Intolerant storyteller, or intolerant critics?

If someone were to tell the story of John Walker Lindh, the “American Taliban”, his feelings before and after his conversion, and his reasons for doing what he did, is that the same as criticising or condemning the United States of America that he  fought against?

If one tells the story of Guy Fawkes, his feelings about his government, and his reasons for doing what he did, is that the same as criticising or condemning the British Parliament that he tried to destroy?

Does the film Spartacus rate as a blanket condemnation of the Roman Empire that he rebelled against?

Is telling the story of this person, her feelings , and the reasons for her actions a blanket condemnation of Israel in its entirety? Or just the soldier who squished her with a tank? Or neither, just the story of a brave person that many might disagree with?

You tell me.

Advertisements

17 Comments

  1. i cannot support a country that would do what was done to Rachel. (and she was just on person, look at all the people that israel murdered this year.)there was a time when israel was the oppressed, but now they have become the oppressor.

    telling the story isn’t condeming israel, joe. the facts do the condeming.

  2. Depends on how the story is told, of course.

    I can’t support a group that sends bombers onto public buses and into restaurants, go figure.

  3. You are, of course, right about it depending on how the story is told. Funny, though, that many who criticise the play haven’t seen it.

  4. It was a bulldozer, not a tank.

  5. I agree that it depends on how the story is told. And if a story is indeed used as a vehicle to make a wider political point (as many are) then this will tend to alienate people who disagree with this point – but this doesn’t mean that the artists should ‘mind their own business’ (as some would put it). People in our society are free to make points like this, just as we are free to agree or disagree with them. Viva freedom, say I.

  6. Some People Should STFU.

    It seems we’re not allowed to voice an opinion about being tired of celebrities either jumping on the bash US/Israel bandwagon or blowing off about world hunger when they’re spending one thousand pounds to have a hat flown to them…

  7. Who says that, Mark? I say we’re all allowed to voice an opinion without being told to mind our own business… Who says we ain’t?

  8. “It was a bulldozer, not a tank.”

    Oh, well, then it’s okay.

  9. “Oh, well, then it’s okay.”

    No, it isn’t. My point is that the fact that it was a bulldozer lends more credence to the claim by the IDF that Corrie’s death was an accident. A tank would not be involved in house-clearing operations (whetehr one agrees with this tactic of the IDF is beside the point) To state that it was a tank is the dissemination of erroneous information, in my opinion.

    Cheezy: That bit was a portion of my post at my site automatically posted here as a trackback. It’s no9t the entire text.

  10. “Oh, well, then it’s okay.”

    No, it isn’t. My OPINION is that the fact that it was a bulldozer lends more credence to the claim by the IDF that Corrie’s death was an accident. A tank would not be involved in house-clearing operations (whetehr one agrees with this tactic of the IDF is beside the point). And it is erroneous to state that it was a tank, even though the dozer was most definitely IDF equipment. There’s a lot to be said for intentionaslly placing oneself in harm’s way as well, but then the more radical Palestinian Arabs and their supporters are no strangers to martyrdom, are they?

    Cheezy: That bit was a portion of my post at my site automatically posted here as a trackback. It’s no9t the entire text.

  11. Okay, that’s valid. MY opinion is that it’s splitting hairs. Squished is squished.

    So how does all this mean that Alan Rickman is bashing Israel?

  12. Squished is squished.
    Well yeah. she’s still dead.

  13. “So how does all this mean that Alan Rickman is bashing Israel?”

    Over at Ruth’s I said:

    “I dunno about the other two, but Rickman is making a fine profit vilifying Israel. He’s managed to take advantage of the leftymoonbats’ perennial cash cow.”

    I think the Kesher Talk article by Judith that I referenced in my post earlier today does a fine example of explaining that. Rachel Corrie’s supporeters ccontinue to disseminate many misconceptions about Israel. Facts, not opinions. Well documented facts, along the same lines as Alison Weir. And the piece I wrote about Alison Weir is chock full of instances where her information on the history of the area was horribly mangled. I documented those. There are many unbiased sources for finding those facts.

    Lauding Rachel Corrie as a hero, in my opinion, serves to vilify Israel. The organization on whose behalf Corrie acted has proven ties to terrorist groups operating against Israel. But then, if one believes that people who slaughter pregnant women and babies in a one-on-one, face-to-face killing spree are “freedom fighters” and not terrorists, nothing I say here is going to change any minds (and I am speaking of people in general who do, and they are out there, I’m not accusing you, Joe).

    Is guilt by association of which I am accusing Rickman? Damn straight.

    But then, it’s just MY opinion.

    :o)>

  14. “So how does all this mean that Alan Rickman is bashing Israel?”

    Over at Ruth’s I said:

    “I dunno about the other two, but Rickman is making a fine profit vilifying Israel. He’s managed to take advantage of the leftymoonbats’ perennial cash cow.”

    I think the Kesher Talk article by Judith that I referenced in my post earlier today does a fine example of explaining that. Rachel Corrie’s supporeters ccontinue to disseminate many misconceptions about Israel. Facts, not opinions. Well documented facts, along the same lines as Alison Weir. And the piece I wrote about Alison Weir is chock full of instances where her information on the history of the area was horribly mangled. I documented those. There are many unbiased sources for finding those facts.

    Lauding Rachel Corrie as a hero, in my opinion, serves to vilify Israel. The organization on whose behalf Corrie acted has proven ties to terrorist groups operating against Israel. But then, if one believes that people who slaughter pregnant women and babies in a one-on-one, face-to-face killing spree are “freedom fighters” and not terrorists, nothing I say here is going to change any minds (and I am speaking of people in general who do, and they are out there, I’m not accusing you, Joe).

    Is it guilt by association of which I am accusing Rickman? Damn straight.

    But then, it’s just MY opinion.

    :o)>

  15. Sorry bout the double post, dude.

  16. I don’t know why those double posts only happen to you. Itchy trigger finger?

    Like you, I do not ascribe the title “freedom fighter” to people who perform the actions above. Unlike many others here in America, I also do not call the soldiers who drop bombs on pregenant women and children in a distant, anonymous fashion “liberators”.

    As I’ve said before, there is no black and white.

  17. “Itchy trigger finger?”

    You know it.


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s