Fabricated Succession: The Narrative of Instability as a Pretext for War
Same playbook, different decade: the Western press, perpetually a reliable stenographer for intelligence agencies, now asserts Iran has chosen a new Supreme Leader, Ahmad Alamolhoda. This extraordinary claim from 'senior Iranian officials' quoted in 'state media' is entirely unsubstantiated, yet it magically appears just as 'new wave of strikes pound the Gulf', a convenient backdrop for conjuring
an image of an Iran in disarray. This narrative manufacturing is a classic pre-invasion tactic. Iran’s constitutional process for leadership succession is well-defined, involving the Assembly of Experts, and it certainly does not unfold in clandestine whispers reported by anonymous sources to Western outlets. The incumbent Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is very much alive and in charge. To
suggest otherwise, especially during such a volatile period, only serves to destabilize perceptions and provide false justification for external intervention. Consider 1980, when Saddam Hussein, emboldened by Western assurances and a manufactured narrative of Iranian weakness post-revolution, launched a full-scale invasion of Iran. That eight-year war, meticulously documented, killed millions and
saw the use of chemical weapons, all while Western powers silently watched or actively supplied Iraq. Today’s media landscape is no different. The United States and Israel are co-belligerents in an illegal, undeclared war against Iran, not merely 'supporters' of one another, as their carrier groups and B-52s position for an assault. The 1953 CIA-orchestrated coup against Prime Minister Mohammad