Comments on: Iranian Regime Shows Off

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:42:43 +0000

Kim,
I completely disagree with you last paragraph for the reasons I’ve already stated. It might seem productive to pick the violations that occur in open societies because we have more power to do something about those (this is the logic of the UN, Amnesty International, and a myriad of other human rights organizations). But when those groups do focus on those countries, they are creating a perpetual situation of atrocities by overlooking the problems of the dictatorships. If we and those groups won’t keep our focus on those countries, then who will? Not to mention that the condemnations that come about that are directed at the US, Israel, etc, give amunition to the propaganda machines of the extreme human rights violators.

I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t also focus on our own failings- but I will strongly argue against the idea that that should be our MAIN focus.

As to MM- yes, I do think somewhat that she has an agenda which is why I’d never recommend that someone read her blog exclusively (same with getting news from Fox all of the time). But when there are stories like this that get zero coverage elsewhere, then MM and others like her are providing much needed balance.

By: kritter

kritter — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:29:28 +0000

But is the point of MM’s piece to condemn Ahmadinejad’s barbarity or to condemn lefty bloggers? Because that is her agenda which is why most on the left and in the middle don’t read her blog in the first place. She’s in the same boat with Rush, Bill’o, Coulter and Hannity. There are and have always been atrocities committed by dictatorial governments which violate the human rights of their citizenry. Those acts should be condemned by any sentient being.

But it is easier to stop human rights violations committed by our own government even if they are not on the same level as Ahmadinejad’s. We hold ourselves to a higher standard, and so receive more of the criticism from our own people.

By: mvdg

mvdg — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:48:02 +0000

Christine, when I was 10 years old, my teachers had already explained to me that such arguments are not valid… at all. Merely tricks, no arguments.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:01:09 +0000

I love these arguments that no one should link to MM or to Fox News. Of course, there are certain stories that simply aren’t covered anywhere else, so establishing a moratorium on those outlets means that we won’t discuss certain things.

Saying that we shouldn’t pay attention to these stories is an association fallacy; it’s fine to acknowledge if a site or organization has a bias, but that doesn’t mean that everything they touch is contaminated by association. We all have brains capable of critical thinking to analyze whether or not a story is factual.

By: George Sorwell

George Sorwell — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:33:32 +0000

As I’m sure you know by now, many have pointed out that Michelle Malkin is a hypocrite herself.

Of course, you, personally, should feel free to link her as much as you, personally, think fit.

Rosie O’Donnell indeed.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:30:52 +0000

Because one is worse, it doesn’t excuse the violations of the other.

Fine, Kim, which is why no one here is saying that it does. So, anyone who blogs continuously about the violations of human rights by regimes like that but refuses to consider whether actions of our country are less than 100% honorable is doing people a disservice. But likewise, it’s a disservice to tilt it completely the other way, and that’s what Michael was getting at. Anyone who decries the actions of the Bush administration but never talks about these things that are far worse, is demonstrating an agenda.

And your point about our laws and the consequences for our poliltical officials actually proves the point: the people of Iran CAN’T speak out against atrocities, so that is all the more reason why we in the West need to do so.

By: George Sorwell

George Sorwell — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 02:36:12 +0000

You know, I’m just asking a question there.

By: jpe

jpe — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 00:53:32 +0000

This may sound flip, but is anyone surprised by these photos? I know I’m not. I’m glad there are people out there doing serious work on this stuff, and it’s those groups and people that will accomplish change, not a pretty haphazard right-wing blogburst.

If righties get serious about human rights, that would be great; an issue like that needs all the supporters it can get. But, given the seemingly opportunistic nature of the right’s concern over human rights, it scans like a cheap political shot. Lefty bloggers don’t say “how high?” when Malkin says “jump.”

By: kreiz

kreiz — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:27:28 +0000

Yes Amajinedad is a criminal … but…

Or as I read recently at FDL- sure, OBL is a mass murderer but..

Hmm. Youre spot on, Michael. This goes beyond politics- it’s a matter of conscience. One should be able to identify barbarity irrespective of where one stands politically.

By: kritter

kritter — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:58:32 +0000

Yes Ahmadinejad is a criminal, and so are many other brutal dictators around the world- but Americans are concerned with the actions of our president much more than that of the Iranian one. If Bush and Cheney lied or committed wrongdoing they are subject to our system of law and the wrath of the voters who are suffering from the consequences of their actions.

Because one is worse, it doesn’t excuse the violations of the other. Bush claims to be so concerned about the fate of the Iraqis, yet has not lifted a finger to help the two million refugees that have had to flee their homes because of the war he created. Many are now penniless and living in Syria or Jordan. Many had to leave under death threats after helping the US government and its forces. Yet it is almost as though they don’t exist in the world of Bush and Cheney.