Category Archives: Reason

UPDATE VIII: America’s Angelic O.J. (No Hearsay, Please!)

Crime, Criminal Injustice, Etiquette, Europe, Journalism, Justice, Law, Media, Morality, Racism, Reason, The Zeitgeist

The following is from “America’s Angelic O.J,” now on WND.COM:

“The conviction of America’s sweetart du jour, Amanda Knox, was overturned this month. Based on O.J.-like evidence, Knox was convicted of murdering her British roommate. The vicious and depraved Nov. 1, 2007 killing took place in the historic, university city of Perugia, Italy. Police bungling notwithstanding, the biological and circumstantial evidence stacked against Knox and her former lover Raffaele Sollecito was considerable. …

…The once-convicted killers were declared innocent, no less, and released, due in no small part to a PR blitz mounted by Knox’s family and their Seattle-based publicist. They were assisted by the country’s national media, left and right. With the exception of Bill O’Reilly, former homicide prosecutor Kimberly Guilfoyle, and Jeanine Pirro; Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC—all worked tirelessly on behalf of the attractive, white kids. The conviction of Rudy Guede the American media let stand. Guede, the pretty pair’s (alleged) partner in crime, is a black man who lacked their appeal and assets. …

… On Nov. 5, 2007, after cartwheeling and canoodling with Sollecito at the police station, Knox framed Patrick Lumumba for Meredith’s murder and rape which she claimed to have overheard. (At that stage, only the cops knew Ms. Kercher had been sexually assaulted.) Lumumba was Amanda’s innocent employer. Knox even committed this evidentiary concoction to writing in a five-page memorandum. Later she blamed police for making her. Amanda’s allergy to the truth cost Lumumba – another black man who remained voiceless in the American media – his livelihood and reputation. …

… Nor did Megyn Kelly, Shepard Smith, Wolf Blitzer, Piers Morgan, Dr. Drew, Oprah (on and on), give the time of day to the victim’s family. In defense of our homegrown popularizers and poor thinkers, however, the Kercher family was way too classy to partake in the circus created by the Ugly Americans and their aides. …

… Comprehending circumstantial evidence demands analytical and deductive thinking. These faculties are becoming rare in the Age of the Idiot now upon us, as was glaringly apparent in the deliberations of Casey Anthony’s jurors. The average individual seldom reads; he knows only what is palpable and perceivable—what he can see and feel. If he can’t picture something—see it happen on YouTube or on CSI—he certainly cannot think about it in the abstract. …”

Read the rest of “America’s Angelic O.J” on WND.COM.

My new book, “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” is available from Amazon.

A newly formatted, splendid Kindle copy is also on sale.

Barnes and Noble is always well-stocked and ships within 24 hours.

Still better, shipping is free and prompt if you purchase Into the Cannibal’s Pot from The Publisher.

UPDATE I: A MEASURE OF THE ZEITGEIST. BuzzFeed wants to know “Who’s Hotter: Amanda Knox Or Casey Anthony?” Intellectually, this item is more honest than what mainstream media has been dishing on the noxious Knox. By lumping the two ex-convicts together—both implicated in “vicious and depraved” deeds—BuzzFeed is disrespecting the duo. At least this is how I optimistically read this contest.

UPDATE II: An interesting thread on my Facebook Wall. I say ideas should not exist in the arid arena of pure thought. Chris Baker disagrees.

UPDATE III (Oct. 7): A comment at TrueJustice.org links to “America’s Angelic O.J.”:

Great article on WND that you linked to Peter. Some nice quotes in it too, such as:

“Ann Coulter offered up a few tart tweets about Knox’s exoneration: – Amanda Knox not guilty, Casey Anthony rolls eyes, says; ‘well, duh…’”

“Comprehending circumstantial evidence demands analytical and deductive thinking. These faculties are becoming rare in the Age of the Idiot now upon us…”

How true, and I must remember that line.

Someone else on the same site’s comments section, however, impugns my column solely because I write for WND, which the writer calls (fairly) “Obama Birth Certificate Central.”

But I am not a “birther.” The comment is precisely the kind of argument to expect in the “age of the Idiot now upon us”: The comment relies on the “well-known logical error known as the ad hominem fallacy. This is the fallacy of thinking one can undermine the status of a claim or argument by undermining the motives or character” or associations of the person who makes it. (I’ve paraphrased writer Mark Rowland’s definition, which I particularly liked.)

UPDATE IV: I like the way writers with a blind spot for crime perpetrated by sweet young females or whites harp-on, and hide behind, the misguided theory of the crime: a ritual or a sexual game gone wrong. As if today’s youngsters don’t sometimes experiment along the lines of the vapid, vampiric films they devour; as if they never enact the alternate reality they occupy. Some kids don’t exist outside their hand held devices, and the stuff they see in these toys.

More to the point, the obsession with motive is another CSI hangover. In “America’s Angelic O.J.,” I clearly say that, “Police bungling notwithstanding,” there is often no accounting for the “subterranean irrational forces that so often propel evil.”

This central stupidity conjures the manner in which Geraldo Rivera exculpated Casey Anthony: “Why would a mother kill her child?”, the Fox host wanted to know.

UPDATE V: Via the grapevine, I am getting word of certain racialists, never rationalists, who are admonishing me for my deductions vis-a-vis the evidence in the Knox case. The claim being that I’ve failed to grasp and formulaically highlight the prevalence of “black dysfunction” in our society. Their implication, I imagine, is that the indisputable involvement of a black man in the murder must automatically exclude the whites. The “case” against me is a grotesque joke, coming as it does from the quintessential American chauvinists who’ve generally ignored (except for tokenism) the largest, if disorganized, racial ethnocide in the 21st century: that of rural, white South Africans. And its chronicler: Guess who wrote the definitive text on that racial enthnocide? And guess who’s ignored that text yet is now lecturing its author about not being sufficiently racial in her treatment of the Knox crime? Your typical, navel-gazing American, Race-Über-Alles paleo. Give me a break!

UPDATE VI (Oct. Eight): NO HEARSAY, PLEASE. Jerri Lynn Ward: As a lawyer, you know that hearsay is inadmissible, and is wrong argument. I try to avoid it on BAB. The information you’ve provided us falls in that category. The source I studied and quoted is a veteran reporter in Italy who was actually THERE, in the thick of the case. She writes for liberals (who generally love Knox) and has no agenda. I know agenda when I see it. Barbie Latza Nadeau’s reporting was as impartial and impeccable as they come, in my opinion. This woman fits the old mold of journalism.

UPDATE VII: Jack kindly left a link to his source on the Knox case, a man called Steve Moore. I perused the site and saw not one hyperlink to a primary source document, meaning court documents, briefs, etc. This is one of those individuals who is postulating from afar. I’m loathe to promote this kind of individual’s verbiage on the blog. For an “investigator” to offer nothing more than a narrative, and no primary documents: that’s is suspect. You are free to look him up on Jack’s advice.

UPDATE VIII: Jennifer mentioned the love-making at the scene of the crime:

Oblivious to the cameras—or perhaps for them—-Amanda Knox (22) and Raffaele Sollecito (25) exchanged a slow, sensual kiss in full view of world media. Not far from where the two kissed lay the body of Meredith Kercher, the English girl with whom Knox had shared student accommodation in Perugia, Italy. Her throat slit, Meredith had expired in slow agony.
The kinky canoodling of Knox and her paramour outside the house of horrors conjured the climactic moment in the film noir “The Comfort of Strangers.”
Christopher Walken and Helen Mirren play an older couple (Robert and Caroline) who live in a palazzo in Venice. They gain the trust of the vacationing Mary and Colin (played by the late Natasha Richardson and Rupert Everett), a young English couple. As Colin sips a cocktail with Robert at the latter’s Venetian residence, Robert suddenly and swiftly (as planned) moves to cut Colin’s throat. He then steps over his gurgling victim and the gushing blood to engage in frenzied sex with his eager wife Caroline.
The two have fulfilled a shared fantasy.

[From “O.J.-Like Evidence Convicts Noxious Knox.”]

UPDATE II: Public Enema # 1 (Bum Doctors Spread AIDS)

Africa, Etiquette, Healthcare, Pseudoscience, Reason, South-Africa

It is one thing to have voodoo for values, but what about a sense of propriety?

The N2 is a major highway in South Africa that starts in my hometown of Cape Town. A repulsed reporter at The Daily Voice snapped images of a traditional “healer” administering a treatment for bewitchment alongside the road, in full view of motorists careening down the highways. The shameless sangoma (witch doctor), whose fees are probably reimbursed by the medical scheme (in the New South Africa), elaborated on his methods. Prepare to be repulsed (if you click on the image).

“Liberals labor under the romantic delusion that the effects of millennia of development-resistant, self-defeating, fatalistic, atavistic, superstition-infused, unfathomably cruel cultures can be cured by an infusion of foreign aid, and by the removal of tyrants. … the values and cultural influences which people (and peoples) bring to the polity cannot be tweaked out of existence like some unsightly nose-hair. … (From Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa.)

UPDATED I (Sept. 5): Gray Falcon, AKA historian Nebojsa Malic—one of the top authorities in the US on the Balkans (if you want the truth)—has reviewed Into the Cannibal’s Pot on Amazon. Do read Mr. Malic’s insights, titled “A cautionary tale beyond black and white.”

UPDATE II: The common, communal and irrational practice described above should help explain to the perpetually perplexed West why the spread of AIDS/HIV is so hard to curtail in Africa. You know that the bum “doctor” does not use disposable equipment. Nor does he have an autoclave with which to sterilize his home-made enema.

Perforations are bound to happen. Infection likely to follow.

UPDATED: ‘Likes’ As a Proxy for Populairty on WND

Ilana Mercer, IlanaMercer.com, Internet, Media, Pseudoscience, Reason

My colleague Vox Day takes a columnist’s number of “Likes” on WND as a proxy for readership of that particular WND column. The problem with this analysis in my case is this: Vox Day’s weblog doesn’t have Facebook interface. Mine does. Many of my readers come first to Barely a Blog and will click the “Like” on the column’s blog post, rather than (or in addition to) clicking on WND’s full version of the column on its site, which these readers still read on WND. Some read the column on both sites and don’t click “Like.” (All readers of this space are encouraged to click the “Like” icons on both the BAB and the WND posts.)

For example, on WND, the column “Is Ron Paul Good For Israel?” has earned 56 “Likes,” as Vox has noted. But on Barely a Blog the post excerpting the same column has garnered 100 “Likes.” To the extent that the reader’s propensity to “Like” is statistically significant—and I doubt it—BAB “Likes” go toward my WND readership, since blog “Likers” almost always read the column in full on WND. (I only post the column to IlanaMercer.com a couple of days after the WND posting.)

Given that my blog interfaces with Facebook, Vox would have to factor in the “Likes” a WND column notice gets on Barely a Blog before he makes a definitive statement about the “Likes” on WND as a proxy for the WND column’s popularity.

Of course, my column’s existence has always been in peril, so far be it from me to claim popularity for it. This is as good a time as any to remind readers to support “Return to Reason” by clicking on the “Like” icons both on BAB and on WND.com.

If you like posts about this stuff, check out my old Alexa debunk. Alexa would have become far more accurate since I wrote “RANK INTERNET RATINGS.” This is because most of us no longer dial up to get an internet connection and thus no longer receive a new IP address each time we click on a site. The same person dialing up many times daily, yet being reflected as a new IP address each time: that’s what made for the promiscuous early Alexa readings.

UPDATE: Robert is right: The reader’s “Like” habits are too full of statistical holes to indicate very much. I almost never click “Like” when I read a column.

Kerry, the other thing patrons of this site can do to support this writer’s work is to review “Into the Cannibal’s Pot” on Amazon.

UPDATE III: Naipaul Right About Women Writers

English, Gender, Literature, Music, Pop-Culture, Reason

It is getting harder to tell men from women writers, as males have been so thoroughly feminized over the last couple of decades. Still, Nobel Laureate V.S. Naipaul is correct when he states the following: “I read a piece of writing and within a paragraph or two I know whether it is by a woman or not. I think [it is] unequal to me.” In general, you can indeed tell right away if what you’re reading was penned by a man or a woman. On the whole, the best writers have always been men, still are. I excerpt here from “The Silly Sex?,” in which I was way to kind:

Since 1950, women have won only five Nobels in literature. And some of those are questionable. How can one put Toni Morrison into the literary company of Patrick White, Albert Camus, and Isaac Bashevis Singer? In past years, the literature prize went to authors of the caliber of J. M. Coetzee, Günter Grass, and V.S. Naipaul. But last year, Austrian writer Elfriede Jelinek was awarded the literature prize. I’m not suggesting the grumpy Jelinek is a fraud like Guatemalan leftist and Peace Prize winner Rigoberta Menchu. Some of Jelinek’s dusty works, translated crudely into English, showcase some skill (if one can stomach the contrived subject matter). However, unlike her male predecessors, she is better known for politically correct posturing than for penning memorable works of literature.

Naipaul fingers women’s “sentimentality, the narrow view of the world … that comes over in her writing too.” True. Sentimentality, moreover, accounts for why women (including those with the Y chromosome) are wont to misplace compassion. If you can’t think clearly, your feelings tend to be muddled and flimsy; your sense of justice is skewed too.

Mundane, mainstream media are furious with Naipaul. This Via NPR:

Alex Clark, a literary journalist, said: “It’s absurd. I suspect VS Naipaul thinks that there isn’t anyone who is his equal. Is he really saying that writers such as Hilary Mantel, A S Byatt, Iris Murdoch are sentimental or write feminine tosh?”

YES! When Vladimir Nabokov, Patrick White and Isaac Bashevis Singer died, I stopped reading novels.

As for non-fiction, Ann Coulter (and this writer) excepted, where is the woman who writes a strong, witty, wickedly funny column? Nowhere. Sure, I like Diana West a lot, but even she suffers from that singularly female proclivity to fixate obsessively on one issue only: Islam this; Islam that. On and on. All terribly important, but it can get repetitive. And that’s another thing: Non-fiction female writers cleave to a couple of easy, oft-charged subjects. Most steer clear of economics. (How many Amity Shlaes are there?) They simply don’t seem to have a wide array of interests. (I’ve covered Ann Coulter’s awful acolytes in many a blog post, “The Republican Tart Trust” is one.)

I’ll tell you what I’ve discovered, though: men generally prefer women who’re sentimental and unhinged, so long as they don’t have a better head than they do.

UPDATE I (June 3): Cross-posted on Facebook:

Has any of my Hebrew-speaking readers read Shmuel Yosef Agnon? Pure genius. Better than Naipaul. He was, of course, widely translated, as is all Hebrew literature. A translation would not do justice to Agnon’s use of the Hebrew language. But this was required reading when I was growing up. The current crop of Hebrew writers is as bad as their English, stream-of-consciousness counterparts.

Agnon was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1966, well before honoring females, however forgettable, became the rule.

UPDATE II: Myron, Ayn rand was one of the greatest essayists, showcasing a brilliant, unparalleled capacity to development a logical argument. But one would be less than honest as a writer—and fall into sycophancy—if one failed to mention that her style was a little dour, lacking in any humor. The classical liberal philosopher DAVID CONWAY alludes to this fact here.

UPDATE III: Rob, I do think Brookner is a genius. I devour her books. I discussed her with Derb, who, in my opinion, has mistaken her subject matter—the utter aloneness of a certain kind of character—for some sort of feminine preoccupation. However, Brookner has written equally of males in this predicament. I ventured that because our Derb is such a suave, confident gentleman, he does not empathize with the kind of person who is as alone as Brookner’s protagonists are. Needles to say, I do.