Response to the cartoon argument

[bignickel]

So far you haven't impressed me with its arguments.

Thanks for breaking my irony meter. Now I have to find a new one today!

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Thanks for breaking my irony meter. Now I have to find a new one today!

Do you think you can explain that remark?

All you have shared with us from Harris' book is that he decided that Osama bin Laden kills people just for the sake of killing people, and that this makes him much worse than other people who kill people for, say, political or economic goals.

Now that strikes me as a daft piece of sophistry.

That's not enough of a reason to make me read a book, and nor is the recommendation of anyone who thinks such daft sophistry represents some kind of philosophical insight without which there cannot be useful discussion.

I think you're trying to hide from reasonable discussion, by unreasonably insisting everybody read this book you've found. If Harris is so amazing, share with us something from his book that is actually amazing.

 

[bignickel]

You're the worst kind of post-modernist. No matter how many times I say 'civilian', you can't tell the differance between that word and 'soldier'.

I'm also not a PR person; I find much to recommend in the book for you, since I thought there was alot of information in it that you could learn alot from.

But it's clear to me now that you would be incapable of understanding most of it's import. When the hoards come knocking at your door, then maybe you'll be interested. But until then, you remain safe in your ivory tower.

There is nothing left to say to the likes of you; you will be of no consequence with what lies ahead. Just stay out of the way, if only for your own sake. And avoid saying anything that might even be vaguing insulting to Muslims. Such as 'freedom of speech', or other such phrases.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You're the worst kind of post-modernist. No matter how many times I say 'civilian', you can't tell the differance between that word and 'soldier'.

I don't know how you get that out of anything I posted.

You don't get that the difference between the Middle Eastern people you used cooked statistics to demonise and everybody else on this planet is not as great as you make out.

I'm also not a PR person; I find much to recommend in the book for you, since I thought there was alot of information in it that you could learn alot from.

But of course you won't specify what it is. Great, that helps a lot.

But it's clear to me now that you would be incapable of understanding most of it's import. When the hoards come knocking at your door, then maybe you'll be interested. But until then, you remain safe in your ivory tower.

The word is "hordes", and the idea that there is a popular-audience political tract that I couldn't even understand amuses me.

Maybe you have not figured out yet that just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean they they do not understand the issue.

There is nothing left to say to the likes of you; you will be of no consequence with what lies ahead. Just stay out of the way, if only for your own sake. And avoid saying anything that might even be vaguing insulting to Muslims. Such as 'freedom of speech', or other such phrases.

So are you actually going to sign up to fight in Iraq or something, or are you just going to post things that sound brave here? What are you going to do while I stand out of the way, Internet Tough Guy?

 

[bignickel]

I was considering "internet tough guy" for my title, but settled on "mad mod poet god" instead.

 

[jjramsey]

Here's the cold hard fact: these rioters want an excuse, any excuse to behave violently. Period. End of story. Forget about it.

With all due respect, flick, you write as if you were describing the behavior of cartoon villains rather than real people.

jj as much as we agree on things I have difficulty rationalizing this kind of hatred in any way, shape, or form. There is nothing really messy about it, in spite of how some European countries have mishandled the law. This response is infantile and thereby cannot be "reasoned" with. I don't write an essay explaining to my 2 year old why she can't spit on her brother when she's angry. I lay down the law, and she responds or suffers consequences.

And if her brother pushed her buttons and she spat on him in response, then what do you do? Of course you still punish the two-year old. That does not mean that you neglect what the brother did to instigate the situation.

It's a similar thing here. Those who burned down the embassies were wrong, and if the relevant authorities refuse to punish them, then they are complicit. Acknowledging the wrongs on the other side does not make them any less culpable.

 

[stamenflicker]

With all due respect, flick, you write as if you were describing the behavior of cartoon villains rather than real people.

An interesting comparison, although I believe Lex Luthor would be a bit more subtle than resorting to mass arson. In that sense, the rioters are worse than bad writing of cartoon villians, they are behaving like juvenile cartoon villians. I'd love to see any form of evidence that the rioters are not looking for excuses to behave in this manner, maybe I could maintain some hope for honest dialogue. It just isn't there and this is behavior that knows no reason or sound human interaction.

And if her brother pushed her buttons and she spat on him in response, then what do you do? Of course you still punish the two-year old. That does not mean that you neglect what the brother did to instigate the situation.

It's a similar thing here. Those who burned down the embassies were wrong, and if the relevant authorities refuse to punish them, then they are complicit. Acknowledging the wrongs on the other side does not make them any less culpable.

If you are referring to the cartoon, there is no similarity. If you are referring to economic disparity, then sure. But again, after MJK Jr., Ghandi, and a host of other sources from which to draw acceptable forms of protest, one can only conclude that these actions represent a deeper seeded need. That need is to inflict suffering and has nothing to do with justice.

Sometimes my daughter needs her buttons pushed and in order to learn alterior methods of expression. And yes, sometimes my son needs to have his jaw clocked to learn when and how instigation should or should not work.

In this situation, we have cartoons drawn in poor taste. But it doesn't really seem to matter what the instigator is or is not, nor what he does or does not do, in the case of these rioters as evidenced by:

a) not having seen the cartoons 1st hand
b) not having witnessed any "inflaming" event 1st hand
c) subverting their personal responsibility in the form of mass hysteria
d) becoming living, breathing examples of the cartoons they protest

They are sore because the truth hurts. Christians rejected the Jesus in urine display because there really wasn't anything particularly true about it. We were able to sit back and muse to ourselves about American decadence with little or no need to respond.

This is a pattern. And if it's not cartoons today, it's going to be whatever they decide it to be tomorrow... why? Because like I said, they are looking for any excuse to behave violently and to exert their will. Which we continue to oblige with our "tender sensibilities" and our Bill Clinton apologies.

Unfortuneately we cannot undo years of hate-breeding in the Middle East overnight. An entire generation will have to come and pass before this mess gets unraveled. In the meantime, both sides will be finding their pennance in blood and smoke.

Flick

 

[Beerina]

tm[/sup] didn't run through whatever city was hosting the exhibit, did they? No. A vocal, heated exchange occured. Many bad words were thrown both ways, but no one lost a life over it.

IIRC this, or at least similar things, were actually paid for by government money on top of it. Of course, Congress put a stop to that quickly, as it should have, but did so by pulling the money out of it. There was no actual censorship, nor could there have been. If you want to do that as art, go ahead; just don't expect taxpayers to fund it.

 

[kmortis]

HAHA...
I tried to follow the link to see what I'd origionally written and I got the following:

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /1424471Fer crying out loud, Mapplethorpe put on a display with a crufix in a jar of urine, and no one lost a life. I don't care that Xians don't have the prohibition against imagery, that's a touch offencive to most people. No one burnt down embassies over it, did they on this server.

Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/2.0.53 (Fedora) Server at forums.randi.org Port 80

I'm thinking that the Muslism extremeists blew up my origional post.