Reader's Digest's View Of Dangerous Leaders
Slightly At Odds With Global Public Opinion
In one of the more ludicrous distortions in the history of magazine publishing, The Reader's Digest(RD) article titled "World's Most Dangerous Leaders" by Dale Van Atta indicts three regional figures as "dangerous" but omits
President Bush.
Yet pollsters repeatedly are being told by people the world over they view Bush as more dangerous than any one but Osama
bin Laden, and much more dangerous than RD's nominees--Kim Jong-il of North Korea, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
One survey was made by the UK daily The Guardian plus the Toronto Star and La Presse in Canada and Reforma in Mexico. Guardian reporter Julian Glover wrote British voters see President Bush "as a greater danger to world peace than either the North
Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, or the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Both countries were once cited by (Bush) as
part of an 'axis of evil', but it is Mr. Bush who now alarms voters in countries with traditionally strong links to the
U.S."
In Britain, 69% of those questioned said U.S. policy has made the world less safe since 2001. And 62% of Canadians and 57% of Mexicans felt the same way. In England, only bin Laden outranked Bush as "a
great or moderate danger to peace" at 87%, compared to Bush, at 75%. Brits said Bush tops North Korea's Jong-il, feared
by 69%, and Iran's Ahmadinejad, feared by a mere 62%. But RD's 10-million U.S. subscribers didn't read a critical word about Bush from Van Atta.
Another survey, by Ottawa-based EKOS Research, reported similar results, according to an Associated Press report of Nov. 3, 2006. AP quotes Paul Adams, EKOS executive director, as saying his survey of the U.S., Canada and Mexico, finds people saying:
"Whoa, this guy (Bush) is a danger to the world." Adams added, "These are allies and if the populations of their
countries are saying George Bush is a threat to peace, that's a pretty damning statement about Bush's public diplomacy
in the world."
And speaking of polls, 79% of Iraqis surveyed opined recently the U.S. is having "a negative influence on the situation
in Iraq" and 58% percent said violence would decrease if the U.S. got out. Too bad the one million Iraqis killed since
Bush invaded weren't asked their opinions before they were blown up on whether Bush is more dangerous than Hugo Chavez,
one of RD's nominees. Of course, many of the two million Iraqis wounded since Bush started a war there to improve their lives might care to utter a few choice words about him. Or maybe Van
Atta will visit Baghdad to make his own survey of what survivors think.
Like Fox News, you can count on RD to give readers a "fair and balanced" picture of events---except some itty-bitty pieces might be missing. In his
indictment of Kim Jong-Il in his RD piece, published last July, Van Atta said Kim "has turned North Korea into the third-largest exporter of opium."
But what country invaded by George Bush is in first place as opium exporter? According to the December 2, 2006, Washington Post, Afghanistan acreage under cultivation in opium poppies grew by 61% that year and total production jumped 26%, accounting
for more than 90% of the world's opium crop.
RD, which has been leaking circulation lately, still claims 10-million Americans pay to read it. That so many people swallow
its distorted news coverage may be one reason why a criminal in the White House can launch serial wars based on lies
with so little public outcry.
*************
(Sherwood Ross has reported for major dailies, radio stations, national magazines, international wire services, and the
Voice of America. Reach him at sherwoodr1@yahoo.com)