I will begin my article with an old American story about a lieutenant, who, after inspecting his marines in the field, told the “Gunny” that the men smelled bad, perhaps because they did not change their underwear. The Gunny, in his immediate attempt to address the situation, went to the squad tent and announced, “The lieutenant thinks you guys smell bad, and wants you to change your underwear. Smith, you change with Jones, McCarthy, you change with Witkowsky, and Brown, you change with Schultz…” The moral is that a candidate may promise “change” in Washington, but don't count on things smelling any better. I remembered the old joke as I was skimming through readers' mail on the articles I wrote about Obama and his administration. The readers were divided. Some expected positive developments, while others believed that the American President wanted to serve his country at the expense of our interests. In their opinion, he would not be fair no matter how much he tried simply because Israel and its lobby control America's foreign policy. I do not have a crystal ball of sorts, but I know that the answer to these and other questions will clear out in the next few months, or in Obama's first few years in office. What I am confident of is that the Obama Administration will definitely be better than that of George Bush because it is simply impossible for it to be worse; I venture to say that this is probably the opinion of all dear readers. In any case, seldom do readers agree on one opinion. They did however agree with me in one rare instance when I said that I shall never recognize Israel until an independent Palestinian state is established. If it will not be established then I will join my voice to those who demand the return of all of Palestine, i.e. all the lands that have been occupied since 1948, not just since 1967. Still, some readers disagreed with me. These are the readers who pledged never to recognize Israel even if a Palestinian state is established in the West Bank and Gaza. Meanwhile, there was a clear division among readers over Iran. I criticized some of Iran's stances, such as its occupation of the three islands and its ambitions in Bahrain. Yet I supported its right to possess the nuclear bomb as long as Israel possesses it. Some readers replied to this fully defending Iran and holding its Arab neighbours fully responsible. In parallel, there are many who held Iran solely responsible for all problems of the region. Meanwhile, and since I complained about some readers falsely interpreting my articles, I want to thank today some readers who maintain with me a cordial and friendly relationship even when they disagree with me. I want to cite the names of Ayman Al-Dalati, Abu Ismail, Abdul Nabi al-Qayyim, Haitham Al-Shishani and Muhammad Al-Muftah, a Syrian engineer who lives in Riyadh and whose letters I can manage to recognize without even reading the name of the sender. It is because his ideas are always numbered 1, 2, 3 or even 4 and 5. The moment I see those numbers, I immediately know that the sender is Muhammad. I also have letters from other readers who were impressed by certain words I wrote in passing. For instance, I mentioned that the Arab League has 22 member states that are either rusty or helpless as I described them using a popular proverb. The readers added some more descriptions but most of them are not suitable for publication. I want to tell them that Amr Moussa has enough problems which would not have existed had he not been the Arab League Secretary General. I also stood against death penalty except for those who sexually abuse young children and kill them as well as Dick Cheney. I received many letters supporting me in my position towards the former vice president - which is more a symbolic than an actual demand - and adding some other candidates for capital punishment, such as leaders from the previous Bush administration and Israel. Furthermore, readers voiced their support for Arab women in each country, after I had written about achievements by women that men fell short of. However, some Kuwaiti deputies chose not to support the women in their countries, and protested against the entry of deputies Aseel Al-Awadhi and Rola Dashti to the Kuwaiti parliament without wearing the headscarf. The Kuwaiti voter made us all proud by voting for four female members of parliament in Kuwait. I welcomed those four triumphant ladies and I was personally thrilled that only two of them were veiled. This reflects the freedom of choice. There are some candidates who want all people to follow them. Narrow-minded as they are, they tailor democracy to their measure, enter the parliament, then oppose the entry of any other deputy who might have different views, overlooking the fact that had people agreed on everything, there wouldn't be any need for a Parliament in the first place. When an idiot is elected to parliament, whether in Kuwait, Lebanon, Egypt or any other country, we say it's alright, because idiots are many and they need parliamentary representation. The same goes for every radical, close minded and close hearted deputy. For the Arab street is rife with many people of his ilk who should be represented in parliament as per the rules of democracy .
