The right wing press has taken to the fainting couch today ( mostly the neo-con ‘we’re gonna kill them all’ corner – or rather, the ‘we’ll be sending someone else’s sons and daughters to kill them all’ corner) over CNN’s Senior Editor of Mideast Affairs Octavia Nasr. Upon the death of a Lebanese Grand Ayatollah, she dared to tweet that he was a loss. She said she had respect for him.
Legions of heroes immediately began clamoring for her head. She then tweeted a follow up:
“I’m sorry because it [the tweet] conveyed that I supported Fadlallah’s life’s work. That’s not the case at all . . .
Here’s what I should have conveyed more fully:
I used the words “respect” and “sad” because to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman’s rights. He called for the abolition of the tribal system of “honor killing.” He called the practice primitive and non-productive. He warned Muslim men that abuse of women was against Islam. […]
Sayyed Fadlallah. Revered across borders yet designated a terrorist. Not the kind of life to be commenting about in a brief tweet. It’s something I deeply regret.”
CNN fired her. Cowards.
Think Progress adds:
“The punchline here is that Sayyed Fadlallah was the religious guide, or marja’ al-taqlid, to numerous members of Iraq’s ruling Da’wa Party, including Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. This means that they looked to Fadlallah as a source of religious authority on matters relating to correct Islamic life and practice, and committed to following his edicts on those matters. So here’s the neocon logic: When a reporter acknowledges the passing of a revered, if controversial figure in a way that doesn’t sufficiently convey what a completely evil terrorist neocons think that figure was — that’s unacceptable. But when the United States spends nearly a trillion dollars, loses over 4,000 of its own troops and over 100,000 Iraqis to establish a new government largely dominated by that same “terrorist’s” avowed acolytes — that’s victory.”