Stephen walks us through the media’s early coverage of the Norway massacres
“Maybe it was a good disguise.” — CNN terrorism analyst commenting that despite the identification of Anders Behring Breivik, a white, blond haired blue eyed native Norwegian as the mass murderer of some 76 innocent Norwegians, it might have just been a clever Al Qaeda subterfuge… a devious application of Polyjuice Potion, used by Harry, Ron, and Hermione to infiltrate the Ministry of Magic and to break-in into Gringotts Wizarding Bank in 1998.
There is nothing reasonable (indicating any type of reason other than self-serving) about these people.
Money obscures their vision and gives life to their fantasies of triumph.
I did too. It was unfortunately, dead on the mark.
But do we see any apologies to Muslims in the U.S.? It would be a good start and perhaps an opportunity for real dialogue.
Or am I fantasizing again about a reasonable world filled with reasonable people?
It’s one thing to have the thought. It’s another to act without verifying.
The moral of this story: “Thoughts do not require action.” And of course,
“Trust but Verify.”
I liked Colbert’s ‘apology’ for not acting immediately on his feelings…
I luv your fantasies Chick!
Hey, I know sometimes we all fall short and stuff, but still. It’s like they aren’t even trying.
More from our intellectually lazy “press”. That is why there are bloggers.
SEC and nonnie:
Glenn Greenwald weighs in on Democracy Now: Glenn Greenwald: Norway Attacks Expose U.S. Media’s Double Standard on “Terrorism”
From the intro:
Numerous news outlets and commentators initially blamed the attacks in Norway on Islamic militants. Rupert Murdoch’s British newspaper, The Sun, ran a front-page headline that read, “‘Al-Qaeda’ Massacre: Norway’s 9/11.” In the United States, Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal also initially blamed “jihadists,” reporting that “Norway is targeted for being true to Western norms.” Meanwhile, on the Washington Post’s website, Jennifer Rubin wrote, “This is a sobering reminder for those who think it’s too expensive to wage a war against jihadists.” To discuss the media coverage of the attacks, we’re joined by Glenn Greenwald, constitutional law attorney and political and legal blogger who has written about the media coverage of the attacks in Norway for Salon.com. “When it became apparent that Muslims were not involved and that, in reality, it was a right-wing nationalist with extremely anti-Muslim, strident anti-Muslim bigotry as part of his worldview, the word ‘terrorism’ almost completely disappeared from establishment media discourse. Instead, he began to be referred to as a ‘madman’ or an ‘extremist,'” says Greenwald. “It really underscores, for me, the fact that this word ‘terrorism,’ that plays such a central role in our political discourse and our law, really has no objective meaning. It’s come to mean nothing more than Muslims who engage in violence.” [includes rush transcript]
the attacks were very timothy mcveighish and very school massacresque, which translates to very whitish and very christianesque.
‘Muslish’, ‘Islamesque’: oh, how does our vocabulary grow!
I think Colbert is aiming to publish his own dictionary some day.; or at least add ‘Muslish’ and ‘Islamesque’ as synonyms for’ truthiness.’
Speaks to the growing phenomenon these days that perception really is reality. See, e.g. , Teabaggers.