Firstly, the Rushdie fatwa was a concerted effort to make Iran the vanguard nation of Islamist revival. It is just as central to foreign affairs as were the overtures towards the US, as Kepel notes.

Secondly, the US position was embolden not just by the trouble Iran had cause administrations in the past but by both the victory over the Soviets and by gaining an ‘ally’ in post Soviet Afghanistan.

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/1186/8611002.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ronald_Reagan/Irangate_Israel_TICC.html

Down in the front rows of the crowd, the chador-wearing women chanted with gusto. But where I stood, directly beneath the Azadi, or Liberty, monument – a 1970s-built monstrosity that symbolises the revolution – it felt more like a predictable football game as people chatted and joked during the speech and then, too soon perhaps as it turned out, headed early for the exits. “He’s talking bullshit,” one man said to another as they left.

At that moment, Mr Ahmadinejad was boasting about aluminium production, the number of new phone lines installed and an apparent massive boost in tourism. “Is he talking about Iran?” one woman muttered to her husband. No mention of the 20 per cent inflation, chronic unemployment and economic crisis. And when Mr Ahmadinejad said Iran owed everything to Allah, another man quipped: “Let’s hope he doesn’t blame the high prices on God.”

Many were genuinely moved, carrying placards saying “30 years of freedom, 30 years of glory”. Somayeh Shahi, 23, a student, confided that she “hated” the US and didn’t believe Mr Obama. “We don’t trust him,” she said. But the numbers were unimpressive (about 400,000 out of a city population of 10 million) for such an auspicious anniversary. And while there were no roars of approval when the President said he would be ready for dialogue, some in the crowd had already decided he should.”Yes it would be better for us to speak to Obama,” said Majid Ahmadi. “But the Americans must listen.”

And among the millions of Iranians who stayed away, most, even if they support a tough nuclear policy, long for an end to isolation and reconciliation with the US. “You in the West have to decode what is going on,” said a student who sums up the Iranian paradox. She wears a full chador, yet thinks her President is “a joke” who has needlessly picked fights with the world Iranians never wanted. “People in Iran are not opposed to engagement with the US, as long as it is on equal terms.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/on-the-streets-of-tehran-even-the-hardliners-are-weary-of-presidential-platitudes-1606325.html

“A penetrating, provocative, and very timely study that deciphers how U.S. policy in the Middle East has been manipulated both by Iran and by Israel even as relations between these two oscillated between secret collusion and overt collision.”- The Honorable Zbigniew Brzezinski, former US National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (The Honorable Zbigniew Brzezinski )

“A brilliant interpretation of one of today’s most enigmatic conflicts. In a sober and original analysis, Dr. Parsi unearths the true nature of the tension in the triangle Iran-Israel-USA as a manipulation by all parties-especially the Israelis and the Iranians-of ideological differences to conceal what can be a solvable strategic dispute. This is a study about the manipulation of ideology and religion in the struggle for mastery in the Middle East.”-Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel’s former foreign minister and author of Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy (Shlomo Ben-Ami )

“Trita Parsi has written an outstanding book, filled with fascinating detail and trenchant analysis. Treacherous Alliance discusses Iran and Israel in dispassionate and smart ways, which is rarely done in the United States.”-John Mearsheimer, University of Chicago (John Mearsheimer ) –This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234455875&sr=1-1

“Trita Parsi has written a compelling book, cutting thorough ideological and political propaganda emanating from the three countries he has focused on (US, Israel, and Iran), and going right through the core issues involving geopolitical and regional hegemony aspirations of the three governments. What is fascinating is that Parsi reveals that such political calculations transcend the particular ideology of the governments in these three countries. Whether it is Likud or Labor in Israel, Democrats or Republicans in the US, or The former Shah’s regime or the reformists or hardliners of the Islamic government in Iran, the decision making process remarkably follows more or less the same logic, and the same priorities are at play. When a shift in policy takes place, Parsi reveals that again the political faction of the government involved is irrelevant. In fact, amazingly, the very same people who were advocating one set of policies, often advance a diametrically opposite set a few years later. Parsi underlines this point by revealing how Israeli Labor leaders, the late Itzhak Rabin and Shimon Perez were lobbying the Reagan administration to disregard virulent rhetoric from Iran and try to open up channels of communication with them, while just a few years later these two men were warning about the Iranian menace in every domestic and international speech. He points out how the neo-conservatives dominating the Bush administration were the very same people who were advocating supporting Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and opening channels in the eighties in the Reagan administration. And how the former hostage takers in Iran are now mostly leading liberals advocating negotiations and moderation in Iranian policies.

Parsi narrates this story in a linear historical context, starting his book from 1948 when Israel was created all the way to present day (summer of 2007). The central theme of the book is that before 1991, Iran and Israel were natural allies, while afterwards (which was coincident with the fall of Soviet Union and defeat of Iraqi President Saddam Hossein’s invasion of Kuwait and his subsequent weakenining) the two countries became rivals and perceived each other as threats.

The main shortcoming of the book as I see it, is that while Parsi underlies the geopolitical underpinnings of the triangular relationship of Iran, Israel and the US, very little is mentioned in terms of economic reasons for these “treacherous” alliances and rivalries. What corporations or industries benefit from continued hostilities between Iran and the US and which ones benefit, and how much influence and clout each has on the direction of the US policies? Who benefits in Iran for continued belligerence towards Israel or towards the US, and who is hurt, and how much influence they have on the Iranian government? Some economic analysis is given for Israel’s attitude towards Iran: Oil investments and sales from Iranian side, and military sales and training from the Israeli side when relations were good; and an Arab-Israeli common market in the Middle East (which would exclude Iran) when relations were bad. But these economic incentives are treated as secondary at best. I wish more and deeper economic analysis was presented from Iranian and American, as well as Israeli perspectives.”

Read the account of Iran-Iraq war veteran: A PATH TO NO WHERE:

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/manoucher-avaznia/iran-iraq-war-path-nowhere-intro

In one month, The Islamic Republic killed more people than the Shah did in his 26 years. Most of Savak stayed put and are running VEVAK and SAVAMA, Paramilitary Ansar-e-hezbollah, paralimitary Basiji, AND the IRGC and so on.

The Western powers and media are also to blame. For the past five/six years or so, when confronting the IRI, the only issue they bring up is the nuclear dossier, Natanz, etc.

The shah was viciously demonized by the Western Media/powers for a fraction of crimes that the IRI has done and continues to pepetrate.

Why does the IRI get such a preferential treatment from the Western Media?? Think about it..

Read the comments and the blog

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/paymaneh-amiri/khavaran-silencing-dead

A Question of Numbers

http://www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.php

Read what Iranians think about Khomeini’s bloody revolution:

http://iranian.com/main/albums/looking-back

The Iranian revolution at 30:
http://www.mideasti.org/files/Iran_Final.pdf

Most Iranians think that the Brits and carter et al installed the mullahs to keep Iran backward and ignorant.

http://www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-P...

http://www.payvand.com/news/06/mar/1090.html

U.S. policies may have contributed to Iran revolution, study says

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-f...

2. Report: U.S. Missteps Led To Shah’s Overthrow NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story...

3. The installation of Ayatollah by the West:
http://www.williambowles.info/guests/2005/iran_cla...

4. Carter’s Habitat of inhumanity:
http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialconten...

5. Complicity of France in Manufacturing the Iranian Revolution and Jimmy Carter’s betrayal of the Iranian People
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1857

Then there was Lyndsey someone on Channel 4 news explaining the wonderfully peace-loving response of the Iranian Mullah regime to the Obama overture – whilst admitting that the mass crowd behind were chanting “death to the USA” (as ever) and even threatening the marginally less rabid Khatami for daring to broach the subject of standing for office again.

Talk of the wrongs of the West in the past are irrelevant now. Certainly colonialism, lust for oil and arms trading have all been chickens that would eventually come home to roost.

But Mullah or Caliph rule is a home grown phenomenon that was the norm for the best part of 1200 years. And that is what we are facing again in Iran.

My comment overlapped with yours.