For CNN, Asperger’s Equals Madness
Russian President Vladimir Putin may be “completely mad,” says CNN–by which it means the Pentagon has speculated that he may have Asperger’s syndrome.
“Has Russian President Vladimir Putin gone completely mad?” was the lead of a news analysis (2/11/15) by Matthew Chance, CNN‘s senior international correspondent in Moscow. “This question is actually being debated in serious circles,” he added.
One piece of evidence offered for this was an offhand remark supposedly made by German Chancellor Andrea Merkel to US President Barack Obama that Putin was “in another world”—which does not on its face indicate that Putin is viewed as mentally ill, and Merkel’s office insisted she didn’t intend to imply any such thing (FAIR Blog, 3/12/14).
The only other substantiation offered for the claim that Putin might be “completely mad” was a 2008 report from a Pentagon think tank that supposedly said “the Russian leader may have Asperger’s Syndrome, a type of high-functioning autism”—thereby combining a spurious propaganda attack on an official enemy with a libelous suggestion that millions around the world with Asperger’s are insane.
Chris Matthews Advocates ‘Rambo Stuff’
Or Just ‘Bombing the Hell Out of Them’
MSNBC‘s Chris Matthews (Hardball, 2/10/15) offered his solution to the ISIS problem:
Now, this sounds pretty tough, but when are we going to stop this?… Do we go into it with a Rambo-style attack and do what we can to get them out?… I’m thinking of Rambo kind of stuff, because at some point you have got to go in there with what you got and do the best you can, or you’re not going to be very proud of yourself.
Of course, Matthews understands on some level that Rambo doesn’t actually exist, so he also offered a more realistic way to kill large numbers of people:
I’m just wondering how long we’re going to put up with this…. When do we say enough?… And just start bombing the hell out of them?… At what point are we going to say we’re going to blow that place up with anything we got, even if we don’t win? When do you just explode as a country and say we’re not going to take that anymore? When is that going to happen?
What’s Wrong With These Headlines?
Ex-Los Alamos Scientist Gets 5 Years in Venezuelan Nuclear Bomb Plot
NBC News (1/28/15)
US Nuclear Scientist Who Offered to Help Venezuela Build Nuclear Bombs Gets 60 Months
Washington Post (1/29/15)
Ex-Los Alamos Scientist Heard Offering to Design Bomb Directed at NYC for Venezuela
CBS New York (1/28/15)
Actually, there was no “Venezuelan nuclear bomb plot.” And the scientist in question, Pedro Leonardo Mascheroni, didn’t offer Venezuela anything. What Mascheroni was convicted of was telling undercover FBI agents, who were pretending to work for Venezuela, that he could give them nuclear weapons secrets. In real life, Venezuela had nothing to do with it. Accurate headlines would not leave casual readers with the impression that an official enemy was interested in getting a nuclear bomb, or in trying to nuke New York.
Facts and Reality Are Two Different Things
The New York Times treats Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s reference to Israel’s actual nuclear weapons as a disputable allegation, while it treats Iran’s hypothetical nuclear weapons program as an established fact.
Covering a speech by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, the New York Times (2/4/15) reported that he “asserted that the nuclear weapons amassed by the United States and, he said, possessed by Israel, have done little to ease their worries about vulnerability to attack.” The phrase “he said” is there to make it clear that it’s Rouhani saying that Israel has nuclear weapons, not the Times—even though no one seriously argues that Israel does not have a secret arsenal of atomic bombs (Federation of Atomic Scientists, “Israel: Nuclear Weapons”).
Meanwhile, the Times frequently refers to Iran having a nuclear weapons program as an established fact—as in a Times editorial (6/17/13) that said that Rouhani’s election “creates an opportunity to move forward on a negotiated agreement to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program”—even though, as the Times (2/24/12) has reported, “American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb.”
‘The Most Serious Flare-Up’–Aside From That Airstrike Earlier This Month
The New York Times‘ Isabel Kershner and Anne Barnard (1/28/15) described a missile attack in which “two Israeli soldiers were killed and seven wounded” as “the most serious flare-up in the area in years.” “Hezbollah claimed responsibility,” they pointed out.
But it wasn’t even the most serious flare-up in the area that month, it’s not even the most serious flare-up in the area this month, as we learned later in the article. “Hezbollah…had vowed to avenge a deadly Israeli strike on its fighters in southern Syria earlier this month,” the article noted, a January 18 airstrike that “killed five fighters from Hezbollah, including the son of the group’s slain military commander, Imad Mughniyeh, and an Iranian general.”
This more serious flare-up was apparently forgotten moments after it was mentioned, when the more recent attack was said to have “shattered a fragile calm that has mostly held along the frontier since the month-long war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006.” Mostly—aside from that Israeli airstrike that killed six people ten days ago.
A ‘Fringe’ That’s Bigger Than the Mainstream
The New York Times‘ Jonathan Weisman (2/9/15) reported that President Barack Obama’s chances of getting “fast track” authority to negotiate trade agreements are shrinking as “the political fringes expand on each end.” Giving Obama the ability to sign trade treaties that Congress cannot amend, but only vote up or down, he said, is supported by some conservative organizations but opposed by “groups more on the fringe.” He related that “administration officials say the voices on the left and right may be loud, but they are still a small fringe.”
Toward the end of the article, Weisman notes how many members of the House of Representatives opposed fast track: 150 Democrats and probably more than 72 Republicans. That’s 51 percent or more of the House—quite a lot of “fringe.”
Relating to the Community With Automatic Weapons
NYPD officers stand guard with assault rifles next to an armored car.
The New York Times headline (1/29/15) no doubt pleased the New York Police Department’s press office:
NYPD Plans Initiatives to Fight Terrorism and Improve Community Relations
The New York City news website Gothamist (1/29/15) dug a little deeper and highlighted a detail that might be more critical for New York’s citizens to know:
New NYPD Anti-Terror Unit Will Get Machine Guns to Police Protesters
