Does Angelina Jolie's passive-aggressive tweet re the Paris attacks tick you off

1. 90

   The Dirt Farmerposted 8 years ago

   Does Angelina Jolie's passive-aggressive tweet re the Paris attacks tick you off, too?
   
   As the world reacts in horror, sadness and anger over the Paris attacks, Jolie tweeted, "Whilst everyone talks about #Paris no one mentions the #ISIS attack in #Lebanon yesterday. I pray for both countries." So . . . what? As an American, am I supposed to feel bad about feeling bad for the attack on an iconic city and a long-time ally with whom we share much culture? Yeah, shame on me "whilst" Jolie gets her more inclusive grief just right.

   replyreport
2. 73

   aliasisposted 8 years ago

   No, that's not passive-aggressive, she's making an excellent point. We are (rightly) shocked and horrified about the events in Paris. Of course they are easy to feel connected to. Paris is one of the most famous cities in the world, and it's Western - many Westerners feel a personal connection to Paris for one reason or another. And the thought of over a hundred people being brutally murdered, more injured, by terrorist attacks makes us sick.
   
   But less "famous" attacks happen and the media hardly mentions it. Facebook didn't give an option to "check in safe" for victims of those other attacks. There was no option to change your profile to a flag of those countries. In fact, when many people hear about those other attacks, they just don't care - of course it's sad, but they feel no connection.
   
   The point is, atrocities happen frequently, but only the most famous places get any concern from most people. Angelina Jolie isn't telling you to feel bad about an attack on Paris. We all SHOULD be horrified and hurt by what happened. What Jolie is suggesting is that we should open our hearts to victims in other areas too, and not let the media shut out equally or more horrifying terrorist attacks and focus ONLY on Paris. We should open our hearts to all victims, and try to have greater awareness about the events that have unfolded.

   replyreport
   1. 40

      ChristinSposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly this, couldn't have said it better.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      Express10posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      THANK YOU! I was a couple days late to this one. I could not agree with you anymore than I already do.

      replyreport
   3. 52

      tyabaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      i found it here
      
      http://www.geeksjar.com/action-launcher … r-android/

      replyreport
3. 69

   Aime Fposted 8 years ago

   I'm torn on this because yes, of course we should all grieve the loss of innocent life equally.  I think that it's much easier for us in the west to relate to the Paris attacks because it's a popular tourist destination, many of us have been there, and this kind of violence is uncommon there.  It comes as more of a shock for those reasons.  When you hear about a place that you're not familiar with, that's fairly disconnected from your life, and that's prone to violence, it's not as jolting.  So it's "easier" to grieve for the place that is closer to you, in culture and in familiarity.  I'm not saying it's right or fair to grieve one over the other but it's also understandable and a normal reaction.
   
   I think there are ways to draw attention to the situation in Lebanon without using words that trigger guilt.  Shaming people into caring about things isn't going to help.  I've always hated it when people say "you're upset about this but you should really be upset about this and this and this, too!"  Why not express your feelings on those issues in a way that actually informs people?  In a way that helps people understand the situation?  In a way that says "this is happening somewhere and it's awful, I think it's worth caring about" without suggesting that people are being ignorant or hypocritical for not expressing equal amounts of grief for everything bad that happens in the world.  Because someone could easily come back and say "you care about Paris and Lebanon but not Syria?" and then "why do you care about Paris and Lebanon and Syria but not ______?" and so on.  It's not a competition.  Encourage people to educate themselves without implying that they don't care enough.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      dashingscorpioposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      " I think that it's much easier for us in the west to relate to the Paris attacks because it's a popular tourist destination."
      - Absolutely!
      Paris is known for good food, romance, fashion, & culture. Most Americans have no interest in Lebanon.

      replyreport
4. 81

   dashingscorpioposted 8 years ago

   
   
   No that doesn't bother me.
   She apparently is pointing out America has always chosen favorites when it comes to other countries. She said she is praying for (both countries). No one else is saying that.
   However our media seems to only be focused on Paris!
   Whenever groups feel ignored or feel discriminated against in some way it usually leads to unrest of some sort. Terrorism is bad period.
   I wouldn't be surprised if  "#Lebanon lives matter" appeared.
   The reality is if ISIS is our enemy we should be just as outraged about any country they attack. The upside to the Paris attack if one can call it that is the U.S. and other countries are now more likely to become much more aggressive with destroying ISIS.
   It's too bad it had to come to this though.

   replyreport
5. 0

   RTalloniposted 8 years ago

   Making this a competition for attention has inflammatory purposes.  Whether people like this Jolie person is ignorant of that fact and just a pawn, or worse, is a question anyone listening to the rhetoric should ask. 
   
   The fact that Jolie and others like her are doing exactly what you say, trying to shame people who express compassion for the Paris victims, is an important concept to consider.  Beyond why she personally is doing that, why does she not see that this is exactly what terrorists want (or does she)?
   
   One must wonder if the Paris attacks not only were intended to terrorize that country and threaten the rest of the world, but to also cover other attacks. A long conversation could be had on how the fact that the Middle East has a long-standing record of being fractured makes the attacks there different from the Paris attacks. 
   
   The fact that they are different does not justify any of them but the fact that they happened in Paris is different for the rest of the world, and it has meaning that we should consider carefully.  For one thing, we need to realize that terrorists want to make their evil work as common in the rest of the world as it is in the Middle East. 
   
   Defense needs to be a priority, and that includes learning the lessons of places like France who have tried to be accepting of refugees, as well as a nation like Israel who has had to make a lifestyle out of defending itself in the face of threats to wipe them off the face of the earth.

   replyreport
6. 91

   Chantelle Porterposted 8 years ago

   It's tragic when terror takes lives anywhere and of course we pray for all the victims everywhere. However, France is an ally and friend of the US. Lebanon, not so much. So while her tweet doesn't make me angry, I think she's being somewhat naive to think that there will be a huge outpouring for a country that supports a lot of terrorism. I feel bad for the people in Lebanon but friends come first.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      RTalloniposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Well said. To intimate that the U.S.A. does not care about the Lebanese people is to try to deny the fact that American aid dollars going there are incredible.

      replyreport
7. 68

   Shyron E Shenkoposted 8 years ago

   No, every one of us have different feelings about the attacks and while they all touch us in some way. I guess Angelina just feels a closer connection to Lebanon than to Paris. 
   What Angelina meant was she feels bad about the attacks on Paris but she feel worse about the attacks on Lebanon.
   An analogy: If many people are killed (as in Paris,) you feel bad and angry.
   If you have a friend who is killed (Lebanon)  you feel worse because the friend is closer to you.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      The Dirt Farmerposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      As I reread her tweet, I just don't see the "closer to Lebanon" thing.

      replyreport
   2. 68

      Shyron E Shenkoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I don't know what the connection is to Lebanon, I do think she is compassionate toward both Lebanon/Paris.  Maybe she feels that Lebanon is being ignored.

      replyreport
   3. 52

      tyabaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      http://www.geeksjar.com/action-launcher … r-android/

      replyreport
8. 89

   mattforteposted 8 years ago

   So...Jolie trying to bring attention to a different attack whilst saying she "prays for both" is passive aggressive, and makes you angry?
   
   I guess you're just another one of the masses that feels the need to be offended by everything.
   
   All she's doing is trying to get people to ALSO pay attention to some OTHER people that died. It's not like she said "Hey go see my new movie instead of praying for France".
   Jesus.
   
   Also, this is a discussion post. It doesn't belong in questions.

   replyreport
9. 0

   Stevennix2001posted 8 years ago

   I honestly don't see anything wrong with what she said.  And to add to her point, there's also grave injustices that happen in other countries every single day that America often turns a blind eye to.  Therefore, I see nothing wrong with her praying for the victims in both Lebanon and Paris.  It just means she's a true humanitarian that has her priorities in order.  Nothing to get offended by, unless you're just that hellbent on thinking everyone in the middle east are the same like some racists are doing these days. .

   replyreport
   1. 90

      The Dirt Farmerposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I felt she was trying to shame those who were upset by the Paris Attacks for feeling extreme emotion when they didn't feel that way about the attacks in Lebanon. Is feeling more upset about Paris racist?

      replyreport
   2. 89

      mattforteposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      You're just being overly sensitive. She didn't say anything about shaming people. She just said people need to ALSO pay attention to other things that are equally as important.

      replyreport
10. 60

    RLWalker LMposted 8 years ago

    She is pointing out the fact that people grief and fret over a highly selective sample of events that take place in the world, and willingly ignore the rest once their empathy quota has been satisfied to allow them to feel like healthy happy loving sensible and responsible human beings. They are not.
    
    Whether she is another question, or myself another too, which is aside from the succinct and accurate point that she has made that pisses some people off, and I second that.

    replyreport
11. 72

    sparksfiendposted 8 years ago

    Plenty mention the Lebanon attack, it's just not getting as much coverage. There's plenty of ways to bring attention to tragedies without acting liking a spoiled brat.

    replyreport
12. 58

    philabustahposted 8 years ago

    The news isn't news.  It is Ex * Lax passive.  It has an agenda and cares very little about its audience.  So, there was an ISIS attack in Lebanon?

    replyreport
13. 89

    IslandBitesposted 8 years ago

    Well, she is right...
    
    
    But sadly, it's nothing new.

    replyreport