VIEW
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
The Real Race for Iran
28-Jun-2010
Since Iran was thrust into internal turmoil by last year's election, the world has been moved by events that unfolded during the protests of the Green Movement. As we watched the violence of the agents of the Iranian government against peaceful demonstrators, most of us thought that it would be impossible to defend the regime's position amidst the bloodshed we witnessed on our TV screens.
Not so. The Iranian Government, despite all the detentions, abuses, and unlawful killings since June 2009, still has support overseas in the guise of purportedly unbiased political analysts, none more vocal than that of the authors of Race for Iran, one a former CIA and National Security Council official, the other a former diplomat in the State Department.
Their solution to the human rights abuse issue? Pretend it is not relevant. Arrests, torture, rape, and the murder of protesters are set aside.
The testament to how far they can go in defending an indefensible position? Consider the lengthy response of RFI's authors to "Misreading Tehran", a series of seven articles published on the Foreign Policy website.
In this article, the duo close their eyes to all other internal matter to declare that the 2009 Presidential election is legitimate, simply because the opposition has allegedly not provided any evidence to back up claims of fraud. Thus, the vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must be free and fair.
If we were to accept this argument, then every election under Suharto in Indonesia was free and fair. Every election held in Islam Karimov's Uzbekistan is free, as is every vote held in Cuba under Fidel Castro. Robert Mugabe is the rightful ruler of Zimbabwe. If stolen or "created" ballots cannot be exhibited, the result is not only legal but legitimate.
Under this "legitimate" Iranian Government, freedom of speech is severely curtailed. Newspapers are regularly banned, journalists regularly imprisoned. Candidates for elections are screened by the establishment, and only those passing the Guardian Council's ideological tests are allowed to run. There are hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of political prisoners suffering in Iran's jails. Under such harsh conditions, it is a distortion -- a dishonorable distortion -- to say that elections in Iran can be free, fair and honest.
If that were not enough, high-ranking clerics -- from within Iran's own establishment -- came forward and decried the elections as fraudulent. Grand Ayatollah Bayat-Zanjani was quoted, "Every healthy mind casts doubt on the way the election was held." Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri called the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "illegitimate" and "tyrannical." Perhaps the most revered cleric after Khamenei, Grand Ayatollah Lotfullah Safi Golpayegani called the results "a grand lie." Their voices were silenced by the media blackout, with Western journalists unaware of their clout within Iran's government and society.
But to RFI's authors, it is beyond consideration that Iran's leadership is a brutal regime hell-bent on keeping itself in power. They dismiss that people from within Iran's establishment question the legitimacy of the election. To them, an inquiry can only be considered if the Green Movement takes up arms, fights the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, confiscates all the ballot boxes from the election through force of arms and then counts them somewhere in Europe in front of international media. Only then, will 'healthy" minds accept fraud.
Yet there is a somewhat tortured twist in RFI's line, illustrated in the article in Foreign Policy. Having declared -- following the sudden execution of five Iranians on 9 May -- that the consideration of human rights was beyond their agenda, the authors resurrect two months-old "studies" of the 2009 election to establish that the political and civil rights of Iranians were respected and defended.
Doing so, they hold up a cracked mirror with RFI's reflection of post-election Iran: one of the purported reports on the election is by little-known "analysts" who have also suggested that Neda Agha Soltan, killed during the protests of 20 June 2009, was slain by agents of "the West":
It is inconceivable that an Islamic regime which understands the power of martyrdom in its own culture would sanction the cold-blooded murder of an innocent and ordinary young woman on the streets of Tehran. However it is every bit conceivable that those who thought the opposition movement needed a symbol and icon of resistance -- recipients and supporters no doubt of a $400m CIA-backed destabilization program for Iran -- would have arranged this horrible murder and try and pin it on the Iranian authorities.)
If RFI's authors claim that rights have no place in their forum, why resurrect a long-surpassed and rather creaky case for a proper vote on 12 June 2009?
In part, it is a necessary tactic to support the authors' main objective, which is to promote US-Iran discussions on important regional and global issues. Putting forth that case requires the notion that President Ahmadinejad can be engaged because he has a legitimate position.
More importantly, though, the tactic is a deflection. The Green Movement and civil rights organizations inside Iran long ago moved beyond contesting the elections to the campaign for a political, social, economic, and religious system that upholds rather than abuses its citizens' rights. Mir Hossein Mousavi has released several statements in recent months emphasizing that the Green Movement needs to firm up its ties with the Iranian populace to spread the message of change and to ensure that the Islamic Republic fulfills the rights set out in its Constitution.
Iran's Government is unable to address these issues, but they are also unable to prevent their consideration. It has persisted in arresting people who protest brutality and human rights abuses, but the challenge continues. It has tried to penetrate the ranks of the Green Movement, but it cannot prevent activists from interacting with disgruntled Iranians who have been affected. It has pursued the alternative of proclaiming Iran's exalted international position, but that distraction cannot be sustained when headlines are re-claimed by the heckling of Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson and the attacks on Iran's most esteemed clerics.
So the solution is sought by Tehran's defenders: while announcing that rights do not matter, revive the notion of the "legitimate" rule -- with the implication that legitimacy confers the authority to pursue any and all acts in the name of the Iranian state -- established by the 2009 election.
The problem for this defense is that rights will not go away. Those who bravely persist in the face of repression are emphasizing human rights and democracy more than ever. Ten days ago, Iranians who marched in Tehran were not heard chanting, "Where is My Vote?"; amidst the calls of God is Great, they were demanding that their rights -- as Iranians and as human beings -- be affirmed by their Government and by their Supreme Leader.
An objective analysis worthy of the label would question why the Iranian government fills the countries streets with security forces if it is stable and loved by its people. It would investigate why foreign media is effectively banned and why dozens of Iran's journalists are in jail, barred from working, or under threat of punishment if they dare to write. It would at least raise a quizzical eyebrow at the scores who are on death row and the hundreds more behind bars or on heavy bail simply because they voiced their opposition to the regime.
But that analysis would be tantamount to a questioning of legitimacy. And there the authors of RFI meet their self-imposed limit. They have shackled themselves even more effectively than the Government which they defend has shackled its people.
If there is a Race for Iran, those who defend the regime -- in the name of the irrelevancy of human rights -- can only stand still, stamping their feet loudly that there is no alternative. And in that race, it is the alternative which -- while hobbled by intimidation, restricted by suppression, hindered by punishment -- continues to move forward towards its goals.
First published in HuffingtonPost.com.
AUTHOR
Josh Shahryar is a Journalist and Human Rights Activist. Follow him on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JShahryar
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
I know, Mina. I just said that. (Dang it, waste of time-Yousef)
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 01:36 PM PDTI edited the post.
I also meant to say to Yousef that I answered him because he did answer me, not didn't
But I couldn't change it because you'd clicked on 'reply'. (God how I hate that feature. I keep telling admin to chuck it, but they won't. They are wrong).
Hi Roie Jan
by minadadvar on Wed Jun 30, 2010 01:32 PM PDTI called it "a waste of time". Fooladi and I use the same avatar.
Dang it Yousef!! (Mina-waste of time) EDITED
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 01:31 PM PDTI'm answering you because when I told you I'd finished with you if you answered me. but I have to say that Mina is right, it's gotten to be pretty much a waste of time because you won't think. But nyway, here goes. Now you've written:
They [gays] have crossed the line from humanity into barbarity.
______________
I ask you again:
So which one is it? They are ill and should be cured or they are guilty of some horrible crime punishable by God knows what?
Make up your mind!
______________
(I thought it was Fooladi at first, not Mina, because I only looked at the avatar...)
Amir,
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 01:10 PM PDTI can't find it but didn't you say something about Ahmadinejad's halo and the face on the moon? I thought you might get a kick out of this if you haven't seen it yet. For a little levity.
//iranian.com/main/2010/jun/sacred-mousavi
waste of time
by minadadvar on Wed Jun 30, 2010 01:01 PM PDTI have read a few comments of this thread. I do not understand, why, people are wasting their precious time on this creature "yousef". He is either a "bikar prankster" or an IRI thug. Either way, not worthy of attention.
However, I do encourage him to continue his rants. Those pro IRI, individuals who are in denial about these thugs, might wake up and smell the coffee.
Dear Yousef
by Abarmard on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:54 PM PDTBasij is not the main reason for Iran not being attacked. Couple of important points here:
Those who fought against Saddam were Basijis who believed in Iran. Some of those were Bahai who are now being pushed from their own homes and land.
Basij therefore meant different then than today. It did not belong to one political party Vs. another. However the culture of selflessness that it promoted, worked for the advantage of all Iranians.
Iranians will fight for their land regardless of their beliefs. If sacrifice was the ultimate game changer, Taliban would have not been attacked. They were ruthless and willing to die any day for their cause. This shows that one ingredient by itself will not be sufficient for supporting a society moving towards modernity. Some of the forces today in Iran must adjust their attitude and begin to unite with the will of the productive portion of society to move forward.
Fooladi,
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:55 PM PDTIf one views Iran through the periscope of Iranian.com
I don't. At one time I kind of did, but then I realized the error of my ways.
then one would get the impression that Iranians are either monarchist or islamsist of some shade. The shades in both camps range from extreme neo nazi like (sounds familiar ?!) to somehow liberal democrat.
I don't really underrstand why you would characterize liberal democrats as necessarily part of those two extremes.
And as you must have noticed there is a wide area where both these spent ideologies overlap.
Yes, I do, and if our boy Yousef could''ve just used that 25% or so that is left that can think straight more, I would've liked to point that out to him.
MKO is just an excuse, it is just one of those common denominators.
Yeah, excuse a good word to describe what I started feeling.
The reality in Iran is quite different from above. I travel to Iran at least twice a year. There I meet old friends, some even in bassij/sepah force who totally disagree with my ideology, but appreciate me for my frankness and love of Iran. Some of those guys just like me believe in social justice and fair distribution of wealth, but they still believe they can achieve it through ahmadinzhad. but does that make thes bassijis traitors to Iran? No! they just happen to believe in a charlatan!
Well, here we get to what I feel is the meat of the matter. When one talks about retributionan, about exterminating all the rats,etc., where will one draw the line?
I don't like that kind of talk. I think it's dangerous.
You are probably aware that during the Nuremberg trials, it was so difficult to draw the line between the three categories established of guilt.. (Karl Jasper's 'Question of German Guilt' posited four, as I discussed with humanbeing on my recent blog).
There was the additional problem that people would turn in and testify against others for personal reasons, fabricating allegations. And so on. Who will draw the line,and how will they know?
About the charlatan part, as an aside, that's exactly the problem of MKO.
________________________
In any case, I'm categorically against capital punishment, but that's another story.
The delusions are multiplying
by AMIR1973 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:43 PM PDTHe, like many basijis, turned certain defeat at the hands of a powerful Arab army
"Powerful Arab army"--don't make me laugh. It's a contradiction in terms. Israel took THREE "powerful Arab armies" and smashed them in Six Days (despite USSR backing for Egypt & Syria). Compare victory in Six Days against 8 years of useless death, destruction, and waste prolonged by that animal Khomeini.
The Baseej are the one thing that prevents Iran from suffering the fate of occupied Iraq and Afghanistan.
The U.S. defeated Saddam in 3 weeks twice (1991 and 2003). IRI couldn't do jack against Saddam, one of history's most incompetent military commanders, in 8 years (despite Iraq's much smaller population and IRI having inherited the Shah's modern military). If it so chose, the U.S. could grind the Basijis and Pasdaran down into dust. The only thing Islamist and Arab "militaries" are good for is killing their own people, stealing money, and acting as economic Mafias within their own Third World economies. What a sadistic and stupid joke the IRI has been for 31 years! What a joke.
The Baseej saved Iran from Saddam
by Yousef Bozorgmehr on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:20 PM PDTThe greens depict Neda as a "martyr" for their cause when all the poor girl did was get shot by a CIA-MKO assassin in a sidestreet.
Yet, for most Iranians, the real example of heroism is 16 year old Hossein Fahmideh who threw himself under a Baathist tank and blew it up with his grenades. When the regular soldiers saw such courage, they rallied and drove the Iraqis back and won the battle.
He, like many basijis, turned certain defeat at the hands of a powerful Arab army, backed to the hilt by the USA and USSR, into a humiliating retreat for Saddam.
All those who shout marg bar baseej! disrespect Hossein's bravery and I have nothing but complete contempt for them. The Baseej are the one thing that prevents Iran from suffering the fate of occupied Iraq and Afghanistan.
Well Rosie:
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:10 PM PDTIf one views Iran through the periscope of Iranian.com, then one would get the impression that Iranians are either monarchist or islamsist of some shade. The shades in both camps range from extreme neo nazi like (sounds familiar ?!) to somehow liberal democrat. And as you must have noticed there is a wide area where both these spent ideologies overlap. MKO is just an excuse, it is just one of those common denominators.
The reality in Iran is quite different from above. I travel to Iran at least twice a year. There I meet old friends, some even in bassij/sepah force who totally disagree with my ideology, but appreciate me for my frankness and love of Iran. Some of those guys just like me believe in social justice and fair distribution of wealth, but they still believe they can achieve it through ahmadinzhad. but does that make thes bassijis traitors to Iran? No! they just happen to believe in a charlatan!
Come to think of it, I do have one more thing to say about MKO
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:03 PM PDTAt the beginning, when I first came here, everyone was biting each other's heads off. The only thing they could agree on was their thorough hatred of the MKO. And I read up on them and I thought that was a little hypocritical because MKO seemed to me, when the Revolution showed its true colors, to have been the only group that was truly brave. But then they went nuts, and I have a feeling they still are.
vpk
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:46 AM PDT1) MKO are not marxist. in fact there was a bloody split within the organisation before 1979 revolution, splitting it into MKO and another (cant remember it's name) marxist organisation. the marxit wing were entirely executed by regime, along with other larger communist groupings by late 1980's.
2) It is not up to you or me to say what the IRI should be replaced with. All we can say , is that within the framework of a united front, embracing all opposition forces, with the key objective of replacing the fascist IRI with a democratically elected government. The only common denominator here is "democratic". No more, no less.
Well, Fooladi,
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:39 AM PDTI definitely don't equate Iran with some sociopathic medieval Regime. Of which Yousef is providing a very chilling mirror.
As for the rest of the MKO issue, I personally agree with VPK, and defer to him and other Iranians to discuss this issue.
The wit and wisdom of an Islamist journalist-scholar
by AMIR1973 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:33 AM PDTAs well as the two towns I mentioned, the Persian kondehs are in Niavaran, Los Angeles, Frankfurt, Paris, Vancouver - they are just jendeh of their jakesh masters in the West.
Please bear in mind that the screeds of Mr. Bozorgmehr and his "sidekick" Reza Esfandiari are referenced by CASMII, the Leveretts, and other members of the gang.
Fooladi
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:29 AM PDTMKO has attacked Iran.
If you want to see decent behavior during the Iran Iraq war see RP. He although opposed to IRI showed decency. Rajavi cult on the other hand was only happy to sell out to the highest bidder.
I do NOT equate IRI and Iran. But IRI is in charge of Iran. Yes an H bomb will destroy the IRI but it will also take out Iran. I therefore do not support attacks specially indiscriminate ones. Taking out IRI should not take out Iran with it. Plus there is no point removing IRI to relace it with MKO.
This Yousef
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:22 AM PDTis crossing a line from civil discussion into name calling. This is a true sign of an Islamist. Ignorant; intolerante and illogical. When faced with logic they resort to "fohsh". In addition due to living in the dark ages the Islamist nuts do not realize "gay" is not an insult.
I find Gay people to be perfectly fine members of society. Some of the greatest people in history of humanity have been gay. If that makes Yousef blow some fuses then so much the better! Tough luck to the little intolerant wannabe bacheh mullah.
VPK
Rosie
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:27 AM PDTwhat do you mean by "MKO attack on IRAN"?
MKO has attacked islamic regime and it's military. Don't equate islamic regime with IRAN. Also MKO membership are all iranians. mosr IRI leadership and support base are lebanese or iraqi arabs!
I am not a member or supporter of MKO, but if I was, so what? I mean look, the islamisc regime supporters in hiding in west already running riot here!
I support any attack from any quarter on the islamic regime, but that does not mean I'd support all of those quarters. The final knockout blow to send the regime and it's supporters to the dustbin of history will be delivered by the iron fist of the Iranians. Fars, kurd, balooch, regardless of their political alegiance.
Clear?
MKOOOOOOOO? HEEEEEERE?/partial retraction
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:59 AM PDTOkay, I partially retract my statement that the people being (absurdly) labeled MKO supporters are vehemently outraged by MKO's attacks on Iran. Fooladi, you said you support those attacks. (Perhaps in hindsight?) I think hardly anyone on this site agrees.
"Reports of Coonies in Delijan" Yousef reports
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:45 AM PDT" My family come from Delijan - unlike Qazvin and Na'in, there are no reports of koonis or bachebazi. "
I guess since your family left the area, right?? :)
No way that monkey is a Jew
by AMIR1973 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:44 AM PDTEinstein, Sigmund Freud, and Spinoza were Jews. How is it possible that Antarinejad could belong to that tribe?
Does anyone know what happened to the halo he saw at the UN? (Oh yeah, it must be in the same place as Emam's face in the moon :-)
Rumour has it Ahmadi is a Jew!
by Yousef Bozorgmehr on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:31 AM PDTThe slanderers say all sorts of things. My family come from Delijan - unlike Qazvin and Na'in, there are no reports of koonis or bachebazi.
We all know that the homosexuals in the media are anti-Ahmadi: you might as well call the "green movement" the "gay movement".
There will be no gay marriages in Iran as long as I have breath. However, transsexuals may get married as is now the case in Iran as the Gayrdian newspaper reports.
//www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/11/iran-t...
Don't worry about me - I am looking forward to my haftadodo bakereh.
Denounce? What's there to denounce?
by AMIR1973 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:30 AM PDTAs an MKO-Shahi-Tudeh supporter :-), I fully support any measure that reduces the number of Islamists in the world. The problem is that this is totally insufficient: these 2 men are just low-ranking guys in a crowd of killers. They should start with these 2 and continue all the way up the Rapist Regime chain to the very top, i.e. The Grand Rapist himself. The top Nazis (those who didn't kill themselves, that is) were tried, convicted, and executed. There's no reason why the IRI's thugs don't deserve the same:
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
Yousef: You are a closet Gay
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:12 AM PDTIt is a known facts that Clost gays tend to be Gay bashers.
Dont worry bache agha, come out, Romour has it Ahmaghinezhad is one too! you are in the west now, you'll be OK you'll find lots of new friends :)
yousef: no we do not denounce that
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:08 AM PDTIn fact we think you should all execute each other, saves us spending money on bullets when the regime is overthrown.
But you still have not told us were you are exactly hiding? Is it still england? Remeber you challenged me to a duell last night., I am eager to pay you a visit......
Will the MKO-Shahi-Tudeh crowd denounce this?
by Yousef Bozorgmehr on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:01 AM PDTIran will execute two prison guards who abused detainees at Kahrizak last summer.
//www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5...
It will be interesting to see if the MKO-Shahi-Tudeh supporters in Fooladi and Amir approve of this or denounce it.
Justice is justice - whoever harms another unlawfully must be punished. This is the shariah in practice.
ROSIE: yes, gays are mentally ill. Why else would one man want to sleep with another man? Because of homosexuals and bisexuals, there are many sexually-transmitted diseases and falling birth rates in Europe. No, we cannot tolerate this in a civilized society.
MKOOOOOOOOOOOOO? Heeeeeeeeere?
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:07 AM PDTAre you frigging serious?
___________________
Okay, okay, I know, I know. A couple of people sound like maybe, maaaybe, they've entertained the notion of target bombing. And they are vehemently: anti-Islamist, pro-SECULAR democracy, and OUTRAGED by MKO's attacks on Iran.
Think.
another p.s., Yousef / Demo
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 09:49 AM PDTYousef, what I just wrote you--it isn't just that you called gays untermenschen (which you will rationalize and rationalize...). You said so many vile things about gays, things completely inapplicable to anyone 'ill'. I highly doubt I can change you, but I have tried to plant a seed anyway, by appealing to basic logic since you're a very intelligent man. And it's only because you've been nice to me. If you don't answer me, I'm finished. But you are the one who's ill, Yousef. You are. And you do need help. And you should try to find it. You're not happy. I know it.
Demo, you were right. Yours should've been the last post. Ah, well.The best laid plans of mice and men.
No Fear
by AMIR1973 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 09:22 AM PDTSorry, but can't stand anyone who chooses armed struggle against Iran. That puts them in my bad book.
Like I said, I am opposed in principle to Islamism of all shades, though objectively speaking Emam-e Aziz is the Number One Killer of Iranian men, women, and children in several centuries, and the IRI is the worst regime in recent Iranian history. There are no "good", "respectable" or "reasonable" Islamists--they should be viewed exactly in the same light as National Socialists (minus the technological acumen and military prowess of the German Nazis, of course). In the scheme of things, 31 years is a relatively short period of time (though far too long for the wellbeing of Iranians). The first step for decent human beings is to shine a light on the IRI, because Islamists, in the true nature of rats, do not like the light.
Yousef,
by Rosie. on Wed Jun 30, 2010 09:11 AM PDTSince God is in the details, and you are highly intelligent, please think about this.
Early on you spoke of homosexuals as untermenschen. Then you explained you meant it in Nietzsche's moral sense.
(I repeat that I don't buy that since you know perfectly well that that was such a loaded word for almost everyone here. It is contemporarily almost exclusively used in the Nazi sense).
Later on, you told me that (Iranian) Aryanists are Nazis, and that homosexuals are mentally ill.
If homosexuals are mentally ill, who can be cured by sex change operatons, why are they morally untermenschen? And why did you lump them earlier in the same category with people whom you later said their tongues should be pulled out?
Yousef, Hitler killed the mentally ill. I have a better idea. Why not just go whole hog instead of just pulling out tongues?
Better still, let's do it during their sex change operations. Then they will be cured.
____________
Think, Yousef. Think.
Maziar Khan
by fooladi on Wed Jun 30, 2010 09:02 AM PDTYou are making a good observation, and I am not sure what your conclusion is but here is my humble opinion: I see "Iran parasti and support for current regime" like oil and water. They dont mix. I'd say this is a deliberate tactic designed to create confusion and division. So we have one of them asking to "chop hands and heads". The other "debating democracy", and another taking a "natinalistic islamic" stance (good cop/ bad cop). If I am right and it is all a coordinated effort by islamists, then the obcvious question would be who is co ordinating and funding them? I think we all know who :)