[Auspicious]

+

And so we come to that point where we ask ourselves thus: what do fairminded and honest people know about the recent presidential elections in Iran, along with its aftermath? Are the protests real or instigated? Are the protesters genuinely agitated, or theirs is nothing but fake natterings? Well folks may not know much, but they know this much; that prior to that election, an event happened halfway across the world that saw an unlikely candidate emerge in Barack Hussein Obama to become the 44th President of the United States.

Like many others across the world, the Iranian people must have followed the events leading up to his election and his latter inauguration with an unusual interest. Like many others, they would also be justifiably doubtful that his society will allow someone like him to emerge as President. And, by the time Mr. Obama emerged, every move and every word he uttered would be closely scrutinized, no doubt because of the peculiarity of his presidency, which is exactly what has happened so far.

By the time he granted his very first interview to the Middle-Eastern TV net work Al-Arabiya, he had gotten the attention of a vast proportion of the Arab world. In that interview, he let his audience know that he represented A New America; an America that would not only respect the sovereignity of others, but would relate with these other nations as equals to whom she would listen rather than go about telling them what to do. He paid his respects to the people of Iran and offered a chance for a New Beginning, reminding the government and the people of their rightful place in the world instead of remaining in isolation.

Rarely had such approach been adopted by any of his predecessors, many amongst who preferred to bluster their way through their differences with those whom they disagreed with, undermining the latters' independence and/or sovereignity in the process and helping seeds of hatred to germinate and grow wild in the hearts and minds of those whose societies had to suffer for their blustering and cowboyism. That was how the bin Ladens of this world were inspired to do what they do best, even while one cannot spare the latter of the fate that he deservers for his attrocities.

Although there was no immediate verifiable reaction to his interview (besides that of the interviewer who later had great praises for Obama after hearing his words), Obama's approach was not lost on his middle-eastern audience, many amongst who still doubted his sincerity at that point, but nevertheless began to pay even more attention to his actions and policies. To those who have followed Obama long enough to understand him, the handwriting was on the wall already. They knew he was for real and didn't need any convincing from any quaters. Their expectations were simply being met. And it remains so.

By the time he recieved the Isreali Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House not too long ago, after which he delivered a speech in Egypt to popular approval across the entire Middle-East, the handwriting on the wall had turned to cracks visible enough for the average, open-minded Middle-Easterner to see. While a greater proportion of the people from that part of the world still remained justifiably suspicious of America and her President, his message had begun to register with a good number of others. Even Osama bin Laden felt pressured to throw a spanner in the works from his cave somewhere out there, but nobody paid the bastard any heed.

People are far smarter than their leaders take them for, wether they be Iranians or the Americans or Nigerians. Leaders may fool some of their people some of the time, but they can't fool all their people all the time. For years on end, leaders of a culturally rich and proud Middle-Eastern nation have practically tied their very existence in power to the excesses of another foreign government in their country's recent history, such that all a candidate needed to do to win votes in Iran is invoke death to America louder than the rest of his co-contestants seeking the Presidency.

Well, guess what? The threat of America's recent belligerence (especially under the garrullous Republican governments) is gradually fading-off the scene, leaving some of those powerful Iranian leaders who have absolutely banked their relevance in the affairs of Iranians on how loud they can spew their perpetual anti-Zionist and anti-American diatribe with nothing else to show for their relevance. All of a sudden, Iranians are looking inwards to solving their own problems at home rather than remain fixated on the "Big Satan" whom those leaders use to hide their recent irrelevance.

And so, just as it was in Lebanon, an election was held that saw a massive shift in citizen loyalties in Iran. While the one in Lebanon has come and gone with little or no hitches, the elections in Iran altogether threw up a different scenario that shocked the millions who rejected the opportunism that have become the standards of leadership in their country in recent years, where American excesses under past governments was used by Iranian leaders to indulge in their own excesses at home as well. It is like the folks saying: "It is Summertime, we don't need the Heater on anymore!"

The wave of change that resulted in the swelling of the ranks of the opposition was a last minute one, otherwise the irregularities (wether deliberate or errorneous or whatever) wouldn't have been so obvious. Granted, no elections are perfect. But where a "McCain" maintains a massive lead past a surging Obamanation that is seeking a transformational change, one can expect a spontaneous reaction from the people. And that was exactly what happened in Iran after the recent elections, contrary to bombastic claims of external influence that this funny Author is propagating around here.

It is the same 'funny' reasons which informs the Author's claims (about 'calculated western influence' being behind the unrest in Iran) that informed his then virulent pro-Obasanjo campaign with which he saturated this Forum at the zenith of the latter's garrulous reign as President of Nigeria. It is brazenly disingenuous that at a time when the current American government is adopting an obviously respectful, hands-off approach as it concerns the Islamic Republic of Iran, others are out here undermining this budding era of mutual respect and understanding between nations.

The Author talks of the fixation with the news coming out of Iran - as if he is too thick in the head to understand why protests of a scale that had not been seen since the last Islamic Revolution would generate something of a frenzy in the world media. One wonders if he would rather nobody paid any heed to the events happeneing out there. Even more, one wonders what his main objective here is. Is it, perhaps, to bemoan a people's expression of displeasure with a government whom they suspect may have tampered with their votes? And are the hundreds of thousands who have marched and bled so far all daft enough to allow themselves to be led-by-the-nose by America?

Like I said elsewhere, the Author is too smart not to know the truth. He is only doing this for attention - as usual.

Auspicious.