Evil has arrived, just a short distance from Ground Zero.
Ground Zero. Where Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's request to visit was turned down and, I think, rightfully so.
A visit by him to the World Trade Center site would be equal to giving America the finger.
Ahmadinejad has already received the classic New York welcome for its enemies: A bold, front-page headline in the tabloid Daily News telling him where to go. (And it's exactly where you think...) The N.Y. tabs are continuing their attacks this week as crowds protest his appearance.
Ah-mad-inejad ('mad' emphasized intentionally) leads a country which supposedly wants to build an atomic bomb, helps anti-American forces in Iran and is generally despicable in the eyes of the American masses.
Meanwhile, he ordered Iraq's major border crossings with northeastern Iraq closed Monday after the U.S. detained an Uranuan official accused of smuggling weapons.
"How come is it that you have that right (to possess nuclear capability), and we can't have it?" he asked.
Wonder what would happen if we closed the U.S.'s borders to Ahmadinejad, as in refusing to let him leave? Dumping a head of state into one of America's you'll-never-get-out prisons for terrorism suspects would definitely (almost misspelled it 'defiantly -- that would work, too, actually) get the world's attention.
Ahmadinejad has claimed America has been denied "correct information" and wants to be directly heard. I consider him as spewing rhetoric, but this does lead to a thought:
Are we -- instead of the "other side" -- being censored?
Our "gatekeepers" include network newscasts, both traditional networks plus CNN and "fair and balanced" Fox News, and the Associated Press, from which newspapers circulating in Shelbyville get their national-world news.
Are network news leaders such as Charlie, Brian and Katie slanting the news through their own biases? And what about Dan Rather, who's filed an I-wanna-get-richer lawsuit against CBS/Viacom? He's a definite example of bias
I lost a lot of respect for Mr. "Courage" (remember that signoff...) when Rather was "brave" enough to broadcast his unwarranted attack on President Bush. I'll admit I'm not the biggest Bush fan, but I was watching that night and thought right from the start, "that's biased." Not good for network news...as if it hasn't happened before.
Back to Ahmadinejad. Should he be given a direct line, so to speak, to America? And should the networks and print news services inject voices of reason or just let him rant and let hearers/readers make up their own minds?