Tuesday, November 08, 2005

New Orleans and Paris

Warehouse BurningSo what do they have in common besides their French names? A lot of volcanic lawlessness, looking for places to flow; water and lava seeking their own level.

September brought floods to one, and it flowed with grievances and finger-pointing.

November brought flames to the other, and it burned the fuel of hatred and revenge.

Both elements --the fire and the rain -- gave criminals their chance to destroy and burn, while choirs of useful idiots sang dirges for these predators they call "victims."

So what could follow now except perhaps the most breath-takingly "DUH" headline of the year?


Oh, wait. Here's another one, vying for mindlessness:


This is journalism. This is cutting edge. These headlines are so far beyond trifling you'd think the media would be embarrassed. But the sad thing is, they probably don't even see the dark hole of nothingness at the heart of their statements. Here, we have an example of Nabokov's poshlost.

Shows you how a word can turn up just in time to describe what's going on.

Do you think the print media has any clue about the reasons for their precipitous decline? Should we tell them? Nah.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Submissions of similarly silly headlines are welcome. Send them in and we'll post updates here!


Dymphna said...

Yep. It sure doesn't! In fact, John Howard (Australia) said it's a sure-fire way to get ground down by these oppressive, aggrieved, super-sensitive predators.

"Too Much" is not in their vocabulary.

moderationist said...

IMO the headscarf ban by the French was huge. If the entire West would ban the headscarf, (all religious headgear in all public places), it would start a domino effect that would bring the rats out of the sewer.

Dymphna said...

Such a rule would be a direct infringement on liberties. Jews ought to be able to wear yarmulkes, etc.

I see the problem you're pointing to, however. And often, women are forced to dress in a particular way. I started using the "I Could Scream" header when I was writing at Belmont Club and that was the quote some teenage girl used in Britain when she won her court case to be allowed to wear an even more severe cover-up than the girls in her school were already wearing. She was from Pakistan and she was demanding to wear the Saudi mode of dress....it was all her brother's doing as her parents were dead. If she didn't go to court to fight for her "right" to wear this gear, her brother probably would have killed her. When she won, she announced that she was "so happy I could scream." I found her use of words telling of her real situation.

But we still can't infringe on liberties; that will undermine our constitution and postpone the problem. This is not going to be easy.

BTW, Attaturk, when he took over Turkey, banned religious dress in government offices and public affairs in order to try to bring his country into the present day. He also ordered the koran translated into Turkish.The fight between the secularists and the Islamists in Turkey has been a long, long battle.

moderationist said...

The violent subjugation of women is an integral part of the lethal supremacist script of Islamofascism world domination.

Banning all religious headgarb in all public places would be preferable to the unfettered spread of Saudi Wahabbi terrorism.

Our 21 century minds can't comprehend the 7th century mind that considers this important.

Dymphna said...

only certain fundamentalist yobos consider women's attire an issue. Many Muslim women do not adhere to this rule.

I suggest you read The Relgious Policeman on our blogroll. He is funny, smart, and civilized. Also Muslim.

As is Big Pharoh, who is concerned for Egypt's welfare if shar'ia law goes into effect.