The Critic Shows His Face Every Day
If I have a beef with something, I always try to have a solution in mind. May not be right, but at least I am bringing something to the table instead of an idle sledge. There is nothing worse than a mere critic. A meddler. The 'all care, no responsibility' type.
You will find a great example in the editorial New York Times article below. Read how this person hurls mud, throws sticks and stones... But not once suggest a solution to the tactics that are being used. I am not writing for against what has happened. I, for one, do not have any first hand knowledge of the tactics used by US interrogators. One of the main reasons I would not pretend to know anything is because I would not for one second believe a word that a large majority of the media has to write about it. The media cannot make logos and theme music for wars one minute and become 20/20 hindsighters the next. The rise of blogs are a direct result of the lack of credibility most journalists have. If these people spewing criticisms were so knowledgeable, why don't they pick up a sword and jump into the fight of politics ? Run for mayor, join a party ? No... they are much more comfortable being 'fault finders'. Why put a solution forward when you have to sip Camomile tea before bed and read Hemingway (the person you wish you had the heart and soul to be isnt it?)
So, read this article not so much for the content, but for the feeling that half the article is missing. Learn how to spot a meddler. A mere critic. If you are going to sledge a group of people for doing what they have done, address the damn topic. Say something that may be an idea or (gasp!) that someone may even disagree with. Take a position. For example, this article is about tactics used by the US government post 9/11 to extract information from people who have not had a trial. Tell us how you would decipher who is guilty and not guilty or how you would extract information that could potentially save the lives of a lot of people. Tell us how you would protect ONE person who has been plucked from a battlefield in spite of the thousands that he or she could potentially harm. Perhaps a nice, civil sit down one on one conversation ? Or should we give them access to the bleeding heart section of the media so they can be turned into 'hard done by' stories ? Please just say SOMETHING!
As I said, there is nothing worse than the mere critic. See one in action.
Looking At America
You will find a great example in the editorial New York Times article below. Read how this person hurls mud, throws sticks and stones... But not once suggest a solution to the tactics that are being used. I am not writing for against what has happened. I, for one, do not have any first hand knowledge of the tactics used by US interrogators. One of the main reasons I would not pretend to know anything is because I would not for one second believe a word that a large majority of the media has to write about it. The media cannot make logos and theme music for wars one minute and become 20/20 hindsighters the next. The rise of blogs are a direct result of the lack of credibility most journalists have. If these people spewing criticisms were so knowledgeable, why don't they pick up a sword and jump into the fight of politics ? Run for mayor, join a party ? No... they are much more comfortable being 'fault finders'. Why put a solution forward when you have to sip Camomile tea before bed and read Hemingway (the person you wish you had the heart and soul to be isnt it?)
So, read this article not so much for the content, but for the feeling that half the article is missing. Learn how to spot a meddler. A mere critic. If you are going to sledge a group of people for doing what they have done, address the damn topic. Say something that may be an idea or (gasp!) that someone may even disagree with. Take a position. For example, this article is about tactics used by the US government post 9/11 to extract information from people who have not had a trial. Tell us how you would decipher who is guilty and not guilty or how you would extract information that could potentially save the lives of a lot of people. Tell us how you would protect ONE person who has been plucked from a battlefield in spite of the thousands that he or she could potentially harm. Perhaps a nice, civil sit down one on one conversation ? Or should we give them access to the bleeding heart section of the media so they can be turned into 'hard done by' stories ? Please just say SOMETHING!
As I said, there is nothing worse than the mere critic. See one in action.
Looking At America
posted by TTB at 5:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home