Sense of Iran’s Elections under Mullahs
The presidential candidates for a four-year presidency in Iran will be soon vetted for qualifications by the Guardian Council. The body is charged, among others, to approve the mandatory of any candidate for any election based on loyalty to the regime and its cult of Islam. Like all totalitarian regimes, under the Islamic regime, laws are able to voice their discrimination during the legislative process. Candidate’s bid to run without absolute devotion to Islam and the Supreme Leader, plus women regarded as equal as the half of men, are rejected to run presidential election. Among the male “qualified” candidates, the presidential election will be held on Friday 14 June.
Although the president is a figurehead and the Supreme Leader, the 12th Imam ‘s deputy on Earth, is the absolute despot, the future president is supposed to carry no limits on the authority of the Supreme Leader and attempts to control every aspect of private and personal life based on Islamic norms. Under the Islamic regime, the president must collaborate to retain power by flooding the populace with propaganda or coercion designed to ensure survival of the Islamic regime.
Despite an overtone of loyalty to the national interests and people’s dignity, a president can also use terror and any restriction to keep the populace, Islamic Ommat, under complete control. Therefore the “qualified” male candidates have mostly efficient records in military, security forces, and repressive organisations of the regime. In this light, the Ex-President Rafsanjani, Ex-Commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Rezaei, Ex-Minister of Intelligence Falahati, and Ex-Foreign Minister Velayati are all wanted by the international police, INTERPOL, for crimes against the Iranian dissidents and non-Muslim “enemies of Islam”. See Mykonos restaurant assassinations and Warrant issued for Rafsanjani in Argentina
Choice of the Supreme Leader
As far as the Supreme Leader is concerned, any president must have the potential to oppress the people in favour of the regime’s interests. Since in a democracy no president follows such a pattern, a majority of western analysts do not understand this warlike characteristic of the Islamic regime against the people of Iran. In this sense, among the “qualified” candidates, the most brutal one would be deemed to be the best candidate for the Supreme Leader. Although, one may believe that the regime capriciously picks one out of the urns, in my opinion, the Supreme Leader has no eminent preference to do so because the candidates are all the most brutal devotees of Islam and himself. Only as such they can be approved by his Guardian Council, no matter what the name and colour of faction is or they belong to.
Choice of regime’s factions
The Islamic regime, with its obvious character as an occupier, shares the general belief that Islam has intention of looting behind any invasion. However, the inner conflicts among the bellicose groups of invaders may sometimes be used by the defeated people to limit the damage. Under some desperate conditions, people are psychologically forced to yield up their right by hoping to limit the damage or put it off for another occasion. It is for this very reason that Islam used this desperate attitude to make the nearsighted Iranians forget that Islam is the core of problem and it permits enslavement, rape and looting of defeated people, all of which happen in Iran ever since the hordes of Islam first invaded Iran in 632. Different factions of the Islamic regime follow this traditional looting while having different networks of clerical Mafias with typically both compromise and conflict on the spoils of war and political power. Each faction of the regime empowers rather a single clerical mafia network that would better do the job. This faction can overtake and enrich new comers and of course their supporters, lobbyists, propagandists and foreign partners. Once in power, smaller groups can then disrupt the original network to form new factions for the future elections and so this mechanism allows the whole regime to stay in power.
Roots of problems
The irrational and immoral atrocities of Islamic regime are not new; these date since the inception of the cult. Islam regards defeated people being part of war booty and thus can be treated as commodities, like wealth, ornaments and other valuable objects. Since the inception of Islam, brother kills brother for such a war booty. Mullahs are the most atrocious and corrupt people in Iran and even the Mullah media sometimes mutually confess their atrocities and $ billions of Embezzlement. But because of fear and self-censorship, nobody in Iran mentions the atrocity and looting as traditional heritage of Islam itself. Muslims’ money launder and corruption are in fact the very interpretation of their Prophet’s looting. The atrocities and embezzlements of Mullahs’$ billions and their bank accounts in the western banks are not due to mismanagement, but the very justified management permitted by Islam since its beginning. Needless to mention that in a community ruled by Muslim elite, Sharia applies to the subjects, not the ruling elite.
Election in totalitarian regimes is normally arranged by a single party that makes all decisions and enacts all policies, but under the force of occupiers, like that of the Islamic regime, it might fit a pacific share-out of power and war booty among its rival groups. In this case, the Islamic regime permits that people elect the heads of oppressive and corrupt regime while limiting their own dissent and enforcing obedience.