A man walks away bruised after a confrontation with

regime-backed militia, on the streets of Tehran, June 20.




Kayhan, Islamic Republic of Iran

'Zionist-Run News Media' are Wasting Their Time


Are "Zionist-run news media" unfairly covering the results of the Iranian election? According to this editorial from the Islamic Republic's conservative, state-controlled Kayhan newspaper, "the illegal demonstrators, foreign spies and terrorists are wasting their time trying to overturn the will of the majority."




June 22, 2009


Islamic Republic of Iran - Kayhan - Home Page (English)

Zionist-run news media continue to take sides, favoring the defeated Mir Hossein Mousavi and the illegal demonstrators who are destroying public and private property. And they are doing so under the pretext of protesting the official presidential election results that show Mousavi losing to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by a 2-to-1 margin.


For example, New York Times editors and other Western commentators are adopting Mousavi's ill-tempered position of rejecting the notion of a partial vote recount by the Guardian Council, which oversees elections under the Iranian Constitution. Instead, the Mousavi camp is demanding an entirely new election! “Even a full recount would be suspect,” The New York Times claimed in an editorial. “How could anyone be sure that the ballots were valid?”


Funny how the very same editorial and many others go on to state that the resistance of Mousavi and his backers to a partial or complete recount suggests something else: they fear that a recount would show President Ahmadinejad winning.


Despite the vehemence of Mousavi’s supporters regarding what they claim is his rightful victory, they have good reason to question their certainty. Certain electoral complaints, already legend, quickly crack under objective scrutiny.    



For instance, the complaint about a hasty claim of an Ahmadinejad victory ignores the fact that Mousavi was out with a declaration of his own victory shortly after the polls closed and hours before Ahmadinejad’s announcement! Hours later, partial results showed Ahmadinejad in the lead.


Another favorite notion - that Ahmadinejad couldn't have carried Azari-dominated districts because Mousavi was an Azari - is countered by findings of an extensive nationwide poll conducted by American experts in mid-May, which showed Azaris favoring Ahmadinejad by about 2-to-1. The poll - described in a Washington Post op-ed by two of its reporters, Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty, also noted that high-tech methods of communication so central to the illegal demonstrations in Tehran aren't widespread throughout country, with only 1 in 3 Iranians having access to the Internet.




Kayhan, Iran: President Ahmadinejad: Election a 'Blow to World Oppressors
Dar al-Hayat, Saudi Arabia: 'Let Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader Continue'
Die Welt, Germany: In Iran's Version of Democracy, West Remains Whipping Boy
L'Orient Le Jour, Lebanon: Mr. Obama's Push of Dialogue and Openness Kicks In
Dar al-Hayat, Saudi Arabia: Worrying Times for Iran's Supreme Leader
Les Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace, France: 'Iran's Ayatollahs are Doomed'
Gazeta, Russia: Kremlin Balanced 'Between Two Chairs': Iran's and the West's
Yemen Times, Yemen: 'Zionists and Their Puppets' Assail Barack Obama
The Asia Times, Hong Kong: Beijing Cautions the U.S. Over Iran

Jerusalem Post, Israel: Iranian Protesters 'Cast Adrift' By Obama and E.U.
Debka File, Israel: White House is Divided on Iranian Protests


Ballen and Doherty also discovered that, contrary to widespread Western impressions, “Iranian youth overwhelmingly favored Ahmadinejad and that of all age groups, the 18-to-24-year-olds comprised Ahmadinejad's strongest voting bloc.”


Mousavi's support was concentrated among the urban middle class, while Ahmadinejad was more a candidate of the poor who have benefited from government support and other development programs.



In summation, the majority of the Iranian nation really did vote for Ahmadinejad. As confessed by many independent American experts and organizations, the illegal demonstrators, foreign spies and terrorists are wasting their time trying to overturn the will of the majority. Under the circumstances, The New York Times, The Times and all other Western news media are better off - and could save face - by supporting the constructive efforts of the Guardian Council to get at the facts, rather than taking sides and questioning the effectiveness of Iran's religious democracy.






























[Posted by WORLDMEETS.US June 23, 2:39am]