And, no, I don't mean "wobbly" as in Industrial Workers of the World.
I've grown to like Ariana Huffington's commentary. But her new group blog - "crowd blog" would be a better name for it - seems to be producing a flood of inane commentary.
Like on the "everything was going great in Afghanistan until Newsweek published that Qur'ān story" hoopla. We get:
Irshad Manji: Why riot violently over the mistreatment of a Quran? It's not as if one's basic human rights have been transgressed.
Summary: Why not regurgitate the Republican Party line of the day ("dumb uncivilized Muslims" version) while making a half-hearted attempt to sound "counter-intuitive" while you do it?
Richard Bradley: Newsweek needs to figure out what it got right and what it got wrong, and fast. But let's not blame the messenger for violence prompted by reporting—even if that reporting turns out to be inaccurate.
Summary: Let's see if we can take a mugwump non-position on the whole thing without actually saying anything.
Danielle Crittenden: After expert examination, they did indeed prove to be pages covered in Arabic script, although their condition made further verification impossible. However, the entire story was subject to the high fact-checking standards of which we at Newsweek are proud. Unlike the Internet, where scurrilous stories can be rushed online in seconds, we have a full week to confirm the details of all our articles.
Summary: Golly, look how clever I am! I assimilated the Republican Party line so fast that I can regurgitate it already in witty satiric commentary. And without mentioning one [Cheney]ing thing about torture in the gulag!
Jim Lampley: Simon writes as if the too highly-regarded "anonymous source" is a journalistic franchise of the left, a story tool never employed by media supporters of Pax Americana true belief. Nonsense. Regardless of your opinion of the efficacy of anonymously-sourced information, you'd tie yourself in knots trying to prove substantively that it has been used more frequently or flagrantly by either side.
Summary: I can be even handed - see how I'm equally skeptical of "either side," clear-minded guy that I am? - plus I can work in a couple of Latin words and even "efficacy" while I'm doing the Mugwump Jitterbug.
Sandy Frank: Anyway, it turns out the source of the tip was "not credible," and I regret that I got the story wrong, and extend my sympathies to the dead people.
Summary: Golly, look how clever I am! I assimilated the Republican Party line ... (see Danielle Crittenden above for the rest)
Roger Simon: Riots ensued across the Islamic world and people died because of what one reporter wrote, evidently without doing any serious checking. ... And let's hope this Newsweek story was motivated by greed, because if it was motivated by a "Get Bush" ideology, this lifetime left-liberal who never dreamed of voting for a Republican for President until 2004, thinks their value system is mighty sick.
Summary: See how sophisticated and counter-intuitive I am? I'm "lifetime left-liberal" but I can spout the daily Republican Party line, too. Did I mention I voted for Bush in 2004? I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.
Arianna needs to get some focus into that mess. Like maybe selecting "feature posts" that, you know, actually have something to say? I mean, if we just want to see the Republican obsession of the day repeated in various incarnations of snarky prose and pompous feigned outrage, we can just go to Instapundit and follow the links from there.
4 comments:
Yes, a little focus would be nice. I've been reading a little of Huffington's blog (and skimming a lot - that's a lot of entries per day!) and I've seen some good stuff, but a whole lotta crap too. They also need to work out their issues with comments too.
I'm confused by this whole Koran in the toilet thing. Are we supposed to believe that it never happened?
You mean that all the other atrocious behavior and cruelty is for real, but this small act of blasphemy is not?
Is our government saying they treat prisoners and their religious beliefs with respect?
Are we actually supposed to believe that?
Are 1.2 billion Muslims supposed to believe that?
Does anybody believe that?
Neil
Neil, you've hit on one of the things that make the Qu'ran desecration story so plausible.
For a lot of pious Muslims, this would be a very BIG act of desecration.
But most Americans, presumably including most American Muslims and non-Muslims who at least make some effort to understand Islam, just find it hard to take something like this emotionally as seriously as the beatings and physical abuse.
So to Americans, it seems imminently plausible that if interrogators are doing things that to us seem so much worse on the face of it, that something like desecrating a Qu'ran wouldn't give them a second thought. - Bruce
Bruce,
I think you're right. Americans are insensitive to how provocative the desecration of the Koran is to Muslims. In fact, the story of the past two years that most Americans have missed is the anger and resentment that have accumulated among Muslims because we have been disrespectful in their mosques and disrespectful in their homes and disrespectful of their women. We have allowed Generals to publicly disrespect their religion.
We have imprisoned and abused them, and we understand the Muslim reaction to the hoods and beatings, the dogs and the sexual humiliation.
But we don't get it that we have dished out a lot of disrespect and humiliation.
And -- this is amazing to me -- for a nation that claims loudly and frequently to be a religious nation under God -- even an exceptional nation favored and chosen by God to work His will in the world (the arrogance and blasphemy of our Christian Right is revolting, isn't it?) -- we don't get it that flushing a Koran in a toilet is deeply offensive and dangerously provocative.
My earlier comments were intended to criticize the false self-righteousness of a government that abuses human beings, but denies abusing their books, and not meant to imply that the desecration was not a serious matter.
Neil
Post a Comment