Friday, January 06, 2006
NEWSBUSTERS: LOOSING THE DOGS
Of the rabid right, that is...
Scott Whitlock blogs at Newsbusters:
"Clooney: We Need to “Understand” Terrorists, Not “Label” Them"
http://newsbusters.org/node/3482
Whitlock is civil enough; it's his commenters who decend to the level of rabid...
Stupid and rabid... Stupid, Stupid, Stupid...
I am beginning to accept it is impossible to get the neocon cannonfodder to grasp this point; the distinction may simply too fine for them:
Just as "martyr" doesn't imply good - you can be a martyr for evil - "understand" doesn't mean give the bastards a big hug... Empathy isn't sympathy. Clooney is 100% right:
"...if you are going to fight a war on terror, which is not a state that you can go and bomb, then you need to understand what it is that creates the people who would do such horrible things, rather then just saying- labeling them as evildoers."
But the neocons can't fit this into their little box. They insist on dragging the baggage of their viewpoint into everything, and everything that cannot be fit into that narrow, tiny framework is rudely dismissed.
That's why they are so easily manipulated by spinners like Karl Rove: He knows how to walk in the other man's shoes - and he understands that if he does, he can direct their path.
I have read Rove is a student of Sun Tzu... Who would certainly laugh at the beetlebrowed neocon approach...
In other circumstances, the neocon attitude could simply be shrugged off, but today the stakes are higher. Long-practiced Western arrogance has helped to fuel a backlash that begins to cost us dear. The neocons dragged us into one war by exaggerating a threat, demonizing a paper-tiger enemy, and conflating one inimical force with another. The result? A debacle. We could have rebuilt the entire mideast for the cost of this mess, and, objectively, we're losing. At every milestone we are assured improvement is on the horizon, yet events continue to mock their surety. Yesterday, eleven more American troops shed their blood on the alter of this fool's errand:
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-01-06T135550Z_01_EIC645805_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-RAMADI-USA.xml&rpc=22
Eleven more martyrs for our side...
Yet the neocons are agitating for another war, even as the one we're already in degenerates and the original objectives in the "war on terror" are lost in the shuffle.
This Nation is mighty, and in many ways mighty good as well. But we are not invincible. We can be destroyed: And the neocons have put us on the first steps of the path to that fate.
Really, I wonder whose side they are on.
Scott Whitlock blogs at Newsbusters:
"Clooney: We Need to “Understand” Terrorists, Not “Label” Them"
http://newsbusters.org/node/3482
Whitlock is civil enough; it's his commenters who decend to the level of rabid...
Stupid and rabid... Stupid, Stupid, Stupid...
I am beginning to accept it is impossible to get the neocon cannonfodder to grasp this point; the distinction may simply too fine for them:
Just as "martyr" doesn't imply good - you can be a martyr for evil - "understand" doesn't mean give the bastards a big hug... Empathy isn't sympathy. Clooney is 100% right:
"...if you are going to fight a war on terror, which is not a state that you can go and bomb, then you need to understand what it is that creates the people who would do such horrible things, rather then just saying- labeling them as evildoers."
But the neocons can't fit this into their little box. They insist on dragging the baggage of their viewpoint into everything, and everything that cannot be fit into that narrow, tiny framework is rudely dismissed.
That's why they are so easily manipulated by spinners like Karl Rove: He knows how to walk in the other man's shoes - and he understands that if he does, he can direct their path.
I have read Rove is a student of Sun Tzu... Who would certainly laugh at the beetlebrowed neocon approach...
In other circumstances, the neocon attitude could simply be shrugged off, but today the stakes are higher. Long-practiced Western arrogance has helped to fuel a backlash that begins to cost us dear. The neocons dragged us into one war by exaggerating a threat, demonizing a paper-tiger enemy, and conflating one inimical force with another. The result? A debacle. We could have rebuilt the entire mideast for the cost of this mess, and, objectively, we're losing. At every milestone we are assured improvement is on the horizon, yet events continue to mock their surety. Yesterday, eleven more American troops shed their blood on the alter of this fool's errand:
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-01-06T135550Z_01_EIC645805_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-RAMADI-USA.xml&rpc=22
Eleven more martyrs for our side...
Yet the neocons are agitating for another war, even as the one we're already in degenerates and the original objectives in the "war on terror" are lost in the shuffle.
This Nation is mighty, and in many ways mighty good as well. But we are not invincible. We can be destroyed: And the neocons have put us on the first steps of the path to that fate.
Really, I wonder whose side they are on.
Comments:
<< Home
IMO, you should understand them if it's useful, which it's not in this case.
Clooney says, "They are, in a way, the most sympathetic, but I think that's important. Because if you are going to fight a war on terror, which is not a state that you can go and bomb, then you need to understand what it is that creates the people who would do such horrible things, rather then just saying- labeling them as evildoers."
You can't ignore the context of his statements, which take them beyond their literal definition. He is obviously making the point that they were made insane killers by some great oil conspiracy which, natrually, traces back to us.
The reason I say it's useless is because what really made them insane killers is indoctrination by their mullahs to kill kill kill. They are taught in schools from day 1.
And this is just a way to deflect blame from their own disfunctional culture/rulers onto more successful western cultures, and of course, the Jews.
Clooney says, "They are, in a way, the most sympathetic, but I think that's important. Because if you are going to fight a war on terror, which is not a state that you can go and bomb, then you need to understand what it is that creates the people who would do such horrible things, rather then just saying- labeling them as evildoers."
You can't ignore the context of his statements, which take them beyond their literal definition. He is obviously making the point that they were made insane killers by some great oil conspiracy which, natrually, traces back to us.
The reason I say it's useless is because what really made them insane killers is indoctrination by their mullahs to kill kill kill. They are taught in schools from day 1.
And this is just a way to deflect blame from their own disfunctional culture/rulers onto more successful western cultures, and of course, the Jews.
# posted by 
: 6:44 PM
: 6:44 PM
Just like the Creastionism/Evolution debate, I don't understand why people think it is impossible to do two things at once.
In this case, understand what causes terrorism, but also understand that whatever the cause, the result in an "evil-doer".
What Clooney and the other -looneys are trying to do is, again, make the terrorists into "victims", who, are just really nice guys (well, when they aren't trying to blow you up).
Pleae also keep in mind that the terrorists and Jihadis come in different flavors. There may be some "freedom fighter" among them that are selective in their targets, and are really trying to better their peoples lot in life.
Most, I am afraid, are no better than street thugs with heavy weapons, using convenient excuses to hide their sociopathic impulses. Throw in some fanatic religious cover, fanned by totalitarian governments to distract the people from the true causes of their plight, and bake well.
Understand them yes...Make a virtual Propangda film for the enemy? I think not...
Post a Comment
In this case, understand what causes terrorism, but also understand that whatever the cause, the result in an "evil-doer".
What Clooney and the other -looneys are trying to do is, again, make the terrorists into "victims", who, are just really nice guys (well, when they aren't trying to blow you up).
Pleae also keep in mind that the terrorists and Jihadis come in different flavors. There may be some "freedom fighter" among them that are selective in their targets, and are really trying to better their peoples lot in life.
Most, I am afraid, are no better than street thugs with heavy weapons, using convenient excuses to hide their sociopathic impulses. Throw in some fanatic religious cover, fanned by totalitarian governments to distract the people from the true causes of their plight, and bake well.
Understand them yes...Make a virtual Propangda film for the enemy? I think not...
# posted by : 7:14 AM
: 7:14 AM << Home
