Was Newsweek Wrong?

This post was written by marc on May 17, 2005
Posted Under: Politics

I really don’t think so in spite of all the self criticism and the rest of the corporate media chiming in to denounce the “mistake” that the military is flushing the qaran down the toilet. I believe the store is true because it is consitent with the storied that prisioners are telling and the Anu Ghraib torture scandal.

The scary part is how the corporate media jumps through hoops for Bush as the Whitehouse controls them like puppets. I’m still waiting for them to apologize to Clinton for all the false reports they manufactured on him.

Does anyone really believe that this sort of think didn’t happen? I don’t think so. At Abu Ghraib this was cmmon. Part of the torture was religious humiliation. They just were too stupid to understand the consequences of it.

The other bizzare aspect of this is that these muslims go nuts over the treatment of a book and not over the the treatment of people. That’s why the religiously insane scare me.

Reader Comments

“The other bizzare aspect of this is that these muslims go nuts over the treatment of a book and not over the the treatment of people. That’s why the religiously insane scare me.”

This is simply not true. All, or some the so-called “terrorist atttacks” ARE responses to mistreatment of people. There have been stories run by non-American-owned media about women being raped, children being slaughtered— all atrocities even worse than the alleged desecration of The Holy Book. After the Abu Ghraib pictures came out, there WAS an influx of attacks. “The religiously insane” have become the way they are for a reason.

#1 
Written By ali on May 18th, 2005 @ 9:30 am

Although some terrorist attacks were responses to the mistreatment of people, it is fairly clear that the recent riots were a reaction to the mistreatment of Qur’an at Guantanimo. Furthermore, none of the Arab regimes – whether pro-American or anti-American – have particularly laudible human rights records.

I agree with Marc that there is something disturbing here regarding the reaction to the mistreatment of a book. Ultimately, it is the same psychology that results in a strong emotional reaction to (for example) flag burning in America. A rational American would reflect that flag burning is (and should be) a protected form of free speech, or lament the sad state of our corporate media and view the burning flag in that light, but he or she would not view it as an attack on anything important (e.g., the *right* to free speech). After all, that is what the flag should stand for (and – unfortunately – often does not).

Likewise, there is an irony that the meaning of the words in the Qur’an can almost become secondary to the representation of those words in some settings. A rational muslim might say (or at least think) – “Hey moron, you just flushed the word of God, but I’ve got it in my head, so f**k you.” I realize that being rational in response to the sort of mistreatment that is doubtless endemic at Guantanimo is probably asking more than many of us could muster, but the strong response by people abroad is another thing. Of course, the Qur’an flushing is related to the mistreatment of people, but there is a disturbing aspect to any situation when literal representations of ideas become more important than ideas.

I would add that this emphasizes an important problem all of us will ultimately have to face. Although virtually absolute freedom of religious belief is desirable in theory, many revealed religions are ultimately incompatible with each other and with reason (witness the Christian right and evolutionary theory here in the states). Will we ever live in peace when people continue to cling to a belief in God? I am pessimistic that we will.

#2 
Written By Louis on May 24th, 2005 @ 2:10 pm

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.