The Associated Press is running an article that attempts to lend legitimacy to the theocratic dictatorship in Iran.
Iran’s supreme leader orders vote fraud probe
You got that? One man’s “terrorist” is another man’s “freedom fighter” but one man’s “Supreme leader” is another man’s…Supreme Leader! Even if he’s a genocidal theocratic dictator.
And he wants a vote fraud probe, as though there are legitimate mechanisms inside the dictatorship to guard against corruption. The AP must think so because they wrote the headline implying as much.
TEHRAN, Iran — Iran’s state television said the nation’s supreme leader has ordered an investigation into claims of fraud in last week’s presidential election.
At the same time, Iranian President Mamoud Ahmadienejad has put off a planned visit to Russia.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is ordering the powerful Guardian Council to examine the allegations by pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, who claims widespread vote rigging in Friday’s election. The government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner in a landslide victory.
Pro-reform candidate? Mr. Mousavi might be less radical than Ahmadi-Nejad, but the guy is a long time member of the revolution and a pre-approved member of the presidential short list, handed down by the “Supreme Leader”.
A quick Google search reveals he was the Editor in Chief of the official newspaper of the Islamic revolution, and supports Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons. Sure he wants to roll back the moral police and allow private ownership of media, but that hardly makes him what those in the West would legitimately call a “pro-reform candidate”.
Only in selfloathingwesternmediastan could a former Islamist Prime Minister who aided in Iran’s illegal and clandestine nuclear weapons program be considered a moderate pro-reformer.
It is a stunning turnaround for Iran’s most powerful figure, who previously welcomed the results.
Welcomed the results??? How about the following more accurate statement? “It is a stunning turnaround for Iran’s dictator, who previously scripted the results.”
Mousavi wrote an appeal Sunday to the Guardian Council, a powerful 12-member body that is a pillar of Iran’s theocracy. Mousavi also met Sunday with Khamenei.
A pillar? Would the AP please be so kind as to point out the other pillars of Iran’s theocratic dictatorship that are not controlled by the “Supreme Leader” and his council?
It is amazing to see how much water a news organization will carry for a dictatorship in order to keep their precious valuable access to the worst murderers on the planet. They did it with Saddam. They did it with Arafat. They’re doing it now with the Mullahs.
& they’ll continue to do it so long as the eevil conservatives are kept out of power.
After some thought, I can’t fully agree with the notion that the AP story reflects a big tilt in favor of Khamanei and Ahmadinejad.
Use of the term “supreme leader” accurately reflects Khamanei’s title; I don’t see it as any kind of value judgment or approval of Khamanei.
The reference to a “pro reform candidate” strikes me as very sloppy rather than biased. Those who have devoted little study to Iran often fall into the trap of assuming anyone running against a hard-line leader must be a reformer. Since the AP writer is aware of the Guardian Council, it seems especially hard to forgive that he or she ignored the Council’s usual (but not invariable) role in screening out true reform candidates.
In addition, it seems fair to say that the Guardian Council is a “pillar” of the Iranian theocracy. I’m not sure what the objection is to this statement. It might be an undemocratic pillar of the Iranian government, but it’s part of the formal structure.
Finally, paint me out of the conservative mainstream on this question, perhaps, but it appears to me that there are a lot of subtleties and nuances to Iranian politics — some of which I am not sure are transparent to western eyes, and some or all of which can shift over time. There seems to be ongoing jockeying between a number of powerful institutions and individuals, including the bazaaris, those who control the bonyads, the mullahs, the various military and paramilitary organizations, and various classes of the population. Uneasy alliances form and dissolve, friends become rivals, etc.
The notion that, say, a majority of the population opposes either the form of government or any given leader well might outrun any real knowledge we have about the Iranian people. It’s good to see people out in the streets of Iran protecting, but whether they reflect anything approaching a majority of the population is unclear.
Unfortunately the U.S. media by and large paint with broad strokes when reporting on Iran, and none of the news organizations (and here I’d include my favorite, Fox) seems inclined to delve into details on any kind of routine basis. Here I would fault the media’s second major failing: On top of a prevalent liberal bias, there’s an emphasis on superficial treatment of complex issues, and many or most reporters don’t bother to get educated. (And some of them, such as the guy who wanted to know what most “enchanted” Obama, are simply idiots beyond redemption.)
As always, thanks for keeping us on top of the news, especially the stories the MSM ignore.
You raise valid points TJ. My fear is that Ahmadienejad is making a power grab in spite of the institutions that put him in power in the first place.
…and he’s freakin nuts!!!