Please, commenters, criticism should be informed of the entire post and supporting links. I refuse to be exhausted by repetition. Comments that force me to repeat prior statements, or that are personally abusive, or that praise her without adding to the debate, will be deleted. Those are all typical tricks of the crazed (male) Logan fans who scan the Internet for criticism of her. I left the No. 2 comment up as a good example.

Finally got around to reading the transcript of Lara Logan’s CBS “60 Minutes” interview about her alleged, fishy “brutal and sustained sexual assault” in Tahrir Square. Sorry, I’ve got kids. They take up time. And I knew this would really piss me off. It’s even worse than I thought. Lara Logan is cold scheming evil, in a “To Die For”/”Wild Things” kind of way.

Before I get to the worst con she’s pulled, by the way, know who doesn’t have kids? Lara Logan. She has one child. [Edit: A kind commenter draws my attention to the fact that her Wikipedia bio is not up to date, and she apparently popped out two kids one year after the other. She must have an indulgent boss. The facts as to her adulterous, suspiciously well-timed “accidental” pregnancy, however, are correct.] So why did she keep going on how she kept thinking of her “children”during this unwitnessed (and counter-witnessed!), so-called brutal sexual attack? Well, you see, Logan has a stepdaughter. When Logan got pregnant with her one and only child, her current husband was married to another woman. That’s the woman whose husband she stole’s child, not Logan’s. That girl’s mother is still alive, you know, notwithstanding that when she got the news of Logan’s very convenient “accidental” pregnancy (yeah, sure, a childless late-30s professional having an affair with a married man gets “accidentally” pregnant with his baby she keeps) she reportedly went to the hospital with an overdose. I wonder how that poor woman feels watching this cheater claim her daughter on national TV. The underling reporter who did the interview surely knew Logan’s biographical details, so when he said “your daughter and your son,” that had to be at her instruction.

Such a well-timed interview, so well-calculated for one last big burst of public sympathy and publicity. Done just when Logan’s first fix of publicity had died down, and she’d almost been eclipsed by real, honest reporter/assault victims like Lynsey Addario. No Obama phone call for Addario, though. No poster-girl status. And … not a single person questioning or disputing Addario’s credible, unsensationalized account of her mistreatment at the hands of her Libyan captors. And conveniently done just as Logan, whose only real professional asset is her appearance, turns 40 — getting very close to the age of the superior but older female reporter who was fired for her several years ago. Suddenly, women feel we have to sympathize with Logan.

Frankly, it’s scary that CBS would let this go on. What happened to critical reporting? What happened to “If your mother says she loves, you, check it out?” It just doesn’t seem to matter that there were eyewitnesses who dispute Logan’s account — and, more importantly, three months later, still not a single witness who supports it other than Logan herself. Not one supporting witness to support her claim that there was a 20 to 30 minute attack where chunks of hair were ripped out of her scalp, she was raped with hands (as she put it), and stripped naked in public. The only witnesses to any harassment at all, ironically, were people who said it didn’t appear that much was going on, at worst she may have been groped over her clothes, and she was protected by a chain of male volunteers. There were no women around when she got to the soldiers. Even without the disputing witness acounts, Logan’s counter-story just sounds like so much melodramatic Hollywood hogwash:

Logan: And I almost fell into the lap of this woman on the ground who was head to toe in black, just her eyes, I remember just her eyes, I could see.

Pelley: Wearing a chador.

Logan: Yes. And she put her arms around me. And oh my God, I can’t tell you what that moment was like for me. I wasn’t safe yet, because the mob was still trying to get at me. But now it wasn’t just about me anymore. It was about their women and that was what saved me, I think. The women kind of closed ranks around me.

Where are these saintly female saviors? How come there weren’t any witnesses interviewed for this segment, except a brief bit from her producer, who doesn’t seem to provide any support for the story except that Logan seemed very upset, like a “rag doll”? Why don’t we get to hear from “Ray,” the former special forces security guy who should be able to support her account of being stripped naked? All we get is Logan’s interviewer commenting that “Ray” said her sleeve was torn from her coat (probably by Ray himself, because he was supposedly holding that sleeve in a death grip). And how is it no one claims to have seen those cell phone photos Logan claims people were taking? Where is anyone who witnessed or took part in this gory, protracted attack and dramatic rescue?

Why did Scott Pelley ask Logan absolutely nothing about the fact that eyewitness accounts seem to dispute her story? It would have been so easy, and it could have been done without being mean. “You’ve probably heard that there were others in the square who claim they saw you there, and that it didn’t seem to them you were being sexually attacked.” I mean, they don’t have to actually interview Mexican photojournalist Temoris Grecko (and here’s his response to her interview, as well as to her crazed fans who wanted his head on a platter for reporting what he and others saw), but at least ask Logan something that gives her a chance to respond to his account of the incident, and the accounts of other eyewitnesses he quoted. It’s irresponsible not to give someone a chance to respond to that. Unless you know they don’t have a decent response.

Logan isn’t brave. She was treated with kid gloves in this interview, just as she’s been treated with kid gloves across the media. There’s nothing brave about a press release, and there’s nothing brave about keeping quiet for three months while the people you conned wring their hands over you, then telling your story your way to someone who won’t question a damned thing. It’s the most cowardly way she could have handled it. It’s the way someone acts when they’re lying.

Yes, Logan conned me and is still conning a lot of other people, and I’m frothing mad about it. So let’s go to someone who can discuss this unemotionally: “DC Dave,” (I found him at Female Faust’s post on the subject. We women do get emotional about sexual assault.) here:

Filming and reporting had gone just fine for about an hour before the camera battery went down, we are told for the first time. This is a convenient way of dealing with my question in part 1 as to why we had not been shown any pictures of what happened subsequent to the one picture we have been shown over and over of Logan looking concerned in the crowd’s midst. [Sheila says: I disagree that she looked concerned in that photo, she had a small smile and just appeared to be looking at something.]

They may have addressed the one-photo criticism—however implausibly—but they provide no explanation for their four-day reporting delay. They also have no explanation for the last-minute redundant coverage of the Tahrir Square celebration by 60 Minutes in this era of financial hardship by the news networks. CBS already had its live coverage of the event. What was the 60 Minutes story to have been in the absence of the “sexual assault?”

They do have an explanation as to how the group of rescuing Egyptian women came upon the scene. The attacking melee was somehow “swept along” until it encountered this knot of local women in the crowd. Only then, we are told, did things begin to change for the better.

What really cries out for better explanation in this new version of events is how the six-man crew failed so utterly to protect Logan. Before, with the “got separated” story, one could imagine terrible things perhaps happening to Logan that the crew knew nothing about. The scene as now painted, though, has the menace arriving with their full knowledge, and Logan, the one person the crew was there to guard, was somehow culled out by the mob. Had I been interviewing McClellan I would not have wanted so much to hear about Logan’s wounds; I would have wanted to hear about his wounds.

It is perhaps significant that the producer of this latest 60 Minutes piece was none other than Robert Anderson. This is the same person who, in the Vince Foster case, put the following complete lie into the mouth of Mike Wallace: “The forensic evidence shows that the fatal bullet had been fired into Foster’s mouth from the gun found in Foster’s hand and that Foster’s thumb had pulled the trigger.” (See the appendix to Part 6 of “America’s Dreyfus Affair.”)

Notice the contrast in journalistic professionalism between this account and what we have been told by CBS and the Murdoch news organs. Grecko names his witnesses and tells you something about each, making it easier to check his story out. CBS didn’t even give us the name of the hospital in New York City where Logan was supposedly sent for several days. It certainly makes you wonder if there really was any such hospital to name.

If [Temoris] Grecko’s is the correct account, which to this observer has a much greater ring of truth, what CBS did with its four-day reporting delay was not to hatch a story out of whole cloth, but to figure out a way to put their propaganda spin on the story. The real story would have done nothing for the larger mission of the U.S. mainstream press, which these days no doubt includes addressing the growing Zionist propaganda crisis …

My favorite line is the last:

A human chain of young men protecting the mildly harassed accused Israeli agent, Lara Logan, just wouldn’t do.

But it looks like Logan and CBS will all get away with it. The story tells too many people what they want to believe.

And that’s why CBS won’t fire her, even if a big media outlet finally picks up the real story and she’s exposed. Her superiors were in on it.


Category: Elsewhere
Tags:

About the Author


35 Responses to Lara Logan: Possibly the most manipulative, dishonest person on television. Yes, that’s saying a lot.

  1. stone says:

    Watch her on the video, and notice that her hair looks very … undamaged. Exactly the length and style it was the night right before it was ripped out “all over the place,” by peopl who “were trying to tear off chunks of my scalp, they had my head in different directions.”

    And she admits, “No broken bones.” An attack that long, brutal, and horrific, yet not a single thing broken. Not credible. And not a single scar on her.

  2. samo says:

    She has a step kid AND two children (as stated in the interview you “read”). Temoris Grecko saw a woman rushed by him for ten or fifteen seconds while he was buying tea (nothing more). A dozen female journalists were harassed that night [Sheila: And none of them sent out press releases or got calls from Obama! They are credible; she is exaggerating and milking it for publicity, discrediting the real victims] and he had no idea who Lara was (or that she existed till after the attack so there’s no way he can say the woman he saw was her). Did you not read the comments to his blog posts at all? Those guys tear his testimony apart. Your post here just makes you sound like a half retarded nut. You probably believe in alien abductions. Lame.

  3. stone says:

    Ha ha, a straw man already! For the uninitiated, Logan has a few rabid male fans (or maybe it’s Lara herself, she sure doesn’t work very hard) who troll the Internet defending her honor. I can always spot you losers because you call her “Lara.”

    Everything you say is incorrect, which anyone who reads Grecko’s post and comments will know. The comments only contain abuse. But if you can point me to an actual supporting witness, or link to anything that disputes any of the facts in my post, please do. I’m interested in the truth.

    Even her Wikipedia profile backs that she has only one child:

    “They live in Washington, D.C., with their two-year-old son and Burkett’s daughter from a previous marriage.[3]”

    Do your research, troll!

  4. stone says:

    And warning, from now on, comments that are personally abusive or refer to her reverently as “Lara” (unless you call her “Lyin’ Lara”) will be deleted.

  5. stone says:

    Further warning: Please, commenters, criticism should be informed of the entire post and supporting links. I refuse to be exhausted by repetition. That’s another one of the Lyin’ Lara Stalker tricks.

    Notice that Lynsey Addario doesn’t need to be defended by any trolls.

  6. samo says:

    You need to look up “straw man” because I don’t think it means what you think it means. Just saying. [Sheila: I do know what it means. It’s a joke that your argument is so lame, it’s as if I manufactured it myself as a “straw man” argument. You’ll never gain Lyin’ Lara’s love that way!]

  7. stone says:

    Speaking of commenters to Grecko’s posts, here’s an example of the blind, treacly devotion Grecko’s critics have for Logan:

    “I’d quit my current job, get back into training, and work as her family’s personal bodyguard and self-defense coordinator if I had any connection with them at all, if it would make her and her loved ones feel safe again, and I don’t think my loyalty would be misplaced. People with ideals should be appreciated and encouraged.” Barf.

    Logan has no female fans. Feminists have been roped into defending her. The only reason she’s on television is because a lot of horny men have misplaced admiration for her. Why can’t guys just admit they want to jack off to her and leave it at that? There are just some men who can’t admit that, who have to delude themselves into believing that the objects of their lust are admirable, gifted, moral, and intelligent. Hence, stealth bimbos like Logan.

  8. DaveinHackensack says:

    Why do you care so much about this? Why are you so angry (to the point of preemptively attacking any commenters who might disagree with you without sufficient deference?)?

    Just curious.

    [Sheila: I don’t think that’s fair, Dave. Will sometimes lays down post-specific comment rules. If you’d paid attention to this issue, you’d see the sort of abuse her male fans spread around. That’s why I left comment No. 2 up. Do you really want to see a bunch of those?

    I already explained my anger. I hate liars. Logan tricked me.]

  9. Anonymous Layman says:

    Sheila, I agree with you, there doesn’t seem to be much of anything from actual witnesses who were there. I was looking through several blogs and did manage to find something though. It’s not much and I don’t know how reputable the sources are, and to make things more difficult, it’s in a foreign language.

    Here is a link from a French news website with interviews of a young Egyptian doctor who was there and one of the soldiers who saved her. It corroborates what she said in the 60 minutes segmentand shows that she was unaware of the danger because she thought everybody was there for a celebration. [Sheila: From the little I can make of it, it doesn’t jibe with her account in anything except he says her clothes were ripped off. It contradicts her story directly in that he says he offered to let her stay with him and his friends to protect her, and she politely refused, seeming unworried. It appears he is saying she was already alone at that point. But she claims she was attacked from the minute she was separated from her crew, in fact as she was separated from her crew. Thank you for this, though, because it does provide the only claimed witness except those quoted by Grecko who support harassment of her at all. But it is questionable that with all the publicity her claim has received, this person is discovered only now, three months later.] If you can read French, go to this site:

    http://www.rue89.com/caire-annee-zero/2011/05/03/ils-ont-sauve-la-reporter-de-cbs-agressee-sexuellement-au-caire-202234

    If you need an English translation, then go to:
    http://egyptianchronicles.blogspot.com/2011/03/regarding-lara-logan-again.html?commentPage=2 and look for the comments by michael.boyd6 who posted on 05/04. It looks like he used google translate, because the translation is very awkward. [Sheila: I can’t make heads or tails of it. It’s not clear to me who interviewed whom, for one thing. Then there’s a comment about a guy who uses fake identities.]

    [Sheila: I did understand the soldier’s last line, and thought it instructive: “I heard that Obama had called, but he has not called me! ” He hasn’t called any of the other victims either.]

    This isn’t much, but at least some witnesses appear to be talking. Perhaps more will follow, but I’m suffering from “Logan Fatigue” and don’t think that I’ll be looking for any more news.

    As an aside, Ms. Logan does indeed have three children. We all know she has a son and a stepdaughter, but she also gave birth to a daughter, Lola Anne, on March 2010. Here is the link confirming it: [Sheila: So I can’t trust a Wikipedia bio?! With all Logan’s rabid fans, you’d think someone would at least edit the basic facts in her bio correctly.]
    http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/lara-logan-delivers-2_b18573

  10. stone says:

    And Dave, it’d be nice if you’d add something to the discussion, instead of attempting to discredit me on the basis of being “angry.” It’s another typical male Logan fan tactic. But I know you, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

    What’s amazing to me is how angry the male Lara Brigade is. No other female journalist inspires this passionate, protective, reverent defense from men. It’s as if she’s a captured princess. It underscores the real, and only, reason Logan has her job: her ability to inspire passion in men.

    But fine, then let her be an actress, not a journalist. Journalists are supposed to tell the truth.

  11. stone says:

    But Dave, as I think about it: I probably should do a post that gets to the root of my anger about this. I hate scammers in general (I’m still pissed about James Frey), but I should also outline some of the many times in my life I’ve been strategically thwarted in an endeavor (unrelated to rape — usually some social situation) by women claiming to have been raped. In some cases they were lying, in others I didn’t know. Another common tactic: men strategically thwarting me by invoking a rape claim on behalf of a female rival, thus placing her in kind of a bulletproof room from criticism and giving her (and them, by association) the moral upper hand in a conflict.

    The bulletproof room! It’s a women’s issue, if not a feminist one.

  12. Kirk says:

    Another common tactic: men strategically thwarting me by invoking a rape claim on behalf of a female rival, thus placing her in kind of a bulletproof room from criticism and giving her (and them, by association) the moral upper hand in a conflict.

    Kind of like Jews and the Holocaust?

    (ducks and runs…)

    [Kirk, I’m not a Jew. I just tried to fuck a few. And as I remember, you’re one of them that calls her “Lara.” (retch)]

  13. Kirk says:

    Seriously, I’ve grown a little sensitive to “princesses” in the workplace. When women entered the workforce, it was because they could supposedly “do any job a man can do.”

    Now I’m supposed to feel sorry for them if they get raped? [Sheila: Dammit, Kirk, she wasn’t raped! ] Sorry, but the workplace regularly doles out punishment that’s either comparable or even worse than rape. The more Logan cries about what she supposedly went through, the more out-of-touch she makes herself out to be.

  14. trumwill says:

    A desire not to be raped does not a princess make.

  15. Kirk says:

    A desire not to be raped does not a princess make.

    Okay, Sir Lancelot. [Kirk, what exactly do you disagree about with this comment? The point is, she’s being dishonest about what happened, and milking her dishonesty for publicity to the disadvantage and discredit of real sexual assault victims. But as Lynsey Addario pointed out, male reporters in the field do suffer indignities and abuses that are just as bad or worse than what Logan suffered. They don’t send out press releases and bask in the attention.]
    As for reporters, some of them really do get injured on the job.

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/popup?id=2887730&content=&page=1

  16. samo says:

    “The only reason she’s on television is because a lot of horny men have misplaced admiration for her.” ~ Sheila

    I guess you do know what a “straw man” argument is, after all. lol

    [Sheila: The below comment is one I’ve seen repeated almost verbatim, dozens of times, on any site with any comment questioning Logan. It always, always, comes from a male fan.]The fact that men are defending her (along with scores of women) [No, she has no female fans. Very few women under 60 had even heard of her before the her false rape report. Now they think they have to defend her only because sexist pigs are saying no woman should be a foreign corerespondent.] is a completely moot point. And, why aren’t we “protective” men instead of “horny” men? [Sheila: Why don’t you act “protective” of Anderson Cooper? Why aren’t you “protective” of the truth? What Logan is doing undermines the credibility of real sexual assault victims.] Why aren’t we simply interested in defending the truth or defending a rape victim instead of just crushing a lot? You sure seem to be passing a lot of judgment for someone accusing a married, successful grown woman (who is married [Sheila: You mention she is married twice. Why does that enhance her credibility? Are single women more likely to lie?] and raising three children [Sheila: We have no evidence she’s raising that other women’s daughter, even if her husband did win the custody battle.]) of falsifying a rape report. Less than 2% of rape cases are false reports. [Sheila: Give me a cite. And you don’t give a damn about sexual assault victims, you care only about defending the honor of your princess. We’re talking about one woman, not a percentage, who actually was something of a sensationalist joke in reporting and has been criticized for manipulation and dishonesty. I’m deleting your further drooling over her because I’ve seen this hogwash worded exactly the same way too many times. It may all be from you.]

    Not giving this woman the benefit of the doubt (because you’re jealous? because she’s pretty?,[Sheila: Ha! Exactly the misogynist crap that is typical of Logan’s male fans! I criticize their masturbatory fantasy woman, therefore I must be ugly and jealous. Thank you, samo, for giving me exactly the example I was looking for to discredit Logan’s defenders as a pack of drooling sexist jerks.] because you have a political bias?) would just be absurd, given her testimony on …

    You really don’t seem very familiar with her work. Maybe do some research on the woman before labeling her a liar. I think that’s fair. [Sorry, Samo, deleted your links. Remember the rule against Logan praise/promotion that doesn’t further the debate. Start a worship website if you want to pull that. And, unfortunately, I am familiar with her “work.” She would not have a job on television if it weren’t for her appearance. Your blind passion for her only backs my argument she’s on the air because of 1) most CBS viewers are old and don’t notice that she’s a bimbo, and 2) She has a pack of horny male fans. The latter is appropriate for a model, not a journalist. Give me Christianne Amanpour any day.]

    [Sheila: Samo is a also good example of the dynamic described in my comment N0 11.]

  17. stone says:

    Just so everyone knows, those links I deleted were just stories samo liked and links to various people praising Logan, not anything valuable as to the credibility of Logan’s claim.

  18. stone says:

    “Logan: Oh yeah, not trying to pull out my hair, holding big wads of it, literally trying to tear my scalp off my skull.”

    And look at her hair. I keep going back to that. It looks exactly the same as it did that night. Hair grows, at most, a half-inch to an inch a month. It wouldn’t have grown back by now, if this really happened.

  19. samo says:

    [Sheila: Sorry, this comment by samo was deleted for being extremely personally abusive. For instance, he compared me to a Holocaust denier. And I’m really starting to think the Internet “Logan Brigade” might just be one really, really active man with a lot of time on his hands. The comments in her defense are so similar everywhere. Samo, you’re welcome back any time if you’ve got anything substantive to add to the discussion.]

  20. stone says:

    Oh my god, what if it really is just one guy? What she only has one rabid fan, and he’s just really prolific? Because I’ve come to realize a lot of my distaste for Logan isn’t so much her, as the creepy male reaction she inspires and seems to invite.

    That’s the problem with the Internet, you really can’t tell if it’s “scores” of people, a handful, or one excitable one with a lot of handles.

  21. stone says:

    If anyone can read fluent French out there, I’d love a real translation of the article “Anonymous Layman” linked to above.

  22. samo says:

    One person wrote the thousands upon thousands of posts defending her on comment streams to articles, videos, blog posts, forums, etc.? Impossible. People just read stuff and repeat it. Same as you. I’ve seen everything in your original post elsewhere. Maybe her critics are all one person. Makes just as much sense.

    [Sheila: I promise you I’ve never commented about her anonymously under a different name. And in everything, I’ve linked to my blog, to back that I’m really a woman. But let’s distinguish between the many people who defended her against sexist comments that women shouldn’t be conflict journalists (I’ve been among them) , and the misogynist, worshipful male Logan Brigade (you, for instance). Your tactics include relentless personal insults toward those who question her, and attempting to bury any criticism of her under mounds of praise and links. There aren’t thousands of those, I don’t think. There’s usually only one or two guys on any post, who just keep coming back again and again, like that pitiful “nine” fellow on Grecko’s blog who would quit his job, take up the cross and follow Logan.

    The Internet’s a big place. You’re welcome to start your own fanblog about Logan, and link to me and call me evil. But I’m not going to put up with harassment and insults on my own posts.]

  23. stone says:

    The question is really: Are there a few crazy male Logan worshippers, or many? The more there are, the more discrediting it is to men in general.

  24. stone says:

    It’s interesting, because before this my feelings about Logan were similar to my feelings about Anderson Cooper: They’re both bimbos (or is he a himbo?) who would not have their jobs if they were judged on their reporting skills alone. Logan has her job because she’s attractive and willing to use her appearance manipulatively to gain access to military sources. Cooper has his job because he’s attractive and he’s Gloria Vanderbilt’s son. Ditto for Dan Abrams — cute, and Columbia Constitutional law professor Floyd Abrams’ son.

    But it’s OK to call Cooper or Abrams a lightweight or a bimbo. We’re allowed to joke about them. People won’t run to their rescue to venomously attack you. Call Logan that, and you’ll get a bashing from her *male* fans. Even if what she says happened to her, happened, it shouldn’t make it impermissible to ridicule her for the same reasons for which she was ridiculed before it happened. She shouldn’t be in a bulletproof room. None of the other harassed journalists are claiming that status. When she milks this for her personal advancement, she ruins the credibility of other victims, because it establishes a motive for them to lie.

  25. samo says:

    I call complete bullshit. [Whoa, there’s a new tone (says Sheila with sarcasm.)] You’ve been every bit as venomous both toward Lara [Ha! “Lara,” indeed. You actually imagine that you’re on a first-name basis with her! You really think being nasty toward a real woman that you can actually communicate with, on behalf of some celebrity, gives you glory as a female protector. Logan, unlike me, is a public figure. It’s not a “personal insult” unless she shows up here herself. ]

    and toward “horny men” in general. [Nah, I’m fine with horny men in general. Approving and welcoming, in fact. But I don’t like abusive men. And I don’t like men who try to justify their sexism and abusiveness toward women by playing the big protector.]

    Your tactics include relentless personal insults [How is a headline “relentless?” And she’s a public figure, for crying out loud. Not your girlfriend. I’ve been a lot nicer to you than you have to me.] (as seen in the over-the-top hateful title of this blog post that that caught my attention). [How could it have caught your attention? You have never been on this blog or in this blog neighborhood before today. Admit it, you found me searching for critics to slam. ] The links I included were not meant to bury anything but to point out the obvious: this woman has done a great job for almost two decades and deserves her place in the industry. [Actually, she was a joke and tabloid fodder until this event made her a cause celebre, unlike the many other reporters this has happened to who didn’t milk it for attention. Unfortunately, this claim on public sympathy makes people feel they have to stop sneering at her for the time being.]

    You’re literally trying to say saying all those vapid hairdos on Fox News, like Megyn Kelly and Michelle Maulkin, deserve their spots on television more than her because they are way super smarter? [No, they’re lame too. Straw man argument, especially considering I was ripping on Anderson Cooper in the comment above. I’m not a Fox news watcher. I’ve said before that Logan should be on Fox news– she’s exactly that sort of bimbo.] Is Chris Hanson average looking? Where are all these unattractive people on the news you feel got their jobs devoid of any and all consideration about their appearance. [There’s a difference between being attractive and qualified, and attractive and unqualified. But I’m not arguing there aren’t plenty of other lame-os on TV. Unlike Logan, none of them have a weird male fan brigade to rescue them from the horror of negative blog posts.] Who are the reporters with whom you are comparing her unfavorably? Have you actually listened to Logan interview or analyze stories? [Asked and answered.] She’s far better than most reporters. She’s won numerous industry awards. [There are a lot of bullshit iundustry awards. All TV reporters have a string on them on their resumes. Seeing a long list of “awards” doesn’t mean anything. She got one Emmy, back in 2006. Amanpour has had about 16. ]

    She’s supremely qualified. [You’re basing this on nothing except your desire to believe. She’s a dimwit former swimsuit model.] Maybe not as qualified as Christiane Amanpour [Agreed wholeheartedly. I hate most TV news except Amanpour, actually.] but certainly more qualified than Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Nancy Grace, Glenn Beck,[Those aren’t reporters, they’re commentators. The fact that you can’t tell the difference may explain your stalkerish worship of Lyin’ Lara.] Anderson Cooper, etc. Those guys are doorknobs compared to her. [Nah, they’re all twits.]

    Face it, you were against her from the start but you were forced to believe her for a minute so you wouldn’t appear to be a jerk and then, as soon as someone gave you an excuse, you tore into her. It’s got nothing to do with her work because you’ve never seen her work. [You really can’t acknowledge that anyone would reasonably fail to share your obsession, can you?]

    “…like that pitiful “nine” fellow on Grecko’s blog who would quit his job, take up the cross and follow Logan.”

    From what I read, that’s probably his line of work. [Stalking Lara Logan is his line of work? Face it, that devotion was just creepy.] Which person on there were you? One of the children spamming the post with random insults? Are you secretly Debbie Schlussel? Man, how many thousands of posts have you been posting all over the Internet [Where are these thousands of comments by like-minded people?! Please direct me, I’d love to find them, I think what I’ve been saying is unusual. But it sounds as if you’ve been on a lot more comment threads than I have.] because of this bitter personal vendetta you have against attractive people. [Wait, you just accused me of letting a bunch of other vapid bimbos off the hook. Why would I do that if I just hated attractive people, rather than because Logan sucks? Unfortunately, I couldn’t comment on Grecko’s post, because he only allowed comments up for seven days. Unlike you, I didn’t have the time on my hands to comb the Internet immediately. That’s why I’m writing this three weeks after the story. But amazingly, as cold as the story was, you still found this in a day.]

    You must be a complete psycho. [I’m speechless. You diagnosed psychopathy based upon a blog post insulting a celebrity?]

    “You’re welcome to start your own fanblog about Logan, and link to me and call me evil. But I’m not going to put up with harassment and insults on my own posts.”
    You don’t matter than much to anyone, dude. I could care less what you do or what you think about anything. [ You sure are dedicated for someone who couldn’t care less.]

    I was just trying to help. [By calling me a complete psycho, saying I sound half-retarded, comparing me to a Nazi, and implying I’m ugly? No wonder you’re single, alone, and can blog all the time.]But, obviously, you’re enjoying your little self-important crusade too much to give it up. I’ll leave you to it. Peace. [That doesn’t sound very peaceful. That sounds like fuck you. You don’t even have the balls to say it. ]

  26. stone says:

    Well, I hope he’s really gone this time. In some ways, he was too good to be true, almost as if I’d created a straw puppet because I wanted a scary Logan fan to illustrate all my points.

    You know what I’d really like to know, though? How samo found this post. It’s not up high in any Google searches that I’ve done on Logan. He must really have done a thorough search, I’ve got to give him that.

  27. samo says:

    [Sheila: Even though he said he was leaving, Samo came back again with a very lengthy response. I deleted most of it for the usual abusiveness, repetetiveness, and unhelpful promotional exerpts from Logan’s press kit. Here’s a little bit just so readers can get the flavor:]

    Sheila: “Nah, I’m fine with horny men in general. Approving and welcoming, in fact.”

    Samo: Whoa. Settle down there, pony. People are going to assume you’re a “bimbo” and blame you for it if you get raped. Then assume you made it up when someone says he saw you walk by him for a few seconds that same night.

    [Great example here of the false protector dynamic in misogynist males. Samo tries to present himself as a protector of women by defending an alleged female sexual assault victim of whom he approves. But when this self-image of Samo’s is challenged by a woman he doesn’t approve of (me), he becomes threatening and ugly, ridiculing me with the prospect of rape. I’ll touch on this dynamic further in my “Bulletproof Room” post.]

    Sheila: “You sure are dedicated for someone who couldn’t care less.”

    Samo: I like to write.

    [Sheila: Samo also let us know how he found me — he was checking Google updates on Logan. Still, three weeks later after the story. So I think it’s more than he likes to write. This story makes an important point to him, just as it does to me.

    But I think it’s more obvious why this would be important to me than why it is to him: I’m a former reporter who likes to critique fishy reporting; I hate liars; I’m against sexual assault; I’m a feminist and the story raises feminist issues. Oh the other hand, Samo is clearly not a feminist. He also doesn’t seem concerned about the broader issues surrounding sexual assault. Therefore, I have to conclude ,based upon his fanatical aggression toward me regarding Logan, that his motive is that he loves Logan obsessively. He probably also hates feminists (women need to understand that Logan is no friend to feminism). Defending Logan, ironically, gives him an excuse to bash another woman for having beliefs that threaten his sense of masculinity.]

    Also, “milking it”? CBS didn’t report it for four days. Logan didn’t say a thing about it for two months. These are things you probably complained about (like everyone). Now, you’re claiming she milked it? When she finally did speak out, she gave ONE interview on 60 Minutes for CBS (her employer) [Sheila: Exactly. If she dealt with an independent news outlet, not her employer, she’d have to face real questions] for which she will not profit [Except in a huge boost in name recognition and mandatory public sympathy] and she announced she will do no more interviews. How is that milking it? Anderson Cooper (in contrast) went on every talk show with footage of his attack and whined about it for weeks on end. That’s milking it.

    Sheila: I left the above in because it raises points worth discussing, which I’ll do in a future blog post. The points are: 1) How newsworthy is anything that happens to a reporter while covering a story? 2) How newsworthy is a sexual assault? 3) When and how is it appropriate and responsible to disclose a past sexual assault? 4) How differently, if at all, should we have to treat women who inform us that they’ve been sexually assaulted in the past?

  28. samo says:

    This is pointless and lame. I’m going back to playing Tetris.

    [Why not start your own blog? You said you like to write. It beats getting your comments edited on other people’s blogs, or pestering people on Facebook. :)]

  29. samo says:

    Ugh. I hate being censored. I’m out of here. It was nice meeting you, Sheila, in spite of your rampant misandry. [Aha! So you believe feminists hate men! I was right about your anti-feminism, and you don’t dispute it. You love Logan specifically because she’s *not* a feminist. Your defense of her has nothing to do with concern for sexual assault victims.] I hope you someday wise up and realize you made a mistake. [Yes, I might wake up sobbing: Samo and I could have HAD something! He’s the only man who ever cared enough to call me a Nazi psycho.] Peace. *gone* [Sheila: That’s the third time you’ve said you’re leaving … and the second time you’ve said “peace” and come back for war. But if you ever get your shit together, you’re welcome back.]

  30. stone says:

    I love how abusive commenters complain about being “censored.” If I kicked him out of my house in real life for rambling on and on and calling me a Nazi psycho, would that be censorship?

  31. stone says:

    Here’s a beautiful comment I lifted from Grecko’s blog from a self-described feminist who calls herself “Voltairine.” Check out the weird racial statements she attributes to Logan in lectures. Unfortunately, she doesn’t seem to have her own blog:

    “I am a feminist, the first person to come to the aid of a sexual assault victim. Unfortunately, I can also smell bullshit. Logan’s story is not believable beyond the parts that appeared remotely sincere. I am positive that those were the members of her crew, she was there that night and she may have been groped, hit and roughed up. The rest is innuendo or unrealistic. Dwelling on the scalping innuendo was so tacky. Playing on America’s history with Native Americans, our ‘savages’.

    Also, America has a spotty history with this theme of dark animal-like men ravaging pretty fragile white women (please see the 1915 film ‘The Birth of a Nation’ for further info). She was also taking advantage of American’s ignorance of Egyptian culture, describing the revolutionaries as cave people. People wanted to hear her story, no one asked what her anthropological opinion was of Egyptians on an evolutionary scale. She also made off comments like this in her AU lecture in March about invading Pakistan, referring to seeing the people of Afghanistan as seeing the “shades of brown you didn’t know existed”. Sheila: That’s pretty weird. I’m surprised she’d get away with that.

    Has she always been a racist Victorian lady from a Merchant Ivory film? People here like this? I’m surprised Americans like this person. Give me Katie Couric any day. And mind you, Katie Couric left CBS News soon after this story hit. The executive producer of 60 Minutes, Jeff Fager, took over as chairman of CBS in February and co-wrote Logan’s press release. The master of tasteless sensational infotainment.

    No one I know of actually took this story seriously. It was designed for racist and ignorant people. I don’t see any of my feminist magazines covering this supposed great story of a woman’s empowerment. The only supposed authorities declaring Logan’s bravery are her friends, who just happen to be journalists. Immediately after this story hit in February, Logan friend and journalist, Judith Matloff, invented this myth that female journalists cannot, yet should publicly open up about their sexual assaults.

    That it is brave for female journalists to make themselves the subjects of stories that draw attention to themselves, given that it is about sexual assault. These friends of Logan have written article after article declaring how brave she is.

    Which is interesting because Lynsey Addario, who is a brave and forthright journalist, was uncomfortable with people fixating on the sexual assault as opposed to the other forms of torture they endured. She was actually arguing against the foundation of this Logan story. Unlike Logan, who has basked in total victimization for months now, Addario spent her time arguing with the media about what it is really like to be sexually assaulted, trying to define the ordeal and defend herself from being cast as this sexually assaulted pitied victim, while her male colleagues were not (even though one of them was also sexually assaulted).

    By: Voltairine on 9 May, 2011
    at 11:52 am

    Just to clear up the hype, outside of her fans and some celebrity-journalist-worshipping sexual assault victims, nobody bought any of this Logan mania as far as I know.

    As soon as the story turned racist and no one at CBS interceded, smart people saw it for the publicity and hate-mongering stunt that it was. And Logan was not famous before this, no one had heard of her besides people who watch 60 Minutes. And those racist comments on the Logan articles, Egyptians and Muslims being called animals and savages, it started to become suspiciously repetitive.

    Then the same animal-savage theme was reiterated in her actual testimony. All of the rumors about her attack back in February were also in her testimony, which means she leaked those rumors to various news agencies to hype the story.

    We know it wasn’t witnesses because, so far, their stories do not involve flag poles, marks all over her body, being stripped, raped and mysterious chador-clad women from the 8th century defying their men and standing up to a rapist barbarian mob.”

    By: Voltairine on 9 May, 2011
    at 11:56 am

  32. Alan says:

    I just found this website while looking up Lara Logan on Google. It seems that there is a lot of personal animus about this topic, both for and against. I will say, however, as someone who was a police detective myself, that it is impossible to tell whether someone is lying without interviewing them, up close and personal, extensively. Then one can observe their body language, can ascertain whether they change their story and details over time, etc. Apart from that, I believe she supposedly stayed at a hospital for 4 days. Of course, medical records are private information, but surely someone would be willing to discuss why she was there. Most people don’t stay in hospitals for 4 days unless there is an issue. As for where the alleged cell phone photos/movies are, well, they were apparently taken by Egyptians, most of whom probably don’t write in English, so it is unlikely they would be sharing their cell phone photos or videos on blogs that we would be frequenting. As for whether a “rape” happened or not, legally, there is little difference between manual/digital penetration and penetration with one’s penis, and I think most women would agree that being manually violated or violated with a penis, is a distinction without a difference. But that is going far afield. In any case, we’re dealing with an Islamic society where women are not valued, and their testimony/worth is only a fraction of a man’s. I have many female friends who spent time in Egypt and other Islamic-dominated countries, and many of them report being fondled by men on the bus, in crowds, etc. So this isn’t exactly far-fetched. To put it in today’s argot, it wouldn’t exactly be a “shocker” that a throng of Muslim men at least manhandled a woman, especially a pretty white one. It would be like being surprised at seeing drug-related violence in Mexico, or finding bootlegged DVD’s in Shanghai. It goes with the territory.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

If you are interested in subscribing to new post notifications,
please enter your email address on this page.