Ted Rall Returns to “Hannity & Colmes”
Last night’s appearance on Joe Scarborough’s MSNBC show went awry when my limo appeared late. The driver attempted valiantly to get me to the studio on time, but alas—despite setting a new land-speed record—only managed to get me there in time to watch the end of “my” segment on Tom Toles’ controversial Washington Post cartoon on the monitor.
Tonight, however, I’ll be at Fox with plenty of time to spare, appearing on “Hannity & Colmes” to discuss both Toles’ piece and the Danish cartoons about Mohammed that sparked outrage in the Arab world. Tune in at 9 pm EST.
That Danish Cartoon Controversy
John is one of many readers who somehow felt I might have something to say about this:
I’m a weekly reader of your column and cartoon and I’m a fan of most of your writing. I just wanted to see what your opinion is of the recent blurbs about the Danish newspaper apologizing and the near unanimous backpedaling by EU members regarding backlash to the 12 editorial cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad. I tred several cursory internet searches and couldn’t find heads or tails of the cartoons and was actually both surprised and impressed with the immediate and violent protest to this seemingly innocuous set of drawings. I think the difficulty to my internalization of this is the relative lack of sensitivity that I have as an American or westerner for outrage over symbols. Especially this level of outrage. Where does the difference in culture come from and if I can’t grasp that, how does an occupying army of 19 year olds grasp that? It seems that a set of 12 images on paper sparked a more violent protest than US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and in a much shorter time frame. The US government doesn’t even understand the culture of predominantly Islamic nations, let alone a reason for their own military actions.
I’m willing to bet that not a single major news outlet and possibly not even any blogs will dare to reprint those 12 cartoons today. That is fascinating and I can not grasp a single parallel in the US.
My first reaction is disgust. Why did the Danes apologize? They ought to have stood behind their cartoonist. And even if the cartoons were offensive to the point that they crossed the line (an impossibility as far as I’m concerned, but then I make my living because of freedom of the press), the editors who published them is wholly to blame. Artists create; editors censor. Once an editor signs off on a cartoon, it becomes his or her responsibility.
Sadly too few American editors seem to grasp that. They fire the cartoonist when it’s the editor who should step down.
I’m also disgusted at American newspapers who did not reprint the cartoons, if only to show their readers what the big fuss was about. How can readers judge a graphic without seeing it? I too have been victimized by this practice. My “cartoon FDNY 2011, about the firefighters after 9/11, was not nearly as offensive to actually see than it was to read about in brief excerpts.
More disgust: Why don’t press accounts reference the cartoonist’s name? They’re not “Danish magazine cartoons,” they’re cartoons by a Danish cartoonist that ran in a magazine. You see the same forced anonymity here, e.g., “a New Yorker cartoon shows a man…” There ARE no New Yorker cartoons. There are cartoons that appear in the New Yorker. It’s gross that word guys are so determined to turn cartoonists into non-persons. At least this guy might get a little PR out of this mess.
Even more disgust: Why are so many right-wing newspapers like France Soir and right-wing blogs up in arms over this act of censorship? Because it’s a chance to attack Muslims! Where were these advocates for free speech when I was dropped by newspapers like the New York Times because of my anti-Bush politics? Screaming for my head. Bunch of fucking hypocrites; they only favor free speech when they agree with it.
Which is why I refuse to join the media pile-on against the would-be anti-Danish censors: I don’t do media pile-ons, thank you. I don’t think those cartoons were particularly useful or even accurate depictions of Islam, yet I do think there’s nothing wrong with publishing them. But I’m not going to join the hounds posting them on my blog in order to seem all pseudo-brave and shit.
Ayman al-Zawahiri Sums Up Bush
Al Qaeda’s newest number two said this aboutthe Generalissimo:
“Butcher of Washington, you are not only defeated and a liar, but also a failure,” he said, speaking of Mr. Bush. “You are a curse on your own nation and you have brought and will bring them only catastrophes and tragedies.”
You know things are fucked up when the terrorists make more sense and tell the truth more often than our supposedly elected officials.
Pashtunwali
Chris notes:
Good points in your column on embedded journos who want to “play soldier.” When Woodruff and Vogt were wounded, I saw a piece on ABC’s World News Tonight with a nifty little computer graphic of the convoy and the attack. Did you know the reporters were in the point vehicle, standing up in the open hatches? That seems downright foolhardy, since point is commonly regarded as a more dangerous place to be. I wonder if this is SOP? Also, your mention of peshtunwali reminded me of a Northwest Frontier anecdote. The future Lord Roberts and a single companion were on a mission near the Khyber Pass, surrounded by people who were ostensibly their enemies. Yet they were completely safe, for they had extracted a promise from a local mullah to provide protection. Some tense moments occurred, but their personal bodyguards, who would kill them at any other time without a second thought, were prepared to give their lives in their defense since they had given their word. Not surprising the British were highly impressed by Pathans, Afridis, etc, and recruited from such “warrior races” as often as they fought them.
One last thing: if they’re gonna push it so much, couldn’t they have found a more attractive word than “embedded?” It always sounds to me like a bad case of chiggers or toe fungus. Perhaps it’s a not so subtle joke by the boys in the Pentagon, letting their true feelings for reporters show.
I just like the anecdote. It’s supported by personal experience as well as testimony of countless Afghan travelers.
Ted Rall is 25 Across
Sharp-eyed reader David points out that, as he puts it, I’ve achieved a new level of celebrity: I was an answer to yesterday’s New York Times crossword puzzle. That really is kind of amazing to this boy from the Ohio burbs. On the other hand, it is a pretty damned hard puzzle.
Ted Rall Show Time Change (Again!)
My radio show will air 2 to 4 pm West Coast time effective this coming Sunday, each and every Sunday. Tune in at 106.9 FM in San Francisco or livestream at 1069freefm.com. (Livestreaming currently not working for Macs–we’re working on it. Ditto on podcasts.)
Column Update
Since this week’s column about the botched Hellfire missile bombing in Pakistan went to press, the Pentagon has changed its story, now claiming that it killed Al Qaeda notables even if they missed Mr. #2, al-Zawahiri. First and foremost, this latest backtracking smells suspiciously like the same spin we’ve seen in the Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch sagas–after so many lies, who can believe them? And the DOD hasn’t even seen the bodies of those they claim to have killed. Even if they did manage to take out these other “terrorists,” however, the missiles still killed at least 22 innocents in the process–and that’s unacceptable.
Today’s show looks like it’s about to begin, albeit a little over half an hour late. My apologies; please hang in there as we figure these things out and we’ll be ready to rock. We have seriously cool stuff today, including an exclusive interview with the editor and publisher of the Colombia City Paper, the liberal paper targeted by an arsonist last week.
Fad Dogs
More proof that a passing thought can reveal something horrible comes from Matthew:
Thanks for commenting on the plight of fad dogs. As an Akita lover, I was a little surprised to see you show Akitas as a “missing” breed. Perhaps I’m just so tuned to look for them, I still see them everywhere! And there are still far more being bred than people actually want to keep. Our organization only covers three states, and we get about 500 calls ,per year from people wanting to give up Akitas.
I have two theories to offer as to why fad dogs disappear so much more quickly than biology would suggest they should (I mean, two besides idiots who dump them when they are no longer faddish):
1 – older dogs need, and get, less exercise. They spend more time indoors, and go on fewer walks. Owners also get tired of walking the dogs, and start just letting them into the backyard instead. So many are still alive and in loving homes, just not as visible.
2 – when a breed becomes popular and expensive, a lot of nimrods get into the breeding business for financial reasons; the result is a lot of dogs with health and/or temperament problems. By the time you are seeing a breed “everywhere”, most of them are of very poor breeding. Temperament issues are compounded by many of the owners having no idea how to raise a dog. After a couple of years, the problems show up, and the dog is either euthanized, or taken to a shelter (and probably euthanized).
I thought the juxtaposition of Akitas and school lunches was interesting. During World War 2, conditions in Japan were so bad that nearly all Akitas were killed for food and pelts, despite the breed being a “national treasure”. It just made sense – a bit of food, some warmth, and one less mouth to feed. Yet another horror of war.
And although I have not heard of euthanized pets going into school lunches, there is quite a bit of evidence that some actually do end up in pet food.
