I tell you right now, this is not even a letter, not really intended to go into the letter section. Hopefully this will find its way to the front page of the website. Nothing is sacred about this letter, its author, or its content. It is as sacred-less as they come.
Human beings, when “reformed” try to over-compensate for their past guilt. Nothing swings the pendulum with an incalculable speed like going from being a photojournalist in the heart of Islamic Republic of Iran at the apogee of ferverish revolution, and being somewhat of a soft supporter of the system than to move from there to the heartland of the confused and excessive liberalism.
This is the same land that at one time produced the map makers, and the designers of the Iranian revolution. They were called the Berkeley Mafia. So adamant against the centrist, and the right wing, and so leaning left, they had molded liberalism to its own form of dictatorship. They took Iran's money in the form of scholarship, and demonstrated and brought down the system that distributed the wealth to them. Mostly they returned to be executed, marginilized, and driven back to the place where they were educated.
Some of those driven back have also been reformed. Time has a tendency to do that.
Today, one of the stars of that group, while mildly supports the reformist, makes his round on just about every radio show, and makes various conflicting comments on Iran. He has a good book, but I wonder how “Hoveyda” could be remotely compared to Jefferson, or be a sphinx of any kind. Hoyeda was as degenerate as the system he was working in. Unfairly executed by bunch of savages, but nevertheless part of a generation responsible for the degenerative disease that has plagued the country in the last 50 years.
So when the curtain is moved, we have our beloved editor of Iranian.com. He can not but irrationally assess GW's policy. It goes to the inertia of pendulum. When going from Islamic Republic to the heartland of liberalist dictatorship, the pendulum has had little time to catch its breath in the center. It is ironic that where nothing is sacred, and everything is tolerated, tolerance of intolerance is fully accepted.
So I can not help but see a personal hatred of GW on his part. GW has made lots of mistakes, but his speech the other night was very supportive of the Iranian public. Sure, there may be no action, or some wrong action, but rhetoric was good. Actually much better than his predecessor Clinton who was about to kiss the mullahs' asses ruling Iran.
Our good editor, full of hatred of anything outside what he is being taught in San Francisco in the name of “tolerance” and “peace”, can not help himself but to make, and print snide remarks everytime he is printing something about the Republicans or George Bush. I wonder how he is going to explain or prove that Capitol police force, a totally independent organization from the executive branch of the government is somehow taking order from GW or how come the same police force also happened to throw out another woman, who had a T-shirt which said: “We support our Troops in Iraq”.
On the very corner of the page that I see these sort of snide remarks, such as “blah blah blah” as a reference to Bush's speech; I see lots of pro-gay, pro-homosexual literature, and endorsements. Nothing wrong with being gay, We all should do more to stay out of each others' bedrooms, and homes, but should we also be constantly reminded of how gays are being persecuted in Iran?! or where their next gathering will be, or when their next publication is coming out?! It is funny to see the Bus drivers strike get as much coverage as the gay rights issue. No Iranian has any legitimate right in Iran, let's leave gay rights issue for later.
All these would not bother me if they were in the back pages, but than I see lots of women getting published on the front page of Iranian.com. Cool, I think Iranian women have lots to say, and we should learn more about their inner feelings, and thoughts. But in an effort to promote women's writing in the name of “personal” stories, or in reality to get more “clicks” on the page, and drive traffic toward the page, I see the promotion of pornographical writing.
Most of the sexual writing coming from the woman in France/Italy, and Brittain reads like cheap porn. Again, as a man, I have watched porn, some are real good too. Nothing wrong with that, but it is funny to see the cheap imitation of porn script, usually reserved for San Fernando Valley production studios in the midst of writing about the nuclear issue, and political situation in Iran.
By the way, these women writing about their sexual life have been reading way too many D.H Lawrence novels, tragically, they come no where close in imitating his superb, and magnificent writing. I was not appalled as much about the content as I was about the cheap imitation. If you are gone copy from the masterpieces by tweaking a few names of characters, and the time frame, at least attempt to write more clearly. I hope when these women talk about women's rights, they are talking on a more substantial level.
