Right-wing blogs attack Lara Logan after tragic incident

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Right now, I'm truly disgusted and ashamed of people within my own party who are either blaming Lara Logan for the brutal rape and assault that she endured or chalking it up to karma.

Two blogs - The Gateway Pundit and DebbieSchlussel.com - have both taken different but equally awful approaches to discussing what happened to Lara Logan.

First, a portion of the entry from Jim Hoft at The Gateway Pundit:

Lara Logan is lucky she’s alive.
Her liberal belief system almost got her killed on Friday. This talented reporter will never be the same.

Why did this attractive blonde female reporter wander into Tahrir Square last Friday? Why would she think this was a good idea? Did she not see the violence in the square the last three weeks? Did she not see the rock throwing? Did she miss the camels? Did her colleagues tell her about the Western journalists who were viciously assaulted on the Square? Did she forget about the taunts from the Egyptian thugs the day before? What was she thinking? Was it her political correctness that about got her killed? Did she think things would be different for her?

[Source]

Next, the entry from Debbie Schlussel:

As I’ve noted before, it bothers me not a lick when mainstream media reporters who keep telling us Muslims and Islam are peaceful get a taste of just how “peaceful” Muslims and Islam really are. In fact, it kinda warms my heart. Still, it’s also a great reminder of just how “civilized” these “people” (or, as I like to call them in Arabic, “Bahai’im” [Animals]) are...

[Source]

Schlussel also posted an update after receiving reaction on the entry:

The reaction of the left to this article is funny in its predictability. Sooo damn predictable. Of course I don’t support “sexual assault” or violence against Lara Logan, and I said that nowhere here. RIF–Reading Is Fundamental. Your premature articulation is a problem. I did say that it warms my heart when reporters who openly deny that Islam is violent and constantly promote it get the same kinds of threats of violence I get every day from Muslims. Because now they know how it feels. They aren’t so dismissive of the threats when those threats are directed at them, instead of at us little people. And yet they still won’t admit that THIS. IS. ISLAM. Lara Logan was among the chief cheerleaders of this “revolution” by animals. Now she knows what Islamic revolution is really all about.

Hoft chose a more "misogyny-on-parade" approach, focusing on her looks and asking condescending hypothetical questions about why she was there, as if her presence gave anyone the right to touch her in the first place. Schlussel, on the other hand, seems to imply that Logan's abuse was deserved based on an allegedly naive attitude about what the people were like and how they'd treat her.

It seems people have taken a casual attitude about rape in the past few years, and that's really bothersome. No wonder rapes go unreported in the world, when you have morons like these playing the victim-blame game.

EDIT: Seems it gets worse when you read the rest of Schlussel's entry:

So sad, too bad, Lara. No one told her to go there. She knew the risks. And she should have known what Islam is all about. Now she knows. Or so we'd hope. But in the case of the media vis-a-vis Islam, that's a hope that's generally unanswered.

This never happened to her or any other mainstream media reporter when Mubarak was allowed to treat his country of savages in the only way they can be controlled.

Now that's all gone. How fitting that Lara Logan was "liberated" by Muslims in Liberation Square while she was gushing over the other part of the "liberation."

Hope you're enjoying the revolution, Lara! Alhamdilllullah [praise allah].

[Source]

I want so badly to punch Debbie Schlussel in the face over and over and over again...

Comments

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

They have elections in Russia and Venezuela.
I don't think they have anything like the First Amendment in their constitution.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Elections do not necessarily mean a democracy, at least not as we considerate it. Venezuela and Gaza HAD free elections, neither place seems to be exactly what we in the west call a democracy.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

But back to why white South Africans like being raped.

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

I already made it, and you replied to it above.

Re: Or should I say

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Slaves also tend not to complain too much to their masters about being slaves and internalise that vision of themselves. That's not an argument that slaves should be kept in slavery of course.

And whether or not that vision of themselves would persist if they were given the choice to make it otherwise, is another thing, and the point of contention I think.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

Democracy doesn't imply free speech.

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Well I was actually going to say that the point of having free speech is that it tends to provide maximum freedom and that freedom is good.

Much like democracy. Democracy is certainly more complex and not quite as clear cut, but in general it tends to maximise freedom better than other political systems.

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I realise I misread this statement:

I'm not knocking democracy, I'm knocking the lack of free speech, though Spaz Own Joo perhaps hit it (people think it comes automatically with democracy).

I thought you were saying that having free speech is important, but that having democracy is not; or at least it's not necessarily the ideal companion political system to accompany free speech.

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Sure, which is one of the reasons why free speech is so important as an accompaniment to democracy.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

It also enables reporting on bad things done by the government and other powers that (currently) be, and there's the exchange of ideas.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

I don't see how that follows. I think there are many who would argue that oppressive governments need a state-controlled press to maintain power.

So... long-lasting oppressive government -> lack of free speech. And contrapositively, free speech -> (eventual) lack of oppressive government.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

I'm convincing myself that constitutionally guaranteed free speech is in fact more important. I'm even convincing myself that it would (eventually) lead to a serious reduction in the oppression of women, though perhaps I'm dreaming.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

There is sort of an "un-written" rule about mentioning moms; altho since I'm thinking almost everyone's mom is greater than the Daily Caller, I'm thinking you didn't mean anything bad by it.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

Because of the Iraq and the Asian countries?

[spaz-own-joo.livejournal.com]

And these are things which can, in principle, be put to great use by a democracy in order to secure better positions for the people.

Or, they can be absolutely squandered by a democracy which has succumbed to regulatory capture by special interests, where people are free to talk as loud as they like about the bad things, and much is made of increasing awareness of those bad things, and nothing changes because public opinion has little effect on the actual process of crafting policy.

Or, an autocratic but benign dictator can hear the complaints and the new ideas, and try in earnest to address them to their citizens' satisfaction. That's happened a few times in history too. Speech can at times be useful even without the power to back it up.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Correct. It just seems to me that we may be jumping the gun here implying that democracy is a done deal.

[spaz-own-joo.livejournal.com]

Guys! I've got it!

We need to sent Egyptian children maps

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

That does bring up another point: the quality of a democracy is proportional to the education level of the citizenry. I just that up, but it sounds right, and if so, bringing democracy to these countries may not necessarily be the best thing.

Whereas freedom speech is (also made up by me).

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

Sadly, burning douchenozzlery is not a phenomenon limited to any particular group of people. This is disgusting and completely unjustifiable.

[thies.livejournal.com]

same goes for any other religion and most ideologies

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Perceptive.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

That might explain why democracy is definitely so-so in this country.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Or you could ask the U.S. why they always side with Muslim countries when it comes to UN resolutions on AIDS, gays, women. Because we agree with them, right?

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

He's pretty famous. He wrote that big piece in Rolling Stone against the Surge. He's been in the New York Review, the Atlantic, the Guardian, etc. He is a darling of the anti-Iraq anti-Bush left.