Fun and Laughing in an Iranian Prison

Jon Stewart saved the day on this one. I had a couple of sketches I'd written as responses to other articles but didn't care for either one. Then I watched the Daily Show and saw this piece.

The response is always easy to write when I find the source of the article exasperating.


~•~


ENG 290
December 1, 2009
Portfolio 5: Fun and Laughing in an Iranian Prison


Maziar Bahari was arrested following the 2009 Iranian elections and jailed for 118 days. While in prison, Bahari was repeatedly beaten and tortured. One of the principle pieces of evidence for the prosecution was an interview Bahari gave to the Daily Show as part of a comedy news story. The Iranian government didn't seem to comprehend sarcasm.

In mid-June, in the aftermath of the Iranian Elections, Bahari met Jason Jones of the Daily Show at a café in Tehran. In the comedy piece as aired, Jones interviews three people who had been detained in the few days since they had filmed. One of them, as Jones tells it, is "Iranian-born Newsweek contributer Maziar Bahari," who shares with Jones "his message of radical reasonableness" (sic).

On the morning of June 21, Bahari was arrested without charge and held in the Evin Prison until October 20. The story of his detention is detailed in several "mainstream" news outlets, a segment on CBS's 60 Minutes and an article in Newsweek. But Bahari also paid a visit to The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Opening the interview, Stewart says, "You were imprisoned in Iran—" and Bahari interrupts, "—because of you."

Bahari speaks of seeing the absurdity in his situation—being under arrest primarily for a seemingly innocuous interview with a comedy report—even as he was being interrogated about the election protests and questioned about accused dissidents. This situation, a clash of staunch theocratic minds of official Iranian government and sarcastic satire of an American comedy show interview, speaks loudly in microcosmic tones about the larger situation.

Terrorism no longer is seen in association with blown up city pubs or civilian bodies in a bread market, but is thrown in among political protests, public gatherings, and, it seems, comedy skits.
Satire and sarcasm have long be held forth as primary evidences of guaranteed freedom in the United States—the Western World. Which makes the clash of culture and understanding that much more sorrowful—more tragic—when it becomes the reason for someone's imprisonment and torture.

But in such a misunderstanding, it seems as well that there is something poetically ironic that humor has such power. For, in facing great tragedy, being able to laugh afterwards is one sure sign that compassion and humanity have survived.

Works Cited

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

"Jason Jones: Behind the Veil - Persians of Interest."
22 Jun. 2009. Online video clip.
Thedailyshow.com. Accessed on 1 Dec. 2009.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

"Maziar Bahari." 30 Nov. 2009. Online video clip.
Thedailyshow.com. Accessed on 1 Dec. 2009.

"Maziar Bahari." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

1 Dec 2009, 05:47 UTC. 1 Dec 2009.

· • ·

Careful with That Ax, Mitchel

The second of the media responses portfolio. This one was passed along to me by my brother, and I found it easy to provide a response to this sort of media nonsense.


~•~


ENG 290
September 17, 2009
Portfolio 2: Careful with That Ax, Mitchel


There are few things I know with absolute certainty, but I could hazard the assumption that if someone came running at me screaming and wielding an ax, I'd be terrified. But to take that sudden rush of confounding fear on to the linguist sibling of terrify to label that screaming, ax-wielding individual a terrorist is just not logical nor proper at all.

In a Star-Tribune article we are told, "A pickup truck driver is accused of trying to run over a bicyclist and then coming after him brandishing an ax after a road-rage incident." This sounds like a case of extreme road rage, and would, indeed, be a terrifying experience. But the situation turns, with a peculiar application of both linguists and the law. "The driver, Mitchel J. Pieper […] was charged in Dakota County District Court on Tuesday with making terroristic threats, a felony, in connection with the altercation Saturday."

Terroristic threats? How odd. Time used to be, an incident like that would be called, as it already had been in the article, "road rage." Now it is "making terroristic threats?

Consulting the OED, "terrorism: A system of terror. 1. Government by intimidation as directed and carried out by the party in power in France during the Revolution of 1789-94; the system of the 'Terror' (1793-4): see TERROR n. 4." But this incident is contemporary Florida, not Revolutionary France, what else does the OED tell us? "2. gen. A policy intended to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; the employment of methods of intimidation; the fact of terrorizing or condition of being terrorized. Also transf. Cf. TERRORIST 1b." That's closer. An angry man with an ax is certainly employing methods of intimidation. But that still doesn't warrant a legal accusation of terrorism.

To equate the acts of a hijacker acting on extremist beliefs (for wouldn't any belief have to be extreme by some measure to conclude that it is in the interest of such faith to annihilate another person?) who would fly a plane into a building, killing himself and thousands of others with a suburbanite in Florida chasing a bicyclist with an ax may well produce some interesting debates, but to designate by name the two things are being the same diminishes the power of the word itself. And that diminishes the power of our consideration of that act—for those who control the meaning of words controls the reality they represent.

The Star-Tribune goes on to say, "The bicyclist was not seriously hurt."

That's more than can be said for most victims of terrorism.

Work Cited

Powell, Joy.

"Driver is accused of threatening cyclist with ax."

The Star Tribune [Minneapolis-St. Paul]
12 Aug. 2009. Web. 1 Sept. 2009.

"Terrorism." Oxford English Dictionary.

2nd ed. 1989. Print.

· • ·

A Right-Wing Terrorist is A "Good American"

This was the first of five papers (I have three of them in this archive) we had to write as part of a media portfolio for Terrorism in Literature. The idea was to find sources in the media that featured stories about, or including references to, terrorism.


~•~
(1st draft)


ENG 290
September 17, 2009
Portfolio 1: A Right-Wing Terrorist is A "Good American"


When Bert Stead stepped up to the microphone at a town hall meeting in Redding, California, he probably didn't think much about what he was going to say and what impact his potentially careless words were going to cause. Yet when he opened his mouth, the words that came out were careless, and carry such impact as to call into question the relative meaning the culture of America for most of the past decade.

"I'm a proud right-wing terrorist," he said. And nearly 200 people attending the meeting cheered.

The California Congressman present, Wally Herger, replied, "Amen, God bless you. There is a real American."

In an examination of the meaning of words, it would be easy to lose focus on "terrorist" in the 15 words spoken by these two men. To keep focus on it, we must overlook the long-ignored meaning of "bless" being "to dowse with blood," or the fact that, at one time, "real Americans" were in fact active terrorists against their ruling government when they set out to form a country independent of the Crown of England. But these days, "real Americans" aren't often equated with "terrorists"—terrorists are the enemy, aren't they? That's what popular culture and almost all spectrums of the media have continually stated since mid-September, 2001. Terrorists are the ones who attacked America. They must be hunted down and killed.

But suddenly the term "terrorist" is being used in a manner that it should be something to be proud of. Patriotic, even.

"A proud right-wing terrorist."

In the mid-1990s, a proud right-wing terrorist and real American, disgruntled at what his country's government had down to its own private citizens in Ruby Ridge, Idaho and Waco, Texas, took matters into his own hands and blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City. Timothy McVeigh was a former Army soldier who had been decorated with a Bronze Star for his service and injury in the first Persian Gulf War. This latter fact marks him as a "real American," his philosophical beliefs would place him in the "right-wing" portion of most political cross-sections, and his actions in Oklahoma brand him as a "terrorist."

Is this the standard Bert Stead of Redding, California held himself up to when he declared himself a proud right-wing terrorist? Are McVeigh's actions sanctioned by Rep. Wally Herger when he replied with a beaming smile and a "God bless you"?

Mr. Stead later commented that what he meant to say was that he was a proud right-wing extremist. Not a terrorist. As if that correction alters what we are to infer from his comments.

It also demonstrates just how meaningless the very words terrorist and extremist have become in our eight-plus years of inundating ourselves with these monikers of fear. When words, however frightening and powerful they are meant to be, get used casually and as carelessly as Mr Stead and Rep. Herger have done, they lose not only their potency to be the signifiers they are meant to, but the words themselves become trite and flaccid. They lose their value to inflict their strength upon our vocabulary, our context, our culture, and ultimately, our mental images of what it is to be filled with terror.

Fear is the most powerful human emotion. And it serves an important role in our lives. Without fear, we wouldn't know to avoid certain things; we as a collective people and individuals would never know when it was time to exercise our courage. When the words used to convey the importance of understanding are abused, we have a lot more to fear than fear itself.

Works Cited

Boerger, Paul. "Right wing 'terrorist' says he misspoke."

Mount Shasta News. Mount Shasta Herald,
28 Aug. 2009. Web. 15 Sept. 2009.

Michel, Lou, and Dan Herbeck. American Terrorist:

Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing.
New York: Harper, 2001. Print.

Skordelis, William.

"Since when does a right-wing terrorist
equal a great American?"
Examiner.com. Clarity Digital Group,
30 Aug. 2009. Web. 15 Sept. 2009.

· • ·