Wednesday, August 31, 2005

I guess one should come to expect 

Der Spiegel to always twist everything to shine negatively on America. They've even done it with Hurricane Katrina. Good job, Spiegel. You can even make political hay out of one of the costliest natural disasters ever. How about for your next act you demonstrate how Big Bird is clearly anti-Bush.

UPDATE: See my reply in the comments for more on this.

(Welcome Daou Report Readers... front page *plink*)

"The Bush government rejects international climate protection goals by insisting that imposing them would negatively impact the American economy. The American president is closing his eyes to the economic and human costs his land and the world economy are suffering under natural catastrophes like Katrina and because of neglected environmental policies."

Ah, the inflated, narcissistic worldview required to believe that we, man, can even begin to control the awesome forces of nature. Too bad the overall number of hurricanes has been declining since 1995, and continued to decline before that, during the so called "warming." Perhaps the Germans are just uncomfortable with the idea that somethings are out of our control...
I have to ask: did you even bother to READ the article you cited? Or just the headline? If you had gotten past the headline, you might have noticed that Der Spiegel was NOT, in fact, saying anything negative about America (or even Bush). Der Spiegel, like you, was commenting about OTHER German papers who were talking about the possible connection between global warming and hurricane strength. Personally, I don't know if there is a connection betwen global warming and Katrina (weather is a complex system, and even if global warming does impact the weather -- which it does almost by definition -- a direct correlation with Katrina would be impossible to make). But, when I look at the disasted in New Orleans, I wonder what we can do to help now and, more importanly, what we might do to mitigate future disasters. You didn't read the criticisms . . . you didn't even read the criticisms of the criticisms without denouncing it as politically motivated. There's a thoughtful consideration for you.

If anything that even hints of criticism of past actions or any idea that contradicts our preconcieved notions, is rejected offhand as politically motivated by people that hate us--WITHOUT EVEN BOTHERING TO SEE IF IT HAS MERIT--then I guess we will never change our minds about anything, and never do anything better than we are right now. We will, literally, continue to plug the dam after it has burst.
Hey, I have nothing against the German people. However, those that continue to blast America have lost my trust. It is true that Der Spiegel, in this instance, was not just bashing America. Good for them. Maybe another few years of running articles like that and they might move a bit on the scale back towards objectivity. But the fact remains that they have a history of bashing America.

It should be also noted that in the articles cited, there are no criticisms of these knee jerk reactions against the US. The closest that a response cited comes to this is saying that Hurricanes are natural phenomenon. This may be indirect consideration, but it is far short of the denunciations that should be flying at those that try to turn this natural disaster into political capital against the United States.

The fact that Der Spiegel itself does not criticize these opinions, and prints many of them--thus spreading them to an even wider audience who will look at all those similar opinions and think that a consensus has been reached--seems to be an almost indirect way of criticizing the US. They do make light of the fact that Bush is directly blamed in the caption at the top of the article, but other than that not a peep on the validity of the opinions below or the lack of responsibility that they demonstrate. There is still an undercurrent of a supreme dislike of the US in that article. When hundreds of thousands are suffering and a city is destroyed it is not the time to be giving the political nuthouse space to spew their idiocy. Instead they should have used that space to print something better.

Sometimes there is some news that's not fit to print. Just like Pat Roberston's call to assassinate Hugo Chavez could probably have not been reported as a major story (while his idea might have some arguable merits, the opinion of one man in his private station means very little and thus should be treated as the minor story it is), these opinions could and should have been ignored at least for now while there are more pressing matters at hand.
The connection between global warming and Katrina may be tenuous, but it is certainly much firmer than that between Iraq and 9-11.
Mr Broander:

The point was made that you were either ignorant or dishonest in your portrayal of the article. Your reply was that since the article did not "correct" the various positions it was *describing* that it was biased.

The problem of course is that when publications "correct" various statements rather than recording them they venture into the editorial.

Now publications like Pravada used to perform the type of journalism you prefer and seem to be on the verge of doing so again. Perhaps you would be happier over there? Our president has looked into Putin's soul and seen such beauty! Or perhaps you would prefer Saudi Arabia. According to our president even after supplying the majority of foreign terrorists for 9/11 and Iraq they are still so nice to hold hands with. And if you're really sweet they'll even kiss you!

And they "correct" their publications so no disturbing ideas are allowed. Your kind of place?
I didn't see anyone post this, but there is another article in Der Spiegel that criticizes Trittin.

So the news article didn't say what you thought it said and Der Spiegel publishes an editorial denouncing the point of view you accuse them of maintaining. Is it that hard for you to be a man and admit you made a mistake?
I think the point of the post isn't to denounce der Spiegel, and all of this silly nit picking over it is ignoring the bigger point about the incredible ego and lack of compassion required for anyone to make the comments made by the persons reported in those stories. Who cares about Der Spiegel? We should be concentrating on helping people in need, instead the people quoted are trying to politicize the disaster, and you guys are argueing over the importance of editorial prudence. Shame on all of you!
It appears to me that the point WAS to cirticize Der Spiegel. I don't see anything else in that post. As for "shame on us" for politicizing the disaster. A) That seems to have been Der Spiegel's point and B) Shame on YOU for politicizing it. That was the point of the blog in the first place. We did not politicize it, you did.
Just because you guys didn't get into Harvard and had to slum it in Hyde Park with the undergrad dorks at U of C doesn't mean you can't understand the laws of thermodynamics. When you add heat to systems, entropy volatility and disorder increase. Lower probability events happen, like severe hurricanes, more often. When you add energy to complex systems like the atmosphere, you are going to see more extreme, improbable outcomes.

George Bush denied funding to the Army Corps of Engineers for hurricane prevention projects in New Orleans instead starting a war and cutting taxes for the wealthy and cutting domestic spending. The poor have become poorer and more numerous during his time in office and they are the ones who are suffering in this disaster. Then he has the audacity to ask middle America for donations instead of having adequately funded and planned emergency responses? The federal response has been a joke so far. Some much for the health and welfare clause and a strng federal goovernment. Bush should be ashamed, and you young turks should reconsider your devotion to conservative politics. I suppose the poor were to blame here for not leaving right? And people should be adequately insured and not rely on the federal government, right?

That German B.S. was rocketed to the frontpage to give the mindless wingnuts something to hate during the tragedy.

Rove knows he can only control you if you hate something and are distracted.

Funny thing too - a lot of conservatives are big on shooting the looters. Good excuse to kill some niggas - a'int that right hoss?
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?