Quote:
Originally posted by Undertoad
Anyone anti-war: you have to read this to find out how you got that way
|
Blanket statements like these, addressed to "anyone who X," always makes me whip out my heavy-duty, industrial-size, grain of salt. Doubly so when the "damning evidence" is in the form of one single reporter's
opinions and
impressions. He claims all of the other reporters were lying and bribing, but you assume
he isn't lying to make himself look good. Statistically speaking, that's a lot more likely. Maybe this guy was an asshole and created problems for other reporters unnecessarily. Maybe the stories are completely untrue. Or maybe he's being honest.
We don't know. This story is information useful in forming an opinion, but it is
not damning evidence.
Quote:
Originally posted by Undertoad
...made you indirectly support some of the worst horrors of the world so that a small number of people could make a quick buck.
|
I have mixed feelings about the war, but I realize that those in power have more information than I do, and for now I choose to trust their judgement. So I don't really qualify for the "anti-war" category you designated. But the above statement, suggesting that people who don't think we should have invaded Iraq when we did are indirectly supporting the horrors there, is like saying that anyone pro-war is indirectly supporting the murder of decent men, women and children... namely Iraqi civilains and US soldiers.
Both are offensive suggestions, are obviously untrue, and are obviously an attempt to invoke emotion rather than communicate facts. This is
exactly the practice that is eroding the quality and value of the news media today. This is
exactly the practice that is condemned by so many bloggers today, but then they turn around and do it themselves. To bloggers' credit though, few claim to be impartial and unbiased.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, anyone who categorizes people, and then makes blanket judgements about the moral character of
everyone in that category, is being a shithead as far as I'm concerned. And yes, I recognize the irony in that statement.