There’s a mudslide of infotainment regarding Iran’s presidential election on the internet today. Not many discussing the biographies of the candidates, the pledges of destruction made by Israeli and U.S. fascists, or the effects of sanctions presently enforced and threatened to be imposed. Slipping out is a report of foreign influence on sovereign elections.
Ahmadinejad is the “madman” and the preferred candidate of the neoconservatives, a descriptive utilised by the go-to guy for progressive change in U.S. Middle East foreign policy, an attitude that reflects the depth of his think tank.
Laura Rozen: As Iran votes, all quiet on the western front:
“We are committed to direct diplomacy with whatever government emerges,” a U.S. official said Wednesday on condition of anonymity. The administration is “being tight-lipped on this one,” he acknowledged, noting that some planned interviews on the issue had been shut down out of apparent sensitivity to concerns that Iranian hard-liners could portray them as evidence of U.S. meddling, a sensitive issue in Iran.
Hilarious. Expecting reports cheering an “Obama effect” should Ahmadinejad be defeated that paint Obama as a charismatic change agent and do not examine his cold-blooded enforcement of the same-old coercive policies.
The mudslingers’ great hope must be for cocktails to celebrate a brief respite in the decline of dear leader’s poll numbers. It won’t be a toast to long lives, health and happiness of Iranians. The election, no matter the result, will change nothing.