None of us has a right to always be right

Greetings.

Jewish date:  18 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Ki Thissa’).

Today’s holiday:  Casimir (Roman Catholicism).

Worthy causes of the day:  “Tell the FDA to Update Nutrition Label Info - The Petition Site”, “DemocracyForAmerica.com » Become a Citizen Co-Sponsor”, This is how we stop Blackwater for good.“”, and “Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) | Tell Democrats We Have Their Backs”.

Topic 1:  More anti-Semitism:  “Israel Apartheid Week Comes to Town” and “Conjecture vs. Fact Drives Vancouver Sun Reporting on Assassination”.  These articles deal with poisoning the well (working to avoid anyone listening to one’s opponents, usually accomplished through lying) and presenting speculation as if it were fact.  (Again, I acknowledge this topic gets a lot of play.  I plan on stopping harping on it once the problem goes away.)  More interesting is “Opposing the digital pogrom”; the government of Israel has gotten so fed up with anti-Semitic attacks from foreign reporters that it struck back with Masbirim (English translation via Google Translate), a site encouraging Israeli citizens to do pro-Israel PR when abroad.  Foreign reporters are reportedly not pleased with being parodied in the videos as being totally clueless, but considering that said reporters frequently have little or no idea of the context of what they are reporting on, the lampooning is fair.

Topic 2:  “Libya slaps embargo on Swiss, demands U.S. apology”.  Libya in this article illustrates the fallacy that one is always entitled to be right, no matter what.  Libya may not appreciate the Swiss ban on new minarets.  Libya may even feel that it is religiously proper to declare a jihad against Switzerland.  However, it is beyond all reason for Libya to expect the United States or Switzerland (or any other non-Muslim country) to necessarily agree to what Libya (or any Muslim country) wants.  The United States and Switzerland are religiously tolerant countries with civil liberties.  Jihad—the epitome of religious intolerance—is not appreciated in either country, and their citizens are free to criticize anyone, including heads of state.  As such, if Mu‘ammar al-Qaḏāfī’s son broke laws in Switzerland on how domestic help is supposed to be treated, then the Libyans should not expect the Swiss to be anything but displeased.  And if the Swiss feel that Muslim immigrants have been abusing their civil liberties, then Libya should not be surprised if the Swiss get wary or even take measures against abuse.  And if Mu‘ammar al-Qaḏāfī calls for a jihad, then he should not be surprised that a US diplomat does not approve.  And, as a US citizen, I invoke my own right of free speech and suggest that everyone in the US, Switzerland, and elsewhere, counter the Libyan boycott with a boycott against Libyan products; there is no point in rewarding a regime which expects to be kowtowed to at all times.

Topic 3:  For today’s religious humor:  “Even Basement Cat”:


Peace.

Aaron

Guilt by association, organ trafficking libel, and poisoning the well

Greetings.

Jewish date:  27 ’Elul 5769.

Worthy cause of the day:  I got a flu shot earlier today.  Please consider getting one yourself and save someone else the inconvenience (or death) from getting the flu.  Thank you.

Furthermore:  “Speak Up for Our Oceans: Oppose Offshore Drilling”, “Oil and Ice Don't Mix: Protect the Arctic Ocean”, “Mining Plan Threatens Lake Clark and Katmai National Parks”, “Take Action: Add your voice - don't forget Darfur”, and “NO MORE LEHMAN BROTHERS”.

On with the daily dose of religious fallacies and misinformation.

Topic 1:  “Nazi Fetishist Suspended by HRW” (Subtitle:  “Human Rights Watch's weapons "expert" suspended following outcry over bizarre "hobby".”):  This affair is logically a rather strange one.  The fact that Marc Garlasco of Human Rights Watch collects Nazi memorabilia does not make anything he claims wrong; he could plausibly claim to be extremely interested in World War II.  Furthermore, even the fact that he took this interest to the point where he was caught “wearing a Nazi-themed sweatshirt” does not make his claims necessarily wrong; he could just be insensitive and offensive.  What makes him wrong is that he has done a lousy job as a reporter writing about the Arab-Israel War and failed to do proper fact-checking or aim for unbiased reporting.  And what is likewise strange is that outrage over Garlasco’s intellectual dishonesty was not enough for Human Rights Watch to suspend him, but outrage over his unpalatable hobby was.   Exactly where are their priorities that people have to resort to guilt by association to have action taken against a fraud?

Topic 2:  “Organ theft reports picked up by Arab media”:  Another report of dishonest reporting, in this case of an improbable, unsubstantiated claim of the trafficking of the organs of Algerian children, with Israelis and Americans as the scapegoats.  No documentation or other proof is known to exist.  The blood libel is unfortunately not dead.

Topic 3:  “J Street’s Shameful Attacks on Aipac”:  Rav Boteach correctly notes that disagreeing with someone does not mean one’s opponents are stupid or irrational (or even wrong).  Assuming they are without giving proof is a form of poisoning the well (an ad hominem used to stifle an argument, thus providing an illusion of victory without doing the actual work).  Such a tactic does nothing to bring anyone closer to the truth, and it has the nasty side effect that it causes pointless hatred.  We most certainly can do better than this.

Have a good day.

Aaron