News Items

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is certifiable, in my opinion. The idea is not what bothers me; despite the endless supply of pictures, videos, and personal accounts of September 11, there is always the possibility of misrepresentation of events. Granted, I think the possibility is microscopic and as an American familiar with our government and press I don’t believe that an event like September 11 could be as grossly misrepresented (for lack of a better word) as old Mahmoud is suggesting, but I can see how an outsider who is not as familiar but has seen other nations duped by their state-controlled press (China, USSR, Cuba, North Korea) might think that it’s a possibility here. So that’s fine. But for his main sticking point to be that the names if the victims have never been published when in fact, as the article points out, they are read out loud on September 11 seemingly every year, is what makes the whole idea preposterous. This guy just unabashedly denies things that are plain for all to see, which is a bit why dissent is growing in Iran, especially among the young folk, which is kind of exciting.

Calling the Chinese “goons” on TV was a stupid thing to do (in our politically correct world; I think you should be able to call anyone you want a goon, which is to the best of my knowledge a term that can be attributed to anyone exhibiting goon-like characteristics, and is not a derogatory term for Chinese people. However, it most definitely is not an “evil attack” on the Chinese. Give me a break.

I like stories like this. I like people occasionally (and I can’t stress “occasionally” enough; it should not be frequent, although God knows that attention-deprived idiots will be all over opportunities like this) asking these sorts of silly questions. I like politicians laughing at things that are genuinely funny and not contrived on TV shows. The human element is fun to see out of candidates. I do not count the crying earlier in the year by a certain potential nominee in this category, because that was not fun (well, it probably was to some). Scripted jokes in stump speeches are not fun; getting McCain to crack up is fun. Similarly, I greatly enjoyed the video of Dubya dancing in his visit to Africa. Unsurprisingly and disappointingly, haters used that video as some sort of evidence that the president is dumb or country or a hick or whatever. I thought it was great to see him letting loose and slightly making a fool of himself. Imagine what the Africans in attendance thought! I’m sure they didn’t think “Look at that fool” but rather “Look at that guy, President of the United States, unafraid to enjoy our culture.” That’s how you cultivate close and healthy relationships with other nations. I’m not suggesting he go dance with Ahmadinejad, but you get the idea. Humor and the human element: two keys to successful international relations. And I am by no means an idealist.

Finally, this piece. I took a Theory and Politics of Terrorism class a couple years ago (clearly making me a be-all and end-all expert in the subject), and one of the many things I took from that class was the fact that the press does a lot of harm, in its eagerness to sell stories, when it publishes these alarmist pieces about the impending destruction of the country by terrorists. I’m not arguing that the threat doesn’t exist; it does. I am also not suggesting that the threat be suppressed or that people should not be made aware. However, there is no need for the media to do an investigation into how effective a nuclear detonation in DC would be. They don’t need to spend a week or a month or a year to look into the security measures of Amtrak or the metro or hospitals or schools or museums or malls so they can then run an expose on them to show how vulnerable they are to this or that method of terrorism. You are doing the terrorists’ research for them. Terrorists and would-be terrorists read newspapers and watch TV. If the media’s true motivation was prevention of tragedy, they would do the research but not publish it, they would just tell the people who need to make the changes and then maybe threaten to expose them. Even then it would be clear that their motivation is ratings and sales. I realize that I’m not offering up a new concept by any means, but it’s really counterproductive, even destructive. Freedom of the press is great, I just wish they would have some common sense.