I read in the paper the other day that the Supreme Leader Khamani(sp) was seeming to back off his earlier harsh stance, saying he did not find it plausible, or believable, that those involved in orchestrating the post election riots and protests had in fact been in contact with Western agents beforehand. Following this, Ahmanutjob did his usual ranting stating that those protesting the legitimacy of the election must be tried and punished severely for doing the will of "outsiders". He seems to be brazenly going against the will of the Supreme Leader, sticking with "outsiders" being involved in the protests.

Now today, I read that Iran's new judiciary chief has fired the hard-line prosecutor responsible for the mass arrests and trials of opposition activists and journalists who were charged with wanting to topple the ruling system. The replacement of the prosecutor signals a shift toward a more moderate position in the judicial system which is now controlled by a rival to Ahmanutjob.

Is Ahmanutjob going to openly defy the Supreme Leader? Are others in positions of power within Iran's ruling system going to openly challenge Ahmanutjob? Will Fred and Wilma ever be able to tell Pebbles she can grow up to be whatever she wants in Iran?

I think Ahmanutjob may not complete his second term.

Good cop, bad cop.

Any sort of dissent leading to public discourse in Iran is a good thing, even if it takes a couple of changes of leaders to get someone truly moderate in there. I think it's safe to say the process has started, we just may have to wait until Ahmadinejad is out. I would say the dissent between president and religious leader is a really good sign.

Our idea of what's "moderate" in Iran, and Iran's idea of what's "moderate" in Iran are so wildly incompatable you may as well be asking what's the uppest down.

You got that right.

Before we get our hopes too high, we should remember that one of the major backers of the opposition group is Rafsanjani. He is the "moderate" who openly advocated using an islamic nuclear weapon on Israel, regardless of the retaliatory consequences.

From our perspective, no one likely to emerge from the power struggle in Iran can truly be considered moderate when it comes to foreign relations. This is primarily an issue between different factions arguing over Iranian domestic/economic policies.

This is true - I was thinking of moderate the way we think of it. It won't be this election cycle, it'll take more time than that for popular opinion to shift.

If we have gotten the 'tunnel-vision' out of the way, let's forget about the Iranian commentator using the word 'moderate' and look at the entire picture of Ahmanutjob standing up to the Supreme Leader, and the head of the judicial system standing up to Ahmanutjob.

There is turmoil within the Iranian government, and it is not just those disenchanted with the election that are protesting in the street who are the source of Ahmanutjob's sleepless nights!

This could be a step in the right direction, but only a step. real "change" never happens overnight but is actually generational. it took the Iranians several generations to throw off the yoke of the Shah. it's now been what? 2.5 maybe 3 since the revolution?**
We are now seeing the true discontent. it will be another generation or two before true moderation enters into the leadership equation.

Don't forget that due in large part to the US policy of the Enemy of my Enemy gets the Haliburton contract the Iranian people essentially lost a generation or two who could have been very influential in moderating the path towards moderation.