SPEAKING FREELY 'Hitler' up for re-election
By William Wedin
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say.
Please click hereif you are interested in contributing.
In case you haven't heard, the Iranian "Hitler", President Mahmud Ahmadinejad,
is up for re-election in June. And you would think that nothing could possibly
be more important on the international front than defeating "Hitler" at the
ballot box. Isn't he "Hitler"" after all? And not just any old "Hitler" - the
way, say, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, Panama dictator Manuel Noriega and
Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein were seen as "Hitlers" in their day.
No, Ahmadinejad is treated as the worst of all the "Hitlers". Namely, a
"Hitler" who has openly, sort of, said that he wants to
"wipe Israel off the map" (or so the gross misquotation goes) as soon as his
mad Muslim minions can develop a nuclear warhead and a missile to deliver it.
That is why Israel is talking about launching a preemptive strike against this
"Hitler's" nuclear strikes, is it not?
So you would think that the White House and the American press would be moving
heaven and earth to support a reformist candidate like former prime minister
Mir-Hossein Mousavi right now, especially as that would mean denying "Hitler"
four more years to advance his alleged "plan". And there is an actual chance
that Mousavi could beat him. For Ahmadinejad has been as "conservatively"
stupid about the economy as any George W Bush-wannabe can. And Iranian voters
are very unhappy about their falling standard of living (being American
consumers at heart).
So you would think ...
But wait! Stop for a second. This all sounds too weird. If "Hitler" is
"Hitler", how can there be an election? How can the outcome be in doubt?
That is precisely the point. That is why we are hearing nothing about the
approaching election coming out of the White House. That is why there is not a
word about it in the corporate press. If Ahmadinejad really were a "Hitler",
there would be no election. There would be no campaigning. There would be no
last-minute efforts to win over Iranian voters. If the man were another
"Hitler", his political opponents would be shot on the spot.
Watch any speech or interview with Ahmadinejad and judge for yourself. Where
Hitler was fiery, Ahmadinejad is flat. Where Hitler was brilliant, Ahmadinejad
is bland. Where Hitler was strident, Ahmadinejad is soft. Where Hitler was
militant, Ahmadinejad is mousy. The only way he can be made to sound like
Hitler is by dubbing Hitler over him.
And even then there is no way to make him look like Das Fuhrer. Take a photo of
Ahmadinejad beneath the image of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. How do you PhotoShop
that guy into Hitler? Even a new Saddam? Ahmadinejad doesn't have a uniform on
because he doesn't own one. Or a necktie either. (In Iranian society neckties
are considered a sign of sinful pride. What? A "Hitler" who piously rejects
pride?) And as for that face. With those upturned eyebrows - he looks a
dachshund pleading to pee. No Fuhrer he.
Indeed when it comes to matters of war and peace, the president of Iran has as
much power as US house speaker Nancy Pelosi. That is, none. Nada. Zero. Zilch.
He's not the commander-in-chief. Not in a nation "under God" like Iran. No,
that authority is invested in the white-bearded man with the smiling eyes
behind him, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei is the supreme leader of
Iran, just as the title implies. He and he alone is the supreme leader in all
things temporal and spiritual in Iran. He is like the pope and US president all
in one. And he has held that position since 1989.
So how come most Americans have never heard of him? Because it is hard for even
Fox News to demonize a supreme leader who has been in power all that time and
has never ever once attacked or threatened to attack any nation. No, not one.
And to my knowledge, no nation has ever claimed that he has. Occasionally the
corporate media will sweep him up in some sweeping reference to the "evil
ayatollahs" who supposedly rule Iran with an iron fist. But mostly the pro-war
propagandists prefer to leave Khamenei out of the script. He just doesn't
"fit". He looks too much like a wise old rabbi to portray him as evil
incarnate. Just think of how long he's been in power - without one wild word
out of the man. That shows both discipline and discretion.
Which brings us back to my original question. Namely, why the stony silence
from the White House and the corporate media around the pending election if
supporting a reformist presidential candidate like Mousavi would deny "Hitler"
another term? To do what exactly? Fabricate a crude nuclear device and lob it
towards Israel on an equally crude missile? With the blessing of the supreme
protector of the Iranian people? While the United States and Israel passively
watch the preparations for the next Holocaust go forward?
Are what about the peaceful people of Iran? Would the corporate media have us
believe that Iranians want nothing more from life than collective suicide? For
with at least three of its own nuclear-armed submarines patrolling off the
coast of Iran (never mind American back-up), Israel could easily turn Iran into
a sea of molten glass before that first crude Iranian missile even cleared the
launch pad.
Yet the Barack Obama administration has no interest in preventing "Hitler's"
re-election? And the current Israeli government doesn't either?
Had Obama made friendlier signs sooner, former president Mohammed Khatami might
not had dropped out of the race. And just who is Khatami? He is a pro-women's
rights, pro-Christian rights, pro-Jewish rights reformer, who sought greater
personal freedom for his fellow Iranians at home and greater cooperation with
the West abroad during his two terms as president of Iran from 1997 to 2005,
when he was succeeded by Ahmadinejad.
So why would the White House not want such a good guy back? Why wouldn't
Israel? According to former secretary of state Colin Powell's chief of staff,
Larry Wilkerson, Khatami was instrumental, among other good things, in gaining
the supreme leader's approval after September 11, 2001, to use Iran's many
strong ties in Afghanistan to help overthrow the Taliban. Yet Bush ignored all
that help and instead made Iran a charter member of the "axis of evil" in his
2002 state of the union address - only five months later. How come?
And then we come to Obama, who won the White House on a campaign of "Change!"
But there has been no change from the Bush administration when it comes to
publicly supporting the reformist candidates in the Iranian presidential race.
And now Khatami has dropped out. Is that what Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and Obama wanted?
It's hard to believe. And yet we see the pattern of American administrations
undermining home-grown Iranian reformers repeated over and over, just like when
"Hitler" was running for president the first time around. Bush held a news
conference the day before the ballot and essentially told the Iranian people
that the election was "rigged" in favor of the conservatives, and that those
who wanted real reform might as well stay home. And, of course, Ahmadinejad -
who portrayed himself as a Muslim "compassionate conservative" - won. I won't
say because of Bush. But then again perhaps the Iranian people figured that if
there was one thing Bush might know about, it clearly would be rigged
elections.
So what's the explanation then? What's the explanation now? Why let "Hitler"
win then? Why let "Hitler" win re-election now? Is Obama another Hindenburg? Is
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu another Neville Chamberlain - the
former British premier? Has Bibi been imbibing arugula salads too? Where have
these men's animal spirits gone to boldly meddle in other nations' affairs?
We'll have to see. But I would put a bailout's worth of money on the
possibility that both men are merely waiting quietly for Ahmadinejad to win
re-election before they start beating their war drums again about the need to
stop this "Hitler" militarily. Is that too cynical? To think that Obama would
raise our hopes that our policy towards Iran is in the process of change only
to turn around and embrace continuity with the Bush administration - once a
crucial election is past.
That would be downright Clintonian.
William Wedin, PhD, is a New York psychologist and longtime activist. He
may be contacted through his website, photosforpeace.com, which offers a
radically different view of the land and people of Iran.
(Copyright 2009 William Wedin.)
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say.
Please click hereif you are interested in contributing.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
