problems" and thereby get a "shirini"(a cookie), meaning a bribe.)

(The people that show up for political gatherings where regime bosses make speeches are mostly made up of these government workers and they are all under tight control and must vote during elections otherwise they won't be promoted or receive other benefits.)

(Even though Prof. Hossien-zadeh presents a larger context of Iran's position in the world, and makes a very good case, the inner workings of this regime are to a large extent rotten and hollow, which I think is an inherent feature of this regime and can not be rectified no matter how hard the rulers try to do so.)

(What happened during the 2009 elections and how Ayatollah Khamenei reacted has opened the eyes of the Iranian people to a level that it's no longer a question if this regime will collapse, it's now a question of when. And what will most likely bring this regime down will be systemic and rampant incompetence. Like a badly designed car it will simply stop working and grind to a halt. Maybe this is wishful thinking but it's what I see and have experienced.)

(And no, those couple of examples don't mean the regime will collapse. It's far more deep rooted than that. Everybody is viewing the situation as an economic or political or military or geopolitical problem. No, it's none of these. The problem is religous. Iran is facing religous reformation and all you have to do is talk to the young people. With changes in the way the youth see reality and as they grow older and bring forth their new ideas so will the reality in Iran change.)