So, it seems to me that the headline Karzai Rejects U.S. Criticism on Opium is just sloppy. I mean, you can’t tell whether it’s Afghanistan’s president who is on Opium or the US critic. Or both. Or whether President Karzai is saying that the US criticism is ‘on Opium’, or whether the US is saying Pres. Karzai is ‘on Opium’. Or both.
OK, that’s silly; the headline clearly doesn’t mean any of those things. But seriously, what is the criticism? Is the opium not strong enough, not cheap enough, is it cut with shit, or is it that lethal stuff we keep hearing about? Is the problem a bad trip, or is the problem inadequate supply? And when President Karzai rejects that criticism, is it really just a cultural difference, rather than a real disagreement about the smack?
And you know, I mean you know, that when you get down to it, either somebody didn’t get paid, or somebody didn’t get their shit. This whole criticism and rejecting the criticism is just trash talk, and everybody knows it, right? The US says “Karzai ‘has been unwilling to assert strong leadership,’ and then “Hamid Karzai said ... ‘we have done our job.” That sounds to me like there’s a shipment missing. I understand, nobody wants to tell the Guardian ‘we’re missing a fuckload of horse’ or ‘some asshole split with the money’, because that’s embarrassing, right? But that doesn’t mean that the Guardian has to play the sap.
... it’s important to keep trying to see the funny side, right?
chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.
It’s gotten easier to find funny headlines ever since Google News started giving quick access to hundreds at a time. And I imagine life has gotten a little harder for headline writers who want to be original, since a quick click can show that their brilliant phrasing has already been used six times if they’re 20 minutes late to the post.
True. Shortly after writing this post, I saw (and YHB is not making this up) the headline Karzai Optimistic on Opium. Or perhaps it was Karzai Optimistic, on Opium. One or the other. And I thought, why that’s an amusing headline, perhaps I’ll blog it—d’oh!
Thanks,
-V.
From the LA Times: “Bush Refuses Karzai on Troops, Captives”
But don’t we need all the troops and captives we can get? If Karzai wants to volunteer…