May I try to get this thread back on track? There appears (to me) to be two important points worthy of debate: 1. Does the Terry Jones article add anything to our understanding of abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan and (possibly) Cuba? 2. Does Terry Jones have any right to address such topics? I think his article skewers fairly precisely what the legal memo meant, in terms that most people can understand. A little overblown, a little short on belly laughs, but the parallels were accurate enough to bring the memo into stark belief. (If others think not, then we can debate the point). Does it matter that Terry Jones used to be on the Monty Python program? I would find it difficult to accept that a valid argument may be dismissed, simply because the person making it is not in the current circle of pundits and public opinion makers. Again, the point is open for debate. But it seems that there is a third topic emerging in our discussions (which I would really like to see go away). If you disagree with what anyone says in this Forum, are you entitled to insult them out of hand? If this is so, I can see why some of our members do not bother to participate in our discussions any more. Does anyone care to examine the role of the Court Jester in the Middle Ages, and those of the Late Night shows nowadays? (Which is where, I think, people like Terry Jones draw both their inspiration and justification). If so, let's discuss it. If not, please don't tell me that I am a worthless scumbag to waste your time of day by raising the point.
|