I've been down with a cold the last few days. Instead of doing work I was incapable of doing, I was surfing the blogosphere. Perhaps the most sickening thing I've found is a rumor going around right-leaning blogs that the bombings at Qana were either staged by Hezbollah or that Hezbollah pulled bodies out of storage for a photo-op. One version of the story is here another is here. The theory seems to revolve an aid worker in glasses. In the meantime, this is a link to the photos of the destruction at Qana: here. (these are very graphic) Right-wing blogs are amusing in many senses because often the argumentation is woefully narrow and frighteningly cold-hearted. For many on the right, it seems that country and sovereignty are more valuable than life. But I can also see why right-wingers vilify the 'liberal=left'. Many of these middle of the road blogs argue from a position of such sentimentality that you wonder if they really are aware of the world around them. The other thing I've noticed about north american right-wing blogs and activist groups is that their enemy seems to be 'liberals.' Most of them don't ever argue about specific points but create a 'liberal' bogyman who is always wrong and has an ever 'bleeding heart.' One of the better blogs out there is Aaron's Israel Peace Blog. The Israel blog is written by a former IDF corporal (?) who is now living in New York. He's written an interesting article on "In Defence of Anarchism"--which seems to endorse a Negri-ish style devolution. My favorite entry is: Snappy answers to stupid questions - Number One in which he takes on the much repeated defense re: war against Lebannon: "What should Israel do? Just sit on its hands while Hezbollah rains missles on it?". In short, his answer is 'yes'! But that would be oversimplifying things. I am on my way back to health. And will have much less time for such wonderings. I'd recommend reading right-wing blogs, as infuriating as they are, if you have the time. Many of the arguements right wingers use re: everying from gay marriage to war to tax breaks for the rich appear in condensed form, sometimes with links to sources. I find it interesting that a lot of the 'sources' for rightist thought are rarely doctors or schooled experts. Converts, say from Islam to Christianity, commentators (people who lead organisations and get onto Fox news a lot) and occassionally governmental investigations make the bulk of the sources. Oh, and Michael Moore is the devil incarnate. The benefit of sourcing in this way is that you have the 'authenticity' of the survivor's story, or of someone who may have lived in an affected region, etc. But of course, these are all half-stories and tend to lack actual analysis. Oddly, for as much as the liberal heart bleeds, the right wing one bleeds in the right places, ne? Anyway, for all of their shortcomings, even the right needs to be listened to. Off to Wal-Greens.