I'm not in support of Knox, and in rereading my post, I can see how it can come across as condescending, but honestly, the two articles are so wildly divergent in their details I'm just shocked someone, anyone, would print such nonsense. That's why I'm curious about your take on the issue in relation to the segment I posted.
And while I read 'Rolling Stone' with every inch of skepticism they've earned, I read Coulter the same (don't forget, this women once claimed a soldier who lost limbs at the battle of Khe Sahn did so on "a beer run"), which is what left me scratching my head at the seemingly inconpatible versions of the events that are related. You'll note I wrote that the 'RS' article painted her innocent from the get-go, offering the "real" details of the crime before bringing Knox in and one of those naive Americans who got convicted because, well, you read what was written.
You're a much more balanced source of data, and I read your opinions seriously, so my question was about why you think a magazine, which is a respected publication on this side of the pond, would paint such a portrait of Knox.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: My Two Cents
Date: 2011-10-04 08:42 am (UTC)I'm not in support of Knox, and in rereading my post, I can see how it can come across as condescending, but honestly, the two articles are so wildly divergent in their details I'm just shocked someone, anyone, would print such nonsense. That's why I'm curious about your take on the issue in relation to the segment I posted.
And while I read 'Rolling Stone' with every inch of skepticism they've earned, I read Coulter the same (don't forget, this women once claimed a soldier who lost limbs at the battle of Khe Sahn did so on "a beer run"), which is what left me scratching my head at the seemingly inconpatible versions of the events that are related. You'll note I wrote that the 'RS' article painted her innocent from the get-go, offering the "real" details of the crime before bringing Knox in and one of those naive Americans who got convicted because, well, you read what was written.
You're a much more balanced source of data, and I read your opinions seriously, so my question was about why you think a magazine, which is a respected publication on this side of the pond, would paint such a portrait of Knox.