A Modest Proposal For Beheading Journalists

AP reports that an Islamic group in the Gaza Strip threatened to behead female TV broadcasters if they don’t wear strict Islamic dress:

The threat to “cut throats from vein to vein” was delivered by the Swords of Truth, a fanatical group that has previously claimed responsibility for bombing Internet cafes and music shops.

Beheading a woman simply for not wearing a headscarf is both wrong and sounds like the waste of a good sword. There are many far better reasons to behead journalists. Offenses for which we might consider beheading journalists include:

  • Spending a career repeating the claims of government officials as fact without checking on the accuracy. Every journalist covering the run up to the Iraq war is in danger of losing their head here.
  • Claiming to be “fair and balanced” when you are actually a Pravda-style propagandist.
  • Limiting coverage of politics to the horse race without discussion of the issues.
  • Using Matt Drudge as a source. Goodby Mark Halperin.
  • Equating a yes vote on the IWR as support for the war ultimately waged by George Bush.
  • Reporting a controversy over global warming without noting that the only significant counter opinion comes from the petroleum industry and their lackeys.
  • Being Katie Couric (with or without headscarf) when your network has a tradition of real journalism stemming from Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite.
  • Failing to provide a male heir to the throne. (Ok, I’ve been watching too much of The Tudors.)


  1. 1
    Howie says:

    Typical. Where are the liberal feminists now? dumbass. Funny how a liberal will abandon you to barbarism when it suits their politics.

    It is “throne” by the way dipshit.

  2. 2
    Ron Chusid says:


    Rather than worrying about a typo you might improve your ability to comprehend posts such as this by studying the classics. This includes classics of satire involving other modest proposals.

    You might also look into improving your vocabulary. After all, people do judge you by the words you use.

  3. 3
    dude says:

    And people will judge you by the morality you display.

  4. 4
    Ron Chusid says:

    You really don’t get it all. Are you all this ignorant of literature? I couldn’t have made it more obvious to an educated person without totally spoon feeding you.

    I know conservatives often have limited knowledge of history, economics, and current events, but I had hoped you’d at least have stayed awake in literature classes.

  5. 5
    Jonathan Swift says:

    I am most distressed to see that, in the 21st century, there are people who would have the audacity to present their views in such a public forum but are uninformed about my work. I believed that my introduction of the phrase “a modest proposal” to the language was an accomplishment which would last for centuries among the educated.

    While my original modest proposal was misunderstood by some, the modern invention of the topic tag, if not cultural literacy, should have prevented any misunderstanding to current readers. I fear your blog might be patronized by an uneducated audience if those commenting above are representative.

  6. 6
    Sarah says:

    I take it some of your readers missed the “humor and satire” tag? By the way, I did get it – any individual who has taken a high school English class should have!

  7. 7
    Ron Chusid says:

    Yes, some did not get it. Hopefully Mr. Swift clarified the issue.

    As you note, the “humor and satire” tag should not even have been necessary.

    Maybe this partially explains how so many conservatives failed to realize that John Kerry was telling a joke about Geroge Bush as opposed to making a slur on the troops. Of course they had motivation to deny the truth on that one.

Leave a comment