Will Uncle Sam Ever Mind His Own Business?

Photos

The Zionist Uncle Sam

see larger image

uploaded by AnanTello

Dear Readers,

Please bring your copies of Newsweek’s July 6/July 13, 2009 issue and turn to page 4: “Theocracy and Its Discontents”.

There comes Victor Lopez’s question, “Thirty years after the shah was deposed, Iranians are back to where they started: divided and polarized. Can the leaders deal with the contents of democracy?”

Among the people who were expressing their opinions regarding the current political issues in Iran were Tim Devlin from Toronto, Canada, Tamas Pack from Budapest, Hungary, Tullio M.S. Carvalho from Belo Horizonte, Brazil and George Blahusiak from Bentley, Australia. Any Iranian name? Anyone from Tehran, Iran, Esfahan, Iran, Tabriz, Iran, Mashhad, Iran or Anywhere, Iran?

Shouldn’t a respectful magazine like Newsweek mention the opinion of at least one person who happens to live in Iran—whether Iranian or not—or, in the worst case, an Iranian who lives outside Iran? With respect to everybody’s opinion, but what matters the most is the opinion of a witness and someone who has the least association with the matter… not someone who doesn’t give a damn or someone who can’t locate Iran on the Globe without a tag that says Iran—inbold.

Moreover, how can Victor Lopez—who’s not an Iranian and lives in Spain—describe the Iranians as divided and polarized. As if the citizens of other countries were neither divided nor polarized, and as if no European country ever witnessed violence during any kind of elections—whether political or not. Mr. Lopez found it weird that during the most important political elections in Iran, people were actually divided and polarized! What’s weirder is that actually many Europeans and Americans found the same ‘divided and polarized’ acts of the Iranians odd and despicable! Have they forgotten that both racism and prejudice reside in the whole West the way air and water reside there? Have they forgotten all the violence occurring during elections, rallies and demonstrations? And have they forgotten how the government dealt with this kind of violence? Liquor and drugs can make people forget a lot more, we must admit.

The Islamic Revolution in Iran definitely changed the Iranians’ lives… to the better indeed. The shah used to live in utter luxury while most of his people lived in utter poverty. The shah used to suck the blood of Iran and, literally, drink it with his master, Uncle Sam. Compared to the days of the shah, Iranians are recently living peacefully and happily under Islamic Law. Yes I definitely do not like religion being enforced… but if we looked closely at the situation in Iran, we’ll find that the use of the term ‘enforced religion’ is almost wrong. Nobody forced the Iranians to become Muslims. Yes, the number of non-Muslims in Iran is remarkably small and that’s why we call Iran an Islamic Country even in the days of the shah. No government is perfect, and I’m not saying this in the defense of Iran. I’m just trying to transfer a clear image. Yes, women are forced to wear the Islamic headscarf in Iran and I’m totally against this… and just as well I’m against France forcing hijabed women to take their headscarves off and denying them many of their rights by doing so. Why do we still call what France does ‘Democracy’ and what Iran does ‘Theocracy’? I’ll tell you why: because Uncle Sam said so. And Uncle Sam happens to be Israel’s lapdog. The most common definition of the term Theocracy among us, people, is ‘a religious dictatorship’. If this was the case in Iran, then why do you think those busy men are wasting so much time and effort campaigning? Why do you think most of the people of Iran are wasting so much time and effort following the news and supporting the leaders they prefer? Why do you think so many Iranians showed up and voted for their preferred leaders?

It’s funny how we can twist and turn with our words forgetting that different words can, at times, give similar meanings. If you’ve been awake and sober since the birth of what we call Democracy, you’d be quite aware that Democracy is nothing but Dictatorship with a college degree. At least a Dictatorship seldom fools the public.

However, if the government which forbids drinking, bribing and stripping is called a Theocracy, then I salute this form of theocracy. Smoking is a minor issue compared to drinking, for example, but I would love the Syrian government to at least forbid smoking in public places like coffee shops and airports. In most—if not all—restaurants and cafes here in Syria, Hookah’s are obligingly offered to kids below the age of 18. People of all ages are allowed to smoke in almost all public places except for hospitals—I never visited a sad, public hospital here in Syria, but common sense says smoking is forbidden inside hospitals, and I relied on my common sense. Governments must protect their people and forbid all forms of corruption not allow corruption under the title “Democracy”. For example, the so-called-democracy of the United States dictates that people are free to get drunk as long as they don’t go home driving. It also dictates that everyone is free to gamble as long as they don’t pick a fight in one of Las Vegas’ fancy hotels.

Now in the same Newsweek issue I previously mentioned, turn to page 10. Under the column they call “Conventional Wisdom”—although I’d rather have them call it “Conventional Rudeness”, some great men were mentioned disrespectfully (nothing new so far). A great man like Khomeini must be respected by everyone—excluding those with severe mental disorders. Now if, for instance, a respectful, eastern magazine like Al-Mojtamaa disrespected someone like the Pope, what would happen (definitely not comparing the two men here)? Apologies, I honestly can’t imagine what could happen.

I won’t bash Newsweek anymore since we all know that, like Reader’s Digest, it serves Uncle Sam. Or else why do you think it’s that big?

Uncle Sam. How many of us are so sick of him?

The Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon said the Lebanese elections were a Lebanese-only matter and no one had the right to interfere. I bet they didn’t let him finish his sentence, so I’ll finish it for him: … except for Uncle Sam and his numerous pets. Iran, the country which helped Hezbollah keep Israel off the Lebanese soil, must not interfere. Why? Because Uncle Sam said so. According to Uncle Sam, Iran and its little wing, Syria, must not interfere in Lebanese matters. Why? Again, because Uncle Sam said so. Iran happens to be Uncle Sam’s sworn rival, and so everybody else must hate Iran without asking questions. This is what Uncle Sam calls “Democracy”.

I still wonder: Will Uncle Sam ever mind his own business?

 

 

 

Anan Tello