What it is an absolute disgrace is that it takes a visit to extreme right-wing ranters to discover alternate, more reasonable narratives than the outrageous, di

What it is an absolute disgrace is that it takes a visit to extreme right-wing ranters to discover alternate, more reasonable narratives than the outrageous, divisive, and inflammatory ones that have been recklessly and irresponsibly promoted by the media and public figures. Just because the President is slick, keeps his cool, and doesn't go off on "vociferous diatribes" doesn't mean he's any less ideologically driven and dishonest. One ideologically-driven liar is The President of the US, the other one is a no-name blogger that no one would know about if he wasn't one of the very few voices to show up in opposition to the original narrative. I'm inclined to give the random no-name blogger more of a pass on tone policing. > "hints" (read: concludes) This distinction is very important, because establishing reasonable doubt in favor the school and teacher who have been tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion is different from declaring Ahmed to be definitely guilty of a hoax which was definitely done to provoke a divisive scandal. "Hinting" offers an alternate narrative that is as least as plausible as the original one. We can thus retract the condemnation of school, teacher, and police without declaring Ahmed to actually be guilty of anything.