Thursday, September 21, 2006

CNN Celebrates Crazy President's Day (First Hour)

Hey everybody. It turns out Anderson did not go plane hopping, but he did do some big time interviewing. We begin tonight again at the UN, a place Anderson says you might think is duller than watching paint dry. But, oh buddy not today. Why? Hugo Chavez and his belief that Bush is the devil, that's why. Anderson is very amused. "Seriously. He called him the devil." But we'll get into that later. Right now we've got a Tom Foreman piece that covers the tale of two speeches. In regards to Iraq making things worse, Bush states that the middle east was already unstable to begin with. Mmkay. You know, my house is kind of messy, but that doesn't mean it's okay to take a wrecking ball to it. Ahmadinejad is all angry because he sees the UN as a puppet and worthless.

On now to Anderson's interview with Ahmadinejad. Yep, you heard me. He got an interview with the man himself. Score! I'll get into the specifics in a second, but first I'd like to say that its overall choppiness was kind of annoying. Obviously there's translation issues (and there was actually some feedback or something going on at one point), but the weird editing I think has more to do with the fact that they tried to spread a 20 minute interview over several segments. The Angelina Jolie interview was also poorly edited and that was the same case. Okay, on now to the interview itself. Anderson began by asking about his Israel comment and Ahmadinejad replies with a nonanswer that the US is prejudiced when it comes to Israel. But he takes many, many words to say this. Seriously, the guy like gave a monologue. I've seen Anderson be Mr. Interrupty Guy before, so I don't know what happened there, but it was allowed to go on too long. To his credit, Anderson finally counters that that was a nonanswer. Then Ahmadinejad said the Palestinians should decide about the land, which is another nonanswer. He still hasn't said yes or no whether Israel should be wiped off the map. And actually, he never does.

Anderson then asks, "Do you really believe the Holocaust never happened?" Ahmadinejad answers with the question, "Where did it happen?" Basically what I think he's going for here is that he thinks the Palestinians are being punished for what was done to the Jews and the Holocaust didn't happen in Palestine, but I could be wrong. He states that there were 16 million civilian deaths in WWII and he wants to know why only one group is focused on. This is where I wish Anderson would have jumped in and said that what happened in the Holocaust was deliberate genocide of a race, but instead he moves on. Ahmadinejad wants to know if he got the answer he was looking for and Anderson laughs and say no, but they're pressed for time. Anderson thinks the conversation is fascinating and would have liked to talk to him for two hours and then Ahmadinejad wants to know if he's asking the questions on his mind or what's given to him. "Actually in America we have a free press--unlike in parts of Iran." Oh, snap! Anderson again mentions he's asking what he interested in, but his time is limited. Then Ahmadinejad gets in his little dig, "Given all the questions are very similar, it speaks for itself." Ouch.

Next there's a little bit of the Bush interview done by Wolf Blitzer, known to me as the Wolfbot, but I wasn't really paying attention. My bad. Oh, for those that don't know, Blitzer is totally a robot. You can't convince me otherwise. Anyway, on now to a background piece from Anderson on Ahmadinejad. We learn he never wears a tie, is prone to wearing sports jackets, is BFF with Castro and Chavez, and the more he angers the US the more popular he gets. However, despite his popularity there's grumbling in Iran about the economy.

Back now with more of the interview. Ahmadinejad says Bush fails to understand the reality of the world. Well, uh, yes. And he invites Bush to speak to his people for 30 minutes every day. Oh, he should do that! Because you know Ahmadinejad is totally bluffing. Ahmadinejad also wants to debate Bush. Uh, Bush probably shouldn't do that. Not without his little helper bump on his back anyway. Also stated, is that the leaders of Iran love the US as they love their own people. But, um, we just learned your people are really ticked about the economy, so maybe you need to love them a little more.

After the break, the subject of the interview moves to the Chavez speech and whether or not Ahmadinejad too thinks Bush is the devil. "Do you want to interview me or Mr. Chavez?" Geez. This guy is very media savy and knows how to work an interview. Anderson also brings up the fact that the IAEA says Iran's nuclear program is not transparent. Ahmadinejad counters by talking about the US program. Another nonanswer. Did this guy answer anything? That's it for the interview and as Anderson says, you "deal with the time you got." I think he did a pretty good job with it. He could have been more aggressive, but I don't know that Anderson has done many of these big time interviews. I guess you have to ease into it because he seemed like he might have been a wee bit intimidated. I know I would have been. Dude's a tough interview. But like I said, pretty good.

Transitioning now to John Roberts and the Wolfbot live and the Wolfbot points out that both presidents gave pretty standard comments. John states that Ahmadinejad is well liked on the Arab streets and is now friends with Chavez. Anderson comments that they were even holding hands and it was like, "wonder twin powers activating." Heh.

On now to a Delia Ghallagher piece on more of the Pope fallout. Really the only thing I caught in this piece is that Muslims have made cartoons depicting the Pope as Satan. Wasn't there some sort of uproar about cartoons depicting Islam poorly? Oh, irony. How I love you so. Next we move into a live interview with blogger Andrew Sullivan. I actually read Andrew's blog and for a conservative he's fairly rational, but I have to say on tv he usually comes off like a jerk. IMHO. Andrew thinks the Pope's comments were inflammatory, but courageous and he's not sure the guy "realizes yet he's the Pope." Hmm, didn't they have a ceremony? Heh. Anderson points out that the Pope glosses over the church's long history of violence. Crusades, anyone? Andrew thinks the Pope thinks Muslims are unable to reform like the church did. Hmm. Anyway, obviously the violence and whatnot are completely ridiculous, but it's still a very small percentage of Muslims. Andrew needs to remember that.

Well that's all for the first hour. I'll have the second one up ASAP. B+
Screencaps by Stormi0611


Blogger Terror-Free said...

New Pope Shows Spine
Islamonazi CAIR Is Not Impressed - video

Please Call The Vatican Embassy In Washington, DC at (202) 333-7121 to Express Your Support!

9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What I don't get: They say Iran "could" obtain the "capability" to build nukes in 10 "could" Surinam or Mongolia or my Uncle Bob.


"The Iranians may have an atom bomb within two years, the authoritative Jane’s Defense Weekly warned. That was in 1984, two decades ago.

Four years later, the world was again put on notice, this time by Iraq, that Tehran was at the nuclear threshold, and in 1992 the CIA foresaw atomic arms in Iranian hands by 2000. Then U.S. officials pushed that back to 2003. And in 1997 the Israelis confidently predicted a new date: 2005….”

SOURCE: AP February 27, 2006 – Ever a ‘threat,’ never an atomic power…”

Late 1991: In congressional reports and CIA assessments, the United States estimates that there is a ‘high degree of certainty that the government of Iran has acquired all or virtually all of the components required for the construction of two to three nuclear weapons.’ A February 1992 report by the U.S. House of Representatives suggests that these two or three nuclear weapons will be operational between February and April 1992.”

“February 24, 1993: CIA director James Woolsey says that Iran is still 8 to 10 years away from being able to produce its own nuclear weapon, but with assistance from abroad it could become a nuclear power earlier.”

“January 1995: The director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, John Holum, testifies that Iran could have the bomb by 2003.”

“January 5, 1995: U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry says that Iran may be less than five years from building an atomic bomb, although ‘how soon…depends how they go about getting it.’”

“April 29, 1996: Israeli prime minister Shimon Peres says ‘he believes that in four years, they [Iran] may reach nuclear weapons.’”

“October 21, 1998: General Anthony Zinni, head of U.S. Central Command, says Iran could have the capacity to deliver nuclear weapons within five years. ‘If I were a betting man,’ he said, ‘I would say they are on track within five years, they would have the capability.’”

“January 17, 2000: A new CIA assessment on Iran’s nuclear capabilities says that the CIA cannot rule out the possibility that Iran may possess nuclear weapons. The assessment is based on the CIA’s admission that it cannot monitor Iran’s nuclear activities with any precision and hence cannot exclude the prospect that Iran may have nuclear weapons.”

SOURCE: Cordesman and al-Rodhan

12:04 AM  
Blogger eliza said...

Islamonazi CAIR? Are you my first troll?

12:06 AM  
Anonymous Mathilde said...

It wouldn't be an Anderson blog without the trolls. He attracts crazies. Including me.

12:23 AM  
Blogger eliza said...

Oh yeah, Anderson is a troll magnet, but those are usually of the datalounge variety. This person is different. Probably just a post and run kind of deal.

Re: anonymous

I agree that there's no way to know if/when they could have the bomb. I think a lot of it is just scare mongering. It's obvious some in the adminstration want regime change. Not that Iran is innocent or anything, but I'm not all that scared right now.

12:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from