A fine episode of Frasier

I was watching a rerun episode of Frasier. In that episode, Frasier becomes frustrated with his love life. Then he hits the road to think through his situation and he ends up arguing in his mind with some of his lovers from past and his first love: his mother. And through these arguments, he notices that he is alone because he is afraid of being alone. He keeps pushing away perfect women because he is afraid of losing them.

This episode brought up some questions in my mind. Are we stuck with thoughts from our past? Why do we keep doing the same mistakes; particularly in our relationships; committing the same patterns? We walk through same hallways and put ourselves in the same misery over and over again. Those of us, who fail in a relationship, force themselves in the same path; force themselves to love someone else. For the rest of us whom failure is a sin and/or pretend to be happy, still force ourselves to stick to one person and keep insisting in loving another human being for the sake of not being alone even if we know that person is right for us? What is this all about: the fear of being and dying alone? In that episode, Frasier's mother uses death as an excuse in her failure. Is death really a good excuse for all the things we can do but we don't or fail to do? Is love something that we choose put ourselves into it just to justify th fear of being alone? Are we so unbearable to ourselves that we need some one else’s company in order to keep a distance between us and our real selves? Is there really someone out there for every one of us to fill all the gaps we feel in our being? Am I over analyzing again? Yes, no? Say something then?

I could see this day was coming,

but not this soon. During G.W. Bush's day and night rants on fictitious subject of Iraqi weapons of mass-destruction and way before the recent war, through some media propaganda (today's most powerful urban mind distracter) particularly American ones and most particularly CNN, I predicted that after Iraq the gang of White House will go after Iran (if they be able to renew their White House lease and stay there for another term) not that the predictions of this kind take a rocket scientist. And now recent demonstrations by students in Tehran in last couple of days ring some bells in my mind, bells that sound bloody and violent.

In 1997 when president Khatami's landslide victory shock everyone the nation, things began to change gradually, professional and independent journalism blossomed, withheld books and cultural materials began to be published and rules began to loosened up a bit on young generation. The more people demanded freedom, the more pressure increased from hard liners on Khatami, and the more Khatami became passive. In 6th Majlis (you read parliament) election, majority of seats were taking by pro Khatami candidates followed by Khatami's second presidential landslide victory which came along as expected, but this time with less enthusiasm from the nation. The political recession had begun. Khatami and his guys in Majlis were not able to fulfill nation's demands. After 6 years, this recession has become a reality and a sort of deadlock until last few days. All of a sudden the political silence in Iran breaks down, right after devastating war in Iraq and American invasion in the neighborhood. Are Iranians terrified of being next victim of same scenario, therefore they want to take action directly before it's too late or this is just an over analyzed thought in my head?