filtering Cole
Paleoprog over at American Footprints runs a few fact-check cycles on Juan Cole (not to be confused with John Cole). While I don't take issue with the substance, I left a comment disagreeing with his style:
While a response to Cole is a good thing - after all, continued dialouge on the topic is the best way to clear away the half-truths and misconceptions of the sort which you did a fine job in addressing herein - I don't understand why people accord to Cole's analysis the importance that they do. Cole is invaluabel for his translations and his knowledge of the Shi'a and Lebanese histories. As far as his analysis goes, as you pointed out, he's a lightweight. Ultimately I think it's harmful to paint him as a completely useless source because he does add value to the discussion, after proper filtering.
And really, calling his misstatements "lies" is just too strong. You think he is being deliberately mendacious? I think it's more a case of pulling facts out of his ass when he's too lazy to look them up.
Comments