Exactly what kind of “rule of law” is it when the leaders can subvert the will of the people whenever they like? The law itself gives them this power. The Iranians do NOT have a constitutional republic like Americans do, in that they invest overriding power in people who are not at all accountable to the people of the Republic. This is how Iran got in this mess in the first place. Khomenei came up with this insane, unprecedent, power-grabbing notion that the clerical guardianship used to care for widows and orphans should be extended to the entire country and its governmental powers. This is not part of the Shi’ite tradition, nor does it make good sense for a “Republic” to be formed in such a way. It’s a naked grab for power, and what we see in Iran now is its natural manifestation. If you don’t like what you see now, then you don’t like the Iranian Republic as it was formulated by Khomenei, who hand-picked Khamanei as his successor. Khomenei would act no differently, I’m sure. If anything, he would use more violence, as he did during his own reign, murdering many, many members of the opposition. You seem to have a romantic and deluded notion of what the Islamic Republic actually is.

I appreciate your insider understanding of Iran, but please, tell me how exactly a series of non-violent protests can actually force Khamenei or Ahmadinejad to abdicate or cede power in any way? I can understand how they could be forced to by the executive clerical councils, but unless the Guardian Council or Coucil of Experts actually acts to do so, how could Khamenei be forced to bow to the protesters? They have repeated said they will not bow, they will just keep escalating the violence, until the protests stop or die. It seems to me that they can carry out that plan quite effectively, as long as the military and the Revolutionary Guards and the clerics continue to back them. Tragic, yes, but isn’t it naive to think that protests alone can have any effect on these fellows so long as they are determined to stay in power (except to the degree that protests can convince the clerics to unseat Khamenei and Ahmadinejad?

I repeat, and I don’t understand why the right hasn’t gotten it yet. The Sea of Green has zero interest in “a democracy”. Bush and Ajax have made democracy a dirty word in MENA.
The Iranians have a constitutional republic, just like the US. They live under the rule of law, just like US citizens. Only it is islamic law, not secular law. This protest is about the rule of law.

“There are forms of government….and their perversions….and the perversion of a republic is a democracy.”

Unless Rafsanjani can convince the clerical elite that the regime has to go, it won’t go. The protesters are dependentl on that outcome, because it is their only real hope. They simply cannot topple this regime internally by mere protests. Only the clergy itself can topple this regime. That is not a revolution, it is a counter-coup. It would be marginally better for the cause of reform, but it’s not as if genuine democracy will result. As you say, it’s the substitution of one faction within the oligarchy for another. Perhaps it will be a better faction. One can’t expect more than that, but it’s not as if that would amount to nothing substantial. It might well represent a gradual opening of Iran. Nothing to sneeze at, even if the critical issue has nothing to do with democracy or the will of the people, but the prospects Rasfanjani sees to make even more obscene amounts of money in a reformed Iran. One can’t expect the motives of human betterment to always be noble.