Iranian Presidential Election

Anyone who has been watching the news is keenly aware of the unrest in Iran following the recent controversial presidential election over there. Incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner over supposedly reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, and in a landslide. No doubt exists in my mind that this was a fraudulant election. Boxes containing Mousavi votes were disposed of, the winner was declared before the voting was even finished, and Ahmadinejad won demographic categories that were believed to heavily favor his opponent. And people have been taking to the streets in protest, being met with intimidation and violence by the Iranian authorities (and responding with violence as well).

But I contend that this election was a complete fraud to begin with. Both candidates for "president" were handpicked by the so-called "supreme leader", who is nothing more than a ruthless dictator swathed in religion. And it is he, not the president, who controls this longtime UNDEMOCRATIC nation.

In order to have a truly functioning democracy, there needs to be freedom for candidates to openly campaign without press restrictions, something completely lacking in Iran. Also, there was no independent polling there to scientifically gauge the public opinion (this would have served as a rough guideline to the validity of the election results).

But I'm seeing all of this from the West, not from inside Iran. I get my information from the western journalists in Iran. And they get much of their information from those Iranians who tend to oppose Ahmadinejad, giving the built-in impression that he was very unpopular among the people at-large and should have lost his reelection bid. But, for all I know, Ahmadinejad would have won the election anyway, since there really wasn't any truly objective opinion polling there to indicate otherwise. The fact that there wasn't, though, shows the futility of even pretending that there was any democracy involved in this "election" to begin with. And does anyone seriously believe that getting opinions and reports from Twitter in Iran is a dependable way to get a pulse on how the Iranians as a whole feel?

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme dictator of Iran, is in some kind of power struggle with another dictator wanna-be by the name of Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani. Apparently, Ahmadinejad represents Khamenei's power while Mousavi is in some way on the side of Rafsanjani. And people are dying in Iranian streets thinking that they are pushing freedom, when in reality they are considered to be expendable pawns in a power struggle between two cruel autocrats.

President Obama recognizes this and is being careful with his comments about the situation in Iran. Meanwhile, the same old motley crew of hotheads on the right are beating the war drums again, led by John McCain. McCain, if you will recall, tried to make political hay during last year's presidential campaign by making vague threats against Russia during that country's brief armed conflict with neighboring Georgia. And naturally, these blabbermouths are trying to make the tragedies unfolding in Iran a referendum on Obama's leadership. Someone needs to remind McCain that the campaign's over ... and he lost!

The whole way in which this is being reported in the media gives me the feeling of being severely manipulated. It's the "good guys" versus the "bad guys" all over again. From where I stand, though, I don't see much difference between the two camps. I have a feeling, though, that many of the protesting Iranians don't like either side and are desperately trying to topple the "supreme" dictatorship and actually have a president whose election makes a difference.