Technically Incorrect offers a slightly twisted take on the tech that's taken over our lives.
Diplomacy and Twitter go together like sausage and semolina.
It's a wonder that any political figure ventures toward Twitter to seek reasoned -- or even reasonable -- debate.
Perhaps, though, some feel that Twitter's innate need for aggression must be fed. This seems to be the view of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The US and Iran agreed a nuclear pact in mid-July. It wasn't, as President Obama said, based on trust, but on verification.
Verification is something that hasn't blessed Ayatollah Khamenei's English language Twitter account. However, @Khamenei_Ir is generally regarded as the Supreme Leader's self-expression.
What to make, then, of a tweet emitted by the account on Saturday?
Its words were somewhat somber: "US president has said he could knock out Iran's military. We welcome no war, nor do we initiate any war, but.."
When a tweet contains a "but," one must always be prepared for something stern to follow. And so it was that this tweet had a picture of a man in shadow pointing a gun at his head. The shadow resembled that of President Obama.
This picture had more words inside it: "We welcome no war. But if any war happens the one who will emerge loser will be the aggressive and criminal US."
It might seem odd to some to call someone with whom you've just reached agreement "aggressive and criminal."
But Twitter sometimes demands this sort of language to be heard.
I contacted the White House to ask for its reaction and was told: "No comment from us on this tweet."
Thus far, neither the @POTUS Twitter account nor the @BarackObama account has chosen to respond to the Ayatollah's tweet.
There is rarely any point in fueling a Twitter war.
Update at 7:50 a.m. PT, July 27: A reply from the White House has been added.