The agreement spanning the past 140 years of definitions in my dictionary collection is that Truth conforms to fact or reality; Truth is the body of real things, events, and facts.
Yet, according to Wikipedia the popular, open-source online encyclopedia:
“Truth can have a variety of meanings… “Truth” must have a beneficial use in order to be retained within language. Defining this potency and applicability can be looked upon as “criteria”, and the method used to recognize a “truth” is termed criteria of truth. Since there is no single accepted criterion, they can all be considered “theories”. ”Compare the two definitions and you’ll see a striking difference. Historically, reality is truth. Yet, according to contemporary pop culture, truth is a subjective opinion. Opinion is truth.
In the interest of ideological inquiry, I decided to contrast the commentary of the right-wing Caroline Glick with commentary from the left-wing Dahlia Scheindlin and Roi Maor published in +972.
The Subject: Mohammed ElBaradei, leader of the Egyptian opposition.
The Methodology: To take the facts as they stand and compare Glick and Scheindlin’s responses.
The Goal: Obviously these writers are paid to opine, so the objective will be to define how much of their argument relies on known fact, versus value judgment.
ElBaradei’s role as head of the IAEA
According to Glick, “As IAEA head, ElBaradei shielded Iran’s nuclear weapons program from the Security Council.” He also, “continued to lobby against significant UN Security Council sanctions or other actions against Iran…”
According to Scheindlin, “During his 12 years as head of the IAEA, [ElBaradei] ratcheted down the increasingly nutty rhetoric calling for military action against the Iranian nuclear program (following a similarly moderate tone before the Iraq war).” They cite Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice-president of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, who “accused ElBaradei of covering up Iran’s true nuclear weaponization capacities while he directed the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog,” and conclude, “Israelis and prominent Jews have already begun working to discredit [ElBaradei’s] image…”
The Facts: In 2009, France and Israel accused ElBaradei of intentionally “omitting evidence that the IAEA had been given [by Western intelligence] about an alleged covert weaponization plan” that involved the building of a nuclear bomb.
ElBaradei on Iran & Iraq
Regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities and the WMD controversy in Iraq, Scheindlin & Maor opine, “ElBaradei certainly has experience, and so far he was proven right on both Iran and Iraq…”
Glick references a current interview in which ElBaradei, “…dismissed the threat of a nuclear armed Iran telling the Austrian News Agency, ‘There’s a lot of hype in this debate,’ and asserting that the discredited 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate that claimed Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003 remains accurate.”
The Facts: In 2006, the #2 official in Saddam Hussein’s air force said that WMDs were moved across the border into Syria via civilian aircraft before the 2003 war. This came out roughly 1 month after Israeli General Moshe Yaalon made it public that Saddam “transferred chemical agents from Iraq to Syria.”
Regarding Iran, the U.S. Government recently arrested an Iranian national “accused of operating an international smuggling network that illegally exported” weapons materials back to Iran to support their ballistic missle and nuclear programs. As of the end of January, the British Defense Secretary declared that Iran could have a nuclear weapon by 2012, calling Israel’s estimate of 2015 “over-optimistic.”
ElBaradei and the Muslim Brotherhood
Both Glick and Scheindlin & Maor agree that ElBaradei is willing to work with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Glick observed that the Muslim Brotherhood has backed Elbaradei’s “political aspirations.” She also quotes ElBaradei from Der Spiegel : ‘We should stop demonizing the Muslim Brotherhood. …[T]hey have not committed any acts of violence in five decades. They too want change. If we want democracy and freedom, we have to include them instead of marginalizing them.’”
According to Glick, The Muslim Brotherhood “is the progenitor of Hamas and al Qaida,” seeks to transform Egypt into an Islamic regime, and has defended Hizbullah terrorists.
Scheindlin and Maor reserve comment on the character of the Muslim Brotherhood. As for ElBaradei, they quote the opinion of one man who had met the “pro-Western liberal moderate” and gathered the impression that the quiet intellectual had “no basis of support” back in Egypt since he’s been away for so long.
The Facts: The Muslim Brotherhood has a history of hating Israel, having “raised an army to fight Israel in its war of independence in 1948. Its Palestinian branch was the nucleus for Hamas.” According to some, it was a Brotherhood agent who assassinated Anwar Sadat after he signed a peace treaty with Israel. According to others, it was a member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which later merged into Al Qaeda. In a related fact, the Muslim Brotherhood has also supported Al Qaeda. Their focus isn’t solely on Egypt or the Middle East: One of the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America is to “establish an effective and stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which…presents Islam as a civilization alternative.”
ElBaradei, now officially backed by the Muslim Brotherhood, supported the group on American television, remarking to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, “You know, the Muslim Brotherhood has nothing to do with the Iranian model, has nothing to do with extremism, as we have seen it in Afghanistan and other places. The Muslim Brotherhood is a religiously conservative group. …We need to include them. They are part of the Egyptian society, as much as the Marxist party here.”
Conclusions
On all three counts, Glick evidenced a clear ability to quote facts in drawing conclusions. Scheindlin and Maor evidenced the ability to hand-pick citation and tailor it to the advantage of their opinions. For example, Glick’s strong suit was in using primary source quotes from ElBaradei to illustrate his relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood. Scheindlin and Maor’s ability to twist facts in order to suit their personal views was most evident in the case of their “Conspiracy Against ElBaradei” theory that managed to twist a known fact into a smear campaign against ElBaradei championed by “Israelis and prominent Jews”. As a result, the former produced analysis while the latter expressed value judgments.
My brother once shared with me a professor’s saying, “There’s your truth, there’s my truth, and then there’s the Truth.” At the time I remember thinking, “If your truth doesn’t chime with the Truth, what good is it?” Opinion should never be the source of Truth. However, in the world of 24-hour news and basement bloggers, opinion often draws more attention than fact. Not to be solely lamented, well reasoned opinion can shine a light on the Truth at hand when done right.
Unfortunately, in this world, “done right” is a matter of opinion.
Originally published @ OurLastStand.com
No comments:
Post a Comment