This ought to be seen, not as a single incident, but as part of the vicious repression that has been going on in Iran for years. Khatami's first electoral victory, along with the victory of democratic candidates in the Majlis, gave the mullahs one Hell of a scare, since it threatened to delegitimize their control of the State. They reacted viciously, by a combined onslaught on the press, on parliament, and on the president's own cabinet; at the same time as brutalizing even further their already savage notions of justice. The result was that the country was effectively wrestled away from its people, whose vast majority had voted against them. The persecution of this unfortunate Christian serves the interests of the propaganda machine, suggesting (dreadful thought!) that the Christian enemy is infiltrating pristine Muslim institution such as the Army. All things considered, he has had it easy (unless, of course, he suffers from some unexplained incident while in jail), as compared for instance with that Canadian-Iranian journalist who was butchered without process a while back. But then the funny thing about the Iranian Republic is that it is really unpredictable: one authority, even one individual, will pull in one direction, and another in a completely opposite one. It is a tyranny, but not yet a totalitarian state - emphasis on "not yet".

Posted by: Paolo at February 19, 2005 9:05 AM

A pre-emtive strike is neccessary on Iran.

Posted by: Ummagumma at February 19, 2005 11:08 AM

It is looking increasingly necessary. Iran is clearly in bad faith and wants its atom bomb - or rather, the mullahocracy wants it. But militarily speaking, it would be far more difficult than occupying Iraq; the country is large and mountainous, and its research centres are hidden away in several different secret spots. If an attack there has to be, then it better be fast, because every day that passes brings the Khomeini-bomb closer and closer; but it had also better be done with care. Remember Jimmy Carter's attempt to use military force across the windswept Iranian deserts and plateaux? And I think we can count on sturdier resistance than the Iraqi Army provided. It will be only after the mullahs have been defeated that the majority of the people will perhaps come to appreciate the return of their stolen democracy, and, even so, I doubt whether they will be very grateful. But whatever the case, nobody wants an Iranian bomb. (Except for the usual morons who yammer about why Iran and not North Korea and of course it's all about oil and blah blah blah. However, I hope that at least on this site that sort of pest should be rare.)

Posted by: Paolo at February 19, 2005 11:17 AM

Wait a second! I thought Sharia law called for the the death penalty for apotasy.Please explain.
ps i read islam for catholics and it was an eye opener on the sources of the koran. but i am disappointed in jihad watch's commenters often anti-all muslim tone. i believe islam needs reform and the koran is cobbled together but most muslims are cultural and comments on this site often seem to polarize. we should make this site decent enough to point it out to muslim friend's to open their eyes.

Posted by: jt at February 19, 2005 12:00 PM

A very troublesome addition to the Iranian equation is the involvement of Russia. This could be the start of the "Battle of Gog and Magog".

Posted by: Carolyn2 at February 19, 2005 1:02 PM

JT, the reason people are anti-Islam is that the core of the religion is aggresive. I for years welcomed immigration, still do, but I don't want Islam, because it is incompatible with our socities. Look at the UK, the so called MCB calling for Sharia law, its not on.

I look at the people first, but one thing I have noticed about Muslims is that they tend to be both arrogant (Muslims are superior) and ignorant(the Koran does not teach them how to live in a modern world.) In a person that is a recipie for problems, but in a growing world religion that uses fear to keep its followers in line its just scary.

After the holacaust Europe took a long hard look at itself and said never again, problem is that by letting Islam in we are setting the scene for an even worse human disaster.

I keep calling for us to stop the building of mosques and Islamic cultural centres, the immigrants we have can evantually become secular, remove the fear and we can do something, but they have put in place their network now and it will take some unravelling, tensions will go up. There is no will in our governments, who do we turn to, the extreme right. Its just a real shame that we allowed this to happen. Our leaders have failed our people!!

I know that there are good honest Muslims, that would not dream of killing others etc. But its not as simple as that. If only it was.

Posted by: Daffersd at February 19, 2005 1:40 PM

I fear the worst for Pastor Pourmand and his family. Islam is a religion with no exit visas, despite JT's comments. In stating that fact, I also refuse to believe any numerical count about Muslims in any country. There is a tradition by Muslims to inflate their numbers and deflate non-Muslim populations, to justify discrimination and power grabs. Also, in dealing with a religion in which people like Pastor Pourmand are not allowed to freely change or chose their own beliefs, the numbers of true believers will always be much smaller than the rolls on the books, so to speak. Millions across the Muslim world mechanically and reluctantly stay in Islam, just to avoid the torture and possible painful death that Pastor Pourmand faces today in that wonderful Islamic paradise called Iran. If Islamic countries actually allowed people under their control to chose their own religion, the billion or so on their membership rolls would shrink quickly.

Posted by: maryrose at February 19, 2005 3:16 PM

Maryrose: that's a fact. In fact, I don't think we shall ever really know how many genuine Muslims exist in each Muslim country until the laws against apostacy are made ineffectual. I keep hearing rumours of Christian undergrounds and (perhaps less attractively) of atheistic and libertine undergrounds, especially in Iran and Egypt, but nothing definite can be found out, because it would be death for many of the people involved to ever admit it.

I can tell you one thing that happened to me, that tells you the terror that goes with Islam, even to the fourth generation. I used to know a very nice kebab shop lady in London, obviously a first-generation immigrant. Her shop was decorated with Islamic plate and posters, and nothing about it suggested that it was anything but the property of a pious Sunni. When, however, she found out that I knew a little about Turkey and its history, she confided in me that her origin was... she did not have the courage to go on. Kurdish, I asked (this was when the civil war was still on). No. Worse. She was Armenian. And even here, three thousand kilometres from her homeland, in a free and still slightly Christian country, within reach of a substantial Armenian community, she still dreaded the Muslims so much that she went on with her daily Muslim and Turkish disguise. I think that until you have lived with a terror like that, you cannot even imagine that it exists.

Posted by: Paolo at February 19, 2005 3:44 PM

I am not pro-islam, trying to help your cause, and looking for answers. Please answer
1-how did this christian get only jail time?
2-how can we make this sight decent enough to attract cultural muslims to open their eyes and spread the truth?

ps
daffersd-we can't stop the building of satanic churches so we can't stop mosques-but we can support reform muslims and expose jihadis as freedom house did

maryrose-if we open muslims eyes the can begin to leave at least in their hearts

paolo-that is my point many people appear to be muslim but inside are not ie persians who follow zoraster not mohammed

pss-when a muslim hears the KORAN TEACHES that Jesus was born of Mary and the Spirit of God, Jesus never died, Jesus rose to heaven, and Jesus will return for the last judgement their eyes open. how could mohammed be more important.

Posted by: jt at February 19, 2005 5:45 PM

Have to agree with JT, the tone of the comments on this site is often really bad - vitriolic and grossly insulting. As Robert and Hugh so deftly demonstrate, that's just not necessary. It reflects poorly on Jihadwatch to have screechy, hateful comments here.

Posted by: kelley at February 19, 2005 7:26 PM

Dear kelley,

I concur. I keep comments open because they often contain worthwhile information, but it is also true that hateful and genocidal posts, and posts that use silly slurs like "Muzzies" not only detract from the discussion, but from the site itself.

Comments are unmoderated. I don't have the time or staff to monitor them. I delete ones I see, but I see few.

You all should realize that this is a human rights site. I oppose jihad and Sharia because they are denials of basic rights that I belive all people should have, and which are set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But posts like the ones I described above only play into the hands of the enemies of our efforts. More than once -- notably in my recent exchange with the Saidist professor Omid Safi -- my opponents have used them to try to discredit me. They can't find any ammo in my own writings, so they turn to the comments. This is ridiculous, since jihadist Muslims have also posted here, and I am no more responsible for their posts than I am for the hateful ones Safi and others have tried to hang me with: unmoderated means unmoderated. Nonetheless, it is done.

Why give them this ammunition? Why not work strategically? Why not fight smart?

In any case, I will say it again:

1. I do not approve of or condone language such as "Muzzies" etc.
2. I do not approve of posts advocating genocide, nuking Mecca, or similar schemes. I believe we can win this struggle while holding to our principles.
3. I strongly urge everyone to comply by this, or maybe I will just close comments soon after all.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at February 19, 2005 7:39 PM

great post robert,
i suggest a thread on reaching out to cultural muslims and someone writing a book deconstructing the cobbled together koran for us to give to muslims.
instead of people hurting robert's scholarly attempts to engage the islamic elite and educate the rest of us.
ps if any one knows of any book already written to open cultural muslim eyes besides the bible please post

Posted by: jt at February 19, 2005 7:50 PM

Of course I agree with Mr.Spencer. And I am glad that he should have made this explicit statement, because the tone of a number of correspondents had been making me depressed. Does it not occur to anyone that we win nothing by sinking to the level of our enemies?

Posted by: Paolo at February 20, 2005 3:27 AM

With all due respect Mr. Spencer, does this not fall into dihmitude of itself?
One of my great escapes is the release of anger by posting here a long with others thinking some how some where I am making a difference by my participation here,by far JW is my favorite site,what comes to mind is that all good things must come to an end sooner or later and this would be sooner.

Now I may have mentioned nuking mecca once or twice or a lot but that is my feeling of my own free will and I am personally unable to carry this out anyhow and if given the chance other options would materialize,If your liabilities are infringed then Sir preserve yourself and do what you must have too however much that would sadden me,in my consideration you will be considered a casualty of war and have my extreme condolences.

Trolls and moles are one and the same feeding the fire with misinformation and blatent lies,comments found herein offend some people;excuse me but I am disgusted with the realities we see EVERYDAY and a mere comment or suggestion pales in comparison to people DYING for real.

The killing of the Armonius family was brought to life in the media and prosecuters office by people made aware in this site and others but from here I contacted several different entities with links from poster's here and then I forwarded this info to other groups,friends and family,in all honesty EVERYONE I alerted had not yet heard of this but after a quick google search they were directed to JW where they were astonished to find that horrible act the way I stated,from there they got to work and now would like to view my copy of the koran which I will gladly buy them their own copy and tell them to "pay it forward".

Keep up the good fight as I know you will.
Chuck

Posted by: hadithher2 at February 20, 2005 6:30 AM

Hadithher:

I don't see calling for an end to abusive speech on JW as dhimmitude. We don't defeat the enemy by descending to his level. We should adhere to higher standards.

Our enemies use such comments against us. We should not give them that ammunition. I don't know why this is so hard for people to grasp.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at February 20, 2005 3:18 PM

Striking a balance between justifiable letting off steam and abusive comment is difficult, and I can't pretend to know all the answers.

One thing is for sure - two of our most eloquent writers, Robert Spencer himself and Hugh Fitzgerald never use abusive or intemporate language, yet make the point very effectively. This is a challenge for all of us.

It is not a good idea to alienate moderate Muslims or others who do not share our views. We do not needd to compromise our integrity, but, as a bare minimum, perhaps stuff about 'nuking Mecca' needs to stay in inverted commas.

This is a battle, perhaps a war, but there are ways and means of winning it!

Posted by: Interestd at February 20, 2005 9:41 PM

Robert,

Will your new book the "myth of tolerance in islam"
be available in paper back ?

paperbacks are cheaper and therefore more cost effective to buy and circulate

Posted by: apostate_islam at February 21, 2005 7:46 AM