I interrupt my relatively post-free
week to ridicule some nonsense.
William
Saletan at Slate, who usually writes
about technology, has a
piece on the latest Islam State atrocities in which he writes:
“Japan’s prime minister
is trying to amend the constitution to expand his authority to use military
force. In that domestic campaign, the ISIS murders of two Japanese hostages in
the last two weeks have become his
most effective weapon.”
My
first thought: has the normally cogent and lucid Mr. Saletan gone mad? But then
I click through and find the following passage:
“Many observers suspect
that Abe sees the events of the past two weeks as an opportunity to push ahead
with his ambition to drastically amend the pacifist Constitution for the first
time since the war, although the government denies it.”
So
who are these “many observers”? Well, I assume that Reiji Yoshida, the writer,
has two thumbs, so that makes it three, including his head. I am willing to begrudge
Mr. Yoshida’s big toes, which makes it five.
I
leave it to you to decide whether 5 = many.
Beyond
that, though, Mr. Saletan fails to take into account the impact on the street,
recruitment, and the IS troops on the ground. My call was based on what I
understand of the local culture, is that, revenge is first and foremost on the
pilot’s family, tribe, Jordanians, and local Arabs in a concentrically
declining vector of rage—they’ll deal with grievances against King Abdullah later.
I couldn’t see the other two being moved by much. He either missed these
talking points, or omitted them because he didn’t know how to treat them.
Either way, bad journalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment