Michael Ledeen Again
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Email]](http://www.eyeranian.net/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
I know by now some of you are probably getting tired of hearing about Michael Ledeen. The man I called ”Iranian people’s number one enemy” is not a weightless writer or some idealist trying to sell his notion of “Liberation, American Style” for Iran and I don’t think he should be ignored. Understanding his huge influence, the Washington Post recently identified him as “one of only four political advisers” to White House’ ideologue Karl Rove. But you can also look at what Ledeen himself thinks of his importance:
In a recent interview with his buddy Rush Limbaugh, Ledeen answers the question of if the White House listens to him or not, this way: “Whether or not the White House listens, it seems that they’ve listened to a lot of things about Iran, that I will say. I mean, some of the language and some of the speech is very familiar to me, and really reflects the sort of thing that I’ve been pushing for.”
Having said that, looking at what he preaches, it is hard not to see him as a dim-witted often deceitful mouth-piece with no real knowledge of Iran or how the system and society works there. His main source of information is always second-hand reports published by various media, plus some dubious facts he is probably fed by a limited circle of biased and predisposed people.
I’ll give you some examples; Look at his explanation of what brought on the current student demonstrations in an interview with Fox News (yeah, them!): “What happened here, if you remember late in the Cold War, Gorbachev sent troops into Lithuania to put down some uppity people and Vilnius. And he sent in at the time, he just misjudged it entirely, he sent in just enough troops to enrage the people and not enough to really put them down. So there were these originally small-scale students demonstrations exactly a week ago in Tehran. And he sent — the regime sent security forces in to try to put it down. But they weren’t enough to put it down. And so, there started to be fights in the campus area and then they spread into various streets and allies around the university. And by now, there is open fighting going on night after night. I mean people are being killed. The regime is using everything from acid to guns to knives and chains and clubs and so forth, and the students are throwing the usual Molotov cocktails and they have some weapons of their own.”
All I can say is HUH? uppity people in Lithuania? What happened to the letter by MP’s that started the original move? weapons and Molotov Cocktails? This analysis could have been written by an 8 year old.
Look at how he answers to where Isfahan is: “Isfahan is central Iran. And it is the place from which most revolutionary movements have started in Iran. So people watch it with particular attention. And there, most of the town turned out to demonstrate.”
What the heck is he talking about? I mean don’t get me wrong, I love Isfahan and next to Tehran it is my favorite Iranian city, but how is demonstrations there more important than in Shiraz, Abadan, Yazd or Kerman? I can see somebody saying demonstration in Qom are significant because of the religious background and being a government stronghold, or Tabriz is so important because let’s face it Azeris are he political engine of Iranian society, or Mashad because of it’s role as capital of Astan-Qods mafia, but Isfahan? “Most revolutionary movements have started” in Isfahan? I must be redaing the wrong history books, I guess. And then “most of the town turned out to demonstrate“? That would certainly mean more than a million as Isfahan is not a “town” but a large city!
But what can you say about a man who last November claimed “something like half a million” Iranians had demonstrated in Tehran. Later, Christopher de Bellaigue, correspondent for Economist who had witnessed the event in person put the number at about five thousand.
Speaking of foreign correspondents, this seems to be the only source he ever uses for his facts. Never talking to any Iranians or attempting to build a dialogue with either activist or even ordinary people there, his current center-piece editorial on Iran uses two sources, both quoted in it’s first paragraph; France’ Le Monde and Canada’s Maclean’s magazines.
In the same Fox interview, he labels the students demonstrating as “Wildly pro-American” and then claims one of the ways Iranians watch the satellite televisions broadcasting from LA is: “I’m told that they can just cut up Coke cans and put them on the roofs and they get some kind of signal”. He then estimates that demonstrators are “as low as 10 to 15 percent students and 85 to 90 percent just families turning out on the streets”.
In the Limbaugh interview he claims his source of such questionable facts this way; “I get a lot of the stuff from Iranians by e-mail” and then goes on a limb, stating “If we could have an accurate public opinion poll in Iran, we would find that upwards of 80% of Iranians are against the regime.” I guess he gets e-mails from all villages and small towns, where majority of Iranians live, to be able to come up with such solid figures.
However the scary part is his prescription for what he advises Iranians to do: “What’s necessary is to put millions of bodies in the central squares of the country and demand an end to the regime, knowing that a certain number of them will die in the enterprise.” Somebody please inform him that Iranians tried it that way more than once in the last century and still didn’t get what they wanted, this time they have chosen a different path. Now wake up and get on with the program. 70’s prescription is way past it’s expiry date and new methods are needed. Of course it won’t matter to him as the “certain number” who “will die” will not be his brothers, sisters, cousins, mothers, sons and daughters anyways.
In another column, he recently had some advice for what the U.S. needs to do to “spread freedom to the heartland of the terror masters in Iran”. His three step plan includes:
1- Support the Monarchist Radio and TV stations in LA
2- Build up “Iraqi Shiite clerics” against Iranian ones
3- “We need to get tangible support to the brave people who have called for a general strike”… in other words: support Reza Pahlavi’s group.
(Is somebody still confused about his support of the Monarchist?)
In conclusion, this man with his limited knowledge and biased approach currently yields way too much power and influence where it matters a lot. His skewed vision has very little to do with giving Iranians what they want and struggle for and more to do with what he sees as what they SHOULD do. He is without a doubt the current number one enemy of Iranian people imbedded inside the inner circles of world’s only superpower, and we will not let him forget that for a second.
