Top story on the online wall street journal today is an article bearing this headline “US condolences Mark Support for Iran Dissidents“. Appearing as it does, two days after the passing of Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, this poor piece of journalism makes reference to “Iran’s nuclear program” and “Iran’s nuclear ambitions” without even attempting to define even from the side of the editors of wsj, the nature of the program or the nature of Iran’s ambitions.
Is it considered expeditious from a narrative point of view – “journalistic” perhaps – to omit such banalities, merely superfluous qualifications, to the readers’ imagination? The often repeated unqualified and unfounded accusations regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions, are not even mentioned in this article. Expeditious in the sense that qualifications then need not be made by the wsj. It is not mentioned furthermore, that several statesmen representing Russia, Turkey and China, have added their voice recently to those of statesmen from Iran itself, saying that international law in fact guarantees the right of any nation to pursue nuclear objectives (whatever those might be). Iran is a co-signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty, while a key US nuclear ally has refused to abide by the principles of this treaty. Five of the signatories possess nuclear weapons. Nuclear research inside Iran is monitored by the Islamic republic. Iranian spiritual leaders have always ensured that laws and domestic mechanisms exist to ensure that research of this nature is for peaceful purposes. Interesting details which are omitted. Wouldn’t you agree?
Related video and stories at wn.com IranObserver
