The last couple of months has been one of the least active periods, here at casa de la jogin.com. In spite of that, it has also been one of the most traffic intensive ones. And it's all Al Qaeda's fault.
Every time one of those sub-humans cut off some poor innocent's head over there in the Middle-Eastern shit-pit known as "Iraq", people tend to search for news, pictures, footage, god-knows-what, concerning these beheadings.
As it were, an entry of mine is in the top ten when searching for "beheading" using some search engines (not Google, thank god). I keep -- or at least I used to keep -- a keen eye on my visitor statistics, but it has actually gone so far that I associate a spike in traffic with a grizzly act of terror that makes my stomach turn.
Before this August, big traffic spikes usually meant that someone -- once again -- had linked to my popular posts on Real Player in a comment on Slashdot. Now, it means someone lost their head to a cruel motherfucker.
On the one hand, it serves as a reminder of the cruelties the lowest lifeforms in the world are capable of; on the other hand it makes me sick.
Comments
I think peoples morbid curiosity gets the better of them during times like these simply because that's what the media is pandering to. Most people would be ashamed to admit they had searched for or witnessed such grotesque events - but they do. It is a rather curious correlation you have found between the cataloged snapshots of your thoughts and the current pulse of CNN.
To be contextual - you should feel lucky you don't get a similar spike every time the US carpet bombs a civilian area from 30,000 ft and it's not reported.
Comment by Peter at 17:50, 29 Sep, 2004 #
The "To be contextual..." paragraph is incomprehensible to me. Would you care to elaborate, Peter? What's the relation with the first? Lost...
Comment by David at 02:24, 30 Sep, 2004 #
do bloggers need to attract website visitors with beheading or hurricane?
Trackback from Traffic Statistics Users Newsfeed at 09:48, 01 Oct, 2004 #
David,
What I meant was the correlation between the frequency of unreported violence propogated by our country and the ensuing apathy. We don't care that we're killing innocent people and ruining lives every day under the pretense of a false war. Instead we are diverted to television screns of selective media that panders news of beheadings and activities of 'the vile enemy'. I'm not suggesting apathy or consideration for terrorists - there's just this thing that seems to have gone missing in the Afghanistan desert of the 1970s called context.
Comment by Peter at 15:45, 01 Oct, 2004 #
Peter, I can see your political views --and source of information-- are quite different from mine. What are the sources of your information? I mean, if it isn't reported --as you wrote--, from where do you get your briefings? From the liberal media? Or are you tied, somehow, with Al-Qaeda or Al-Jaezeera News? (read the irony between lines and forgive the spelling, please)
The truth is, lives in Iraq were been ruinned every day, before the conflict started. I am sure there is less of that today. Your first comment insinuated, somehow, that we bomb civilian areas indiscriminately. I do not believe so.
Comment by David at 21:48, 01 Oct, 2004 #
The fact that you have to refer to my aquisition of otherworldly news knowledge in an ironic fashion is very revealing.
You think this is about Iraqi citizens and their lives being better? Apparently you forget Oil for Food and dozens of other broken and fundamentally criminal sanctions and treaties applied to the country in the last few decades? Apparently the only thing in your mind is pre-war rhetoric about Saddam and WMDs. Oh yeah, the ones he turned out to not have stockpiled or harbor the ability to create.
It's funny that you can 'be sure' about the situation and quality of life in Iraq. Funny in the morbid, pathetically impracticle sort of way.
Comment by Peter at 20:37, 04 Oct, 2004 #
Peter, sanctions are applied to countries because of the persons governing those countries. We are not the only one's who apply sanctions. The UN has approved quite a few of them as well, which means other countries have too.
No, when I replied to your comments I wasn't thinking about WMD. Saddam was a cruel dictator, and I come from a country that has a dictator (no really cruel, but a dictator indeed). I know how it feels; you probably don't (I am assuming you were born and raised on a developed country and not on a third world one).
I have friends who were on Iraq, and they told me what they saw, no politics involved. As I said, I have lived on a totalitarian country, with a maniacal dictator. I know how it feels. It is different from the Iraqi experience, yet the same.
To sum up. Do not compare our army manuvers with the terrorists. Do not blatantly write that we "carpet bomb inocent civilians indiscriminately", because it is not true. Do not insinuate that the news would not know, should it be happening. Believe me, they would. And I am not refering to some obscure news reporters or news agencies.
Of course, you can write what you please. Tomas, nor your nation government will censor you on that. That's freedom of speech, something Iraqis lacked and now have.
Comment by David at 13:58, 05 Oct, 2004 #
My apologies to Tomas, as it was not my intention to create a dichotomous bantering on your blog. A little more creative and relative comment would be that this trend you notice has alot to do with your 'Perplexing' article.
Comment by Peter at 15:09, 07 Oct, 2004 #
The discussion has been closed on this entry. Thanks to everybody who participated.