Glenn Greenwald unpacks the myths (and truths) in Dean Bartlett's 9/11 generation. Dean's particular line of reasoning I find unusually offensive. If I became a proponant of a war, I am 100% certain I would find a way to substantively support it financially, and physically. Dean's "logic" and, by proxy the logic of those who have been writing similar agitprop, is basically that of the younger, tag-along brother. It conflates just wars for a purpose with all wars, generalizes issues of freedom and liberty, and, to be honest, takes credit for other people's work. Both pieces are worth a read becuase Dean is so unabashedly dishonest in his arguement.
The question I still have after reading it though is this: who is he writing *for*? The President has a jaw-dropping 71% disapproval rating becuase the american public has finally given up listening to him. Even the right is beginning to suspect that, after 5 years, the plan may be a bit off track. Who is reading this stuff anyway?
Or is it just to annoy people like me, who went against this at the beginning? Is this just sand-in-the-eye stuff?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment