All and every article published on this site is protected by a no nonsense copyright law.

It is for use by everyone, and I actually encourage you to redistribute it,

but you are required to clearly reference the site and the author.

After The Fact Fussing

A new breed of semi intelligentsia has emerged into the new millennium that is got only one thing in common with most people.  That is fussing, and fussing after the fact.  This new breed has become an expert in shifting the blame.  Bush administration started it, and it goes down to a large portion of the population whose only source of information is corporate controlled mass media.


It does not matter whether you agree with a particular policy or not.  What they fail to realize is that for every action or inaction you take there is a consequence.  Freedom does not mean you can do whatever you want to.  It only means you will enjoy the benefit as much as you suffer from the consequences of your actions and/or inactions.  So, stop whining for the undesirable outcome.  It was your choice, even if it sounded wonderful at the time.  Yet, it was a stupid one because you had to change your objective, from the threat of WMD to a rogue regime to spread of democracy, etc. after the fact.


In his article “Democracy’s Double Standard” published in New York Times Mr. Hossein Derakhshan writes “Shame on the U.S. for backing Iran's election boycott”   His view is, of course, shared by many Iranians who are abreast of times, but for the whiners it comes from Israel!  It is clear he dislikes both the Iranian and Palestinian elections outcome.  But it is only through comparison where you are disgusted with the double standard: “Contrast the "don't vote" message that President Bush sent to Iranians to the one delivered to Iraqis through a major media campaign and other costly means: "Your destiny is in your own hands. Disappoint the anti-democracy radicals and go out and vote."  The funny thing is the fact that Bush administration does not like the Iraqis election outcome either, but has to pretend it likes it because warmongers love a potential for civil war that could well lead to the collapse of a nation into small ethnic/religious parts!


I certainly believe Bush administration was well aware of what was going on in both Iranian presidential and recent Palestinian elections.  Not only Bush is simply too arrogant to face the reality, but also he enjoys being surrounded by warmongers and profiteers who do not miss even the most remote opportunity for creating and/or continued instability in the region.  They are the only ones who enjoy windfall profit for human lives and misery.  In short, they are looking for violence while giving lip service to peace and stability. 


“That's right: with what appeared to be the endorsement of President Bush and dozens of American-backed satellite television channels that broadcast in Farsi, the disillusioned young people of Iran effectively took one of the world's most closely watched nuclear programs out of the hands of a reformer and placed it into the hands of a hard-line reactionary.” Rightfully writes Mr. Derakhshan.  Bush administration sold moderates who could gradually lead the country towards a true democracy to hardliners who do not compromise to avoid confrontation.


It may serve the JUSTICE because Iran has every right to a peaceful nuclear energy like any other country in the world.  However, this is the most expensive justice a country may ever gain because it may well lead to World War III in real terms.  If there were a claim of possible EXISTENCE of WMD in Iraq; this time it is a possible INTENTION for a country that has fully cooperated with IAEA in recent years including compliance with additional protocols that have not been even ratified by the board yet.


Moderate voters, who listened to such outright stupidity and boycotted the election, had actually signed off their own defeat.  Do they ever learn?  No.  Stupidity is simply commonplace when you hear an anchor shouting at the audience “those who did not vote were on our side!”  Not only this is first hand moronic, it shows how ignorant they are about the rules of the game.  In this so called game of voting, only actual ballots are counted, not the ones that failed to reach the voting box.  Even if we take such a claim seriously, it only means those who did go to the voting box voted for the Islamic Republic regardless of hardliners or moderates.  So boycotters lost.  Fair is fair!  But no; whiners will INVENT new excuses to avoid admitting the fact that the days of boycotting an election is over.


Disregarding the candidate selection process that, in ESSENCE, is commonplace in even the most democratic nations in different forms, Ahmadinejad came from nowhere, and defeated the most powerful candidate by a landslide.  All his opponents could do to assert the real reason behind his victory was to whine about a nonsense irregularity in the poll.  They simply downplayed the center figure of reformists camp Dr. Moeen’s assessment when he said “People don’t believe us”


Yes, double standard democracy may fool a good portion of better off populace of the west, but it does not work with the wretched people of the world even if the choice brings them more misery than good.  Meanwhile, West in failing to stop Ahmadinejad’s popularity in the region is meticulously arranging the building blocks for bringing about WWIII in the name of peace. 


Ahmadinejad is a hardliner alright, but he plays hard ball intelligently.  He is pushing west to the corner to either lose big time in its “double standard democracy” or gradually inflame the world by WWIII.  The third alternative is a new Israel/Palestine type crisis in the region.  It may or may not be a planned invasion and/or internal/external conspiracy against a sovereign state, but it sure is an imperialistic aggression by a handful of power wielders, this time through the UN, against Iran.  Wait for hypocrites to keep changing their objectives as the Iranian crisis over its nuclear ambition is overblown regardless of whether Iran come to a compromise with Russian proposal or not.



Mohamad Purqurian

January 31, 2006