Friday, August 11, 2006
Brian Williams -- Our Seals and Special Forces As Brave As Jihadists
MSNBC talker Chris Matthews' "Hardball" had a visit from NBC news anchor Brian Williams tonight (8/10/06). In one off the cuff comment, Williams seemed to equate the bravery of members of our military and emergency services personnel to the presumed bravery of Jihadists all of whom are willing to die for their cause.
Matthews' point to Williams was the following:
"Here we have maybe 24 people who have lived in London and England and the free world for all these years that become citizens, subjects of the Crown, and, yet, after having gotten to know us, they want to kill themselves to hurt us. Isn't that an even deeper conundrum here than the chemicals being used in these attacks?"
Williams replied with:
"And that, Chris, that last aspect, the willingness to take one's own life -- I always tell people there are guys on our team like that, too. They're called Army Rangers and Navy Seals and the Special Forces folks and the first responders on 9/11 who went into those buildings knowing, by the way, they weren't going to come out. So we have players like that on our team."
It's always possible, of course, that Williams was only attempting to comment on the assumption that those on both sides have people who feel they are acting bravely, despite the relative causes, and that he didn't mean to directly compare the causes themselves and raise them to the same level of legitimacy and importance. To be fair, it wouldn't be too far out of the question to give Williams the benefit of the doubt on this one.
But, that he would so quickly wish to somehow prove that Jihadists are also "brave" in that they are willing to give their lives to their causes is, in itself, disturbingly close to also equalizing their cause to legitimacy and "goodness" -- whether he wanted to or not.
After all, how "brave" is it to give your life for an evil cause?
Let's face it, in our society one equates giving your life for your country to the highest form of bravery. And that bravery is used in a positive context, as opposed to a negative one. So, Williams' positively denoting a Jihadist's willingness to give his life for his cause would, in general parlayence, reflect that said Jihadists are also brave. This would lead one to an assumption that the cause that one is dying for is also worth being brave for!
So, sadly, Williams seems to see no difference between the bravery of our soldiers and emergency services personnel and that of those who would die for those 72 virgins. And, if he so quickly imagines that Jihadists are also brave enough to die for their cause then we cannot escape the conclusion that he either sees neither cause (the Jihadist's or ours) as any better one from the other, or he really DOES think both causes have the same legitimacy.
Either way, his sense of moral judgment is in doubt at this point.
Somewhere in my blog, I explain using "gollum" instead of "terrorist". Anyway, here's the text of the message I'm hoping you'll peruse intently.
". . . Wood'ja (?) buh-leave! . . .
I almost feel sorry for the fools, bent on destroying Israel. If only they knew what they're going up against. In the post titled ". . . more 'italian' than you realize . . .", I expound on the chief reason for that emotional "near miss".
Anyway, the text for the hyperlink to that post is just below . . .
If this comment intrigues you, consider bringing up that page.
Links to this post: