I suggest you buckle up for this one, kids. Here's Kate, apparently quoting approvingly of the detention of a journalist:
Reporters Without Borders, of course, is outraged that a journalist--a journalist!--is being detained. After all, aren't all journalist--journalists!--immune from any and all suspicion?
To be honest, this may be one time (finally) that Reporters Without Borders has something intelligent to say (maybe). I have Taliban phone numbers and plenty of Taliban propaganda on my computer. Granted, I've never actually given Zahidullah Mujahid or Qari Mohammad Yousuf a phone call, but still I have them. Our friends at the NEFA Foundation have. They certainly aren't rooting for the Taliban.
I'm not a fan of media types doing interviews with the Taliban, but it's common practice. AP, AFP, & Reuters routinely quote Qari Mohammed Yousef.
But it's really the context of the contacts with the Taliban that matters in this case. If Ahmad served as a surrogate propagandist for the Taliban, then he's a combatant and his detention is justified. Enemy propagandists are just that: enemies, and should be treated as such.
Having journalistic credentials is not some magical immunization from suspicion. There's no reason why one cannot be a willing or tacit Taliban agent and be a member of the media.
Another problem would be if Ahmad not only called local Taliban commanders but actually met with them. By not disclosing the location of illegal enemy combatants who routinely commit war crimes, Ahmad would be assisting in the commission of those war crimes--journalistic credentials or not.
Now, unlike Canada's right-wing cementheads, let's think this through, shall we? Why might a journalist be meeting with "illegal enemy combatants" (whatever the fuck that is, since those same right-wing nimrods have no idea what that phrase even means). Anyway, why might he have contact info for members of the Taliban? I don't know -- maybe he's just a journalist who's trying to do his job. You know, being fair and balanced, insisting on getting both sides of the stories, not playing favourites, that sort of thing. What journalists used to do before they turned into cheap hookers.
So, to sum up, Kate really doesn't like it when reporters show obvious bias. On the other hand, it also pisses her off when they're scrupulously fair and even-handed.
I'd use the phrase "dumb cunt," but that would be demeaning to female genitalia everywhere.
Why is it so hard for them to understand that journalists get more stories by being fair than by being biased. Journalists serve an important function, they have been involved in clearing up miscommunications between nations, they have put themselves in direct lines of fire to inform and educate a lazy public that normally doesn't even give a damn about the truth.
How dare that screeching harpy even think to disparage journalists without doing any fucking background checking.
I guess bigotry gives her the unique super-power of being able to identify traitors, just like all of the other asshole conservatives in our two countries.
hmm, enemy of the state etc. so supposing that a journalist might have the numbers of senior public officials that have the temerity to out a cia agent in a time of war and other outlandish acts that a sane person would call treason...
on planet kate being brownish is being guilty, the name ahmad is evidence of a crime. she's a fucking lunkbag.
The anti-journalist jihad is nothing new. Catherine is a frustrated would be journalist. She therefore hates real journalists and tries to boost her own status by putting down journalists or trying to take them down.
Witness the silly nonsense with Kinsella. He is a real journalist. Not only did he study journalism in his undergrad before law school, he is the author of published books, many articles, and until recently was listed as a columnist with the NP.
Catherine probably thinks that by conning Kinsella into putting a bogus picture on his blog, she lowers his status as a journalist and thereby raises her own. Supposedly Kinsella is a bad journalist for not fact checking said picture. Unlike her, his blog is not his highest achievement in life, but simply a diary of his musings. He is following the original meaning of blogs, as diaries. You have to avoid libeling anyone since it is public, but it should not be treated as anything more than his own fun pages. Had he chosen to run with the bogus picture, like run it in a newspaper, you can be sure he would have fact checked it thoroughly, along with several others at the NP.
But that is the way of Catherine. Put others down to boost your own status by comparison.
It is often said that journalists compared to bloggers are like movie stars compared to porn stars. Some can actually artful and interesting. Others are just porn.
Catherine and Kathy. 2kates1cup.
So by KKKate's logic, the taliban and the Iraqi insurgents would be justified in beheading any embedded journalists they come across since they are "enemy propagandists"
I've met and talked to Afghan journalists. KKKate isn't fit to eat what they would put in the cup. She really has no depth to which she will not sink.
what a small minded, bigoted, no-talent, linear-thinking skank! How does anyone come to hating Reporters Without Borders? Oh, right! Truth haters do.
Post a Comment