Sure. I agree with that. Not only agree, I go even further and say that, in fact, protests are pretty much a non-separable part of any political landscape and not just that of Iran, phenomenally, and Ms. Nazila’s stating of the obvious is, no pun intended, quite obvious!…
My take on that, unless she explains otherwise, is that by eloquently stating the obvious, Ms. Nazila is actually trying to trivialize the concept of Iranians’ protests and, along with it, all the blood that Mullahtaria has shed. She does that by employing the nice, inherently peaceful word “landscape.” She must dabble in psychology, I am convinced!
But, she maybe forgetting that landscaping, for those who can handle it, is actually a good paying job in the U.S. and other places. When one landscapes, one is trying to present a pleasant face or impression of an otherwise unsightly situation and/or establishment! Why should I not, now, think that Ms. Nazilah is doing a fine job of landscaping in hope of remedying the ugliness of a murderously terrorist regime?
So let’s see how this landscaping job, if you will, of Ms. Nazila is apparently working in her masterfully crafted communication for the benefit of Mullahtaria’s monstrous face:
The protests don’t mean there’s going to be a revolution or a regime collapse, she says.
I see, however, that those words, coming from behind a nicely landscaped and made up face and via smoothly uttered words presented in a delicate wrappings of academic assurance, can certainly help to subconsciously establish the notion that the damned regime of the terrorist Mullahtaria is here to stay- accept it and get over it!
Then she passionately, and with significant animation professes that protest have “become a way of communication.”
That is not a logically correct statement, in my humble opinion. My problem is with her usage of “become.” The fact is that protesting anything has been a mode of communication to establish the cognition of displeasure and dissatisfaction against something, practice by many species of birds and mammals, including humans, of course!
Then why is Ms. Nazila attempting here to restate an obvious fact in such a peculiarly twisted manner?!… What does she aim to accomplish by fabricating an event, i.e. the event of protests “becoming a way of communication?”
Well, IMHO again, she wants to subconsciously divert a mind’s attention from the energy associated with, and present within, the recent protests, especially those of Iranian women.
These are perilous days for Mullahtaria, which have in conjunction with the successful American foreign policy, brought the ugly regime to the verge of collapse. Yes. She doesn’t want anyone to think that way. Thus, again, we see how masterfully she employs the benign word “communication” in her twisted communication to cement in the minds of American masses that there’s nothing going on in the Iranian street but just simple, good old communication.
In fact, in there, in some poetic justice she stands in chorus with the former deputy of former secretary of state, Collin Powell, who maintained in his communications that “Iran was a kind of Democracy,” and that the protests that were then happening there, were some kind of “family feud!” not to be interfered with.
Then, she brazenly asserts, falsely of course, that over the years, in the face of the regularly occurring protests, Mullahtaria has “made some kind of compromise” in its admittedly horrendous responses to them. I totally disagree with this seemingly disgraceful attempt at sanctifying the diabolic deeds of an evil band of ruffians.
The fact is that Mullahtaria has not compromised, but rather has changed repressive tactics and re-adjusted, if anything. Nobody in the world whose eyes have been open to what has been happening in Iran, can see an iota of compromise in how thousands of unarmed souls were gunned down by military action in the marshes, and hundreds of sleepy eyed innocent souls in flight were shot missiles at blown to pieces.
Finally, at the end of her tweeter interview clip, we who by now are quite suspicious of Ms. Nazila’s ulterior motives in that interview, as a result of what she says about Hijab and regime’s socially imposed restriction are left with this question:
Was Ms. Nazila also trying to relay the regime’s signal that it is willing to cancel Hijab restrictions and so forth, so long as it is permitted to remain in existence and power?!
Look. Let me cut the thread and get to the bottom of it:
If the case is, in fact, that Ms. Nazila is for whatever reason trying to be of help to prolong the life of the rotten regime of a bunch of corrupt Mullahs and their cohort at this time, for the benefit of the obvious and undeniable truth that Mullahtaria is evil and needs to go, I, Piyalechi, say to her that she will be beholden to goodness to rethink her position and ponder deeper upon the way she uses her God given talents. She needs to abandon rationalizing for status quo and leave that apologist paradigm. She should be the harbinger of light, as we stand in the dawn, and help us all step into its warm consuming embrace.