Casserly: Arabs are All Liars
Chopping my way through JJ's prose jungle this morning, I was genuinely hopeful that he might have something interesting to say. He claims to have spent some serious time in the Middle East. Sure, it was a long time ago, but still, most people who live for any length of time outside the wire gain some useful perspective of the real world. I looked forward to finding a nugget or two of that among his usual maudlin incoherency.
Sadly, it was not to be. JJ is among that minor group of Americans who can't see beyond their self-imposed blinders no matter how closely they face reality, like tourists following rented GPS systems down closed roads to bad ends in Death Valley.
He wanders through pedestrian highlights of the region's history, recalls his days as a student in Beirut, then disgorges this: "The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish strict Sharia, Islamic law, throughout the world. Arabs, in general, are split with their traditional past contending with a noncompromising, violent future." Leaving aside the syntax and sense problems, this is as clear a window on the neocon Bizarro world as any I've seen in a year. To spout something so blithely ignorant of the broad spectrum of Arab life is amazing enough. To get paid for it is breathtaking.
But wait, as they say, there's more. JJ goes on to wave the bloody shirt over the Muslim Brotherhood, a minor and moderate political force grown into a bogeyman for the right, and then hammer out three grafs stating pretty baldly that he thinks all Arabs are liars. (JJ, a hint: If you won't trust Mubarak when he says he won't run again, why are you trusting his word about the Muslim Brotherhood?)
How can even the Courier editors take this guy seriously? He's a stain on the profession.
1 comment:
To the Courier Editor(s): Re: This seemingly endless string of badly composed, researched & edited editorials by your Mr. Casserly. I hope you will take a minute to read Steven Ayres' comments on Casserly's Egyptian meanderings. And the comments I sent you and you did not print. What can you be thinking? This man is no writer. And he is either simply sloppy or borderline senile. His research for his articles is pathetically shallow, and very often downright wrong. But you insist on perpetuating this embarrassing invasion on our good sense. Why? Why? Why?
Post a Comment