I received a fair amount of criticism after my post following the death of Maummar Gadhafi objecting to the apparent execution of the deposed leader and the abuse of his body. One rebel has now come forward to take credit in executing the unarmed dictator and there is now a report that a Libyan rebel may have sodomized the dictator as part of the abuse after his capture.
What is clear is that, even if this report proves true, it will not matter and will likely receive little media attention. There is a clear aversion to appearing sympathetic to a tyrant. The result is this disconnect between the images on the screen and the cheerful coverage of the anchors.
I was surprised by the response by some of my friends, who dismissed concerns about how the man was killed or abuses given his past history of abuse. It is a form of moral relativism that forgives any form of abuse. What concerned me most (and still does) is the almost complete failure of the media to even acknowledge the abuse of Gadhafi while repeatedly airing the footage and joining the “celebration” of his death. The lack of journalistic integrity and independence was chilling. It was only after Human Rights Watch and other groups called for an investigation that the media generally felt comfortable in raising the issue as a news item.
Instead of acknowledging the shocking savagery displayed on the film, CNN turned to the more pressing question of how Gaddafi’s death might translate into a positive factor in the President’s reelection. Abusing and possibly raping a tyrant does not seem much of a cause for celebration, but it does deserve scrutiny from the media (including the obvious violation of international law). It offers little hope for era of dignity heralded by President Obama — anymore than the announcement today that the new Libya will be based on mandatory compliance with Sharia law.
Source: CBS
Ditto Elaine…
Gene,
🙂 … it’s karma baby, accept it
That’s alright cheryl … whether one understands the theory of karma from Hinduism, Buddhism, or Theosophy … did Maummar Gadhafi bringing upon himself this inevitable result by the manner in which he chose to live his life in a concept of karma that embraces the cycle of cause and effect? Perhaps.
But I think the Professor’s point goes to the guy with a stick, the guy with the gun and those who do not condemn their actions. For any theory of karma does not excuse one from doing wrong.
Actually Dredd, without the “pop culture” qualifier, your statement “Karma is a feeling, a useless plastic pop term that is bereft of any mature concept of American justice formed by a valid application of American Constitutional law” is baseless and incorrect. Even then, it is inaccurate. The Eastern idea of karma – specifically that found in Hinduism – is intimately tied to the Western idea of justice. In Hinduism, karma is a parallelism to the Golden Rule of Judaic and Christian tradition. The idea that one gets back what one puts forth in the world. This idea is intimately tied to the ideal of justice where inequities and unjust actions are balanced out by punishment in an effort to make the victims (or their survivors) whole again. This is a valid application of the word and in line with a the valid application of American Constitutional law. It should also be noted that the Hindu meaning of karma is distinctly different from the Buddhist and the Jainist meanings of the word. In those two traditions, the meaning of karma is truly foreign to the Western legal and religious traditions. From what I understand, Sikhism has yet another meaning of the word karma, but as that is a religious tradition I know little about, I’ll refrain from discussing its applicability to the more Hindu-like Western use of karma.
mespo727272,
“Karma”, to the eastern religions, is one thing,it is entirely another thing, however, to Westerners, especially American Westerners.
Words are like cups which can contain many liquids and solids.
For example, “coffee cup” can contain milk.
The word “karma” in American pop usage means nothing more than a feeling of bloodlust or ill will toward another person, fused with a mystical sense of cosmic justice from the sky.
The target of that bloodlust or ill will is said to experience “karma” when something bad happens to them (because someone wants something bad to happen to them for any number of reasons).
The thing that negates that dynamic, as a valid concept, is that those who are supporters, family members, or otherwise part of the group that the target belongs to, see an injustice, not “karma”.
Karma is a feeling, a useless plastic pop term that is bereft of any mature concept of American justice formed by a valid application of American Constitutional law.
pete,
and then the sodomizer of the sodomizer would get a stick … and on and on it goes … the famous karmic chain …
karma would be the sodomizer getting a stick up his
cheryl:
Sorry I don’t understand karma at all then. The “valiant” Libyan rebels complain about the abuse heaped upon them and then returning the favor. I do understand revenge though.
Somebody tell me again why trading one bunch of barbarians for another is a good thing?
I don’t condone it but in a way I understand it. I feel it is a Karmic retribution. Like an abused wife, the Libyans snapped and took out their years of abuse on Gaddafi when they got ahold of him.
“I received a fair amount of criticism after my post following the death of Maummar Gadhafi objecting to the apparent execution of the deposed leader and the abuse of his body”
My only criticism was not against you personally, it was against any and all of us for thinking we have to qualify what we might say with the qualifier: “We long denounced Gadhafi on this blog.”
In this post you add that “There is a clear aversion to appearing sympathetic to a tyrant” … to which I add, that aversion is a propaganda induced conditioned response, as if we were Pavlovian dogs salivating at the ringing of a bell they call “liberty”.
We must break that bad, bad, bad habit.
And even more than that, the only “proof” we have is what we read in the media and hear from the government prosecuting something, someone, somewhere.
Get a free copy of the book Authoritarians and read where those who go along with “authoritarians”, the very silent majority, are in fact the foundation of authoritarianism, rather than the visible rulers themselves (the ruthless leaders are only the tip of the iceberg).
Our way of law requires a grand jury indictment, a trial before a petite jury of peers, and due process throughout.
Absent that we are the rapists and we are the murderers when we are move by the bloodlust of the lawless mob.
There was even a shocking post on fluffy Huffington Post declaring that the “murder” (their word) of Maummar Gadhafi was a very good thing.
What next “The Sodomy Done To [Mister Bad Man] Was A Good Thing” ???
Come on people, resist.
if nothing else it’s something for the new leader to think about
Death in a combat environment is never pretty. Furthermore, there is a thin veneer to “civilization,” anywhere; when it breaks down, all the evil genies govern. No one, no Country is immune. It will be interesting to watch how the Libyan people put “Humpty Dumpty back together again.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-24/in-the-mideast-spinning-qaddafi-s-death-however-it-suits-noe-raad.html Some that are still in power did not want a trial that could reveal “dirty dealings”.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/world/middleeast/libyas-interim-leaders-to-investigate-qaddafi-killing.html It could have been his own followers, raf.
I heard this news on the radio earlier and nothing would suprise me anymore. Do we even know if this was done by his captors or his own people?
Cain is falling and Gingrich is rising.
If Obama is going up in the polls it must be because people are watching the republican debates featuring Mr. Wall Street, himself, Romney, and the cast of losers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/libya-to-investigate-gaddafis-death/2011/10/24/gIQAjuQtCM_story.html
JT,
Sometimes the right position on an issue is not the popular position.
Instead of acknowledging the shocking savagery displayed on the film, CNN turned to the more pressing question of how Gaddafi’s death might translate into a positive factor in the President’s reelection.
He did get a bounce in the polls but it will be short lived just like the bounce he got after Osama. I mean there for a minute I was thinking about voting for him but I soon came back to my senses.