On another issue: Robert Gibbs is nothing short of incompetent and blithering. In his defense, he has no chance since he is speaking for an incomprehensible administration that seems bent on destroying the American way of life.

Interesting theory. Out there a bit, but we’re talking about Iran, so it’s not inconceivable. There is little difference between Ajad and Moussavi, politically or ideologically. The internal power struggle among the mullahs (if there is one) remains opaque to us. The news media in this country are worthless in helping us understanding what’s going on behind the scenes. Hopefully our intelligence guys have a better idea of who the real players are, and what the game plan is. If their assessment is similar to yours, it would explain in part why Obama is not more supportive of the protesters. He would just be participating in a charade.

TLM, good points, however do not underestimate the psychological sophistation of the Mullahs on how to release and vent the growing anger of the populace safely and still maintain real control.

They have over a 700 year history available to them of the great Persian Sufi writers whose level of understanding of human nature still has not been surpassed. Certainly not be American Psychologists.

To suspect that this is a ploy one only needs to look at the two men involved. Both were essentially picked by the Mullahs. The ballot boxes were obviously stuffed. The one pick becomes a victim the other a source for focus of angry advanced emotions.

The objective is to provide a focus to vent anger and action providing a significant release of energy in the streets.

The Mullahs provide a target of the “mobs” that poses no danger to the existing status quo and an easy method to vent and satisfy this problem with the populace.

If the mob is allowed to win and they will be if large enough, the victim is now in power. This is the Mullah’s hand picked victim. This is the Mullah’s game plan.

What is happening here? Even if the one “bad” guy is allowed to be overthrown the “good” guy is still the Mullah’s pick.

In the end nothing of political significance has occurred to change the system, but what has occurred is a release of emotional energy before if reaches a point of true revolution.

No significant or effective fighting and relatively few deaths has occurred just enough to let everyone in the street feel that they have won. What have they won?

I believe my points are true even granting the validity of yours.

BHO is not at play here other than to be a POTUS that will do nothing. That was also needed by the Mullah’s to pull this psychological venting and release of anger off and still control the situation.

In general the average Iranian is still like a fish in water he does not begin to understand the nature of water–his environment and how he is being played.

I also believe the Iranians’ in the US are just as described. None can or will fight directly for what they want. All need someone else to do it for them.

I agree disorganized protesters are unlikely to overthrow an organized despotic regime. they may still result in changes to the system, however. Any change in the Iranian government is likely to be better.

“Most of the demonstrators are killed by simply stray shots.”

I disagree. Shooting at a crowd to breakup a demonstration doesn’t necessarily require accuracy to be effective. That doesn’t mean the shots that kill people are “strays”. I doubt this young woman, Neda, was hit by a stray bullet. She appears to have been targeted.

Why don’t you?

——-

tanstaafl, I thought you were a rightist not just some american ‘fleedom’ looney…

“[The mullahs of islam look more like the western government left]”

You absolute dunce.