  |
|
|
|
Potpouri: SirCam, Macedonia, Condit and the media©
© 2001 Deborah Lagarde.
Comments? E-mail: "mailto:dlagarde@suite101.com"
This week I present a smorgasborg of topics to discuss regarding media issues, the foremost on my mind being the SirCam virus/worm/whatever, which has been extensively covered in Wired.com at "http://www.wired.com/", the technology news outlet. Last week I bemoaned the fact that my Netscape Communicator browser no longer works, period. When I try to type in a URL in the locator bar my computer crashes, and if I am using my Netscape Messenger e-mail client, my computer crashes when I quit Netscape. Thus, I am forced to use my IE browser--which means that when I want to do a suite101 article I have to login each time now (since the Suite servers don't recognize my computer on their 'cookies' anymore). However, when I read the article, "Love Bug, SirCam Neck and Neck" by Michelle Delio at "http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1...", I learned that my Netscape browser just might have been bugged to death with this virus--despite the fact that the virus only attacks Windows operating systems (the .exe files)--and I use a Macintosh, and despite the fact that I did not open the attachment (I never open attachments unless I know who they are from). Yet I got an e-mail (Netscape Messenger) from some unknown individual using an e-mail address with the .il (Israel) extension, which read: "Hi! How are you? I send you this file in order to have your advice. See you later! Thanks" which I thought was obvious spam, so I deleted it immediately. A very short time later, my Netscape stopped working properly. I (having first saved my user profile and folders) then trashed the old Netscape preferences (having saved them--maybe that was part of the problem!), re-installed Netscape, and it still didn't work. I lost my bookmarks, but kept my e-mail. Thus, I wonder--do these viruses targeted for PCs also infect Macs? The mainstream news coverage of the crisis in Macedonia is wierd because the various organs can't seem to get their agendas straight. When NATO went into Kosovo, ostensibly to thwart a "genocide" by Serbs against Albanians, it was obvious whose side the media was on (which is unfortunate--the objective media shouldn't take sides, should it?). Supposedly, the minority Serbs were committing "human rights" violations against Albanians, the majority there, so NATO had to step in to curb these violations. Now we have NATO seemingly wanting to step into Macedonia, not because Macedonians are violating the rights of Albanians there (which they aren't, since Albanians in Macedonia have virtually equal rights with native Macedonians. This might be why for many years Albanians left there homeland--Albania, that is, which was a hellhole then, and is a hellhole now--for Macedonia, because Macedonia was a better place, economically and politically (you may remember Albania was ruined by 50 years of hard-line Stalinism, followed by several years of being governed by a pyramid scheme which brought down Sali Berisha's more moderate government). Yet that hasn't stopped the "NLA" (affilated, of course, with the KLA, which is a stomping ground for Albanian ex-communists, Albanian Mafia types, and even descendents of Albanian pro-German forces during WW2--the "Skanderberg Division") from demanding that Macedonia literally gives the country over to them. The problem in the media is this: unlike Kosovo, which ostensibly had a good reason to have NATO/K-four troops to stop "human rights violations", there is no good pretext in Macedonia regarding rights vs. Albanians. Thus, the NY Times, Washington Post, etc. can't seem to figure out whose side they are on, particularly since President Bush has recently denied certain KLA/NLA members entry into this country based on the fact that they are "terrorists". Let's hope they don't take sides this time! Go To Page: 1 2 |
|
|
|
