Mundine KO's Critics

[RandFan]

...and the 9/11 comment need not have been that big a deal if only there was a little more respect for the right to free speech in the country that claims to have cornered the market on it.

Don't you just love the double standard. If we excercise OUR right to free speech then we are not respecting Mundine's right to free speech.

So is Mundine the only one who has a right to free speech?

Here is a little "free speech" for you, BULL ◊◊◊◊!

I really think people should just get over it. The hand wringing and wailing that goes on every time someone dares to mention 9/11 with a viewpoint counter to, "It was a despicable attack perpetuated by people who are jealous of America," is getting a little old.

So, what you are saying is that we should sit down, shut up and ignore it when someone else says something so stupid as "we brought it on ourselves"?

You say it is getting a little old? Well if it is getting old then other peoples idiotic statements are getting old.

And I suppose rape victims are partly to blame?

I suppose the innocent palestinians who have died in Isreal "brought it on themselves"?

The logic is bankrupt. You cannot excuse terrorism.

Hey Manifesto, two wrongs don't make a right.

I guess some people just can't look on the bright side.

Here is an idea. Don't want me to respond to stupid remarks. DON'T MAKE THEM!

 

[Suddenly]

Don't you just love the double standard. If we excercise OUR right to free speech then we are not respecting Mundine's right to free speech.

So is Mundine the only one who has a right to free speech?

Here is a little "free speech" for you, BULL ◊◊◊◊!

So, what you are saying is that we should sit down, shut up and ignore it when someone else says something so stupid as "we brought it on ourselves"?

You say it is getting a little old? Well if it is getting old then other peoples idiotic statements are getting old.

And I suppose rape victims are partly to blame?

I suppose the innocent palestinians who have died in Isreal "brought it on themselves"?

The logic is bankrupt. You cannot excuse terrorism.

Hey Manifesto, two wrongs don't make a right.

Here is an idea. Don't want me to respond to stupid remarks. DON'T MAKE THEM!

I think it is important, especially when dealing with things like 9-11 to remember that causation and culpability are two seperate concepts. To say that U.S. acts abroad were not a cause of the 9-11 attacks is as absurd as saying that the U.S. is culpable for those acts.

It is unfortunate that when someone starts questioning the cause of the attacks, they are accused of assigning blame. When someone makes a statement of blame, they are likewise attacked as if they are dening other "causes."

If I call out for a pizza and that pizza guy gets into a fatal car crash on the way over, my acts are a cause of his death in that but for ordering the pizza the crash wouldn't have happened. Only a lunatic would find me morally responsible.

A more likely example, a rape victim who was raped while walking alone late at night in a high crime area. That victim's behavior was a likely cause of the rape, in that but for her waking through a bad area alone at night she wouldn't have been raped. However, as above, to say she is morally culpable, or that her acts make the rapist any less culpable seems insane.


I think a lot of political discourse gets muddied because for some reason people don't seperate causation from culpability. The boxer has a point that American policy made 9-11 more likely, but is wrong that American policy excuses or shifts moral blame for those attacks.

 

[shuize]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mundine KO's Critics

The motive was that Australia is too closely aligned to America (becoming little more than a sock puppet of America) ...

O.K. Thanks for the clarification. America brought the 9/11 attacks upon ourselves and America brought the Bali attacks upon Australia.

It's all becoming clear: Everything is always America's fault.

I guess in the "blame America first" camp, that actually makes sense.

 

[Grammatron]

I think it would have been more apt for the boxer to critique a specific policy in specific country/region. However, he took a low road just IMO so he could get some publicity.

As far as his boxing goes, well I'd have to see it before I could judge it.

 

[jj]

Boxing = BORING !!!

Didn't you mean "disgusting?"

I don't get it. Why is it a "sport" to see two people do each other deliberate brain damage?

 

[Grammatron]

Didn't you mean "disgusting?"

I don't get it. Why is it a "sport" to see two people do each other deliberate brain damage?

The damage can't be any worse than watching Fox News.

 

[RandFan]

I think a lot of political discourse gets muddied because for some reason people don't seperate causation from culpability. The boxer has a point that American policy made 9-11 more likely, but is wrong that American policy excuses or shifts moral blame for those attacks.

Thanks Suddenly, good points.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Don't you just love the double standard. If we excercise OUR right to free speech then we are not respecting Mundine's right to free speech.

So is Mundine the only one who has a right to free speech?

Here is a little "free speech" for you, BULL ◊◊◊◊!

Now, now, RandFan, don't have a tanty. Free speech works both ways. The Murdoch press is free to say Mundine can't fight, and I'm equally free to say that the Murdoch press is saying so out of a vested interest.

So, what you are saying is that we should sit down, shut up and ignore it when someone else says something so stupid as "we brought it on ourselves"?

I'm saying you could at least discuss the issue (it isn't that hard, suddenly does it in this very thread) and present your point of view instead of screaming SHUT UP! SHUT UP! I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT!

You say it is getting a little old? Well if it is getting old then other peoples idiotic statements are getting old.

And I suppose rape victims are partly to blame?

I suppose the innocent palestinians who have died in Isreal "brought it on themselves"?

The logic is bankrupt. You cannot excuse terrorism.

Your hyper-sensitivity of 9/11 is reading excuses of terrorism in what I have said. I am saying that these events do not happen in a vaccuum.

Hey Manifesto, two wrongs don't make a right.

Here is an idea. Don't want me to respond to stupid remarks. DON'T MAKE THEM!

But I like watching people like you lose your temper. It reinforces my belief that Americans are a bunch of flag-waving, donut scarfing morons.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mundine KO's Critics

O.K. Thanks for the clarification. America brought the 9/11 attacks upon ourselves and America brought the Bali attacks upon Australia.

It's all becoming clear: Everything is always America's fault.

I guess in the "blame America first" camp, that actually makes sense.

Alexander Downer and John Howard are Americans? Y'know, we'd always suspected, but we didn't have any concrete proof until now. Thanks for letting me know, I'll pass it on to parliament for an inquiry...

 

[Grammatron]

Now, now, RandFan, don't have a tanty. Free speech works both ways. The Murdoch press is free to say Mundine can't fight, and I'm equally free to say that the Murdoch press is saying so out of a vested interest.



I'm saying you could at least discuss the issue (it isn't that hard, suddenly does it in this very thread) and present your point of view instead of screaming SHUT UP! SHUT UP! I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT!


Your hyper-sensitivity of 9/11 is reading excuses of terrorism in what I have said. I am saying that these events do not happen in a vaccuum.


But I like watching people like you lose your temper. It reinforces my belief that Americans are a bunch of flag-waving, donut scarfing morons.

Judging by the last quote it does not appear like you would listen to anything other than the conclusion you already arrived at long, long ago. However, I still think you are missing the point of why others and I are upset with you when you make or quote comments like that.

9/11 was a tragedy and I think you agree with me on that. People who died in it did not deserve to die and were slaughtered by terrorist for some idiotic cause. Your view on this is to forgo the blame on the terrorist and blame USA for being attacked. That view pi**es people off. Now, if we look at USA's history you might make a fair point that our foreign policy created an opportunity for those terrorist to gain power, you might even say that some of USA's action may have directly or indirectly affected the lives of those terrorists. If you want to blame USA for those actions I think you will not find emotional outbursts or insults, you most likely find agreements if you present your evidence properly. Once, however, that those terrorists become terrorists and commit such heinous deeds, all that for the most part flies out of the window. And if you start reasoning out those deeds than you might as well apply the same kind of logic to everything USA ever did wrong -- someone forced their hand they had no other choice.

 

[Suddenly]

Judging by the last quote it does not appear like you would listen to anything other than the conclusion you already arrived at long, long ago. However, I still think you are missing the point of why others and I are upset with you when you make or quote comments like that.

9/11 was a tragedy and I think you agree with me on that. People who died in it did not deserve to die and were slaughtered by terrorist for some idiotic cause. Your view on this is to forgo the blame on the terrorist and blame USA for being attacked. That view pi**es people off. Now, if we look at USA's history you might make a fair point that our foreign policy created an opportunity for those terrorist to gain power, you might even say that some of USA's action may have directly or indirectly affected the lives of those terrorists. If you want to blame USA for those actions I think you will not find emotional outbursts or insults, you most likely find agreements if you present your evidence properly. Once, however, that those terrorists become terrorists and commit such heinous deeds, all that for the most part flies out of the window. And if you start reasoning out those deeds than you might as well apply the same kind of logic to everything USA ever did wrong -- someone forced their hand they had no other choice.

I don't think he's missing the point. He's saying American policy was a cause of the attacks, and he's right. The moral blame rests with the terrorists alone, however this doesn't foreclose the possiblility that we could have prevented the attacks. I'm sure you would agree preventing another attack such as 9-11 is of the utmost importance. To prevent the next one we must find out the causes of the first one. This is not an exercise in morality, rather one in reality. Yes, terrorists are evil and bad. This we know and really cannot control.

There are things we can control, such as our internal security, and our image on the world stage. There are two questions in this regard. First, how can we physically keep the next one from happening. Second, is there something we can do or stop doing to keep people from being so mad they want to do this sort of thing? Somehow when someone tries to find out where these two things went wrong leading to 9-11 (especially the latter) they get accused of blaming America.

It's just that somewhere along the line "looking for a cause" became "placing blame." The cold fact is our policy in the middle east, and lack of intelligence were causes of the attack. Except now going and examining those causes without saying over and over that "terrorists are bad" leaves one open to charges that he/she is blaming America and "taking the side of the terrorists" and the like.

I submit that is insane.

We can only say "terrorism bad" so many times. At some point it becomes absurd. Looking into deeper causes in neither unpatriotic or disrespectful, and I'd argue the exact opposite, that not doing so is where the harm lies. From the quotes you list in your post as well as the rest of the thread I can see no example from Manifesto where he "forgo[es] the blame on the terrorist and blame USA for being attacked." He is discussing causes and saying that American's sensitivity over 9-11 is preventing us from discussing this rationally and I'm not so sure he's 100% wrong about that.

 

[reprise]

I really have trouble understanding how people can believe that the Bali bombing was an "attack on Australia" in the same way that the events of 11 September, 2001 were an "attack on America".

Ever since 11 September, 2001 our politicians and the media alike have sought to include us in some kind of macabre "can we play too?" game which requires Australia to establish its importance on the world stage by being a prime target of terrorism because we joined the "coalition of the willing".

Australia has long had a very strained relationship with Indonesia and there are plenty of extremists in Indonesia who believe that we should be "repaid" for our interference in their domestic affairs. Our alliance with the US and Britain in the "war on terror" is to those people just another example of our interference, and while it may reinforce their view that we need to be "taught to mind our own business" it is not the cause of that viewpoint.

The Bali bombing was an attack against non-Muslim life and values in general and against Western society and values in particular, but it's difficult to sustain the argument that it was directed at Australians and that the other casualties (including the mostly Hindu Balinese) were merely "collateral damage". For terrorists who truly want to target Australia, there is no shortage of identifiably Australian "soft" targets in the Pacific region.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the time will come when Australia is the specific target of an act of terrorism and that it will probably occur in the Pacific region - probably Indonesia, especially if Megawati loses power next year. I just don't believe that the Bali bombing of October last year was such an act.

And yes, I agree that it's almost impossible to make criticisms of US foreign and military policy and how the application of that policy relates to terrorism without such criticisms being perceived as veiled statements that "America deserved 11 Septemeber, 2001".

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't think he's missing the point. He's saying American policy was a cause of the attacks, and he's right. The moral blame rests with the terrorists alone, however this doesn't foreclose the possiblility that we could have prevented the attacks. I'm sure you would agree preventing another attack such as 9-11 is of the utmost importance. To prevent the next one we must find out the causes of the first one. This is not an exercise in morality, rather one in reality. Yes, terrorists are evil and bad. This we know and really cannot control.

....

Suddenly, an American who doesn't just give a knee-jerk reaction to issues such as this is a joy to behold. Keep up the good work.

 

[Zep]

I don't get it. Why is it a "sport" to see two people do each other deliberate brain damage?

Just one example of agreement: I find it awfully unnerving and very sad to see how debillitated Mohammad Ali is these days. Although he was undoubtedly a fine boxer, he did take some big head shots, and it seems foolish to deny that this at least exacerbated his current condition if not caused it. Whatever his views and faults, he was respected by many. So what a pity his leadership is being undermined in this totally avoidable fashion.

 

[RandFan]

Now, now, RandFan, don't have a tanty. Free speech works both ways. The Murdoch press is free to say Mundine can't fight, and I'm equally free to say that the Murdoch press is saying so out of a vested interest.

Yes, but YOU are the one complaining about others not respecting free speech.

...and the 9/11 comment need not have been that big a deal if only there was a little more respect for the right to free speech in the country that claims to have cornered the market on it.

I did not make any such complaint.

I'm saying you could at least discuss the issue (it isn't that hard, suddenly does it in this very thread) and present your point of view instead of screaming SHUT UP! SHUT UP! I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT!

I'm more than willing to discuss the issue. I have discussed it at length on this forum. The comment is provocative. When one makes a provocative comment then one needs to expect such a response.

Your hyper-sensitivity of 9/11 is reading excuses of terrorism in what I have said. I am saying that these events do not happen in a vaccuum.

Yeah, right. Sorry if I don't buy it. If the comment were something along the lines of "America's actions contributed to 911" then there would have been NO response. Compare that to "Americans brought it upon themselves."

That's like me calling you an idiot and then saying I just wanted to discuss your relative intelligence.

But I like watching people like you lose your temper. It reinforces my belief that Americans are a bunch of flag-waving, donut scarfing morons.

That's fine. Ad hominem suits you.

You actually had a post that could almost pass as reasoned and intelligent. I was about to complement you but you couldn't resist ruining it with fallacious argument.

For that I own you a debt of gratitude.

Thanks,

RandFan

 

[Zep]

Originally posted by Kevin_Lowe Like many things, it's boring if you don't know enough about it to appreciate it.

But I do. Which makes me dislike it more.

I find opera tedious. Those of my friends and family who are singers, and know enough about singing to appreciate the skill of the performers, enjoy it.

I enjoy watching ballet. My girlfriend, who avoids all forms of exercise and athleticism, finds it tedious.

These are your personal preferences, and I don't know that opera causes brain damage! (except possibly Mahler or Wagner).

I enjoy watching boxing. I like watching what they do with their hands, and how they use their footwork. I can see it when they do something clever, or something dumb.

And how they get their brains rattled inside their skulls? We have continuous revulsion against people shaking babies, but this is exactly the same thing. I have no problem with most combatitive one-on-one sports (karate, tae-kwon-do, judo, real wresting, etc ) but boxing is the one that I would NOT support.

Sadly, it causes brain damage and people really shouldn't do it or encourage it. But ballet isn't good for your feet either.

Quite true, but sore feet mend when you stop, which is not the same as having brain damage.

 

[RandFan]

I don't think he's missing the point. He's saying American policy was a cause of the attacks, and he's right.

Are you talking about Manifesto or Maudine?

The comment by Maudine as it stood is inapropriate IMO. It at least in large part places blame on America.

It's just that somewhere along the line "looking for a cause" became "placing blame." The cold fact is our policy in the middle east, and lack of intelligence were causes of the attack. Except now going and examining those causes without saying over and over that "terrorists are bad" leaves one open to charges that he/she is blaming America and "taking the side of the terrorists" and the like.

There are better ways to broach the subject. I think most Americans are willing to discuss foreign policy and our mistakes. It is the pompus and arrogant attitude that it is our fault and no blame is placed on the perpatrators (as in this case) that angers Americans.

We can only say "terrorism bad" so many times. At some point it becomes absurd. Looking into deeper causes in neither unpatriotic or disrespectful, and I'd argue the exact opposite, that not doing so is where the harm lies. From the quotes you list in your post as well as the rest of the thread I can see no example from Manifesto where he "forgo[es] the blame on the terrorist and blame USA for being attacked." He is discussing causes and saying that American's sensitivity over 9-11 is preventing us from discussing this rationally and I'm not so sure he's 100% wrong about that.

Nowhere does Manifesto make the blame apparent either. Sorry but I don't accept your point. The statement is provocative. If a friend of yours died as a result of a crime and I said to you he brought it on himself I would think that you would find that insulting.

The statement IS insulting. It might have been unitentional and was done so innocently but it was insulting nonethless. Manifesto might not be able to recognize why this might be insulting so it was wrong to attack him but he knows now. I doubt that will stop him from using provocative and insulting language in the future.

We will see...

 

[KelvinG]

Just my take on boxing, I absolutely love the sport and watch it every chance I get. And I make absolutely no apologies, nor will anyone be able to sway me otherwise.
I'm usually not this dogmatic, but this is one issue I have no desire to debate. I'm right, those who oppose me are wrong. Plain and simple.

BOXING=AMAZING

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Judging by the last quote it does not appear like you would listen to anything other than the conclusion you already arrived at long, long ago. However, I still think you are missing the point of why others and I are upset with you when you make or quote comments like that.

9/11 was a tragedy and I think you agree with me on that. People who died in it did not deserve to die and were slaughtered by terrorist for some idiotic cause. Your view on this is to forgo the blame on the terrorist and blame USA for being attacked. That view pi**es people off. Now, if we look at USA's history you might make a fair point that our foreign policy created an opportunity for those terrorist to gain power, you might even say that some of USA's action may have directly or indirectly affected the lives of those terrorists. If you want to blame USA for those actions I think you will not find emotional outbursts or insults, you most likely find agreements if you present your evidence properly. Once, however, that those terrorists become terrorists and commit such heinous deeds, all that for the most part flies out of the window. And if you start reasoning out those deeds than you might as well apply the same kind of logic to everything USA ever did wrong -- someone forced their hand they had no other choice.

Suddenly responded to this point every bit as eloquently as I would have liked to have responded to it. If you think I'm 'blaming' the USA for the terrorist attacks, I can't help you. All I can say is you're letting your sensitivities cloud your better judgement. Take a breath.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Yes, but YOU are the one complaining about others not respecting free speech.

Yes, I am. The difference is, the people who are not respecting free speech are attempting to injure Mundine (by stripping him of his boxing ranking), which they have no right to do. Free speech means that you counter free speech with more free speech, not by resorting to acts which are designed to shut you up or punish you for not shutting up.

I did not make any such complaint.

I'm going to tell you something that might come as a shock. So make sure you're seated. The world does not revolve around you. I was responding to vague comments made by ziggurat and grammatron as well.

I'm more than willing to discuss the issue. I have discussed it at length on this forum. The comment is provocative. When one makes a provocative comment then one needs to expect such a response.

Who said 'two wrongs don't make a right' on this thread... Need to find that quote... can't put my finger on who it was... Don't suppose you could help me find it?

Yeah, right. Sorry if I don't buy it. If the comment were something along the lines of "America's actions contributed to 911" then there would have been NO response. Compare that to "Americans brought it upon themselves."

That's like me calling you an idiot and then saying I just wanted to discuss your relative intelligence.

Lousy analogy. If you had said 'compared to Oxford Dons, you are an idiot' that would be a closer analogy. Mundine was speaking in the context of how Islam fell about America.

That's fine. Ad hominem suits you.

You actually had a post that could almost pass as reasoned and intelligent. I was about to complement you but you couldn't resist ruining it with fallacious argument.

For that I own you a debt of gratitude.

Thanks,

RandFan

Sometime, Rand, you need a little slap to wake you up.

There are better ways to broach the subject. I think most Americans are willing to discuss foreign policy and our mistakes. It is the pompus and arrogant attitude that it is our fault and no blame is placed on the perpatrators (as in this case) that angers Americans.

Tell me what this better way is. It seems to involve crawling through a mile of broken glass on bended knees and invoking to the Statue of Liberty: "Oh, Mighty America, may we speak of the 9/11 terrorist attacks without reprecussion?"

Nowhere does Manifesto make the blame apparent either. Sorry but I don't accept your point. The statement is provocative. If a friend of yours died as a result of a crime and I said to you he brought it on himself I would think that you would find that insulting.

The statement IS insulting. It might have been unitentional and was done so innocently but it was insulting nonethless. Manifesto might not be able to recognize why this might be insulting so it was wrong to attack him but he knows now. I doubt that will stop him from using provocative and insulting language in the future.

We will see...

I was reporting fact and making a valid criticism. 'Making the blame apparent' would only have detracted from the basic issue: that these events don't happen in a vaccuum. As to it being insulting, I can only say, again, it's your hyper-sensitivity that translates what I say as insulting. Or, to put it a simpler way: The truth hurts.