As'ad AbuKhalil doesn't appreciate Americans' double standards:

I am in no way sympathetic to Moussavi. He is a man who suddenly discovered the virtues of democracy. When he was prime minister back in the 1980s, he presided over a regime far more oppressive than Ahmadinajad's. And why has no Western media really commented on his rhetoric during his own campaign: the man kept saying that he wants a "return" to the teachings of Khomeini. I in no way support a man who wants a "return" to the teachings of Khomeini. But Western media are always quick to pick villains and heroes: especially when one side is identified against Israel. I don't know whether the elections in Iran was stolen or not, and I would not be surprised if such a regime did that. But why do Western media express outrage over a stolen election in Iran but they don't even feign outrage over lack of elections in Saudi Arabia? So it is not about democracy or respecting the will of the people any way.

Because Iran actually has a population capable of sustaining democracy; and Mousavi is as good as we'll get. I also suspect that all judgments about who these people are need to be held provisionally. These events are surely changing the mindset of everyone in that country, most of all Mousavi. In a moment of extreme flux, we have to look at intimations of the new, not recitations of the old.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.