VIEW
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
House of the Leader
05-Jun-2009
On June 3, Iran marked the twentieth anniversary of Ali Khamenei's appointment as the leader of Iran. While international attention is focused on the June 12 presidential elections, the winner of that contest will remain subordinate to Khamenei in power and importance, despite the latter's low profile. Lacking the charisma and religious credentials of his predecessor, Khamenei has managed to attain his powerful position by taking control of key government agencies and building a robust bureaucracy under his direction. Understanding Khamenei's role in Iran's complicated governmental system and how he wields his understated power will be key for the United States as it undertakes a new strategy for dealing with Tehran.
A Weak Starting Point
When he assumed the leadership in 1989, Khamenei faced three serious obstacles to his legitimacy: he lacked the religious credentials required by the original constitution, he had not exercised significant political authority in his capacity as president, and a questionable selection process cast doubt on the legality of his appointment.
According to the original version of the constitution, the leader was not only supposed to be a religious authority (mujtahid) but also a source of emulation (marja or a mujtahid with religious followers). Khamenei, who had never even been recognized as mujtahid, let alone a marja, and whose religious knowledge was in question, did not appear to measure up to this requirement.
At the time of his appointment by the Assembly of Experts, Khamenei was serving his eighth year as Iran's president, a largely symbolic office that offered him little power. Other prominent figures in the Islamic Republic, such as Majlis speaker Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, head of the judiciary Abdulkarim Moussavi Ardebili, and prime minister Mir Hossein Moussavi, were all equally powerful, if not more so. Moreover, Khamenei was not particularly close to the previous leader, Ruhollah Khomeini, until after the revolution. Rafsanjani was among Khomeini's trusted appointments to his original Revolutionary Council; Khamenei joined only after the council decided to add members.
Several months before Khomeini's death, however, he dismissed his officially designated successor, Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, and ordered a constitutional review. The review aimed to remove the marja requirement, which would allow a mujtahid to become leader. Unfortunately for Khamenei, who was neither a marja nor a mujtahid, Khomeini died and the Assembly of Experts appointed Khamenei as his successor before the revised constitution was ratified, leaving the appointment in question.
Creating a New Generation of Politicians
Khomeini's charisma and authority enabled him to exercise power without an established bureaucracy, but Khamenei was aware of the essential differences of his circumstances and leadership. Since the revised constitution gave much more authority to the president than did the original, Rafsanjani exercised more power than his predecessor, but Khamenei still tried to expand his authority at Rafsanjani's expense. From the outset, he created a colossal bureaucracy through which to maintain power.
One important part of this effort was to take control of existing agencies. He overcame his lowly standing among veteran Islamic Republic officials and within the clerical establishment by making use of his connections in the Ministry of Intelligence and in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). During the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, then president Khamenei developed ties with these institutions, which were expanding their authority beyond the security sphere, becoming involved in economic activities as well. The end of the war and the return of commanders to their cities allowed Khamenei to create a power base outside of conventional political institutions.
Khamenei succeeded in recruiting young, loyal politicians by bringing military commanders and intelligence agents into the political arena. Among the figures who emerged from Khamenei's circle were Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Majlis, Said Jalili, the secretary of the Supreme Council for National Security, Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad, the president, Ezzatollah Zarghami, the head of state radio and television, and Mohammad Forouzandeh, the head of the Oppressed Foundation. These appointments essentially converted organizations like the IRGC into economic-political-military-intelligence conglomerations responsible only to the leader.
By bringing in a new generation of politicians and gradually marginalizing the veteran Islamic Republic officials who were not willing to work for him, Khamenei concentrated power under his authority. He became head of all three branches of the government and the state media, as well as the commander-in-chief of all armed forces, including the police, the army, and the IRGC. In the process, he has transformed the clerical establishment from a traditional religious institution into an ideological apparatus and government proxy. As leader, he also controls the country's most lucrative institutions, such as the Imam Reza Shrine and the Oppressed Foundation. He has used the funds they generate to advance a political agenda both inside Iran and abroad, building dozens of centers, foundations, and Islamic banks with political, cultural, social, and economic missions.
House of the Leader
In addition to taking over existing agencies, Khamenei also began building up his personal office or "house." Traditionally, the head of a religious authority's office was either a son or a prominent cleric; for example, Khomeini worked from his home, receiving information and issuing orders primarily through his son, Ahmad. In contrast, Khamenei created an extensive bureaucracy and transformed the "house of the leader" into a vast and sophisticated institution, with thousands of employees working in different departments.
Since his sons were too young, and prominent clerics were unwilling to take the position, Khamenei chose a low-ranking cleric, Mohammad (Gholam Hossein) Mohammdi Golpayegani, to lead his office. Not surprisingly, Golpayegani also had a strong intelligence background. He was one of the founders of Iran's intelligence service and served, among other positions, as the intelligence ministry's deputy on parliamentary affairs under Khomeini.
Khamenei also reached into the intelligence services for other significant appointments in the house of the leader. For example, he selected Asghar Mir Hejazi, another founder of the intelligence service, as the head of his intelligence department. Mir Hejazi began his career as a commander in the Committee of the Islamic Revolution (a post-revolutionary military organization parallel to the police that was later disbanded), and served as a deputy in the intelligence ministry's international affairs office before moving over to Khamenei's office. The appointments of Golpayegani and Mir Hejazi were also significant because, though low-level clerics, neither came directly from the seminary, a departure from Khomeini's practice.
Khamenei turned the house of the leader into a focal point of power. It is not only the de facto headquarters of Iran's armed forces, but also the actual headquarters of the intelligence ministry, the coordinator of the three branches of government, and the manager of economic matters, especially of the supreme leader's organizations. It also oversees the Leader's Army (Sepah Vali-e Amr), a special military unit of 21,000 soldiers under the supervision of the IRGC, responsible for the security of the leader's house.
Foreign Policy Institutions
To direct Iranian foreign policy, Khamenei created new committees and entities under his control, with the Foreign Ministry relegated to mostly administrative issues. These offices also drew on Khamenei's military connections. For example, the Military Advisors Center consists of former high-ranking IRGC and army commanders, such as former IRGC commander-in-chief General Rahim Yahya Safavi, former army commander-in-chief General Ali Shahbazi, and former head of police Hedayat Lotfian. The Supreme Council for the National Defense (SCND) also plays an important role. The secretary of the SCND is formally appointed by the president but in reality is chosen by the leader. Khamenei also has other trusted advisors, such as Ali Akbar Velayati, who served sixteen years as the minister of foreign affairs. Velayati was Khamenei's first choice for prime minister in 1982 but failed to gain parliamentary approval and instead became foreign minister under Mir Hossein Moussavi (a candidate in the upcoming presidential election).
Not Omnipotent, but Most Powerful
In the traditional monarchic despotism of Iran, the shah or king was not omnipotent; he was forced to balance power with other social authorities such as clerics, landlords, and tribal heads. Such rulers used the royal court to establish and maintain their preeminence in all aspects of governance. Following Khomeini's revolutionary break with this tradition, Khamenei has reproduced this prerevolutionary, patriarchal structure of political leadership.
During his twenty years in power, Khamenei has managed to overcome his initial obstacles and transform the conventional house of religious authority into a bureaucratic powerhouse. As a result, Iranian decisionmaking is no longer shared, as it was in the last years of Khomeini's life, especially with regard to war. The house of the leader makes the main decisions today, whether political or military, domestic or foreign policy related, and Khamenei is the principal decisionmaker. Khamenei relies more on his own hand-picked men when making major decisions than on elected members of government. Khamenei readily admits that he has the final say on foreign policy issues. As his advisor Ali Akbar Velayati wrote last year, "a European asked me recently 'Who rules Iran?' The response is clear. If something is related to strategic and fundamental issues, according to the constitution, which was approved by a referendum, the leader has the final say."
The United States must keep in mind the authority of the leader as it begins a new approach to dealing with the Iranian regime. While President Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad is the public face of Iran, the real power lays with Khamenei, a skilled behind-the-scenes operator. Finding a way to directly engage Khamenei, while not letting him hide behind the more visible president, will be a critical challenge for Washington in the months ahead.
Mehdi Khalaji is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, focusing on the domestic policy of Iran as well as the politics of Shiite groups in the Middle East. First published in PolicyWatch.
| Recently by Mehdi Khalaji | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Waste of Dollars | 4 | Dec 13, 2011 |
| Prisoner of two regimes | 12 | Jan 20, 2010 |
| Mohammad Taqi Khalaji | 9 | Jan 13, 2010 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Not very different from the US
by SmartAss (not verified) on Mon Jun 08, 2009 05:14 PM PDTIn the US we have the same thing - a president who is very publicly visible (but with very limited power) and then certain small number of individuals behind the scenes who actually run and control the system. There are special interest groups (such as AIPAC, etc) set up to manipulate the government in various ways in order to make sure power stays within that small few.
So I guess that makes Iran as "democratic" as the US!
IRI stooges vs AIPAC stooges
by sdf (not verified) on Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:00 PM PDTIt's interesting that some basiji and devout IRI supporters think they have more credibility than the AIPAC. There are no differences between AIPAC stooges and the IRI stooges; one is a foreging enemy and the other the domestic enemy of the Iranian nation.
missing the point
by hamsade ghadimi on Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:03 AM PDTeven if a supporter or an organization supporting iri, the shah or whomever brings up a discussion, i would first read and analyze the content before questioning the intent of the source. it is futile when discussions are dominated by character assasinations, name-calling and bullying tactics. in fact, it is a rarity when someone correclty identifies himself and states what organization or political leaning to which they belong. i appreciate this sort of transparency. and i'll let myself be manipulated by facts, if there's such a thing, until someone can challenge and correctly refute the statements made by the author. if i was closed-minded and only read and listened to those who i agree with, the world would be much simpler to me, and i would be a mere simpleton. i don't know how else i can articulate what i've repeated in my past comments. all i've asked is what are the falsehoods in this article? is that too much to ask?
If the institute
by Abarmard on Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:28 AM PDTWas the Islamic Republic security and an institution for the Iranian international policies who wrote about certain powers, or lack of it, of Israel, most people would have question its core ideas based on the possibilities and agenda.
These people are not shy to say what they are, who they work for and why. Take a look at the AIPAC site, or the Washington institute. They proudly admit their warmongering and fear mongering strategies.
If the individual did not mention their background and "explained" the "inside of IRI" powers, then you would want to know where that person got those information. Anyone here can claim anything they like. You would want some sort of credibility. For this institute, it's obvious why they would want the US policies be directed from this style of analysis. Bush had followed the same strategy because he gave these groups too much credit and money.
when transparency becomes liability
by hamsade ghadimi on Sun Jun 07, 2009 08:11 AM PDTif the author had not identified himself and his organization as many iri bloggers or anonymous molla-zadehs on this site, then we would've just focused on the content of the article. i still haven't heard a specific claim contrary to the content of this article. and if the author's organization's aim is to weaken the iri by merely stating facts, then all we're doing is reading the writing on the proverbial wall; and therefore, we're not being manipulated.
These informations provided here are not factual
by Abarmard on Sat Jun 06, 2009 02:49 PM PDTAnd the credibility of the institute and its agenda is well known for those who have investigated them.
Although some of the events mentioned here are factual, the entire article is not. These people work in collaborations with the Israeli government and trying hard to promote specific policies that weakens the Iranians. Thankfully after the Obama administration taking charge, the institutes power has been reduced dramatically. I would not give them too much credit.
shooting the messenger...
by hamsade ghadimi on Sat Jun 06, 2009 01:41 PM PDTi really don't care who the author is or the orgainzation he represents. as long as the information that he provides is factual and i've learned something from the article, i'm thankful. i would respectfully ask the commentators to point out the falsehoods in the article, if any, so that the audience will not be misled. or if the commentator can argue why a pro-israeli organization wants to publish such article so that they can position a certain policy in place. with respect to the latter, i think their position is to inform the western policymakers who they should be dealing with: khamenei and not the president-select.
it seems that khamenei started from a weak position but he has been able to consolidate his power and consequently his office has more power than that of khomeini. maybe not from a religious aspect but all political, judiciary, and military aspects. not only khamenei is not considered the highest authority in religion, at least in the clergy circle, he does not seem to care about it either. he's been either able to stifle those who have a higher religious authority than him (e.g. montazeri) or has discredited them (e.g. shariatmadari accused of conspiring with ghotbzadeh to assasinate khomeini).
one last note, a picture is worth a thousand words.
This is bogus- don't believe everything someone writes
by Mashty (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 01:18 PM PDTThese information provided here is bogus. Be smart, ask where did the dude got this from? What's his source? Besides AIPAC advosers.
I do not believe this at all and those who blindly buy this crap because they fail to know how things run in Iran, are ignorant.
Prove it sir. Another attempt by AIPAC to simplify and undermine the Iranian system. Wasn't this tried *nd failed? As now everyone knows that the leader alone doesn't have all the power as thought. Do we have to go through this again?
What a bunch of bowlshit. No wonder people such as Fred jump with joy, AIPAC wrote something new...
As if...
by Francesco Sinibaldi (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:44 AM PDTThe blackbird
lives in a
country like
a rose in the
dreamland,
and even a
pleasure declares
in a moment
that intention
of love.
Francesco Sinibaldi
rotten to the core
by babakkhoramdin (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 09:45 AM PDTlike fred said, you can't put lipstick on a nasty pig- which is the mullahcracy suffocating our nation.
khomeini and other akhoonds did their best to portray the monarchy as an all-evil monster.....but now we see how they compare to the shah.
they disregarded the original constitution of iran, and re-wrote a backward, self-serving one in its place to ensure that their grip on power will never be challenged.
how can anyone have faith in their system, when the tree is rotten to the core???!
when you have a bunch of ruthless akhoonds who will do anything to keep their plundering of iran to continue and don't want to let anyone challenge their powergrab, and you have "candidates" handpicked by a russian/chinese/french-backed mullah....then what's the point of voting???
I wonder how those fools who participated in this sham revolution feel now, when they see how the shah was an angel compared to these morons
informative but wrong conclusions
by Niloufar Parsi on Sat Jun 06, 2009 08:13 AM PDTregardless of the bureaucracy, khamenei has one major weakness: he lacks legitimacy, and this weakness only grows in time no matter what he does.
the revolution was based on freedom and justice, and sooner or later the position of the 'leader' must be reduced to something akin to a constitutional monarch or even removed because there is no need for it.
Khomeini fitted the bill because he led the revolution. No one else can or even should be allowed to continue that 'institution' as there is no justification for the existence of a 'supreme leader'.
Khamenei's 'authority' is based on a false premise. he represents no one but himself and his small clique of followers. he does not even command the respect of the senior clergy, let alone the people. he really has no real function or use, but spends most of his time figuring out how to survive.
The new US administration should not encourage the power of an unelected leader who adds no value and is devoid of character. on the contrary, they should only deal with an elected president in a system such as Iran's. It would fit their claim to promoting democracy in the region.
Peace
I stopped reading as soon as
by getalife (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 06:55 AM PDTI stopped reading as soon as I realized the author is a member of an organization created by AIPAC.
Ugly queen in progress
by An Iranian Observer (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 06:42 AM PDTThe guarantor of the world's freedom, the U.S. government, has the world's largest prison population--that is right here at home NOT abroad. Most of these inmates have been imprisoned for non-violent crimes. The U.S. government has kidnapped and tortured people from around the world at Guantanamo, Bagram Air Base, Abu Ghraib, and at countless secret detention sites. It has a history of detaining for extended periods large numbers of civilians (e.g. the Strategic Hamlets in Vietnam). It has imprisoned, mostly without trial or even charges !!!, tens of thousands of Iraqis--many of whom are picked up in "sweeps" that target neighborhoods or even entire villages. It is without doubt the Number One sponsor and Patron Saint of murderous right-wing dictatorships (e.g. Guatemala, El Salvador, Zaire, Indonesia). It is a virtual guarantee that Iran would become an even MORE repressive society if it becomes a U.S. puppet state (look at the examples of Uncle Sam's most obedient Middle East puppet dictatorships, Saudi Arabia and Egypt). U.S. intervention in Iran (a la 1953) would be absolutely poisonous to the Iranian people's aspirations for freedom. Advocating such a disastrous and destructive "prescription" for Iran is tantamount to being a "Shaban Bi Mokh".
Beauty queen in progress
by Fred on Sat Jun 06, 2009 05:25 AM PDTIt seems after experiencing three decades of life in the free world; there are still those who don’t get it. The free world including its guarantor, America, does not denote freedom crusaders (in a nonreligious sense), it simply means their own population and way of life are free of organized and systematic oppression.
Any unbiased observer would see the tremendous progress in all fields that the free world has achieved is mostly due to its adherence to freedom within its borders. That observer would also notice freedom is an evolutionary state, the longer it is practiced the less kinks and dents. Does that mean regardless of cost the free world in general and America in particular are actively after spreading that freedom to other parts of the world, the answer is an unequivocal no. It simply means when it is beneficial to the free world it is yes and if not, a fat no.
Those who have fled tyrannies taking refuge in the free world and understood this basic fact have been instrumental in doing some good for their motherlands. And those who took advantage of living in freedom to only nag about injustices done to their homeland by the free world have done nothing but legitimizing the rule of their tyrants. It is up to those who understand the value of freedom to use it not to rehash known history, not to forget it, rather to make it clear how advantageous it be to the free world should their enslaved motherland join the free world club. Due to historical events and sheer happenstance opportunities arise when it is easier to make the case for membership in the club.
In the aftermath of the 9/11 Islamists’ murderous attack on America and the ensuing bloody events, it is rather hard for the dollar minded decision makers to advocate business as usual. It is also hard to cover up the fact that the only lasting solution to the problem is lifting the restrictions and fronting the club membership fee.
Iran with her historical leadership in the region is where the process has to start and the rest will follow her lead. It is up to the free world to either support the historically manifested desire and thirst of the Iranian nation for justice and freedom or try to cut a deal with her oppressor a la 1953 and brace itself for more of the same to come.
No nation on the face of this planet, not even one, has ever gotten rid of their oppressor without outside help in some shape or form. It is incalculably cheaper to help Iranians with material and unrelenting moral support than trying to put lipstick on the Islamist republic pig and call it an indigenous democracy beauty queen in progress.
Very Informative
by StateDept (not verified) on Sat Jun 06, 2009 05:07 AM PDTJust to add: Election of Mousavi by voters will be a blow to Khamenei legitimacy because Ahmadinejad is his preferred choice and that Khamenei eventually pushed office of prime miinster (Mousavi) out of power when president.
THANK YOU FOR VERY INFORMATIVE ARTICLE
What is the Washington Institute?
by Question (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 08:12 PM PDTCan someone please tell me what the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is? I know that Mr. Khalaji is a so-called "senior fellow" there. I think it's very interesting that the parent organization for WINEP is AIPAC:
//www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Washing...
mr khalaji
by hamsade ghadimi on Fri Jun 05, 2009 07:50 PM PDTthank you for the informative article. i wonder who will inherit khamenei's throne. given that rafsanjani will be too old by the time khamenei's dead, will it be one of these junior clergies like golpayegani? will the next rahbar be as influential? do you see an end or a some kind of change in this oppressive government?
"I wonder's" imaginary world
by Just Asking (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 04:30 PM PDTAs far as Iran's nuclear bomb program, even the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of the Bush administration stated that there was no evidence of an active Iranian nuclear weapons program. This is the official consensus view of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies!
I will remember the free world's love of human rights the next time I hear about the U.S. bombing another Afghan village...AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN! I have always though it funny that the leader of the free world has the world's largest prison population, most of whom are in prison for non-violent crimes! I suppose we Iranians will always have Shaban bi Mokhs in our midst who spread the U.S. government's propaganda.
1) Re: support for Jondollah (none of the links are affiliated with IRI's media. In fact, almost all are American). Your pathetic VOA hosted the group's murderous leader, Abdul Malik Rigi, and him as "the leader of popular Iranian resistance movement":
//blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/04/abc_ne...
//www.hd.net/iran.html
//www.hd.net/transcript.html?air_master_id=A4...
2) On U.S. government support for the gangs I mentioned:
//www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/04/17/060417...
3) On support for Pejak:
//kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx...
//www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127...
4) On support for Rajavi's lovers of freedom:
//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7471999.stm
//cornerstonegroup.wordpress.com/2008/01/14/t...
complex web called IRI
by shirazie (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 03:48 PM PDTI can not figure out, if these guys are organized like the Mofia or Juntas. The Governor of Mashad apparently is too rich and powerful to pay federal taxes and IRI can not force him out of power.
So this regime is setup like the old Islamic Empire. One big Caliph and whole bunch of little ones.
Eventual they will eat each other..
Commence Eating ASAP.. Pretty Please
THANK YOU!
by eroonman on Fri Jun 05, 2009 03:09 PM PDTTHANK YOU! FOR EXPLAINING HOW IRAN REALLY WORKS! PLEASE BLACKBERRY THIS TO OBAMA IMMEDIATELY BEFORE HE IS CONVINCED BY HIS LESS THAN EDUCTAED STAFFERS TO AGREE TO SIT DOWN WITH IRAN'S NEXT "PRESIDENT". AS IF!
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!
TANX GOD.
To Just Asking: Oh really! let me see!
by I wonder (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 02:38 PM PDT"Currently, the free world is supporting the Islamist fanatics and killers of Jondollah, the "Ahwazi" bombers, the "Marxist" Kurdish Pejak (Iranian cousins to the terrorist PKK of Turkey), and the Rajavist gangs who are spread out between Iraq's Camp Ashraf, European parliaments, American television stations, and of course, Iranian.com."
You have absolutely no evidence as to whether the free world is supporting Jondollah, Kurdish Pejak, or Rajavis!you are just accusing and parroting the ruling clerics in Iran. You have NO PROOF, the same way you claim that the world has no poof your mullahs are building a bomb!
Haji joon, television stations in America are not government controlled like in your mullahs' Iran, they cannot be censored and ordered what to show and/or what not to show! Besides, it is against U.S. constitutional principle to deprive people from freedom of speech! Unlike Iran under your mullahs, the Free world respects the principles of universal human rights in their countries. You want the free world to shut down Iranian.com as well?!!How about VOA and RadioFarda?
Very funny
by farokh2000 on Fri Jun 05, 2009 02:33 PM PDTHow about your so called "Free World", which is murdering hundreds of thousands of people around the World, Iraq and Afghanistan for example, minding their own business and leaving the people of other Nations alone to deal with their own internal issues?.
That way you would not have the puppets like the Shah(CIA man), Ayatollah Khomieni (CIA man), Sadam(CIA man), etc., etc. doing the criminal work for them against their own innocent people to benefit their Masters?
How about that vision?
Reply to "I wonder"
by Just Asking (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 01:58 PM PDTHow about the free world stop providing weapons, money, and diplomatic support to these gangs? These are the same freedom-loving Iranians who worked with Saddam (Rajavists) and Al Qaeda (Jondollah). Time and again, the free world has proven itself the enemy of freedom, and not just in Iran but in Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
to Just Asking: and you want exercise in despotism
by I wonder (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 01:40 PM PDTSo you expect the free world to arrest them all and turn them over handcuffed to your mullahs?!
To Fred
by Wishful thinker (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 01:16 PM PDTYou expect the free world with its leade MR. Obama to help Iranian people?!!!
we pray to God he does not turn into another Jimmy Carter at the end and unintentionally help make life quite unbearable in Iran.
Exercise in delusions
by Just Asking (not verified) on Fri Jun 05, 2009 01:05 PM PDTRe: the laughable and delusional observation: "the free world has to help Iranian people overthrow the tyrant and with him so will go the entire Islamist republic"--
Currently, the free world is supporting the Islamist fanatics and killers of Jondollah, the "Ahwazi" bombers, the "Marxist" Kurdish Pejak (Iranian cousins to the terrorist PKK of Turkey), and the Rajavist gangs who are spread out between Iraq's Camp Ashraf, European parliaments, American television stations, and of course, Iranian.com. Previously, the free world hired Shaban Bi Mokh and street gangs to bring freedom to the Iranian people.
Is this the free world you're talking about Fred? I'd like to know. Thank you.
Exercise in futility
by Fred on Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:48 PM PDTThe unelected and unaccountable lifetime ruler has the absolute power on all matters large and small. Any “reforming” of the Islamist republic has to be done where the center of power resides.
Aiming to reform the Islamist republic through “elected” offices the regime has put up as fronts/buffers is a complete waste of precious resources and more importantly hope.
Before it is too late the free world has to help Iranian people overthrow the tyrant and with him so will go the entire Islamist republic.