Are you:Actually (e) none of the above. Torq can speak for myself (and has, somewhat). But I have said nothing, by choice, on the matter of the fake-priest "allegations" (which the article, by the way, does not say were condoned or approved even if they happened). An important distinction one would think.
a) Majoring in minors?
b) Spectacularly obtuse?
c) So bent on defending the indefensible that you just don't care anymore how silly your defenses sound?
d) all of the above?
To explain why I said nothing: here is Shea's initial post (I knew nothing of the "allegation" previously, and neither did anyone else, hence the Washington Post calling it "previously unreported.")
The military brass, bless 'em, tightened the regs to make this stuff much harder to get away with (even as Vice Glorious Leader Cheney labored to loosen the regs and make it easier). In all the torture discussions here, stuff like this was blown off as unworthy of mention. No bones broken. No tissue damaged permanently. Hell, it's just a little frat hazing according to Limbaugh. And Catholics on my blog have labored to excuse it as well. So I think it a kind of poetic justice to see something like this. If you are going to commit grave evil, particularly in an age when Catholics are swift to excuse it in obedience to our National Greatness Narrative then I think it is only fitting that the one doing the evil should make it crystal clear to Catholics who condone prisoner abuse just what it is they are condoning.Of course, given that at the point Shea is expelling this dribble, neither Torq nor myself had said Word One about fake baptisms, one would wonder how he knows "just what it is they are condoning." Never mind his hyperbolic (though not by his standards) mind-reading about narratives and glorious-leader blah, blah, blah. And at the same time I first read it, there was this in the combox from one of Shea's new friends, Morning's Minion.
(VJM: I put a break here because at this point I really stopped paying attention, though the term "fog" clinches the intended identification.)
If prisoner abuse continues to vanish from view in a fog of euphemism about "aggressive interrogation tactics" and "national security", perhaps the vision of a false Catholic priest in vestments playing satanic black metal and mocking the sacraments will finally get a Catholic's attention and make him suspect that all is not well.
I felt nauseous when I read this. But I am sure the Fog Coalition will find a way to defend it.When people have decided they can attribute ideas to you before you've said Word One on the subject (so, Shea doesn't even his "skim" excuse) ... well, what's the use? My honest reaction, excuse my french, was "fuck it. They can think what they like. They have no interest in what I actually think in reality, and what I actually think in reality is all I could rebut it with. They can have their lies and their straw men. Nobody whom I care about believes them."
There are things in this life not worth responding to and Shavian straw-men (except to the extent they may have entertainment value) are among them.
Free advice, Shea. You want me to say X about some topic? (1) Don't say it yourself; (2) Don't lie about me or put words in my mouth about the topic while doing it; and (3) Don't demand that I prove my religious bona-fides by jumping through a hoop on the topic. The first makes it less likely. The second and third will ensure I won't.