Edwards and Rielle: Beverly Hilton Security Guard Speaks

It is pretty obvious now that John Edwards was indeed sneaking around in the Beverly Hilton Hotel in the wee hours of the morning of Tuesday July 22, 2008.

The security guard who intervened between Edwards and the paparazzi who were chasing him has now confirmed a story that everyone in the United States media has known (but not discussed) since at least December 2007.

"What are they saying about me?" he asked during that fateful encounter Tuesday night.

"John Edwards cheated on his cancer stricken wife -- the mother of his 3 children -- and is the father of Rielle Hunter's baby." -- that's what they're saying Johnny.

And the chatter has only just begun.

It's a sad day in the American media when FOX news is the only corporation doing actual investigative work -- they are the only major news channel covering this story. In fact, some corporations, like the Los Angeles Times, have actually told their staff to keep away from this story.

Man, where's Larry Flynt and his adultery brigade when we need him? (Though Flynt failed to bring forward George W. Bush's mistresses.)

American investigative journalism is shoddy indeed. But at least we can say well done to the reporter who way back in 2007 discovered that Johnny boy Edwards gets $400 haircuts -- that was the first big sign that this guy is a few cuts short of genuine.


For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Vanity Fair Spoofs New Yorker Cover

Now this is funny because it's true.

Vanity Fair has spoofed the ridiculous New Yorker Cover of the Obamas, but unlike the New Yorker cover, it is an accurate portrayal of the facts of the McCains's lives.

John McCain is portrayed looking stooped over and aged.

True.

Cindy McCain is portrayed wobbling around with prescription pills she admitted stealing from the charity she ran to help underprivileged children.

True.

The frame in the oval office that contained a picture of Bin Laden on the New Yorker cover now contains the actual World #1 Terrorist: George W. Bushler, John McCain's frenemy du jour.

True.

And instead of the US flag burning in the Oval Office fireplace, they have the US Constitution which, as is common knowledge, has been burnt to a crisp under the Bush presidency.

True.

Well done Vanity Fair, you made fun of the New Yorker and sent a political message too: that the truths of these candidates' lives are far more amusing than the prejudiced half-truths.


For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Jesse Jackson's N-word Rant Against Obama on Fox

Stick a fork in Jesse Jackson, cuz he's done.

Jesse "you are not a man because you can make a baby" Jackson has a sad history of not taking his own advice. And now he's crossed the line into the realm of plain fool.

It turns out that that controversial FOX News recording of him whispering to Dr Reed V. Tuckson wasn't just a call for Barack Obama's castration, but also included a tidy little reference to another topic the Reverend Jackson has spent decades enforcing but not practicing: use of the n-word. (click here to watch a 2007 video of Jackson discussing use of the n-word.)

Yup, Jesse Jackson called Barack Obama a nigger. Well, Obama and every other African American out there. See, the original statement by FOX that Jackson had said Obama "talks down to black people...telling [black people] how to behave" was a paraphrasing of what Jackson really said -- not "black people" but "niggers." (Click here to see the uncut version of Jesse Jackson using the n-word on Fox.)

Ah! Nostalgia! It was only last year that Jackson accused Obama of "acting like he's white" because he didn't comment on the Jena 6 racial scandal. And here he goes using the very word that white slaveholders used to diminish and emasculate black men and women.

Smooth move, Jesse.

It is a godforsaken shame that this man of the cloth just cannot bring himself to practice what he preaches. But hey, that kind of comes with the cloth, doesn't it?

Still, the biggest crime Jackson has committed here is not that he attacked Obama's testicles or even that he went against his own rule of not using that insult of insults.

No, Jesse Jackson's biggest screw-up was that after a lifetime of being in the spotlight, he didn't have the brains or the common sense to know how to behave in a television studio. And that's the straw that breaks the camel's back for Jesse "frogeyes" Jackson.

He is now officially and globally stripped of any dignity he may have had remaining. Not that there was much left.

As the Saccharinist has said in the past, the black community is desperately lacking in a unified leader who instills dignity, cohesion, and pride on a national scale. Jesse Jackson is not that leader.

And neither is Barack Obama -- at least that's what this whole episode has concluded for Obama: that he is not a candidate for African Americans but a candidate for all Americans.

Another score for Obama and the legions of white Americans who might have voted against him because they thought he's the new Malcolm X. Well played indeed.

For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Ahmad Batebi Arrives in America

Little wonder that the US military is so aggressively protective of any images leaving in the hands of photojournalists -- one single image can alter the course of an agenda.

Just ask Ahmad Batebi.

This July 1999 cover photo on the Economist magazine changed his life forever. As a student protester in the '99 demos, he was in Tehran along with hundreds of thousands of other Iranians, demanding civil and human rights. Unfortunately for him, a Western-based photographer took this picture of him and the Economist published it -- already under arrest for participating in the demos, the publication of this picture only worsened his plight.

At the age of 21 he was sentenced to a 15 year term in the notorious Evin prison. The judge who sentenced him allegedly stated that "with this photo you have signed your own death sentence."

Batebi was tortured, then released, tortured then released, then tortured some more -- one of the lucky ones who wasn't actually tortured to death.

And irony of all ironies -- like so many thousands of victims of torture from around the world, he has landed in the United States. Yes, Ahmad Batebi -- a true hero of Iran's struggle for civil and human rights -- with much difficulty arrived in the United States nearly 2 weeks ago.

He has already been interviewed on the Persian language US State Department broadcaster, Voice of America (click here for YouTube videos of him in Persian) and the New York Times, amongst others.

But Batebi himself is eager to tell his story (click here for Ahmad Batebi's blog). He has declared that he used his cell phone camera to film his escape through Iraq (he was granted medical leave from prison since for many years he had not been given proper medical care following his torturings) and he wants to make a report of his escape for the world to see.

There are countless Iranians who have made supreme sacrifices to expose the human rights violations of the Islamic Republic government. Only a few names are known. Ahmad Batebi is one of them.

Cover-up: Obama in the New Yorker

The latest issue of the New Yorker has created a minor stir amongst the less than 1% of the American population that even knows this magazine exists.

The cover includes 4 prominently offensive items...

1...a caricature of Obama dressed in that Kenyan attire from that photo he took in Kenya in local clothing which has been called "Muslim" clothing throughout the mainstream press in the United States. I guess Hassidic Jews, Buddhists, Catholic Cardinals, Hindu Gurus and an endless supply of other religious leaders should now be referred to as wearing "Muslim clothing" because they wear flowing robes and bulging headgear.

2...Michelle Obama curiously dressed in military gear and strapped with a Kalashnikov. Not to mention an outrageous depiction of a fro that completely contrasts with her straightened 'do, and shoulder pads circa 1985 which have nothing to do with the tailored and contemporary designs she is regularly seen wearing.

3...an American flag burning in their fireplace as both Barack and Michelle Obama stand in the Oval Office giving each other that 'scary' fist handshake that Black people do that scares non-Black people so much, cuz, you know, they all do it and the rest of the world just can't do it without looking very uncool.

4...a framed image of Bush family friend Osama bin Laden. Enough said.

Obviously, the cover is pure propaganda and was published with the intent to profit from some of the lies and misrepresentations that succeed in electing thieves, criminals, and other kinds of Bushes to high office in the United States.

The Ryan Lizza article that the cover image refers to is yet another attempt to discredit Obama's years as a community worker in the Chicago area. In the article, Lizza makes a pathetically bold attempt to make Obama out to be an opportunist, a dangerously goal-oriented individual, and a strategist. Opportunists, goals, and strategies oh my! We certainly wouldn't want such qualities in a President.

George W Bush's draft dodging in Alabama didn't get a fraction of the coverage that Obama's community service has gotten which makes you think: to get elected POTUS it is better to have violated the laws of the land and engaged in criminal activities than to have made an effort toward positive change in one's community.

Thanks for the tip limp Lizza, but we'd already figured that one out.

And as for you, New Yorker, nice try but your magazine is still irrelevant (which is why significant information in Seymour Hersch articles gets published within your pages instead of in the mainstream news where such information would actually affect the voting public of America) and the only thing you've succeeded in doing is filling in air time on Fox News.

For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

War on Iran: US Congress's Naval Blockade

In just a short while, and just under the noses of the American public, the US House of Representatives and the US Senate are due to vote on two resolutions that declare war on Iran. Yes 2 declarations of war against Iran are now in process in the US Congress and nobody is talking about it.

This has received insignificant coverage in the US media, and in the vast reaches of the media in Europe, Australia, South Africa or other "western" allied states.

In fact, the only news about Iran all over the US and British press in particular is news that Iran has tested missiles in its own Persian Gulf. What other sovereign nation in the world wouldn't step up its military exercizes after years of threats and last month's military exercizes in the region which the US government itself admitted were in preparation for an attack on Iran?

Worst of all, the American public has been kept in the dark about this next, horrific war that their tax dollars, their soldiers, and their gas money will pay for.

Both of these resolutions call for US Naval Blockades in the Persian Gulf's Strait of Hormuz -- for those of you who haven't figured out what that means, it is an authorization for US naval ships to congregate in a foreign body of water in an act of war. Against Iran.

Let's see how Obama votes on Senate Resolution 580, considering that he's in good company with hard-core Republicans for his vote on the soon-to-be law bill # HR 6304 which is a 'foreign surveillance act' that passed in Congress today. Obama's "yea" (curiously, Clinton voted "nay" and McCain decide not to vote) announces loud and clear that he doesn't have a problem with the terrorist tactics of the Bush administration against the American public -- at least when it comes to spying on them.

HR 6304 lets Bushler get away with various types of invasive tactics on American citizens -- such as wiretapping and other dangerous intrusions of civil and human rights. Just another sign that the Wart on Terror is still going strong...and that Obama is right on board.

There is no way the Bushler-Cheney regime will leave office without achieving the one goal they rigged an election to win: attacking Iran.

These two Iran war resolutions which, according to the few sources (almost all of them citizen journalists on the web) who have reported on the issue, are being fast-tracked through Congress are the next big step in the Bushler-Cheney regime's long-held effort toward destabilizing the most powerful country in that region.

Senate Resolution 580, entitled "A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate on preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability" has packaged its effort -- as always -- in the form of an immediate danger to the lives of Americans. Resolution 580 was introduced on June 2nd, 2008, and is sponsored by that bigot, Democrat Evan Bayh and as of July 6th, 2008, has 32 co-sponsors including 13 so-called Democrats.

House Resolution 362, entitled "Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the threat posed to international peace, stability in the Middle East, and the vital national security interests of the United States by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and regional hegemony, and for other purposes" also employs the nuclear weapon fear tactic and doesn't even bother to delineate the full intention of its purpose, merely adding that it is for all of the above mentioned fear tactics plus "other purposes". Fascinating workmanship. Resolution 362 is sponsored by Democrat Gary Ackerman, was introduced May 22nd, 2008, and already has 220 co-sponsors as of July 5th, 2008, including 102 so-called Democrats.

Because of the profound lack of information amongst the American public, the majority of which obtain information on their nation and their world from commercial news outlets, this tactic has proven successful since Woodrow Wilson convinced an anti-war public to join World War I after a few short months of propaganda.

Yes, these two massive declarations of war against the tax dollars, safety, and citizens of the United States are being sponsored by declared Democrats and are on their way to a vote -- all as the American public suffers the highest gas prices in history, a devastating mortgage crisis, massive poverty and infant mortality rates, a major economic recession, and a war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan that has proven to be an even greater disaster than the Vietnam war.

***Thanks CrooksAndLiars.com for featuring this Saccharinist blog entry in your July 11, 2008, Blog-Round-up

For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Barack McCain: On Track to the Presidency

For any Americans out there who still think progressive values have any hope of budding in the Corporate States of America, think again. Corporations are mini-dictatorships and not benevolent ones at that.

Yes, Barack Obama is half-black but he's all-conservative. Because he has to be to win.

Progressive politics -- human politics -- flickered in and out of the American way with Roosevelt and the New Deal and there we might consider thanking Eleanore Roosevelt for her existence on the world stage. Jimmy Carter didn't exist -- he was the short-term concession conservatives had to make to Americans after the media got out of hand and exposed them for who they are with Watergate and Vietnam. Hence, today's massive reign on the American media.

Today, within the top US media -- the most watched, listened to, and read media amongst Americans -- the only criticism of the US government is in the realm of comedy. The situation is so desperate that even the self-admitting idiot David Letterman has seized an opportunity to brave political opinions -- even if they are limited to addressing George W Bush's lack of intelligence.

See, 3 and a half years of Jimmy Carter and a half a year of negative campaigning
against "soft" politics (best known today as "efforts at negotiation, compromise, and
analysis") succeeded in convincing the malleable and deeply uninformed American public that fear, aggression, and invasive foreign policy are far more significant to
their lives than national healthcare, a living wage, education and social services.

The Clintons only reinforced centuries of standard US government policy: conservative ideology and practice through and through.

So don't be surprised that Obama is showing signs of being tougher on Iran.

Don't be surprised that Obama has hired the Clintonites Madeleine "collateral damage saves lives" Albright and Warren "bomb Iraq" Christopher as his national security kingpins.

Don't be surprised that we are constantly reminded of the Obamas' long held
religious values.

Don't be surprised that Obama is loosening his stance on a sustained and rapid removal of forces from Iraq -- that massive city within in a city that is the US Embassy compound in Baghdad was built to last way way past George W Bushler's reign.

Just don't be surprised. And don't keep yourself in the dark -- do some research of
your own and learn a little bit about American history. Inform yourself. Educate
yourself.

The conservatives who founded this country back when the Puritans realized that wiping the Indians off the map would save them the hassle of negotiation have never lost their hold as CEO's of the most bountiful and well-run corporation in the world.

The "Republicans" as the conservatives are formally labeled these days (wrongly so, as most any Democrat in office will tell you) will not "lose" this election -- they've never lost an election -- their agenda has stayed in place since day one.

Amongst the conservative elite that run the US of A, there is no fear, no hesitancy, no worry that John McCain will lose the election. Come November 4th, 2008, you will find that Barack Obama has made the final necessary transformation to the ideal conservative candidate.

Right on schedule for the vast majority of Americans whose profound lack of
knowledge of their own lives and their own country dictates the misery of the vast majority of the world whose lives are run into the ground because of election day USA.

For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Running Short: The Tall Tale of John McCain's Height

It is increasingly difficult to look at John McCain without wondering if he wears lifts.

According to most sources – and according to eyeballing estimates by even the least discerning Americans out there, Mr McCain is at most 5’ 7” (1.70 m) tall. Now the last time any man under 5’ 8” (1.73 m) had a taste of the U.S. presidency, his first initials were U.S. and he’d just commanded an army that united the states into one grand ol’ nation. Oh, and he wasn’t considered short since the average height of a man in the 1850’s was approximately just over 5’ 7.5” (1.71 m).

While surprisingly little is being made of many of McCain’s substantial shortcomings, one would think that the U.S. press – notoriously shallow in its coverage of any issue, especially a significant one like whether someone has the credentials, character and ability to lead the most powerful nation in the world – would at least smirk at or even remark on the fact that the Republican party’s big candidate is actually quite small.

The problems McCain faces even at this juncture of the campaign season are worrying indeed for the Republican party and not just because pretty soon McCain will be standing side-by-side 6’ 1.5” (1.87 m) Barack Obama at presidential debates. Now, as McCain and his party pursue a suitable Vice Presidential candidate for their not-so-winning ticket, the problems that another height challenged presidential candidate, one Michael S. Dukakis (5’ 8”, 1.73 m), faced seem very real indeed.

When Dukakis chose the 6’ 1” (1.85 m) Lloyd Bentsen as his running mate for the 1988 presidential campaign against 6’ 2” (1.88 m) George Bush the elder, it seemed like a good idea at the time – an undoubtedly concerted effort to present a more balanced height average for the Democratic ticket. Sadly for Dukakis, none of his advisers succeeded (if they even tried) in predicting just how unfortunately silly a presidential candidate looks when his lesser-office partner towers above him. Some say it might have cost him the election.

So what’s McCain to do? He obviously can’t choose a VP candidate as tall as Lloyd Bentsen (especially considering he’s even shorter than Dukakis), which leaves him with the only option of choosing a VP that barely makes the average height of a U.S. male (5’ 10”). Will American voters notice that the Republican ticket is short on prospects? Does the U.S. public care how their President looks? Just ask H. Ross Perot (5’ 6”, 1. 68 m).

Sure, it’s wrong to judge a book by its withered little cover but Americans are going to do it anyway. And certainly history is chock full of short men (with short man complexes, also known as the Napolean complex after one of history’s most notorious overcompensators) who’ve reached great heights. But the Vladimir Putins (5’ 5.5”, 1.67 m), Nicolas Sarcozys (5’ 5”, 1.65 m) and Silvio Berlusconis (5’ 5.5”, 1.67 m – though, embarrassingly, he himself claims he’s taller than both Putin and Sarcozy at a whopping 5’ 7.5”, 1.71 m) of the world pulled off their towering achievements at an age when the vitality of a lingering youth still propelled their detractors to look beyond their shortcomings.

This isn’t about ageism, it’s about wondering if the oldest presidential candidate ever – a man whose clean bill of health has been tattered by advanced skin cancers, kidney stones and high cholesterol – is up to the job.

Which brings us back to McCain’s choice for VP. Will the Republican ticket this year be a repeat of the Bush-Cheney arrangement: A known but largely incapable Presidential candidate being matched up with an actual president that – due to a number of faults, such as being in possession of the face of evil – couldn’t win on his own? You know the Republican strategists aren’t kidding themselves about McCain’s long term standings. Be on the lookout for a major behind-the-scenes puppeteer – someone who’s been a significant policymaker or adviser deep within the U.S. government for at least the last 30 years – being chosen as McCain’s VP.

Today, as Barack Obama has claimed the Democratic nomination and the actual presidential campaign season – all 5 months of it – takes off, the long and short of McCain’s candidacy will only now become apparent to the American voter. The Democrat versus Republican presidential debate season is on the brink and even if the masterminds of the Republican party (the same ones who did a bad job of sneaking George Bush the younger (5’ 11”, 1.80 m) an earpiece during his last presidential campaign debates) manage to maneuver a taller stand for McCain’s podium, at the end of the debate he’ll still have to shake Obama’s hand and put himself up for instant comparisons as Obama stands there looking authoritative, powerful and, well, tall.

Click here for a regularly updated height comparison of McCain VP choices...

For the latest Saccharinist coverage of Selection '08 click here.

Tea Time for Alan Johnston

BBC photoline: "Alan Johnston could enjoy some luxuries after his release - like a nice cup of tea"

It is indeed good news to hear that amongst the many journalists that have been victimized since the hostilities of the Wart on Terror began, at least one, Alan Johnston of the BBC, has survived his ordeal.

But sadly, "news" articles like this one on the BBC today demonstrate why a motive might have existed for a Western reporter to be kidnapped in Gaza in the first place: his "news" organization doesn't display basic respect for the people, culture and society he was based in.

The BBC takes great pride in the fact that from both sides of the Palestine-Israel issue, it is receiving criticism -- as if to say that we must not be biased if both sides are accusing us of bias. But this is paltry logic and a pathetic effort at spin on the part of the BBC in an effort to disguise the obvious: the BBC's coverage of sensitive international issues is insensitive and incomplete and both sides of the issues have noticed it.

"Alan Johnston could enjoy some luxuries after his release - like a nice cup of tea"

For the BBC to publish an image of Johnston having a cup of tea with such a simple but offensive statement under the photo is yet another example of infantile British politics in top form. Sorry to see that Johnston himself willingly took part in such a charade.

You see, tea is only a "luxury" in England, because in the Middle East and Asia it has been a staple drink for centuries. In fact, British style tea -- bitter, mouth-puckering, cold, and topped with unheated milk -- is considered unpalatable in Middle Eastern and Asian countries.

Johnston himself, if he had the sense, would have been able to tell his uninformed colleagues at the BBC (or at least the buffoon who wrote this ridiculous statement) that he had several cups of very luxurious (by British standards) tea with mint and other fine spices every day of his captivity in Gaza. But, alas, he posed for this ridiculous attempt at patriotism and has belittled the courage he displayed during the ordeal.

Iran Launches English Language TV

Iran is so cool. An English Language Iranian broadcast channel now exists! Today is the launch of the Press TV network:

"PRESS TV is the first international Iran-based news network to broadcast in English on a round-the-clock schedule."

Please take a look at the amazing and visionary Goals and Visions of Press TV -- let's just say this was a long time coming and the world would definitely change for the better if more non-"Western" countries would take this initiative and try and have a news network IN ENGLISH that does not pander to the interests of current establishment "Western" powers (as their own "Western" media have become exceptionally adept at).

Yes, Iran is still a nation that does not grant its own people basic social and personal freedoms, and that remains an extremely disturbing problem with Iran and very little good can be said about the present Iranian government, but at least Iran now has a competing English language broadcaster! Magnifico! Let's watch Press TV's coverage and see how it is, but for now, such wonderfully candid headlines as "Declassification of CIA's Illegal Activities" are worth the read.

---GOALS---

PRESS TV offers broad news coverage, specifically focusing on the Middle East.

PRESS TV dares to tackle the controversial global news agenda and broadcasts cutting-edge documentaries with political, social and economic contents.

PRESS TV’s goal is to present a deeper analysis of current affairs, aiming to show the other side of the story.

---VISION---

1- To break the global media stranglehold of western outlets.

2- To bridge cultural divisions pragmatically.

3- To highlight the versatility and vitality of political and cultural differences, making up the human condition.

Ahmadinejad Kiss 'N' Tell

.............................Above, the soon to be infamous kiss of Ahmadinejad and his school teacher.

With one kiss Ahmadinejad has shed light on political rumblings in Iran.

The Western press has picked up on yet another item that suits their needs by headlining the opinions of an obscure fundamentalist newspaper, Hezbollah, which as you can imagine is read by a tiny fraction of Iranians who still align themselves with ultraconservatives. Hezbollah (the newspaper) has expressed outrage and disgust at Ahmadinejad's indecency for kissing the gloved hand of an elderly woman who was once his schoolteacher at a public rally promoting education in Iran this week. Wednesday's article also bothered to mention Ahmadinejad's early presidential announcement that women should be allowed in football stadiums -- as yet further evidence of his unacceptable overtures toward women.

What's interesting here is that the Western press is obviously still on course toward indicating that Ahmadinejad is losing support from his conservative backers. But what Westerners do not realize is that Ahmadinejad's kiss actually helps his image amongst most Iranians. And, presumably amongst the Western public who, whether their governments or press likes it or not, have actually taken a liking to this charismatic fellow. Heck, even Mike Wallace couldn't help but wallow in Ahmadinejad's charm.

Frances Harrison & BBC: Let Iran Be

Image from "A Very British Coup" -- a documentary about British and BBC involvement in the 1953 Coup in Iran

Knowing, as we all do, that different media outlets possess and extoll different political outlooks, it would seem unfair to criticize any one particular journalist merely for doing his or her job. But the fact is that journalists include their own idiosyncracies in their reporting and certainly with feature stories, choose their own topics.

Which brings us to Frances Harrison. The BBC has foreign correspondents all over the world -- most of whom do not speak the language of the countries they are based in -- and most of them, as evidenced by their reports, appear to be quite happy to comply by the Blair-BBC standards: a nouveau colonialist-imperialist attitude that openly aligns itself with whatever administration is in power in the US.

Harrison's reporting -- especially that which appears on the BBC News website, which like most stories on the site, tends to gloss over details like sourcing and in-depth anaysis -- is lacking at best, biased at worst.

Take for instance her latest news story about crackdowns on hejab and attire in Iran. The story itself is simply not news: the authorities have been harrassing Iranians over their attire and outward appearance for decades now. But scroll down to the bottom and read Harrison's fascinating criticism that "even foreign tourists are being cautioned" about their dress. This sentence is pure presumption on the part of Harrison and her editor at the BBC that allowed it to be published.

You see, all women in Iran -- be they citizens or tourists -- are required to abide by hejab. If Harrison is not biased, then why doesn't she provide some basic background or poignant analysis of the situation? If she is biased, then why does the BBC not reprimand her for it? If the BBC is biased, then why does it complain about its treatment in Iran?

But even more telling of Harrison's journalistic credentials is her tale of "one foreign journalist" who "was stopped and the police complained the photograph in her press card was indecent, even though it was taken by the Ministry of Islamic Guidance." Either this is Harrison herself or a friend of hers -- but in either case, what is the point of it? To demonstrate that "foreign journalists" or "foreign tourists" deserve special treatment in Iran? On what basis? This kind of colonialist-imperialist attitude is simply not professional and certainly not becoming of a quality journalist.

It is also poignantly reminiscent -- as Harrison's Iranian husband has failed to inform her -- of the grievance most Iranians had about the monarchy's special treatment of foreigners in Iran -- it's the kind of attitude that offended Iranians about the Shah and contributed to his popularly-led ousting. Perhaps it should lead to Harrison's ousting, too.

Yes, we all know that reporting from Iran is not an easy task -- especially for a woman -- due to the difficulties in obtaining press passes and various permits. But this does not apply to the BBC: it has been reporting from Iran (and openly involving itself in Iranian politics) for decades, has a protocol and a line of command to turn to, and has the authority to make a stink if one of its journalists is put in harm's way -- something that isn't even a threat in Iran. Frankly, it's just not a credible excuse for shoddy, biased journalism.

The Western public's main and for most, only, source of information on Iran is from journalists -- and the public's perception from these journalists is that of an Iran that is volatile, backwards, corrupt and ignorant. This is inaccurate and not conducive to positive international relations. Either Iran should oust all of these Western journalists or individual journalists and editors should rightly accept a more realistic burden of responsibility for their work.

Besides, these foreign journalists' talent for biased and negative portrayals could do some amazing and much needed work on soiling the all-too-shiny reputation of their own Western governments and societies. Chip-chop!

This is What Ismail Ax Means

The answer to what "Ismail Ax" means came in the mail yesterday, in the form of a package to NBC. Ever since the Virginia authorities announced that the Virginia tech killer had the words "Ismail Ax" scrawled in red ink on his arm, there's been an internet frenzy to figure out what he meant by it. The answer is that Seung-Hui Cho -- the cholerically enraged psycho who, sadly for all of us, ultimately acted out his violent anger -- did NOT write Ismail Ax on his arm.

That's right. While the world would never have gotten a chance to see his arm and the supposed writing on it, we all got a chance to see the return address on the envelope he sent to NBC, where he has scrawled the name "A. Ishmael".

"Ishmael" as in the exact spelling used by Christians and Jews. "Ishmael" as in the exact spelling in the Bible. "Ishmael", as in not Ismail.

Yes, folks, the media (including the New York Times which persists in stating that the name is "Ismail" rather than "Ishmael") and the authorities' attempts to make this South Korean Christian's violent act into something, anything, to do with Islam or Muslims, was discredited by the killer himself -- see the photograph of the envelope (above, and in better quality also at this link) as provided by NBC.

And that's really all we need or care to know about Ishmael Ax -- the media is obsessing over this freak's horrible act, and has conveniently headlined him and it over the biggest story in the US today which is the trial of Attorney General Gonzales who, in the scope of his power, his violence, and his evil, has caused many many more deaths than a disturbed and powerless psycho like Cho.

No wonder some nuts are calling Cho the Manchurian Candidate. Maybe if the media stopped over-publicizing these crime sprees, then more psycho kids wouldn't seek to glorify themselves by making a "multimedia manifesto" (as NBC has called Cho's package) out of violent crime.

Poor Man's Journalist: Christi-yawn

Yes, I know it's shocking that the Saccharinist has, up till now, limited analysis of Christiane Amanpour (aka Christi-yawn A-poor-man) to mere jibes in select posts. So, without further delay, here is my first-ever post focused exclusively on this ingrown butt hair of Western journalism -- ah! where else but a blog can that jewel of a description be published?

Simply put, she is an incompetent journalist, if the word can even be applied to her, a telehost, who has used her "career" to mingle with international politics and make something of a life that was headed no where until she slept with the "right" guys at college. We won't dwell on her manliness, her aggression toward the entire Middle East or her direct ties to the US government (be they as weak as they are these days since her husband, Scarface, has been passing time between Democratic presidents posing as a journalist himself) despite the fact that journalists are supposed to be independent.

What we will focus on is her continual and longstanding use of the country she despises the most -- namely Iran -- as a footstool for advancing (or at times, maintaining) her farcical job as the resident "expert" on promoting US foreign policy at CNN (the Conservative Nepotism Network) -- a job made all the more easy considering Clinton and Bush had very little policy differences, just a rather divergent means of implementation.

Take a look at how this queen of condescension -- hate Arafat all you like, but at least he had the decency to teach this tool a lesson -- treats non-Westerners in this video clip of her showing her true colors at a news conference in Iran with members of the Iranian press. Amanpour is exactly the type of tool the US and UK governments have thrived and survived on for centuries: treasonous sell-outs who'll do anything for a piece of the pie. Surely it would be too much to wish that she gets her just desserts, so instead we here at the Saccharinist will remain content knowing that this poor man's journalist is really freakin' unattractive and time hasn't been on her side... hmmm... justice works in mysterious ways!

Round 2: Ahmadinejad vs Sawyer

Let's get the obvious out of the way on this one: Diane Sawyer is a low-grade telehost*** who has the intelligence of a doormat and knowledge of world affairs of your average American soldier: best described as zilch. Her pet peeves are a gray hair flickering amidst the blond, unshaven knees, and "news" gigs that force her to travel beyond New Jersey to the East and Orange County to the West to interview titillatingly calm world leaders whose panache and unbreakable hold on their interviewers makes her want to jump out of her chair and fondle them just to see if her purported (only by her, of course) sexual prowess can do anything as a final resort for domination.

In short, Sawyer's "news interview" (also known as a state-sponsored interrogation) this week with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be a YouTube chuckler for some time to come. (Click here to see the video of the interview.)

As we reported during the previous attempt (see also here and here) by an American telehost (I believe they refer to them as "journalists" in the US) when Mike Wallace interviewed Ahmadinejad and fell to his knees shortly thereafter, Mr Ahmadinejad is impeccably in control in an interview setting -- in other words, he effortlessly propels the interviewer to desperation and emotional grabs for the steering wheel in an interview gone magnetically in his favor.

The best thing about the Sawyer interview, which like the Wallace one involves condescension and racism of a level that reminds one of the slave master's rancor toward a slave who knows who the real master is, was that Sawyer lost her temper, lost her false gentility and practically thrusts herself toward Ahmadinejad at times, only to be kept slightly at bay by her genuine concern that the headscarf she's been forced to wear (the hilarity of this power dynamic amuses me to no end) might slip and give Ahmadinejad the satisfaction of seeing her dark roots.

It seems the main purpose of the interview, aside from employing the US government's highly secret weapon intended as a last resort toward regaining power in the Middle East, known only by its code name "Condi's Legs", was to inform the dangerously underinformed American public that while billions of their US tax dollars have been squandered on weapons and genocide in Iraq, while thousands of their young soldiers have been murdered by their own government in a sadistic rampage of profit, the much bigger danger to world peace is that a handful of grenade launchers found in Iraq have been identified as having Iranian serial numbers. The level of stupidity at play here is astronomically astounding.

The interview is riddled with laugh out loud punchlines mostly due to the fact that Sawyer proves her inexcusable ignorance about very basic facts pertaining to Iraq, Iran, Middle East politics and culture, and, well, anyone at all who doesn't wear Chanel lipstick or drive a tractor. One particularly entertaining highlight was when she pretty much gave away a state "secret" when she accepted Ahmadinejad's insinuation that the American government and forces have been active in organizing the killings of Shiites in Iraq. She then goes on to ask "Are you here to solve the problem of the American government in Iraq?" thereby capping off an already embarrassing litany of confessions.

And in a final bullet to the heart of her nadir of professional credentials, Ahmadinejad struck at the one thing an American "journalist" cringes at: accusations about sources:

Sawyer: You said you have 52,000 suicide bombers. Where would you deploy them?

Ahmadinejad: Did I say that?

Sawyer: One of the Iraqi officials said that...

Ahmadinejad: [laughs] Well I think you should check your source...

(Sawyer has now publicly admitted that "Ahmadinejad was right to challenge me, it was not a statement by an official but a so-called unofficial organization dedicated to suicide bombing.")

God I hope more American telehosts do these filmed interviews with Ahmadinejad -- they not only serve to embellish an already gratifyingly high level of disdain for the American media worldwide, but also keep us all entertained for hours on end.

***just for the record, The Saccharinist coined this term, in this article, on this day.

Nationalism is Humanity

................................................(Click on the maps for link to higher resolution)

This, friends, is the future of the "Middle East" -- all of those nations stretching across the north of Africa through the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the plan that has been implemented and will reach fruition when this Wart on Terror is over, according to the tiny elite of overseers who decide the fate and fare of most of the rest of us.

The Cold War lasted 50 years and wasn't even a war: no blood was shed. The Wart on Terror has officially lasted just 5 years now and millions have already been killed. For this "map" to reach fruition, millions more of your family, friends, neighbors, kin must too be killed.

What can you and I do? The only hope for the future of our world is in the Internet. Use this powerful military tool to effect change by communicating to others, by passing on information, by opining, by being a source of news for yourself and others. Don't rely on mainstream media: these are bought organizations who churn out propaganda for their buyers and this includes any and every media organization you think you can trust.

Finally, do not be a Saddam Hussein -- this horrible individual was the key weapon that foreigners used to bring this region of the world to the frighteningly victimized position that it is in right now -- under no circumstances form an alliance big or small with any representative of a government or powerful entity who turns you against your kin and your neighbors. Britain and the United States are notorious for this, but they are not alone. The former colonizers of the world are the imperialists of today and they buy and sell the low-life traitors like Saddam who unlock their agendas for inhumanity in our countries. Identify these agents in your countries and use the Internet to speak out against them. In Iran, we have Rafsanjani at the top of the list, but there are others who work in embassies throughout the world, who are heads of corporations, politicians, journalists, and above all, cowards.

Scholars may tell you that nationalism is dead -- yes, the Western definition of it as a supreme allegiance to one nation is, but nations are not confined to borders in our world so do not fall for such rhetoric: be nationalist!

Be someone who cares for his or her neighbors for the mere reason that they have suffered the ills of colonialism and modern-day imperialism along with you. Feel the pain of the Iraqis. Feel the pain of the Kurds. Feel the pain of the Turks. Feel the pain of all of the Uzbeks, Pashtuns, and Baluchis. Feel the pain of the Sunnis, the Shias. Feel the pain of the Jews, the Christians and all the religions of your neighborhood. Religion is a political concoction that will wither like a weed against the antidote of a common humanity. Feel the pain of your extended kin and feel it with the intensity of a nationalism that knows no borders. Instill it in your friends, your lovers and your families.

We are all one people -- this duality, this enmity, this polarization that the imperialists are trying to impose on us is nothingness -- it does not exist. Do not follow blindly, but most of all, do not remain silent. Silence is the sanctuary of fools and traitors. Silence is the entrapment of your humanity. Do not let anyone scare you into silence. The mere act of sending an email, of forwarding a piece of knowledge or information releases you from this burden of silence. Exercise your free will, exercise your self-respect and your sense of humanity. Do not silence your mind: educate yourself by reading, reading, reading!

Today's borderless nationalism is strength and love and humanity. Do not let anyone convince you otherwise.

The imperialists' redrawing of the maps of our lands would be irrelevant if borders meant nothing to us -- this is their cage for controlling us and ripping the threads of our common humanity. But what they don't know is that their maps have never meant anything to any of the people whose lives have coincided with the borders of these fabricated nations. From East to West, North to South, the former colonizers manipulated the map of the Earth with the mere scrawl of a pen. The borders they drew throughout the world only made sense to their need to control us, our lives, our resources, our futures.

Today's imperialists can draw and redraw these meaningless lines -- if we stand together against them, our blood will not flow with their ink. Thanks to the Internet, the powerless are a dying breed and we ourselves will redraw our own maps as and when we see fit.

The BBC Foreign Service Strikes Again

The BBC -- a well-known supporter of and at least once in Iran's history a direct and actual instigator of antidemocratic efforts in Iran (nobody can ever forget the Mossadegh coup) -- has today, again, shown its true alliance in the battle to save Iran from corruption and imperialism: right down there with the criminals themselves. The BBC's outright support of Rafsanjani -- most obviously perpetrated through the excessive column inches they afford to this known anti-Iran agent -- was back in full stride today to record Rafsanjani's election "win" in elections to the Assembly of Experts. As usual, the BBC is referring to Rafsanjani as a "reformist" which, as we all know is code for "one who is weak and collaborates with established powers in Iran and the West by claiming that Islam is compatible with modern democracy" -- this is as opposed to those who are against clerical rule in any form, and who truly wish Iran to have an actual democracy that has separation of mosque and state.

That's right, Rafsanjani, this thief and corruption warlord lost the 2005 Presidency, but gained something better and with actual power: entrance to a top government body that advises the Supreme Spiritual Leader (aka. the Supreme Feeder) in his inhumane activities against Iran and Iranian interests.

For the record, Rafsanjani is and has been for the last 30 years one of the West's (i.e. the UK and US's) top representative for their interests in Iran -- interests which always have and will be completely contradictory to the well-being of Iran and Iranians. For its part, the US has been less careful in recent years to hide this relationship, most recently manifested in USA Today's bizarre campaign coverage of Rafsanjani during the 2005 election in which they did numerous profiles and news stories extolling a guy most Americans could care less about.

As most Iranians have come to learn in the last 30 years, the mullahs have no difficulty in taking sides against Iran and Iranians because they do not in fact have any allegiance to Iran: their primary allegiance has and always will be to any benefactor which keeps them funded and continues their existence. The vast majority of the Iranian people have never been the primary or even secondary benefactors to the clergy -- it has always been the wealthy or the elite, including the monarchy and foreigners with interests in Iran.

The BBC World Service is the BBC branch in charge of "media management" throughout the world. For example, the BBC Persian Service has, just as its counterpart in the US through the Voice of America (and its most recent manifestation in Radio Farda), always been an arm of the Foreign Ministry.The various international languages in which the BBC broadcasts are essentially tools for communicating British government propaganda to people throughout the world -- but it's not as straightforward as that. The propaganda is not always overt and is mainly achieved over time as people come to turn to the BBC because their own state media is insufficient, outwardly biased or non-existent (in almost all cases the reason for this weak media is that British, and now US, backed leadership in most of these nations has deterred democratic efforts in these countries.

The BBC Foreign Service, as it should be called, is a media operation set up with the explicit aim of conveying two critical propaganda to Iranians (and other nationalities): the idea that the "West" is a wonderful haven of democratic value and freedom of expression, unlike their countries AND that the false idea that the "West" is doing everything it can to improve these nations.

Human Rights Day

The champions of democracy and human rights -- the "West" -- and their lamentable weapons of mass democracy, the media, have managed again to spectacularly bludgeon any sense of decency they may be in possession of. Yes, today, though you'd never know from reading BBC News Online, CNN, Le Monde, Sueddeutsche Zeitung (though they've managed to cover the earth-shattering news of the birthday of the 'Master of Trash Talk, Larry "Tweety" Bird' ), or any number of "reputable" Western media institutions, is International Human Rights Day.

How fitting that Pinochet -- a known war criminal, who like most war criminals in history gets away with murder -- should exit our world on such a memorial to the sanctity of human life, no? How even more fitting that not one of these major "Western" news outlets troubled themselves to remind their readers of the irony of Pinochet's passing on such a day.

What a debasement of the concept of human rights it is that one day must be set aside each year to remind the world that human rights are still predominantly unrecognized and disrespected, and that humanity is still far from appreciating human rights as anything less than second nature. Human rights are the inherent, inviolable rights that each and every human being is born with: the right to health, education, nourishment, due process and equality under the law, and the most misunderstood and overlooked one of all: respect as an individual human being.

Human rights day is everyday, not just today...

Iranian Photographer Honored

This image won the Pulitzer Prize for Spot News Photography in 1980. It was the first image in the 90-year history of the organization to be awarded anonymously. This week the identity of this photographer has been revealed to be Iranian photojournalist Jahangir Razmi and the Pulitzer Prize committee has announced that they will award Razmi his due prize in their May 2007 ceremonies.

It's a chilling imprint of the legacy that a cowardly dictatorial shah left his people when he fled Iran and threw Iranians at the mercy of a religious regime that not only scarred their dignity as the Shah had done for decades, but scarred their bodies, as well.

To see more of the 70 pictures Razmi took that day, see this link.

Bushler & Bliar: Honeymoon's Way Over

George W. Bushler and the man portrayed as his puppet but who is actually his puppet master, Tony "Evil Eye" Bliar, were back on the media scene today purporting a united front like a couple of washed up bullies on the playground of international public opinion.

It was an expected assemblage in the face of yesterday's Iraq Study Group findings which basically said what everyone in the world already knew: the US-UK coalition in Iraq is a complete failure and has transformed from a quick and tidy military operation (yeah right) into a desperate and incoherent murder spree, also known as genocide. Or something like that. It was also a chance for Humpty and Dumpty to divert attention from the embarrassment of Iran's growing arch of power in the region.

Bliar, a persistent example of the modern British peacock politician (a well-tailored suit may trick the eye momentarily but the ugliness underneath eventually shows its feet), spewed his regular spin throughout the Washington DC conference, managing as always to say nothing while endlessly talking. Knowing that he is, nonetheless, not Enemy #1, certainly helped Bliar keep his cool while his "best buddy" (a.k.a. lapdog) Bushler melted in the heat of a barrage of questions that have nothing to do with praise.

Agitated, impatient, and unable to control the pace of his automatic retorts or his growing frustration, Bushler, as he has always done despite long hours of training and advice, showed the true face of a regime who has magnificently failed at the one thing you cannot fail at in the digital media age: keeping up appearances. A high profile blurb here and a media-opp there simply do not a spin success make.

And of course, that's the one and only thing the British have ever mastered to perfection: never letting go of the pretense -- it's what brought those tiny islanders to the fore of international infamy but it's also what will eventually bring them down as more and more people worldwide take offense to being to played the fool by snobbery, classism and manufactured charm.