April 02, 2004

Watching the congressional committee investigating 9/11, I was suddenly at a loss to understand what they were talking about when they mentioned "UBL." Finally, by repeated references I was able to figure out that they were talking about Usama bin Laden.

How many years has it been since everyone seemed settled on the English version of this evildoer's name as Osama? For awhile it was "Ossama" or even "Ossamma" and "ben" or "bin" Laden. Are we now to accept the spelling of several of the members of the congressional committee and the "Usama bin Laden" used by Dick Clarke in his book "Against All Enemies?" Have we been wrong all this time?

Dick Clarke seems to have been the one person who not only organized the program of investigating terrorist activity, but was the first to mention Usama. If this is the correct spelling, maybe we ought to start an investigation into who, when, and why "O" became prevalent so it doesn't happen again. Did some spinmeister decide that "O" had more shocking and memorable connotations such as "Oh, my God" that would serve better than a "U" would serve?

Let's not forget that we are dealing with the translation of Islamic symbols into English. Our typewriters, word processors, and printing presses are not set up to handle these symbols and few Americans would be able to understand what we were talking about if we used pictures of these symbols. But we ought to be able to agree on something as simple as an accepted spelling of one or the other translation.

And then there's the "al Qaeda" or "al Qaida," both in common usage when only one should be enough, and how about "Qatar" which people like Wolf Blitzer pronounces as "Cutter?" Now really, if the phonic sound of this name were as Mr. Blitzer says it, why wouldn't the translators have spelled it C-U-T-T-E-R? Is it really so hard to imagine the pronunciation as "Ka-tar?"

On top of that, did you know there isn't a single word in the English language that begins with a "Q" and is not immediately followed by a "U?" Not one. At least there weren't any until these two, Qaeda and Qatar, made their appearance. What does that tell you about the English speaking ability of the translators?

If there's this much confusion over agreement on spelling and pronunciation of these simple words, what does it say about the translation of complex ideas and information gathered by our intelligence forces? Are we chasing the right people? Are we looking for weapons of mass destruction, crass construction, or class instruction?

Aren't our leaders always telling us that we must pour more and more money into the education of our children because they are the future? After generations of this plea, shouldn't we be able to look around and see what we got for our money? Is this spelling disagreement but one of the results?

Maybe we should "outsource" our educational system. If you want your children to get a basic education, send them to India or Cuba. How can anyone argue with a literacy rate that has gone from practically nothing to 98 percent? And now we have to endure insults from Fidel Castro who says; "George W. Bush couldn't debate with a Cuban ninth grader."

I'll bet that if we let Dick Cheney or the other presidential protectors set up the rules of debate, and had Wolf Blitzer as the moderator, we would win hands down.

Visit Ed Henry's own web site!

Send a message to your elected representatives. Click here to start. Be sure to send a copy to Ed Henry.

Archives

What's The Rush? Count Votes By Hand

Wartime Debt. Can We Afford It?

Warning! Social Security Red Alert

Greenscam! Doing It To Us Again

Third Rail - Dilemma For The Pirates

Trust - Hopless In Washington

Missing - $89 Billion Trust Fund Mysteriously Disappears

Medicare - A Symptom Of The Disease

Covert And Collateral Damage

Complete Archives for Ed Henry