Posted on 04/23/2003 6:43:31 AM PDT by Egregious Philbin
Kamiya vs. O'Reilly Salon challenges the bullying Fox host to stop misrepresenting our "Liberation Day" story and debate its author fairly.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
April 23, 2003 | On April 11, Salon published, as its lead article, a piece by executive editor Gary Kamiya. The headline read: "Liberation Day: Even Those Opposed to the War Should Celebrate a Shining Moment in the History of Freedom -- the Fall of Saddam Hussein." The accompanying photograph showed an Iraqi man kissing an American soldier.
Here is the central argument of the article:
"To stand in solidarity with humanity on those few occasions when it lurches forward is more than an honor, it is mandatory if you have a soul, like keeping faith with those you love. And so, at this moment, as the Mordor shadow of Saddam Hussein, a truly evil man who, like a sociopathic murderous husband, killed everything that he could not control, lifts from the long-suffering people of Iraq, all of us, on the left and the right, Democrats and Republicans, America-lovers and America-haters, Syrians and Kuwaitis and Israelis and Palestinians, owe it to our common humanity to stop, put aside -- not forever -- our doubts and our grief and our future fears, and for one deep moment, celebrate."
Kamiya also wrote of the welter of reactions the fall of Baghdad was likely to engender among those who, like him, had opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq. In one passage, he talked about the "moral schizophrenia" the war induced, and candidly admitted that its opponents -- including himself -- had at times succumbed to the wish that it might not go well for the U.S. He criticized and explored such feelings, tracing them to the fear, held by many who opposed the war, that an easy American success might ultimately lead to imperialist adventures that would be worse for the United States and the world. In the end, however, he disavowed such feelings.
It's a complex argument. You may or may not agree with it. Either way, it deserves to be considered in its entirety.
But why weigh a complex argument when you can seize a brief passage from the article, wrench it out of context and draw blood by entirely misrepresenting it? For the conservative storm troopers who, it seems, have conquered vast territories of the U.S. media under cover of the wartime flag, that's the whole point -- that's what they live for.
And so last week, the organs of the right-wing press in the U.S. -- from the Washington Times to Newsmax to Rush Limbaugh to Bill O'Reilly -- ripped out a small chunk of Kamiya's article and began circulating it to the faithful. The Washington Times said Kamiya was "cheering the enemy." O'Reilly called him a "fanatic" who had "no place in the public arena" and who should "think about moving to Costa Rica." And the wing nut fedayeen of the right crawled out of their base camps at sites like Free Republic to throw spitballs at Salon e-mail accounts and advertisers.
Of course, the real agenda of conservative media's overbearing pundits -- despite their lip service to the marketplace of ideas -- is to drive everyone who disagrees with them out of the public arena. They're not interested in open debate; their goal is to intimidate and silence. If you dare oppose the war, if you dare even admit any ambivalence about it, then you should be gagged and expatriated. In the current climate of mind control, you can't even admit to having entertained thoughts that are not "appropriate," even if you end up rejecting them.
Salon is not a doctrinaire or party-line publication. We have run antiwar pieces and pro-war pieces; we have lauded the antiwar movement and critiqued it, too. We seek the full, free exchange of ideas that is the hallmark of liberal discourse. And we believe that there is still room for, even hunger for, honesty and nuance in political debate.
O'Reilly's show invited Kamiya on to defend his (wildly misrepresented) prose; but anyone who's watched the show knows that it's a hopelessly rigged game, in which the bullying host gives himself carte blanche to outshout his guests. (Although Newsday's Ellis Henican did a great job defending Kamiya's piece from O'Reilly's constant interruptions, and we thank him for that thankless task.)
Instead, we hereby invite O'Reilly to debate Kamiya, one-on-one, via e-mail. Let the unedited exchange become part of the public record on the Net. Let O'Reilly leave the home-turf advantage of his studios. Let's see how he fares when he can't simply yank the mike from a guest who disagrees with him too articulately.
We also invite the public -- left or right, Salon-lovers or -haters -- to read the article that started it all in its entirety. "Liberation Day" was originally published as subscriber-only content, but given the controversy, we are now making it available for all. We're confident that any reasonable-minded reader will find it a very different experience from the "fanatical" treason it has been identified as by the O'Reillys of the world. But like they say at Fox: We report, you decide.
-- The editors of Salon
Translation - he won't throw us softballs like Larry King, so we ain't going there.
Soft balls or not, when I do watch the show (much less frequently, now) I find myself shouting, "Bill, let the guy answer the question!"
Heh. A year ago we were the right-wing Taliban. Now we're fedayeen.
wing nuts.. LOL
It sounds like Salon.com needs readers... at any cost to their sullied pride.
I never had reason to read such a fair and open-minded org's output in the first place. They are just another glittering example of Clinton's legacy, fading in the rear view mirror. Buh-Bye!
As one of the members of the "wing nut fedayeen of the right," I chuckle to think of the perception that nonFreepers and sheeple must have of us based on references like this and from the Dixie Chicks manager, etc.....I've always thought myself pretty normal, but these FR bashers make us sound like Dixie Flag Emblazoned, Ford Excursion-driving, (not that there's anything wrong with that) 1930's Germany-inspired, winged monkeys from the Wizard of Oz or something. In actuality, I'm just a normal, red-blooded American who
--has skin that turns dry in winter and oily in summer
--failed to do laundry last weekend and will probably have to pull a shirt out of the dirty clothes to wear before the week's end
--drank a little too much wine at least one night this week
--is 750 or so miles over the scheduled mileage for my oil change
--has toenail polish that is chipping and so must wear close-toed shoes until weeks' end when I will probably re-polish before I get around to doing above-mentioned laundry
--failed to eat breakfast even one day this week, despite preaching to the kiddo that it's the "most important meal of the day" (well, there's those 2 or 3 chocolate Easter eggs I had on Monday morning)
--is spending time FReeping online instead of working, like I should be (while non-FReep America is shopping gap.com or ebaying while they should be working)
Does any of this sound THAT abnormal? Does any of this sound like the life of the fedayeen winged-monkeys that we are purported to be?
That one gave me a laugh... They evidently subscribe wholeheartedly to the "repeat the big lie often enough and most people will believe it" philosophy of the left...
Er...I resemble that remark.
Salon's "complex argument" excuse is pointless. The fact is, this author admitted to having anti-American sentiments.
Salon may find significance that the author's hostility to America was part of some (typical) liberal mental confusion. So what?
Salon's unpatriotic hostility was uncovered. Now it can never be denied.
Pretty much what the left is now doing to Rick Santorum and has already done to Lott, Gingrich, Jimmy the Greek, John Rocker, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.