The Consequences of CBS’ Cover-Up of Lara Logan’s Assault (Update: Another Account?)
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.]
My personal position on the Lara Logan assault has been, simply put, we have a right to know the full details of what happened to her. A serious crime took place on a public street, in a important Middle Eastern capital, on a night of celebration.
By comparison, here is what was happening in America when we defeated tyranny at the end of WWII:
And while the photo looks, well, aggressive in retrospect, apparently she was in the spirit, too:
“Someone grabbed me and kissed me, and I let him because he fought for his country,” Ms. Shain later said. “I closed my eyes when I kissed him. I never saw him.”
(Source.) But something was broken in Egyptian culture that night and things got uglier—a lot uglier—for Ms. Logan, although how bad things got is a mystery. And that’s the problem throughout this entire post.
For starters, Big Journalism has revealed that al Jazeera has been lacking in its coverage of the story. And the reason why? Oh, because of the privacy of Ms. Logan. So they aren’t covering it, at all. Not even to the anemic levels that CBS has informed us. Heather Allan, head of news gathering for Al Jazeera English, explains:
The attack on Ms. Logan was shocking and brutal. Many journalists were attacked, detained and beaten. These incidents were mentioned in our reporting but were not the focus of our output. We believe, as a general rule, that we are not the story. When CBS issued their statement about the attack, they specifically asked the press to respect her privacy and that of her family. That’s what we opted to do.
Jonathan Capehart, to his credit, does a great job showing al Jazeera’s hypocrisy on the issue, here.
Meanwhile the truth is coming out. Or maybe not. At Wizbang they have a post (warning, really nsfw) describing all the horrible stories on the internet about what was done to her. Or do they? As I pointed out a few days ago, the WSJ was reporting specifically that it was “not a rape.” But what Wizbang describes in different videos constituted exactly that. So who is telling the truth? It’s impossible to know. Meanwhile Newsbusters got an account via the Daily Mail, which has the virtue of lining up more with what other accounts have said. But I don’t feel comfortable reporting any of these as the Truth because we have no idea if any of these accounts are right—although the Daily Mail account does strike me as being more credible.
And let’s return to the Wizbang post for a minute here. The Wizbang post repeatedly refers to videos available on the internet. If we assume that Wizbang is wrong, then this suggests the real possibility that people are manufacturing fake videos of the incident, playing off of the lack of information. All that could be disposed of, if CBS news just, you know, reported the news.
A few years back, protests broke out all over the world because a Danish paper published cartoons of Mohammed. And our media decided that we didn’t have the right to know. Most media outlets refused to publish the cartoons even when telling people that these cartoons were supposedly offensive. The most pitiful moment was when Cnn aired images of the cartoons, with the image of Mohamed blurred out, thus reducing them to images of blurred pieces of paper. And not only did this strike me at the time as cowardly, but it positively made things worse because then as members of the Muslim Brotherhood and fellow travelers whipped up anger over these cartoons, they invented additional cartoons. They created additional cartoons, far more objectively offensive than anything the Jyllands-Posten published, and claimed they were genuine Danish cartoons, using those fakes to whip up even more anger. By failing to tell us the unvarnished truth, the traditional media opened the door to all kinds of deception.
And CBS is doing it again with the Logan attack. It is time to come clean and tell us the entire story, CBS.
Update: Debbie Schlussel has some very nsfw video, where a man describes what he has seen on various Arabic websites. It is really graphic, but simultaneously very dubious.
Update (II): Also, apparently, I am a bigot and pervert for wanting the truth to be revealed. Also I have failed to notice that Logan was rescued by Egyptians, too (except I did). And I didn’t notice that good Muslims in Egypt stood up and defended the Christians there from terrorists (except I did). And I have never ever supported women’s equality except to beat up on Muslims (and wouldn’t you know that isn’t true, either). And I am pushing for the story to come out because I want to tar all Muslims or all Egyptians with it (nope, not true, either).
(Update (IV): Pat in the comments below made me see that the last paragraph was a little ambiguous. Tbogg only called me a bigot in the main post. The other accusations came from his peanut gallery in the comments. Sorry for the confusion.)
My favorite comment has to be from “MarkinAustin:”
I haven’t read Worthington’s [sic] worthless screed, but I have no doubt of the accuracy of the [paraphrase].
Yeah, don’t let any facts get in the way of your vilification of me.
The fact is Tbogg can’t back up his assertion that I am a bigot even when repeatedly challenged to do so. If he had class, he would withdraw it and apologize.
Update (III): Last one from Tbogg’s special commenters, but this is too funny not to share. “UncertaintyVice Principal” imagines that with all of this I am trying to prove “[t]hat Muslims are inherently icky, violent, unstable…” And then later he claims that because of that “your post made you look like a racist[.]” Now obviously I didn’t say that and I have specifically denied that we can say anything that ugly about Muslims in general based on this incident. But don’t get distracted by the casual defamation there. Instead let’s focus on the fact that in his mind, smearing Muslims is… racist.
Which is itself a racist statement. As I said to another person who pretended that criticism of Islam was racism:
A religion is not a racial trait. I am white and I could convert tomorrow. I mean, okay, it’s not [censored] likely, but it’s not because of my skin color; its certain basic issues I have with the way Mohammed conducted his life….But point is, Islam is not tied to skin color. Therefore it is not racist to criticize it, even harshly.
So in fact in denouncing my supposed racism, he outted himself as a racist. Golden.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
I’m afraid I still don’t understand why you think the “full details” are important… Nor do I really know what “full details” are lacking.
Do you want to know the manner in which she was sexually assaulted (i.e., was there penetration, bloodshed, etc.), and if so, how does that add to your understanding of… well, anything?
And to what end? So that people will become outraged against her attackers? Like the information we do know isn’t enough to feel outrage?
Kman (5576bf) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:14 am” we have a right to know the full details of what happened to her. A serious crime took place on a public street, in a important Middle Eastern capital, on a night of celebration”
You have a right? Where in the constitution does it say so?
I’ve never seen the details of rape cases in newspapers. If it was your daughter would you want it in the papers?
nf2u9738e7i (8e079a) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:18 amI too am curious if she was raped or gang raped, or merely groped, or something in between. It’s obviously a massive difference from one extreme to the other, and adds to one’s understanding of just what this protest was like. If women were raped in public at a protest, that is simply amazing to me. I simply cannot fathom a large group of free men clamoring for rights who would allow that to come even close to happening. If, rather, someone was groped or something short in duration occurred, that means I can’t assume lots of people were aware of what was happening in time to do much about it.
Of course, you’re Kman, so you’re just trying to be a jerk for whatever reason, probably insinuating that there’s something perverse about Aaron’s interest in a major story.
These people may very well take more power over an incredibly important part of the world, Kman. Get a life.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:19 amnf2
you are proving my point. we don’t even know if it was a rape or what?
Kman
How about as much as we usually know about these things? how about that much?
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:19 amNon sequitur.
People can be of the opinion they have rights to things that aren’t expressed in their government’s laws. This is an important story that the world needs more information about.
Yeah, if it were my loved one, perhaps I wouldn’t care about the big picture very much. Or perhaps I would want the people who did this exposed for what they had done.
I think the idea is that we have a right to something approaching justice. While simple awareness of a problem is not justice, it’s closer than ignorance of a crime is. These crimes may have involved hundreds of acts of omissions, themselves horrible crimes.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:22 amI don’t think we have a right to know, outside of broad brush details. However, listening to the MFM speak of respecting someone’s right to privacy cracks me up. And kmart is a twatwaffle.
JD (d48c3b) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:23 amCBS does not want to come clean about the story. They have their heads buried in the sand and they really don’t want to pull out. They don’t want to see the ugliness of the people that they have supported throughout the years. Just as with the Dan Rathernot false story about George W Bush, CBS would rather be in the dark. Who knows whether or not, the Lara Logan story was ginned up to bolster a narrative that the network wants to foster or if it is true. As they say, all the details will eventually come out in the wash.
Stan25 (103775) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:28 amI’m not going to go so far as to demand anything, or insist it’s my right to know, but I do think it’s helpful to note that journalists have claimed to be operating under those assumptions. They have demanded that we abide by this right to know. Ms Logan herself defended gruesome descriptions of dead US Soldiers because she was moved to make sure Americans understood war. Would I want that to happen if it were my friend or loved one killed in Iraq?
I don’t even think we have a right to expect journalists to apply their own principles honestly, but that’s basically what Aaron’s asking for, and it’s not unreasonable at all.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:28 amhttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103844570
“In 2003, a survey of female veterans found that 30 percent said they were raped in the military. A 2004 study of veterans who were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder found that 71 percent of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while serving. And a 1995 study of female veterans of the Gulf and earlier wars, found that 90 percent had been sexually harassed.”
Bernard F. (d80b5a) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:36 amWhether a severe beating and groping, a rape, or a gang rape, all are heinous violations of a woman. And yet the damages done by a rape (whether by one or many) are by far going leave a more serious and lasting scar on her whole being – body, mind and soul. God keep her close.
What is so very, very damning is that men in that part of the world feel free to commit such acts against women with very little concern of retaliation or prosecution. It’s normalization of the sexual assault.
The question that needs to be asked in the public square, and an answer demanded, is: What makes these men believe they are within their rights to freely violate women like pieces of meat and who has given them this permission?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:37 amGiven that this is a culture that sanctions gang rape as a punishment for the girl’s family actions, there should be some explanation using the usual legal terms.
Of course, the US Army is even less willing to face reality with the “report” on Hassan.
Mike K (8f3f19) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:40 amI’d suggest that CBS respect Ms. Logan’s privacy, if that’s what she wants. If she doesn’t want that, she’s free to talk to any other media outlet. If they are suppressing details against her wishes, that’s probably a big enough story that it would score her a job elsewhere.
carlitos (c006f6) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:41 amCan you imagine CBS covering up this story if it had occurred at a Tea Party rally?
Arizona Bob (e8af2b) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:47 amYou really are a great troll. Smearing the military like that is a great distraction. Any rape is obviously a horrible crime, but a rape in a crowded public forum is something else entirely.
What’s your point? I think everyone here abhors any sexual assaults in the military too. It’s sick to attempt to defend one horror by simply diverting attention to one you think serves your politics more.
Every thread you’re in, you bring up something that is not related to the topic.
The person who was behind that figure is a professor at Columbia and a hard core shill for hating the military, like her institution. That’s not to say there isn’t a problem with rape in the service. But the DOD tries very hard to get reports maximized instead of covering it up, something Benedict is always hammering them hard for. The DOD doesn’t react to the bad press cynically… they do all they can to ensure reports are made freely.
Helen uses their good faith law enforcement and mental health work against them, but I’m proud that the military doesn’t hide this problem.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:53 amBernard
is there a point to that link, besides going off topic?
i mean not that we are big about enforcing topic discipline, here, but it seems like what you are saying is, “my response is… look! A squirrel!”
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/21/2011 @ 10:58 amPart of our compact in Western society is an affirmative duty to call out evil. We are duty bound to proclaim crimes and to work to suppress/incarcerate those who perpetrate crime.
Aaron is 100% correct when he asserts we have a right to the truth of this matter. The full truth. Again, if by some happenstance, the alleged scum were brought to trial, would Logan have the right to refuse to testify against them? In a moral sense, absolutely, unequivocably, no. If victims refuse to stand up, we ALL suffer.
Since all rights are granted from a moral source, one does not, therefore, have a right to silence.
The rank hypocrisy of the media who protect their own from scrutiny is brighter than it has ever been. May the darkness of the overwhelming ignorance of the masses be replaced by more clarifying and purifying truth.
Ed from SFV (adab2a) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:00 amUgh. It just ticks me off. The DoD created something it calls the ‘climate of confidentiality’, leading to a increase in women reporting sexual harassment or assault. The DoD justifiably notes this is a success because we want victims to get help and justice.
Columbia Professor Benedict actually bashes them for these measures, which help women (and men who are sexually harassed or assaulted), because it sells her books and huffpo articles. The USA generally is better about honestly reporting bad things, like infant mortality, or rape, or crime, than other places, and we’re always being bashed for it by the most cynical leftists.
At any rate, a lot of the NPR/Huffpo figures are not well sourced and are starkly out of line with the DoD’s well sourced figures. This is a serious issue. Sexual assault and harassment are real problems in the military that deserve better than political shills like Bernard give it.
I guess we’re not supposed to note the inferiority of Egypt’s treatment of women until the USA is absolutely flawless? I’d rather have a get-real approach.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:03 amWhatever the details, it seems something quite brutal, which didn’t fit ‘the narrative’
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:08 amAaron,
If Ms. Logan herself has requested no more details come out regarding her attack, would that sway you on this? Or do you hold to the belief that the entire story must be told – regardless of the victim’s wishes?
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:17 amI think it’s a hard call, Dana, but difficult decisions almost always involve balancing interests. Logan has an interest in privacy and the media/public have an interest in learning whether this was an anomaly.
IMO the details of Logan’s story will be shared within the media and the government so they can make informed decisions about how to protect their employees in Egypt and elsewhere in the region. The government has an added interest because it bears on whether this is representative or an anomaly. To the extent that is the case, the public also has an interest in this story.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:32 amShouldn’t we know if the perpetrators were actually “Mubarak hugs” as was reported? I thought it rather strange that Mubarak would want to harm the international press. How would that have helped him?
vote for pedro (e7577d) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:33 amThe fact that Kstooge is ambivalent is no surprise. Too bad it wasn’t this ambivalent about stalking Aaron.
Looks like we didn’t have to wait very long for Egypt to fall off the narrow path to democracy:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2011/02/yuppie-revolution-in-egypt-is-over.html
On the highway to Armageddon.
gary gulrud (790d43) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:36 amRosen, is the gift that keeps on, something;
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/q_a_nir_rosen_on_afghanistan_a.php
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:44 amI, too, agree this is a very difficult call to make and as such, I have not expressed a personal opinion as to whether I believe the details of the story should be made public – especially if the victim requests privacy. I did ask Aaron as he has posted his insistence that it should be.
I’m curious whether he believes that even when a victim would rather it not become public, he still feels that way. IOW, I would like him to make a distinction between a victim’s right to privacy and the public’s right to know.
As to whether this was an anomaly or representative of the region, there has already been a plethora of confirmation that it is representative.
Only 1.7 percent of 2,800 women surveyed on their experience with sexual harassment by the Cairo-based Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights said they reported incidents to the police. The May 18 survey found that 40 percent of professional women experienced harassment “regularly,” 32 percent of women under 18 experienced it “daily or more” and 30 percent of women overall reported “obscene gestures or words.” More than half of incidents occur on the streets or in public transit.
Sexual harassment remains widespread in Egypt, and even women covered by veils and long robes in strict Islamic dress say they are not immune.
A 2008 survey by the Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights found that 83 percent of Egyptian women and 98 percent of foreign women in Cairo said they had been harassed, while 62 percent of men admitted to harassing.
To me, it seems at the least, very short-sighted of the government and media if they do not already know how to successfully protect their employees in that part of the world. And yet we have this brutal attack. There might be specific protocols not yet formed, but what I saw with this was, frankly, to a great degree, a serious lack of common sense for the sake of capturing the moment.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:53 amAnyone care to bet that the numbers Yelverton yammering about above is complete BS?
JD (0d2ffc) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:58 amIt is astounding that the media will circle the wagons to protect a journalist’s privacy and from embarrassment.
And yet will put the life of a security officer working for the US in danger, revealing the identity and CIA affiliation (and former Xe and Blackwater affiliation) will he is in a Pakistani prison.
TimesDisliker (5d76cf) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:02 pmThe Dana Who Asked Me a Question
> If Ms. Logan herself has requested no more details come out regarding her attack, would that sway you on this? Or do you hold to the belief that the entire story must be told – regardless of the victim’s wishes?
Absolutely, tell the story. we should always know what happened. as i said in one of my posts on this (i think i might be up to four, if you include the post on the other woman), i don’t object very strenuously to leaving out the woman’s identity when practical. Seriously, if CBS wanted to tell us that “a woman working for CBS news was sexually assaulted” and tell us the details, without telling us who, i would have been fine with that.
I have defended the egyptian protesters. in this i have disagreed respectfully with those who argued that that this is leading to iran all over again. it could be iran, by i am going to maintain my cautious optimism. but we deserve to know the whole story. What if, when all the stories that were kept silent finally come out, we find out that these men were raping every woman they could get their hands on, western, local or whathaveyou? that changes things. and the danger in “respecting her privacy” is that we might have hundreds of victims suffering in silence.
i say tell us everything let us sort it out.
Besides, we are treating this as though she should what? be ashamed. her attackers should be ashamed. and spayed. *EG*
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:05 pmYes but Valerie Plame! it’s very situational, and your instincts are probably right about that
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:05 pmI’m sorry I intruded on your discussion with Aaron, Dana.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:20 pmnarc
actually valarie plame rode a desk at langley. i saw little value to actually keeping her service at the CIA a secret. which is not to say armitage was right to reveal her. he should not be making that decision unilaterally and i doubt he knew enough about her life to know it presented no actual danger.
but we keep too much secret. i mean there are “classified” files that include clippings from the NY Times.
yes, for limited examples of national security, obviously there is a place for secrecy. and i am sure there are a few more examples. but my rule of thumb is we should know more, not less.
incidentally a post i am working on touches on that, too.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:29 pmI am torn on this issue. In general my default would be to respect the privacy of the victim. I this case however it is not just an assault, it was part of a much larger news story, and I do think that it would be helpful to know what happened. I am also torn because the press has absolutely no sense of that same privacy when these things happen to someone who is unlucky enough not to be a member of the press.
By way of illustration, I once read a thread on a forum for photojournalists. This discussion started when one of the photojournalists posted that he was upset because the night before he had been attempting to cover (photograph) an accident on a highway, and the police and first responders had the gall to put up sheets (like a tent) so they could take care of and extract from the cars the victims. This, of course, meant that he could not take photographs of the accident, or the bloody and possibly dead victims. It was his contention, and the majority of posters agreed, that the police and ambulance crews had no right to “censor” him and that they had no right to decide what should and shouldn’t be shown in the paper the following day. They were (the majority) firmly convinced that the photographer was the only person who should be making decisions about what should be photographed at the scene, and that photographers and editors were the right (and only) people who should be making decisions about what gets printed in the newspaper. This is their mindset. I saw this many years ago and haven’t got a clue where, I wish I could find it.
My point is that the press always thinks they should be in charge of these decisions, and somehow, their conscience always dictates that whichever way is best for them, is also the right way.
Not My Problem (e5ae6e) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:35 pm“My personal position on the Lara Logan assault has been, simply put, we have a right to know the full details of what happened to her.”
Nope.
If Logan and her bosses don’t feel like talking, then they don’t have to.
Dave Surls (7c5174) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:48 pmSure, but that has no bearing on HER privacy. And you’re assuming that CBS is sitting on a pile of stories about other rapes. Granted, as Dana points out, rape is widespread in Egypt, but we already know that. So maybe you are looking for stories that don’t actually exist?
Yeah, but you can’t dictate how a victim should or shouldn’t feel. Whether it is right or wrong, or makes sense or not, a rape victim is going to feel the way she feels.
And incredible as it may sound, some women would prefer not to have what happened to them discussed among others, and certainly not over the national media. I suggest you sit down and have a close confidential chat with an actual rape victim — they might be able to explain it better than me.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/21/2011 @ 12:50 pmKmart manages to be a douchenozzle every single time. That cannot happen on accident.
JD (2da347) — 2/21/2011 @ 1:01 pmKman
> Yeah, but you can’t dictate how a victim should or shouldn’t feel.
You have been stalking me for nine years. i have told you to leave me alone repeatedly. And now suddenly you are solicitous of the privacy of others?
Take your own advice and never comment here again.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/21/2011 @ 1:15 pmI think the answer’s far less insidious than some here suppose: this didn’t happen to some CBS reporter, it happened to their colleague, i.e. someone they work and interact with on a regular basis. I know, I know, they should’ve adhered to larger journalistic standards, but as a human being, it makes perfect sense to me that they’d respect her wishes more profoundly than they would someone they didn’t know personally.
SEK (1d9681) — 2/21/2011 @ 1:38 pmAre we sure it was CBS’s decision not to talk about this? Maybe Lara Logan did not want people to talk about it until she was ready to talk about it herself. A lot of women who are victims of assault don’t like to discuss it publicly. In fact in many cases the details and sometimes even the identity of the victim are not released.
Who made the decision not to talk about the fact that Mubarak’s regime has been accused of using rape to intimidate dissidents for years? I have noticed that there were a lot of things about Mubarak’s regime that did not make the papers until that regime collapsed.
The only time I can really remember a public rebuke from the US was back after Ayman Nour was imprisoned when he came in second in an election. Condi Rice and Bush both said Mubarak should release the man…other than that it seems to me there was silence. Maybe there still is.
Terrye (84455a) — 2/21/2011 @ 1:39 pmFrom what I have ascertained her injuries were due to aggressive pinching in sensitive areas, some of her attire was removed and she was whipped with the poles that flags were tied to. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen.
What we do know is that there were fundamentalists in the area who arrived after dark. The sight of a blond foreigner who was uncovered and a journalist was most likely accused of being a JEW, a spy, and probably some comments from the rabble who have little or no respect for females in the first place.
It is my opinion that the case was not discussed because it did not fit the narrative CBS was looking for. It would have been easy to hide behind privacy issues to put a hold on the story. If this is the case, and this is studied speculation on my part, what looked like a TIME SQUARE celebration had very real undertones of intrigue and conspiracy on the part of the various factions vying for position and leverage in Tahrir Square.
There was motive, opportunity and means. More telling is that political correctness has no cache on the streets of Cairo at 0100 local time in the midst of a power struggle between radical Islamists, Mubarak supporters, Iranian provocateurs, democratic supporters of freedom, and a military trying to keep a lid on the situation.
Wrong place, wrong time. Prayers to the lady for her efforts to do her job. She may well have been as pivotal for her attack showing us the mindset we are dealing with as the Tunisian who set himself afire which gave genesis to the current mideast conflagration. The fact that she was rescued by the locals should give us all hope for the future through their acts of kindness and compassion.
vet66 (eb4cdb) — 2/21/2011 @ 1:42 pmI’m sorry I intruded on your discussion with Aaron, Dana.
I don’t understand this???
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 2:20 pmAaron, thank you for your response.
Because we don’t know whether Ms. Logan herself requested privacy, I’m inclined to be prudent and not have the sordid details released.
I think that a statement from her would indeed go miles to bring to the public eye a systemic problem in that region of the world. One hopes an international scrutiny and condemnation might make have an impact in some areas…
Several years ago when Mavis Leno and other public figures began to help bring to the public’s attention the regular practices of female genital mutilation, there was a general condemning of it and in some places, prohibitions against it made. (However, interestingly, it did not stop Egyptians…)
I guess I don’t see it as a black-and-white-this-is-the-way-it-should-be-decision. I can’t come to it that easily – not when a woman has been so violated.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 2:30 pmI’m focusing on the issue, of the double standard, AW, hence the sarcastic exclamation point.
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 2:35 pmSEKS apparently thinks it is less insidious for the media to apply their standards based on whether or not they work with someone, or whether they like them. All he really did was highlight the laughable position the MFM takes.
JD (b98cae) — 2/21/2011 @ 2:48 pmIt is astounding that the media will circle the wagons to protect a journalist’s privacy and from embarrassment.
Embarrassed? Why? I don’t see how on earth being savagely beaten and possibly raped renders one embarrassed.
Is it possible at this point in time, CBS is acting compassionately in protecting her – the victim of a horrific crime?
It would seem our cynicism toward the MSM is so fixed that we don’t think there could be any other reason they might not be as fully forthcoming as they could be other than to just control the narrative.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 2:50 pmThe media serves its own interest, we know that, but from now until the Lord returns, Aaron, I will disagree with your claim that “we have a right to know the full details of what happened to her”. No you don’t. To say you hae a right to that means somebody has the obligation to give it to you. No one does. Do some have a responsibility to relay the kind of information that makes clear the type of environment was present? Yes. Does that mean a responsibility to provide “full details”? No. Where to draw the line is a valid question that includes the victim’s wishes and what information has already been made public by circumstances.
On the other hand, why do you even concede Plame was “outed” at all? Even Muslim terrorists know the entry to Langley and have attacked agents going in and out. Unless Plame went in and out of Langley through a “Get Smart” entrance there was no “secret” to be “outed”.
MD inh Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 3:21 pmYou show up at the same law-related blogs as I do, leaving endless trails of “come visit my site” links, which (eventually) I do from time to time. This is “stalking”? You know it’s not.
But what is more incidious than that is how you make a parallel between that and a woman being raped by 200+ Egyptian men…. yikes!
Kman (26c32e) — 2/21/2011 @ 3:33 pmI think that I have read all the comments, but can’t find anything that suggests anyone was raped by 200+ Egyptian men. Care to clarify?
carlitos (180bd6) — 2/21/2011 @ 3:43 pm#40 Some years back I brought up the heinous treatment of Muslim widows in the Arab world. Several feminazi Irish ex-pats insisted any so-called cruelty was cultural and if the women there did not like it, it was up to THEM to institute changes from within. yeah, right, that will work. And of course satyr Bill Clinton remained their hero despite all the accusation directed at him, not to mention the blue dress stained with his semen.
Calypso Louie Farrakhan (798aba) — 2/21/2011 @ 3:48 pmAlso amusing that Billy was receiving some counseling by the rev. Jesse Jackson when it turned out dearest Jesse was banging a staffer on the side also.
Wondered why someone could not develop a guillotine-like device for women to wear that bobbitts a rapist’s johnson. I recall vietcong women had razor blades secreted in their vaginas toward just such end.
I guess when you link Debbie Schlussel, you invite comments like the one above. Interesting times.
carlitos (180bd6) — 2/21/2011 @ 3:51 pmWhat if Lara Logan doesn’t want the details made public? Doesn’t she have the right to make that decision?
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:01 pmFWIW, I read where the famous picture above was actually staged. You just can’t trust journalists.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:12 pmKman
No one invited you, kman. No one invited you to this site, or my last, or to freespeech.
You’re just a creepy stalker, liar and hypocrite.
Carlitos
i looked around and she had an account, that i felt was glomming off the lack of information. so i linked to her, because i liked that option better than putting the creepy video on this site myself. i don’t know very much about debbie, except she feels this is reflective of islam generally.
I don’t particularly care who i link to, most of the time. Aside from a few special instances, if i am relying on an account or think it says something worthwhile, i link to it.
as for Calypso, he has been posting here for well over 6 months. he has nothing to do with her, if that is what you are talking about.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:25 pmNY Post:
New details have emerged about Lara Logan’s brutal attack in Egypt, including that she was stripped, repeatedly punched and slapped and pinched so hard that sensitive parts of her body were covered in red marks, according to a new report.
Wounds on her body were consistent with being hit by the poles that demonstrators were using to fly flags, London’s Sunday Times reported.
Logan, a CBS foreign correspondent, was taken to the Four Seasons hotel, treated and sedated and then flown out of the country. She’s still recovering at her Washington home.
CBS originally said only that Logan was “surrounded and suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating before being saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers.”
Guards with her also were beaten by the mob celebrating the exit of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on Feb. 11. One had his hand broken.
“Lara is getting better daily,” a friend told the Times. “The psychological trauma is as bad as, if not worse than, the physical injuries. She might talk about it at sometime in the future, but not now.”
The White House last week demanded that Egypt bring the thugs who attacked Logan to justice.
A native of South Africa, Logan has been CBS’s chief foreign correspondent since 2006 and has regularly filed reports from Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot spots for “60 Minutes” and the “CBS Evening News.”
Arizona Bob (e8af2b) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:33 pmMD n Philly – I am loathe to disagree with you, so I would appreciate a clarification.
Is it the case that a victim does not have an obligation to testify in open court as to the exact nature of a crime against them, or is your objection one of venue – that the public has no right to details through media?
Ed from SFV (adab2a) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:45 pmAaron,
carlitos (180bd6) — 2/21/2011 @ 4:45 pmI find Schlussel (and Calypso’s comment) to be execrable, but thanks for clarifying. I suppose that the six degrees of separation phenomenon applied to online means that we are all a link away from someone we don’t love, but might have content we want to read.
I think her first instinct was probably to say little, being in shock, but the comments of Rosen, as well as those that seem to minimize it, prompted
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 5:00 pmher to speak out.
Comment by Ed from SFV
Thank you for your kind request for clarification.
I’m thinking that when one has been severely traumatized, it is a kindness to make their subsequent life as easy as possible, at the very least not add to it. She will still need to go to the local store, pick her kids up from school, etc., etc.,. I guess I’m just thinking if it was me, I’d rather have people know that I was “brutally attacked and hospitalized”. The person I’m interacting with knows I’ve been through something bad, and depending on how well they know me may or may not say something or ask something. I would rather face that, than knowing the person is looking at me and thinking, “You were gang raped by 14 men, etc., that must have been awful” (for example, not that I’m saying that was a report on Logan). I think dealing with the latter by anyone who recognized me, whether I knew them or not, would add to feeling vulnerable and “exposed”.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 5:15 pmNow, where the actual details are “kinder” than imaginations, I think the details are a blessing. If the account given in the Post above by Arizona Bob is a good approximation of the truth, to me that is a “less embarrassing” explanation than suffering “a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating”.
I don’t think the analogy between the Mohammed cartoons and this incident is that clear.
Giving incomplete details on a story that provokes people and contributes to riots is a bit different than withholding details of what an individual living victim encountered, IMO.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 5:22 pmAdd me to the list of those who do not need the “full details.” She was assaulted for 20+ minutes by a mob and had to be rescued and then hospitalized for 5 days. That’s enough information for me.
Perhaps Andrew Sullivan, ObGyn, can fill in the details some of you crave.
Y-not (45d6ad) — 2/21/2011 @ 5:32 pmIt’s interesting to see people condemn a desire for transparency as prurient. The motivations of the Egyptian street during the uprising is a matter of international importance, so the public has a valid reason to care about the details — not only because of what it tells us about the Egyptians but also in deciding how these stories should be covered.
In a way, it reminds me of the Jessica Lynch story. I’m sure it was very personal and private matter to her and her family, but it also spurred a reasonable debate about when and how we should put women in the military in harms way.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/21/2011 @ 5:46 pmDRJ,
For me it’s not so much that the “desire for transparency [is] prurient,” it’s that the lack of immediate release of intimate details is assumed to be a “cover-up.” See the title of this post. Does CBS News fall under some bizarre obligation to release the medical and criminal details of their reporters’ lives? Must we assume that all liberal / big media types have impure motives, whatever their actions?
carlitos (180bd6) — 2/21/2011 @ 6:09 pmDRJ
What details does the public need to know?
– That it was one individual attacking who was stopped by the crowd vs. a crowd stopped by a force of 20 soldiers? fine
– That it was brutal and required hospitalization? fine
– That it involved sexual assault, rape, gang rape? Why? Did the crowd not do a contemptible thing by brutally attacking a woman reporter? If we don’t think she was raped do we think it is safe for women reporters in a Cairo mob after all?
– Is pointing out the fate of one American journalist somehow going to make the standing of women in Egypt better all of a sudden?
It would be more important to know if the attackers were Mubarak thugs, Muslim Brotherhood thugs, or freelance thugs, but giving details on how many men touched her exactly where will not help that.
When a doctor sees a patient there are a bizillion things one could ask, do, test, etc., but most of them would have no bearing on the matter at hand.
It is important to know if one was “tortured” did that mean made to stay cold and hungry and isolated or beaten and bones broken. But as a member of the general public I don’t need to know which bones were broken.
Is there anybody reading this that does notalready know men can act worse than animals? If you already know that to be true, why insist that an individual person needs to get put up as exhibit A in public?
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 6:19 pmIs there any doubt we would not know every detail of the assault and the name and history of every individual associated with that person, had the assault not happened to a journalist? We would know more than we would care to know and we would hear the story repeated over and over again for days so we could relish every new tidbit that was discovered. That is the double standard that is so damned infuriating.
vech (2c6272) — 2/21/2011 @ 6:31 pmTu quoque, 3,000 years after the Greeks, remains a logical fallacy. Not an argument.
carlitos (180bd6) — 2/21/2011 @ 6:56 pmMD,
As a doctor, you are concerned with your patient’s health but as a lawyer, I want to develop all the facts because I know it’s unlikely that one or two people can give us a complete picture of what happened.
Thus, I want to know if perpetrators were operating as an organized group or if it was a random group of thugs because it helps us decide whether this was organized intimidation of a Western journalist or a random event. Getting more details about how the attackers were grouped, whether they seemed to be organized, what they were wearing, who tried to stop the attack, etc., could help us answer that.
Similarly, as unpleasant and invasive as it seems, the nature of the attack is instructive. Based on what I’ve read, women in the Middle East are sometimes subjected to groping to the point of assault. Even the mildest account of this story sounds worse than that, but it tells us something about the motives of the perpetrators if it turns out this attack involved multiple rapes that goes beyond even the worst stories.
Finally, how does it help to simply chalk this up to ‘men can act like animals’? Women can act like animals, too, but that’s not the point for me. I want to find out what happened and learn from it.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:15 pm:rolleyes:
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:23 pmOne thing, that is sometimes missed in these blog exchanges, and I admit I’m guilty of it in part, is the humane reaction, That was the apriori missing detail in Rosen, Marcotte, et al, and Schlussel (who I’ve really come to despise,) The second part is a sense of justice, of accountability against those who committed this act.
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:27 pmI guess the last two comments are directed at me. Thanks for being honest.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:35 pmMy comment #59 seems clear. Perhaps you (DRJ) could address it?
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:38 pmDRJ, if you were Lara’s lawyer handling a civil lawsuit or if you were the prosecutor handling a criminal lawsuit against the mob, then you’d have a right to develop all the facts.
You’re not.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:38 pmI didn’t direct it at you, DRJ, I guess I’ve been angry since I first heard of this, and subsequent
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 7:43 pmreactions like those I mentioned before, haven’t
helped settle the matter.
Carlitos, I don’t think DRJ is claiming a delay must mean a cover up. She’s simply explaining a non-sleazy reason that someone such a myself might be interested in the details of this attack. And they are great reasons.
There’s no need to replace the excellent and compelling argument for more details about this attack with some kind of hysterical ‘you’re insisting on a bizarre requirement!!! AAAHHH!!!’.
It’s important news, and a lot of people think journalism has something to do with getting as much of that out as they reasonably can. Vech’s right. They would absolutely be dishing all the details had this been a rape in the Army, or a Tea Party attack on a meter maid.
Why pretend we don’t get it. This is CBS showing great concern for the interests of one of their own, even though there are compelling reasons to have the details you’re rolling your eyes about. You can’t roll your eyes enough to make those reasons less relevant.
Lighten up.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:00 pmAaron and DRJ–
I’m in the camp that says we already know everything we need to know.
We know for instance, that there was organized thuggery aimed at foreign journalists in the last week of Mubarak’s rule. I believe there are even videos of some of those incidents online.
We know that a group of women, eventually backed up by a small group of soldiers, were the ones to stop the abuse.
We know that sexual humiliation of women is rampant in the Middle East, and milder forms of sexual harrassment are commonplace there.
The one thing we don’t know that is really pertinent is the actual identity of the attackers, and I doubt we’ll ever know. Ms. Logan might be in a position to provide details on that, but even she probably couldn’t be sure if these were Mubarak thugs, jihadi misogynists, or simply a group of men out for “a good time”.
kishnevi (827a72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:05 pmThe Egyptian police might come up with suspects or even arrests, but I’d be skeptical of anything produced by the Egyptian police right now.
Well DRJ, I’ll try to make myself as clear as possible to see if we understand each other and disagree, or what.
I would like the facts of the case to be developed, appropriate lessons learned, justice enforced, mercy given to who it is due. I guess I have little faith or hope in the idea that those things will be played out in public through mass media. Why do people such as myself come to this blog to be informed on legal related issues? Because I have no confidence that the typical news report I hear will have the facts accurate, will be objective if they do, and will seek wisdom concerning an event rather than a “quick angle on a story”. If I want the press report of OJ’s trial I can get it. If I want to understand what was overlooked or under emphasized, what made a reasonable doubt and what was contrived, I come here.
In the last battle/war/conflit between Israel and Lebanon (or rather Hezbollah in Lebanon) there were many claims in the press of Israeli attacks on civilians and on ambulances, etc. With internet resources one could find amazing things. One could exam the video and photos of the “Israeli attacks on civilians” and see the same actors as first responders in different settings. You could see inconsistencies in what was written and what was in the photo. You could see photos “contradicting” each other. In other words, you could see how much was staged/fake. You could see photos of “ambulances” that only looked like it but were carrying missiles. Now, it is possible that the things that told “the real story” were also fake, but it was clear that the media was putting out one story when something else was true.
So I have little confidence that what I see in print about something on the other side of the earth is really the case. I don’t think what I read will necessarily be the same findings as those investigating the event on the ground in Egypt. I can’t trust the CIA to be honest in the info they give the President and what then gets leaked to the press. It’s not that I don’t want somebody in a position of authority to know the facts and do something about it, but my knowing it or your knowing it or Aaron’s knowing it will make little difference.
I guess I think that what I personally know about a specific incident will mean little. I assume there is organized intimidation, some organized by different factions with different goals. There is some opportunistic evil in the midst of chaos. There is an overall attitude towards women that leads to brutality. I know all of these things. To know the details in the life of one individual seems unnecessary.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:09 pmAW:
Actually, the proprietor of Freespeech did invite me to post there, but let’s not let facts get in the way. And I wasn’t aware that this blog (or others) were invitation only. Anyway, I’m ignoring your ad homs from now on. “Stalker” is getting boring, frankly.
Carlitos:
You’re right — I was imprecise. Surrounded by 200+ Egyptian men, sexually assaulted by some of them.
Kman (26c32e) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:12 pmAlso, I do get the touchy feeling tears of sympathy for Logan that would compel people to jump all over themselves to do whatever they can to relieve her anguish by shutting down the process of learning what hundreds of protesters let happen.
i don’t mean that sarcastically. I feel awful for Logan, even if she was just groped and held away from her protection, surely in fear.
But those concerns are not as important as the public learning about the state of mind of these protesters. It’s not as though revealing information about the attack serves no purpose but to lap up a sordid story. The balance of interests is drastically different from the traditional sexual assault confidentiality situation.
I think it’s a pretty easy call. This is not a small movement. There is a major privacy cost to learning more about some of the most horrible things that happen in the middle east, but it’s an easy call, IMO.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:15 pmKman is still a creepy stalker who hasn’t left Aaron’s ankles for 9 years. But frankly it’s not worth anyone’s attention. Everybody has a hobby, I guess.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:16 pmApple+ F “surrounded by” finds nothing. Again, perhaps you could clarify?
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:17 pmThat last post was directed to Kman and his apparent projections.
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:17 pmI think it’s a pretty easy call.
I would suggest that given the strong disagreement here in this comment section alone, this isn’t so. I would guess that in the very real world of Ms. Logan and the volatile situation in Egypt, it is even a more difficult a call to make.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:19 pmGoing off the link to Legal Insurrection which Narciso provided, there’s this post with what is claimed to be a picture of Logan moments before the attack.
One of the haunting aspects of the reported story is that photo of Logan in the moments before the attack, as the angry crowd swirled around her and she seemed to recognize that she was in trouble.
We don’t know enough yet to say if any of the young men in the photo were the attackers, but the looks on their faces and their gestures suggest they were out for something more than celebration
Except that to me Logan doesn’t look particularly alarmed or anxious, and the men behind her don’t seem to suggest that “they were out for something more”. (Of course, I suppose for some men, sexually assaulting a woman might be a way of celebrating.) The man flashing the V sign behind her left shoulder (right center of the photo) reminds me of those kids here in the US who make a fuss behind news reporters because they want to be seen on camera.
However, perhaps that autistic inability to read facial expressions and body language is getting the way, and that guy on the extreme right of the picture doesn’t seem to be a very friendly guy, but he might have been (part of) her security detail, and the man behind Logan’s right shoulder (viewer’s left)certainly seems to be wary of him.
So I leave it the assemblage here to decide if Prof. Jacobson is guilty of rhetorical overhype.
kishnevi (827a72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:22 pmDustin, I’m not sure what learning the details of one attack will of necessity tell us anything in a wider context. How many thousands of people were in the street? How many factions were represented? How much was “random violence” in the midst of chaos? If we know what the attackers were dressed like, what kind of equipment they had, what they said or shouted, those things give me more information than how many hands touched her where. Sexual assault can be used as political terrorism, but it obviously doesn’t have to be.
Whether CBS treated her differently than others, that’s a fair question. But if CBS goes overboard at times, I wouldn’t begrudge them doing right for once even if due to bad intentions.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:26 pm“From behind me I heard someone cry, “She is with them. Get her. Get her!” Before I realized what was happening, my arms were seized by two musclemen who walked me away from the square. All I could hear as the mob closed in on me was: “She is with them… with them… the agents…the Americans… Baradei’s dirty supporter.” Many thugs pulled my hair while others volunteered slaps and slurs. In a matter of seconds my shirt was ripped open and my mouth was full of blood. We passed an army tank and I saw the officer on top. “Help!” I screamed. The soldiers were waiting for his orders. Bystanders called on him. “They are going to kill her,” someone said. All my energies were focused on staying conscious, putting my head up for air and down to avoid further hits. I wrapped my jacket around my body and my shoulder bag, which had my ID and my camera, and cried for the officer’s help again. Finally he ordered the soldiers to jump into the crowd and pull me up. They led me into the inside of the tank where I joined a few other soldiers.”
http://justworldnews.org/archives/004168.html
Bernard F. (d80b5a) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:27 pmPlease accept my apologies.
Your POV is perfectly legitimate, as is MD’s. I just have a different one.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:29 pmI agree with you, kishnevi, on the interpretation of the photo. It’s a woman in a crowd of men. No one specifically threatening her, she doesn’t look especially terrified. Other than it being one white woman in a sea of Egyptian men where there have been days of protests and flashes of violence, a rather unremarkable picture…
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:33 pmUh, Bernard, we were talking about a different person…
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:36 pmI have to rely on imagination to tell you how it might.
For example, if hundreds of people saw a woman being raped or stripped in the streets to antisemitic jeering, I think that tells us a lot. If it happened several times, over a protracted (like 20 minute) period of time, that is frankly mind boggling.
OK… I’ll be honest and admit that most informed people already understand this culture treats women like dirt, but this is such a particularly bad example. In a country with rampant FGM, perhaps I’m wrong, and it’s a lost cause shaming Egypt (I do see this as a stain on their country), informing anyone who doesn’t already care, etc etc.
I just see this as a great example because it helps people in the west identify with something horrible. I think a lot of people in the west are far too insulated from reality, and hope this story could help. We’re in a protracted culture war, and one of the biggest problems we have is a lack of awareness about it.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:37 pmComment by Bernard F. — 2/21/2011 @ 8:27 pm
Said all I need to know about you, Bernard, when I realized that you think a pro-Hamas site is a reputable source for news.
That said, the story at the link, if true (and I don’t know of any reason why it isn’t true, does indicate what happened to Logan was not unique, was tied to Mubarak supporting thugs, and shows the military did intervene to protect some of the protesters and journalists from the thugs-but that even the military was afraid of the thugs.
kishnevi (827a72) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:45 pmWhat can I say? I’m not trying to dismiss the other POV, but I think the scales are tipped very heavily towards disclosing the news.
And perhaps CBS could have a special on this problem, without specifically linking an incident to a victim. They could have a host of women victims and male and female witnesses describe a lot of attacks, and a narrator tell us their experiences. They could include the news about the reporters and other foreign women in enough detail to be informative without violating privacy.
I think a professional news organization should be capable of working this kind of issue out, and it’s an easy call to go ahead and do so.
Unfortunately, it would take a ton of impact out of the story, and I do want people in the west to identify with the experiences in Egypt. But OK.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:47 pmWhy is it so hard to believe that the folks in the square, who follow Quradawi, and other programs on ‘the Flame’ Al Jazeera, who have shown paranoiac attitudes toward Westerners in the past, (one poll
narciso (28df0c) — 2/21/2011 @ 8:59 pmshows they see us as the enemy, about 80+%, would
do this, and not a security force which seemed defeated at that moment.
Aaron,
The pathetic apples-to-oranges comparison of the photo taken on V-J Day to what happened to Lara Logan is really beneath you. Seriously, what was the point? that there is a right way and a wrong way to celebrate the defeat of a tyrannical regime? Gee, thanks for the primer.
“A serious crime took place on a public street, in a important Middle Eastern capital, on a night of celebration.”
— Okay, so, 1) you acknowledge that it was a serious crime, no prurient interest in the gory details necessary; 2) that it allegedly took place on a “public street” means what, that all privacy rights go out the window? 3) your other ‘facts’ are supposed to support the notion that only full-disclosure will do?
“By failing to tell us the unvarnished truth, the traditional media opened the door to all kinds of deception.”
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:13 pm— How does experiencing your own personal “blubonnet moment” feel? Her inner voice would tell you that it matters not how much info is divulged; the spin will continue unabated.
Everyone,
Attempting to shed light on the Egyptian man on the street at the expense of Ms Logan, CBS, OBama et al is problematic.
In the next few months we will see who is really leading Egypt.
Even in a perfect scenario Egypt indentifies, and extradites all those 200 men to a Federal Court in Jersey, we assembly the best prosecurial team available – we will never know who started it and why.
So we can draw conclusions here that will be played out in the following months:
Either another military strong man herds his people against Islamofacism or radical clerics take control
I dont see a middle ground – which would be a shaky democracy
EricPWJohnson (862059) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:24 pmapples and oranges are different in several ways for example nobody ever makes orange pies and this is because of the way pies evolved not cause of there’s some kind of rule
happyfeet (ab5779) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:27 pmI also agree with MD in Philly
MS Logan doesnt need to give any public details
The fact that 200,000 Egyptian men who just finished a painful revolution for basic rights and freedom – stood by and watched a helpless woman stripped and whipped for 20 minutes tells me all I need to know
EricPWJohnson (862059) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:28 pmAlso compare Abu Graib – the over righteous indignation of the Arab scholars against their deafening silence concerning this incident and many others –
EricPWJohnson (862059) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:31 pmIngredients
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:35 pm1 (9 inch) unbaked pie crust
3 egg yolks, beaten
1/2 cup white sugar
2 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1 tablespoon butter, melted
1 tablespoon grated orange zest
1 cup orange juice
3 egg whites
6 tablespoons white sugar
1 large orange, sliced in rounds
Directions
1.Preheat oven to 450 degrees F (225 degrees C).
2.In a medium bowl, beat together egg yolks and 1/2 cup sugar until mixture is thick and lemon-colored. Add flour, melted butter, grated orange rind, and orange juice. Mix thoroughly, then pour into pastry shell.
3.Bake in preheated oven for 10 minutes. Reduce heat to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C) and bake an additional 25 minutes, until custard is set.
4.In a large glass or metal mixing bowl, beat egg whites until foamy. Gradually add 6 tablespoons sugar, continuing to beat until whites form stiff peaks. Spread meringue over pie, covering completely. Return to oven for 10 minutes, until meringue is golden brown. Cool before serving. Garnish with orange slices.
MD in Philly – which story is ultimately the tipping point in the great questions and causes of the world? Was Rosa Parks’ incident particularly and singularly all that special or unique?
The same arguments of the folks longing for more civil rights for negroes already well understood the horrors and the “thousand cuts” endured by too many innocents. But, Parks helped society reach a tipping point and real change was effected.
I would strenuously argue that the typical American does NOT understand the depth/magnitude of the barbarities that pass for normalcy in vast portions of the Islamic world. If the detailing of Logan’s suffering help lead the West to a better and more clear understanding of the nature of the evils we face, all the better.
If there is any “good” to be extracted from this atrocity, it will be found in the revulsion of right-thinking humans to evil. It will not be found in the shadow of silence.
Ed from SFV (adab2a) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:37 pmMaybe feets needs to spend some more time here in the true South. 😉
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:39 pmwell shut my mouf it is truly an age of wonders
happyfeet (ab5779) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:40 pmNarc
> I think her first instinct was probably to say little, being in shock, but the comments of Rosen, as well as those that seem to minimize it, prompted
her to speak out.
Who? Logan? No, what was happening is that the AP and a few other outlets began to report on it, and CBS was forced to release that statement.
Md
> I don’t think the analogy between the Mohammed cartoons and this incident is that clear.
Its not meant to be a strong analogy. Its just one more example of how when you don’t put out the whole story, then it gives other sources the change to make stuff up.
DRJ
> The motivations of the Egyptian street during the uprising is a matter of international importance
Which is one of many reasons why we deserve to know more. I mean right now there are two debates about what is happening in the Islamic world. Version one is that the freedom agenda is bearing fruit. Version 2 is Beck’s theory of the Caliphate, the idea that the Muslims are rising up to then overthrown their current governments and join into one screwed up whole. And then in between we just worry that Egypt by itself might be the next iran. This kind of thing is a piece of the puzzle.
Carlitos
> it’s that the lack of immediate release of intimate details is assumed to be a “cover-up.”
They know what happened. They are not telling us. Thus, it is obviously a cover up.
> Does CBS News fall under some bizarre obligation to release the medical and criminal details of their reporters’ lives?
No, just when they are assaulted in a public square at a historic moment.
> Must we assume that all liberal / big media types have impure motives, whatever their actions?
I don’t believe I have said anything to attack their motives. I mean, okay, I am suspicious of Al Jazeera, but CBS news isn’t telling us most likely for the reason they cite—an overly solicitous sense of privacy.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 2/21/2011 @ 9:58 pmLOL
You will of course apply this standard to all aspects of the war on terror for consistency’s sake, right? 😉
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:29 pm>we have a right to know the full details of what happened to her
No, you don’t
the woman was viciously attacked by an angry mob. The clinical details are not necessary to appreciate the horror she endured. Leave to her what smidgen of privacy she may have left
re: the muslim world
BDJ (72b0ed) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:34 pmthese people are savages. a reckoning is coming
I look forward to the “assaulted in a public square at a historic moment” exceptions to rape shield laws.
carlitos (01d172) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:35 pmVersion 2 is Beck’s theory of the Caliphate, the idea that the Muslims are rising up to then overthrown their current governments and join into one screwed up whole.
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:40 pm— *sigh* What is the opposite of “insightful”? Is it ‘insightless‘?
Good call, carlitos!
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/21/2011 @ 11:42 pmOne of the multitude of false assumptions floating around — and given the thrust of Aaron’s comments, maybe the most critical — is the assumption that Lara Logan has given CBS News a detailed account of her attack. How does anyone know that she has? Is this possibly a partial source of the irritation being displayed by some commentors on this thread? considering it a given that, as a result of Logan being the consummate reporter (or the organization conducting an in-depth interview with her — or something equally important, and totally unknown) CBS for sure knows all of these ‘critically important’ facts? How do you know that they are supressing ANYTHING AT ALL at this point?
Icy Texan (e01928) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:04 amI take back comments I made about her silence. If these reports of her treatment are accurate she’s not in any condition to report. I sincerely hope she recovers and can report on the attack.
That is how this “revolution” in progressive Egypt must be remembered. It reflects Egypt as it really is, primitive, dirty, sexist, and Muslim.
{^_^}
jdow (98e9d7) — 2/22/2011 @ 4:06 amNo, I was referring to statements made, that she will address the matter, that said, I almost instinctively distrust the AP and CBS News, so who knows what the truth is, As to the Caliphate, well seeing how it shifted from Syria to Baghdad to Istanbul, over a period of a thousand years, how Nasser tried to rally the Arab world vs. the Saud fiefdom, including in Yemen, it’s unclear who would end up at the top.
narciso (28df0c) — 2/22/2011 @ 4:56 amCarlitos
> You will of course apply this standard to all aspects of the war on terror for consistency’s sake, right?
You mean what? We should disclose troop movements? No, rational minds can say that there are valid times for the use of secrecy. But how many secrets are kept from us should be kept to a minimum.
> I look forward to the “assaulted in a public square at a historic moment” exceptions to rape shield laws.
Rape shield laws are about the conduct of trials. Not about the reportage of rape. The government has no power to prevent the latter.
BDJ
> The clinical details are not necessary to appreciate the horror she endured.
Really? what they described could have been anything from aggressive groping, to full on rape (although the WSJ denies it was rape). You make no differentiation between the two?
Because if a defendant is charged with that as a crime, that would make a big difference in sentencing.
Icy
> is the assumption that Lara Logan has given CBS News a detailed account of her attack.
CBS had a crew that was there. they know, or at least know more than they are telling.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:32 amEd from SFV-
You make a good point, but when the individual in the center of events is alive I think that needs to be taken into account. The individual who suffered the attack (in this case Logan) still should have some choice as to whether they will be the “poster child” for a larger movement, no matter how important it is. If somebody wants to report on the plight of women in Egypt it seems they should be able to find plenty of material.
What I react to is the absolutist position that we have a right to know everything. If AW wants to make a point about how he thinks CBS was covering things up for their own purposes, that’s a fine concern to take up.
I guess my last question is simply, “If it was your wife or daughter, would you want “all of the details” out for public display? If you would, fine, we simply disagree, but I think only to a degree, not a foundational principle. We both agree truth should be reported, I am just hedging on the side that says the victim does not give up all rights of confidentiality.
I think no person really understands things that devastate the life of another unless they have had a similar experience. One can make approximations of sympathy and empathy comparing one’s experiences to another, but that’s all. I do not really understand what it was like to live in Saddam’s Iraq nor in Iraq after the US intervention, for example. I can only try to weigh what I hear. I guess the important thing is whether one has enough of an awareness of an evil to do the right thing.
Icy- Is that recipe sort of an orange equivalent to a “Key Lime Pie”? Please “attach a piece to one of them j-pigs and post it” for me to try…
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/22/2011 @ 6:00 amRecently a decorated veteran was delivering his POV on the Campus of Columbia University. He had been shot eleven times in a firefight in the ME ultimately losing a leg and suffering severe injuries requiring 2 years rehab. When he mentioned that there were bad people out there who hated Americans and wanted them killed he was met with laughter from one female in the audience in particular. He was hissed and booed as he completed his presentation for ROTC on that campus by others.
There are many in our country (USA) who do not, or refuse to, understand the enemy we are fighting. I will not hold my breath that there will be a hue and cry from the students in general or the women in particular that the outrage perpetrated against the journalist is a common occurrence in Islamic society. It doesn’t fit the narrative.
Recently there was a story about a muslim father who ran over and killed his teenage daughter because she was too westernized. Honor killings? Stonings? Genital mutilation, whipping a female to death because she was raped? Will this tragedy have a short shelf life or will it be a wake-up call for the deniers and apologists? Sharia law has already changed our everyday life in western culture.
Laughter from the audience in the face of truth empowers radical islam and strengthens their hold over the failed multi-culturalism policies of political correctness.
vet66 (eb4cdb) — 2/22/2011 @ 6:18 amvet
yeah, i posted on that disabled vet over the weekend. look for ROTC in the title.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/22/2011 @ 7:11 amI for one am gratified that the media has suddenly discovered something called “privacy”
Dan Kauffman (9a7fc3) — 2/22/2011 @ 7:29 amWhen did this happen?
Yes, we must know the details of the attack so that we can calibrate how much we hate Muslims. Thanks, Aaron.
beejeez (b28c75) — 2/22/2011 @ 8:07 amhttp://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/260288
narciso (28df0c) — 2/22/2011 @ 8:07 ambeejeez, news should be censored to avoid truthful reporting from causing people to form politically incorrect opinions, eh? Thanks, beejeez for instructing us how to behave to match the expectations of our betters.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/22/2011 @ 8:32 amGoing way back to the beginning of the thread, on the concept that we have a ‘right to know the correct story’ from CBS:
CBS broadcasts inside of a limited spectrum that is rigidly controlled by the FCC and thus, the US government. That spectrum is valuable because of its transmission qualities. CBS pays a premium to the government to be allowed to broadcast on that spectrum and CBS’s permission to do that must be regularly renewed.
Even though I have exactly the same First Amendment rights of free speech and the press that CBS has, I do not have the right to broadcast on that spectrum, which would interfere with their signal. It’s illegal under federal law and regulation. If I did that, I’d be arrested and made to stop.
That spectrum is a public resource managed by our government. If CBS repeatedly posts false or misleading stories, the public can have their license revoked and leave CBS to continue its news organization through printing broadsheets and on the Internet and such. Such tactics are continually threatened against Rush Limbaugh and others on the right, for example, and it is only the threat of legal and public action that keeps them on the air.
luagha (5cbe06) — 2/22/2011 @ 9:51 amThanks narciso for the link. For me that was more helpful than debating the details of what did or didn’t happen to Ms. Logan. I still think one can report what the essential facts of a matter are without demanding to know “every detail”.
The second I heard Egypt has let Qaradawi back in the country that was bad news.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/22/2011 @ 9:54 amThis is the curious thing, Obama spoke at Alzhar, nearly two years ago, and not far way away from the ‘Citadel’ where Qutb saw his last breath, and Sheikh
narciso (28df0c) — 2/22/2011 @ 10:00 amRahman, spent three years in prison,
I agree completely. I’d like the essential facts to be presented, and to the extent I can get that without going farther, I’m satisfied. I think there were many attacks, and CBS should be able to report what kinds of attacks it is aware happened, noting these attacks had victims who were of various nationalities (if that’s the case) without specifically linking an attack to a particular victim. I really don’t think I’m asking more than CBS is capable of.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/22/2011 @ 10:01 amDustin, I agree completely with what you say in #117. What I disagree with is Aaron’s absolutist position that he is entitled to knowing all of the details of a particular case or as he says, “tell us everything let us sort it out”.
AW said also:
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/22/2011 @ 10:20 amBesides, we are treating this as though she should what? be ashamed. her attackers should be ashamed. and spayed.
Should and is are two different things. Should a rape victim feel ashamed? No. Does that mean she won’t? Where does embarrasment (which would seem to be appropriate) become pathologic in the midst of trauma?
btw, see the update. apparently i am a bigot and lot of other bad things for writing this post, according to a moron at firedoglake.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/22/2011 @ 10:56 amchavs is chavs I think
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/22/2011 @ 11:03 amYou have been challenged repeatedly to lend support to your assertions that you have a “right” to know the “full details” about the sexual assault on Ms. Logan. You have been asked for what purpose it is necessary to know more than we already know. And you have evaded the answers.
So, I think it’s only natural for some to conclude that the only reason you want the “full details” is (1) that you are either some sort of sexual pervert or (2) that you need the full details to properly calibrate your anti-Muslim “hate b*ner”.
If either or both of those conclusions are untrue, fine. But you really have done much to support your “need to know” or allegations of cover-up.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/22/2011 @ 11:39 amUh, “have not“
Kman (5576bf) — 2/22/2011 @ 11:41 amAaron, only David Cassidy can express my feewings!
Kb*ner (e7577d) — 2/22/2011 @ 11:46 amKman doubles down on the “censorship of news is good for you” meme.
Failure.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/22/2011 @ 11:59 amWhat’s with the straw men demanding Tbogg retract things he did not write?
Tbogg made no mention of “Logan was rescued by Egyptians”
And no mention of “good Muslims in Egypt stood up and defended the Christians”
He did not imply anything about “women’s equality except to beat up on Muslims”
And Tbogg did not write that you “want to tar all Muslims or all Egyptians with it”
Ever hear the term, “protest too much?
Pat (d439c0) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:03 pmSPQR, censorship is when the government steps in and tells the media not to report X. This isn’t about censorship, and a smart guy like you ought to know better.
Or, to paraphrase Fred Friendly, “it’s not about what CBS has the right to do, but about what is the right thing for CBS to do”. Nothing can be gained by providing “full details” of the sexual assault on Ms. Logan. And since Aaron refuses to elaborate on why we’re entitled to the intimate and salacious details of the assault, I and many others have concluded that what we’re really talking about is exploitation and/or incitement merely for the sake of exploitation/incitement…. neither of which falls under the heading of “journalism”, in the eyes of most people.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:07 pmat first they just said she was assaulted they didn’t even say she was raped and everybody knows getting raped is a whole different order of enchiladas than just getting assaulted
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:09 pmSpare us the semantic horse manure, Kman. Even an ass like you should know better. Self-censorship is still censorship. I never mentioned the government at all.
Just officious little twerps that want to label everything “racist” because they have an IQ deficit.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:10 pmNo, it’s not, unless you take the position that every news outlet should provide EVERY SINGLE DETAIL on EVERYTHING CONCEIVABLE STORY no matter how unnewsworthy, boring, or unimportant it is. It’s called the editorial process, and decisions are made everyday not to run with certain stories.
And that’s certainly true with stories involving sexual assault.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:18 pmMethinks, Aaron, that your hope is that a grisly, detailed account of the attack will engender a horrified reaction — and therefore a more critical assessment of the protest movement throughout the Middle East — by the bleeding hearts of the left.
Too bad that such a scheme requires Lara Logan to lose every last shred of personal privacy that she, for the moment, still enjoys.
[“enjoys” being a relative term; in this case it means having the freedom to grieve, heal and maintain mental & emotional stability in the midst of what must surely be the worst time of her entire life.]
Icy Texan (7cb5e1) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:27 pmIn tbagg, kmart has found its kindred spirit. The funny part, to me, is that I do not necessarily agree with AW on this, but I understand his ppint. Tbagg and kmart just see a chance to scream PeRV and RACIST at someone.
JD (0d2ffc) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:36 pmKman
> You have been challenged repeatedly to lend support to your assertions that you have a “right” to know the “full details” about the sexual assault on Ms. Logan
And the post itself answers the question, or at least gives you one reason. The one over the weekend on the other assault is another example. And the fact is we just plain have a right to know. It is relevant to many viewpoints.
> So, I think it’s only natural
Of course you side with them. They believe in attacking a person’s writing without even reading it. really, seriously, go to that forum and stay there, stalker-boy. They will love you.
> SPQR, censorship is when the government steps in
Everyone with more than two brain cells knows that in ordinary speech censorship is any attempt to silence people or withhold the truth. You knew what he meant and you were just being a jerk as usual.
And you have made it abundantly clear that you believe that the role of journalists is to decide what we should think and withhold all information that contradicts it. by comparison I have specifically said that I think the people in Egypt want to establish a decent republic, but I have advocated the release of information that might tend to contradict that, because unlike you I believe that individuals should make up their own damn minds.
Pat
> Tbogg made no mention of “Logan was rescued by Egyptians”
He didn’t but people down the thread did.
He limited it to calling me a bigot, at least at first. But then his peanut gallery joined in.
But it’s a fair critique. I will update.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:37 pmWow, Kman, you sure taught that strawman a lesson. I bet it never stands up to you again.
Me, not so much. I never said anything remotely like that ridiculous crap you pumped into your strawman.
You really aren’t very good at this “logic” thing.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:41 pmAm I mis-remembering, or was it Ernesto Zedillo that was quoted while campaigning as he repeated the line “if you’re going to be raped, you might as well bend over and enjoy it.”
Maybe he could do a guest blurb on CBS Telenoticias and talk about the “cover up.”
carlitos (01d172) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:43 pmYeah, and Dan Rather still believes in the Rathergate documents.
This is hardly man bites dog news… LOL
Just FYI, repeating yourself like that is considered bad writing style.
😛
I want to know if the professor in question believes in the Andrea Dworkin definition of rape as “all sex is rape, there is no such thing as consent”.
I believe that this situation is unusual in that it has political signficance. If, say, a female ambassador was assaulted while touring another nation, that does have some very important relevance to international relations and, while one does not need a blow-by-blow description of events, the details of the extent of the crime is certainly relevant. If men stood by and ignored what was happening a few feet away, or, even worse, assisted in it somehow — that IS NEWS. It says much regarding the capacity of the population in question to be a member of the civilized nations of the world.
And yeah, I personally suspect that the REAL underlying reason why CBS’s newsfolk want to sweep this under the rug is very much because of that reflection on Islam.
IGotBupkis (edf445) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:44 pmAaron, your post on the other assault seems to claim that it was important for CBS to broadcast details on this attack because… why? Are you suggesting that reporters on the ground in Egypt would be getting their safety tips from American broadcast television?
carlitos (01d172) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:45 pmYou want the release of information that “might tend to contradict” that “the people in Egypt want to establish a decent republic”?
What does one have to do with the other?
You see, only a bigot would attempt to draw overarching conclusions about “the people in Egypt” (population 83,000,000) based on the gory inhumane acts of a comparative few. That’s what bigotry is — painting people and cultures with a broad brush based on the acts of their lowest representatives.
So now perhaps you can understand why that label is being applied to you?
Kman (5576bf) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:48 pm“Pat” – what race are Muslims?
The next time the MFM starts trotting out the public’s right to know, while camped out in someone’s front yard, I hope they remember this right to privacy that they are using now. I don’t think we have a right to know, I just think the MFM is a bunch of hypocritical buttfaced twatwaffles.
JD (109425) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:49 pmTo say that kmart is Pavlovian would be an understatement.
JD (2da347) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:55 pmI don’t know the veracity of the accounts, but I read that at least some violent criminals were released from jails in the early days of the protest. This has happened in other like situations, where dictators want to validate martial law with examples of street crime.
Using this attack to question whether Egyptians want a “decent republic” is like using the crime wave post Mariel boat lift to question whether Floridians want a “decent state.”
carlitos (01d172) — 2/22/2011 @ 12:58 pmIcy
> Methinks, Aaron, that your hope is that a grisly,
Why is it so hard to understand that a person might want to see the truth revealed for its own sake?
Carlitos
> Aaron, your post on the other assault seems to claim that it was important for CBS to broadcast details on this attack because… why?
There are a million good reasons. I have named something like 12.
I don’t believe in hiding unpleasant truths from the masses because I am afraid they will draw the wrong conclusion.
> I don’t know the veracity of the accounts, but I read that at least some violent criminals were released from jails in the early days of the protest. This has happened in other like situations, where dictators want to validate martial law with examples of street crime.
I would seriously love to see a citation if you run across it again.
And I have noted before accounts that suggested that the muslim brotherhood had taken over the situation, which means that rightfully this might imply something about the muslim brotherhood more than anything else.
Kman
> You want the release of information that “might tend to contradict” that “the people in Egypt want to establish a decent republic”?
> What does one have to do with the other?
Right, what does the handling of women have to do with society?
Let’s take a concrete example from an article on how Iran deals with “adultery”:
> Then there is the problematic relationship between adultery and rape in some Islamic penal codes. Rape victims can themselves be charged with adultery if they are unable to definitively prove sexual coercion. Indeed, there have been some cases in which the victims of rape, rather than the rapists, are convicted of zina [adultery] and stoned to death for adultery.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-08/stoning-a-woman-in-iran-for-adultery/
Now, does that say anything about Iranian society? yes or no? The best you could say is that the government does not reflect the desires of the people. And I hope and pray that is the case. The less jerks that are in the world, the better. But we would not have stood for anything like that in America. Even if conquered by a foreign power, we would not stand for it. And that says something about us, too.
> You see, only a bigot would attempt to draw overarching conclusions
Except I have not attempted to draw any conclusions. I have simply said we should know everything and let people draw their own conclusion. And you stand for keeping people in the dark.
> So now perhaps you can understand why that label is being applied to you?
Oh, I know. Because it is the first sign that the left is losing their argument. It happens all the f—ing time.
Meanwhile, by comparison you have actually said something racist. I mean there is that.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/22/2011 @ 2:18 pmhttp://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/01/29/egypt.protests/index.html?eref=edition
Aaron,
In my humble opinion, you’re on really shaky ground. If you must see the TRUTH about this situation for whatever reason, fine. Drawing some broader societal conclusion about it is really tenuous. If you want to make a case that the MB is evil, just do it. If you think rape is intrinsic to Egypt / Islam / religion, just say it. Make a case. There are better ways to do it than demanding a CBS reporter give you a play by play of her assault.
carlitos (01d172) — 2/22/2011 @ 2:55 pmno means no in Egypt same as in America and most parts of Europe
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/22/2011 @ 3:16 pmOt, pikachu, http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/260410/mitch-daniels-indiana-republicans-should-drop-right-work-bill
narciso (28df0c) — 2/22/2011 @ 3:20 pmthat would make a good post Mr. narciso and someone could point out that Mr. Daniels stripped public unions of collective bargaining rights in 2005 and is moving forward this year to further restrict the bargaining abilities of teachers
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/22/2011 @ 3:23 pmmeanwhile quitty quitty Sarah never struck a meaningful blow against organized labor in her whole life and actually employed union labor while she was out tromping around the forest with her fecund bff Kate Gosselin
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/22/2011 @ 3:24 pmhttp://www.theblaze.com/stories/megyn-kelly-confronts-milwaukee-union-president-over-sick-teachers/
narciso (28df0c) — 2/22/2011 @ 3:31 pmAnother beautiful confrontation – Donald Rumsfeld schools the embarrassingly obtuse Andrea Mitchell.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:19 pmCarlitos
> If you think rape is intrinsic to Egypt / Islam / religion, just say it. Make a case.
But the issue isn’t what conclusions we are going to draw but what information we are going to have access to. That is the distinction you keep missing.
Say i am going to trial. What do i need to make my case? Evidence. But if every piece of evidence is suppressed, indeed if all discovery is banned, how can i make my case?
I have defended these protesters. But i also defend absolutely our right to know the truth, so that people who disagree with me, who think the next caliphate is on its way or whatever, can make their case. I believe in the long run my optimism about the appeal of decency and democracy will be vindicated. but i don’t want to win a rigged game.
Why is that so hard to understand? I don’t want my information filtered to reach a pre-determined conclusion.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:30 pmInteresting account posted this afternoon to latimes.com. A number of Egyptian women who have had experiences similar to Logan’s are quoted.
Angeleno (aa4443) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:32 pmDana, do you remember the SNL skits with Donald Rumsfeld? They were classic. And I’ll bet Rummie laughed at each one of them.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:40 pmAaron,
If your sister was the victim of an assault (assaulted in a public square at a historic moment) that exhibited a number of particular perversions, would you want the details to be made public? What if your sister said “please Aaron, I don’t want this particular detail to be made public?”
Would you persist in making such details public, or would you prefer that my information be “filtered?”
Yes or no please. Because whether you find the liberal media reprehensible or not, they are people just like you.
Thanks,
carlitos (01d172) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:44 pmc
Carlitos, I don’t understand the relevance of your question in 152. We grant that Lara doesn’t want some details exposed, and I grant that those near her are inclined to want her to get her way.
That was already well accepted. That privacy is cost by more public discussion of what exactly happened has been the underlying issue the entire time, no matter how it’s rephrased or how we put ourselves in whoever’s shoes.
And remember, we’re not really getting ANY details. I don’t speak for Aaron, but knowing the gist of what happened in various assaults at this protest would be very informative. I don’t know how you can say this is similar to asking about some quirky perverted detail. We really don’t know even the most general facts.
Also, you made another point that this could just be the work of isolated criminals released as a dirty trick, to taint the protest. That’s BS. If hundreds of people saw this happen for 20 minutes, they are all going to hell for that, and we should identify that. At any rate, I don’t know that is the case because I don’t know anything other than CBS is covering up what happened. They should report this story, and if the can’t figure out how to do so while navigating the morality of privacy, then they should shut down.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/22/2011 @ 5:54 pmThat is one of my all-time favorite photos. The thing is, you don’t know if that sailor and that nurse have said a single word to each other before that kiss. They could be married. They could be on their first date. The could have just been walking in opposite directions and, for a moment, in arms’ length.
But yeah, the body language is pretty easy to interpret, and while that kiss might have been unplanned and maybe uninvited, by the time the picture was snapped it was certainly not unappreciated.
Beldar (c23585) — 2/22/2011 @ 9:55 pm(I’m ignoring Ms. Shain’s explanation because I’m a romantic and I prefer projecting my own interpretations on the photo in lieu of her objective reality.)
Beldar (c23585) — 2/22/2011 @ 9:57 pmWhat does the handling of ONE woman have to do with society’s handling of WOMEN (plural)? This is the wall that you keep banging your head on (and liking it, apparently).
I think we can all agree that, generally speaking, Egypt is more misogynistic than our country. This is NOT news. But at the same time, I don’t think you can paint an entire country of 80+ million with one solid color. And that’s what you want to do.
You’re no better than the Soviet propagandists of the 1960s who couldn’t get enough of the pictures of Bull Connor turning the German shepherds and fire hoses on the black kids. “Look”, the soviets would say,”THIS is American culture”. When in fact, it represented only a part (a sordid side) of American culture at the time.
That’s what you are, only with Egypt.
Fail.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/23/2011 @ 6:33 amKman
> What does the handling of ONE woman
it wasn’t just one. Fail.
> This is NOT news. But at the same time, I don’t think you can paint an entire country of 80+ million with one solid color. And that’s what you want to do.
except for the fact that i specifically denied that i wanted to do that. Fail.
In fact that is now officially a lying personal attack. given your history of contant lying personal attack on me… well, goodbye, again.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/23/2011 @ 6:55 amIntuitively, I would agree that Egypt is more misogynistic, but the only good measure I know doesn’t bear this out. Geert Hofstede’s “MAS” or masculinity coefficient for “the arab world” is 50.2, or nearly exactly average. The USA measures 62 on this measure. Hofsteede’s research posited that the reason the arab world scored lower suggests that the limiting of women’s rights is the result of Islam, not arab culture. I suppose if you take the prevalence of Christianity in the US into account, that could explain the 62. Traditional female roles etc.
http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_arab_world.shtml
That’s yet another reason why one or two crimes in a chaotic situation indicate exactly bupkis about the broader culture. The plural of anecdote is not proof.
carlitos (01d172) — 2/23/2011 @ 6:57 amI stand corrected. You want to have get all the detailed information out so that others can exercise their right to paint an entire country of 80+ million with one broad brush.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/23/2011 @ 7:04 amBUNNIES!!!!!!!!!
JD (7ef7d4) — 2/23/2011 @ 7:08 amNot painting with a broad brush at all there, eh?
carlitos (01d172) — 2/23/2011 @ 7:18 amCarlitos, you’re overlooking the fact that AW specifically denied that he wanted to do that. Jeez.
Kman (5576bf) — 2/23/2011 @ 7:25 amAnother good point is that there is an obvious and massive problem that is extremely pervasive in Egyptian culture that treats women far, far, far worse than they are treated in a place like America, where they are nominally equal.
Women in America are usually literate and not mutilated. And people who think it’s a broad brush to note the fact there is a general difference are exactly those who need to hear the facts of cases like this one. They have somehow failed to appreciate the Egyptian reality, and I think having someone identifiable from western culture be part of that story can be extremeely helpful at penetrating their heads.
Icy’s description of cynicism is somewhat fair in my case.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/23/2011 @ 7:44 amcarlitos
> Yes or no please.
I will give you the most honest answer I can. I would try to be consistent, but humans fail. I mean we all understand, for instance, that it is wrong to ever give in to the demands of terrorists. But everyone watching Air Force One understands exactly why Harrison Ford lacked the courage of his convictions.
And of course the real danger of inconsistency is that I don’t believe it’s a 100% rule involving any woman. For instance, let’s say Lara Logan was raped by a major crime figure, and she was told that if she told anyone else what happened, that her family would be murdered. That would seem to logical exception. So while I hope I would be consistent in my application of my principles, if I suddenly found an exception, I would be rightfully subjected to an accusation of biased reasoning.
So it can’t quite be yes or no, but instead, I would like to think I would say that if the situations were exactly the same, only substituting my sister for Ms. Logan, that I would say yes.
And contra dustin’s opinion, i think its a fair question. Its like asking Dukakis about the possibility of his wife being raped. If you can’t stand for the rule to apply to your loved ones, you should wonder if the rule is a bad one.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/23/2011 @ 8:10 amI don’t mean to be hard on Carlitos, and I’m glad someone is providing his point of view. However, while this question may be interesting and fair, it is also completely irrelevant once it’s granted that there is an interest on the side of privacy.
It’s like asking about whether you’d favor the death penalty after you jut got caught murdering a bunch of people.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/23/2011 @ 8:19 amDustin
> It’s like asking about whether you’d favor the death penalty after you jut got caught murdering a bunch of people.
and the answer is, NO. lol
my favorite version of that logic is when kman once said in relation to the sexual abuse of detainees, that we should treat our detainees as we would want to be treated if AQ caught us. to which i replied something like, “well, if i was caught by AQ, first i would want to be sexually abused by a pretty girl. And then i would want to be set free. And then i would want a bazooka so i could turn around and kill my captors. but i don’t think that is workable when dealing with our detainees.”
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/23/2011 @ 8:36 amWe disagree, but thanks for the answer. Your lack of an expectation of privacy in this instance seems consistent with your take on other issues related to privacy, based my my reading here.
carlitos (01d172) — 2/23/2011 @ 9:21 amDamn, I wish nurses still dressed like that..
Frank Drackman (550e6d) — 2/24/2011 @ 4:11 am