freecounterpoint: Rage Boy, Afghanistan Tour 2008

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Rage Boy, Afghanistan Tour 2008

"We want the government of Denmark and Holland to arrest and bring to justice all those who are insulting Islam," one of the organisers said.

Pepe?

42 comments:

Mr roT said...: Interesting. So what to do? They try to make you play their game in order to let you help them.
A dilemma in my book. I am sure others on this board will say simply screw them, but it's in our interest neither to ignore them nor destroy them. Particularly when you consider the hygienic issues.
I think Shyster (what happened to him? A client get his wits back?) probably had the right balance on this now that this might be the situation that spreads bout in a contagion.
The Dutch and Danes in gratuitously insulting these guys' stupid but fervently believed religion are not more courageous than the US newspaper editors that chose the path of dhimmitude (if you go along with AA and AI) but are simply stupider. If you want someone to eventually take your point of view, you don't slap him hard in the face at your first meeting.
Enough bullshit about press freedoms and exercising them for the sheer offense this can cause. I wrote something to this effect a long while back too.
The point is to win the war and distractions like this are not the way.
You respect your adversary (this is in every military field manual since Thucydides), winning graciously and fighting intelligently.
There is no room for berserkers when there is a real war on you can lose.
This also relates to a running argument A I Pelosi and I are having about whether it's OK to bare-knuckle Obama.; 3/09/2008 12:05 AM
Tecumseh said...: JJ--your argument is well-meaning, but ultimately fallacious. Because, we're not talking about a single location here -- Afghanistan -- where I agree that the expeditionary forces should do all they can to not let stupidities detract them from their purpose, which is, kill dead as many of Pepe's minions as possible, and prevent the return to power of the head-hackers. So I think we all (well, except the usual suspect) agree on that much.

The hard and messy part comes when we're talking about the domestic front. Here things clash with other basic principles, such as, free speech, due process, etc -- things we take for granted ever since the Magna Carta in 1215. Now, why should we give up on these basic principles, in order to appease the ullulating Arab Street or whatever? It's sort of the argument the pinko Left is purportedly making when they urge us to give up in the fight against the bad guys -- but their argument is bogus, cause they use it against a bogeyman (Bushitler-Cheney-Halliburton-Rove, yada, yada, yada), whereas mine is based on reality.

I can go on, but so far, are we (except Pepe, of course) on the same page as to basic principles, eg, that Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, etc, are worth fighting for?; 3/09/2008 12:41 AM
Tecumseh said...: As an aside, note how the article slyly casts aspersions on the motives of some of the people involved: "a Dutch film that its far-right maker". Of course, left, let alone far-left is never part of the style manual of these guys, and anything branded to the "right" (let alone the "far right") is ipso facto a clear smoke signal to the Pepes of this world to dismiss, and start raging against. Disgusting piece of reporting, I say.; 3/09/2008 12:48 AM
Mr roT said...: Last in, first out: I would rather have guys on the right provoking others described as 'far' right than to lump moderates like myself in with them. That would be like some fallacy, dunno which. They can call Gogh an extremist if they want. I am sure that you would not have invited him into your house for dinner with your daughters, AI. He looked like an animal and likely was one as well.

As far as the homefront versus the fight far off is concerned, I saw that objection coming, but the fact is that the Net makes everything a lot more global nowadays. Just as we cannot ignore Africa anymore for being poor and backward for fear that they will become poor, backward, and armed to the teeth and after us, we can't as a society be a bunch of loose cannons.

I never thought it was cowardice that prevented US newspaper editors from publishing the inflammatory cartoons. I thought it was just better taste than the Danes'. Look at LGF at the time and you'll see the lack of moderation this discussion provoked. All the arguments contrary to mine were of the most seething and rabid sort. True assholes.

But assholes can be right, of course.

Thing is that if the US papers are going to go so far to offend Islam, then why not everyone else too? The don't, and it;s fine with me.; 3/09/2008 1:23 AM
Mr roT said...: Anyway, self-censorship is not the same as government censorship and so the Magna Charta, or whatever vague historical reference is in Men's Vogue today, has nothing to do with it.
Just because sodomy is legal doesn't mean we ought all go out and indulge.; 3/09/2008 1:30 AM
Tecumseh said...: Free speech is not some vague principle -- it's one of the top 2 or 3 core principles of Western Civ, methinks. If we abandon that in order to appease Islam Militant, we may as well follow the guy from Canterbury, and adopt sharia law.

As for "not offending Islam", can you define the notion? Far as I can tell, we don't need to do anything for that to happen, is the default, stable-state solution for IM. By definition, the mere existence of non-Islamic, non-dhimmified people offends their own core principles, non? So all this high-fallutin talk is deep-down empty talk. If the Dutch and the Danes were not courageous enough to stand up and be counted, would Binnie & his boyz be any less offended by our mere presence on this Earth? Put that in your moderate pipe, JJ, and smoke on it for a while.; 3/09/2008 1:58 AM
Mr roT said...: The vague thing was the historical reference, not the legal principle.; 3/09/2008 3:04 AM
Mr roT said...: Maybe Piss Christ will help define the notion of gratuitously offending, AI. It's obvious what it means to desecrate something. You take its rules and subvert. Read Arnol'd's idea that math is a natural science with cheap experiments again.
Piss Christ will take ordinary moderate people that think that religion and state should be separate and that public funding should go to the arts and make them question these two ideas. The only people made happy by Serrano and his colleagues are those that hate religion.
Notice the word hate, AI, and try to find a moderate of any kind that wants junk like Piss Christ around.
Islam has rules that are foreign and idiotic to us. Christianity does too.
IF you want to alienate ordinary moderate people of that fate, then it is easy to figure out how. You play the game Serrano has.

On a different thread, MFT has indicated he's reading Rabelais. You read that, AI? It's about like Serrano, you know?; 3/09/2008 5:50 AM
Mr roT said...: From the same Wiki: The Manic Street Preachers had originally intended to use Piss Christ for the cover of their debut album, Generation Terrorists. However, their record label wanted to avoid any religious controversy, and the royalty was deemed excessive. "Piss Christ is a stupid, affront photograph that offends the Church" says Madeleine Day, a journalist for The Age newspaper.

Did they do the right thing, AI, or did they piss on the Magna Charta?; 3/09/2008 5:53 AM
Tecumseh said...: Fallacious and disingenuous analogy, JJ. In what way shape or form does the profoundly repugnant "Piss Christ" compare the Danish cartoon, or to the Dutch movie you haven't seen (and abouit which you accept, sight unseen, the mendacious characterization as being a "far-right" product -- much the same the rage boys would accept such characterizations)? Also, in what shape or form do the violent reactions by Islam compare to the latter compare to the mild, peaceful reactions of the former? Lumping everything together in the fashion you just did is typical of Pepe's world. I'd expect more nuance from you.; 3/09/2008 10:34 AM
Pepe le Pew said...: Pepe?
My post vanished so here I go again:

While I don't see any merit in hurting people's sensitivities, I can't think either on what legal or moral grounds the "offenders" should be brought to justice.

That being said, I don't think much either of those who make every effort at pissing these people off by insulting them for the fun of it, and then drape themselves in the self-righteous comfort of a freedom of speech argument.; 3/09/2008 11:45 AM
Tecumseh said...: I'll say it, once again: freedom of speech is not just any old argument, it's a core tenet of Western Civ. It's the thin red line between what we take for granted and doom. Lefty types keep on bullshitting about freedom of speech -- egging on people like Bush, or religions like Catholicism or Mormonism -- in full, cowardly knowledge that those won't respond in kind. Bur they get all wooly, touchy feely when it comes to exercising freedom of speech with respect to people who in a second could chop their heads -- and are ready, nay eager -- to abandon at a drop of a hat they key principle behind democracy as we know it. Nice.; 3/09/2008 12:28 PM
Tecumseh said...: With that narrow statement I can agree. Look, I'm not the one going out provoking people -- never done that, never will. What pisses me off is double standards and self-contradictions. They are offenses to logic -- which for me is a serious sin.; 3/09/2008 1:04 PM
Pepe le Pew said...: They are offenses to logic -- which for me is a serious sin.
Most of the fun in life consists in committing serious sins. Serious sins rule, ai.; 3/09/2008 1:51 PM
Mr roT said...: I'll say it, once again: freedom of speech is not just any old argument, it's a core tenet of Western Civ.
Who in the hell is disagreeing with you? I was criticizing this slobbering about the Magna Charta.; 3/09/2008 2:36 PM
Mr roT said...: Van Gogh's version of Piss Christ: He habitually called Christ the rotten fish of Nazareth. The Tele also calls him a provocateur and In footage intended to infuriate Muslims, he depicted a voluptuous girl in a transparent gown with verses of the Koran painted across her naked chest, back, stomach and thighs - ostensibly to dramatise the humanity of the oppressed female beneath the Muslim veil.

No, killing him is wrong, but he was asking for it.; 3/09/2008 2:50 PM
Tecumseh said...: JJ: You've been saying this several times now, so I must assume it's not a simple typo: it's not Magna Charta, but rather Magna Carta, as in Latin for carta. Maybe if you spent some more time reading it (I just re-read the whole thing a few days ago) instead of mocking it, you'll learn this.

And no, there is absolutely nothing, nothing that would justify Van Gogh's butchering. Please don't blame the victim for this hideous murder.; 3/09/2008 3:08 PM
Pepe le Pew said...: AI - there are drug dealers 10 blocks from where I live. I could go there, make fun of their ridiculous pants falling below their boxers, and call them ignorant shitheads (which they no doubt are). But if I get shot exerting my freedom of speech rights, I will have had it coming.; 3/09/2008 3:22 PM
Tecumseh said...: Perhaps, perhaps. But, I would never, ever justify the murder on any kind of grounds (even if you are a @#$@%@ -head), and I would vote for life without parole or death penalty for the murderer(s) if called to serve on a jury. Again, I am a consistent guy: you'll never hear me condoning murder, on whatever grounds. If I have a lapse (we're all human, after all), you can come down like a ton of bricks.

Also, nuance: a well-known legal principle recognizes the difference between impulse-murder (the sort of hypothetical you describe, which very rarely results in a death penalty conviction), and premeditated murder, especially one of a gruesome nature (as happened with Van Gogh). The rage boy who found an unexpected defender in JJ was not personally provoked by Van Gogh on the street. Rather, he stalked Van Gogh like a prey, then jumped him and butchered him. How anyone can rationalize such actions is besides me.

Next thing you know, if one engages in this slippery slope of an "argument", one starts talking like Ward Churchill of "chickens coming home to roost", and rationalizing the murder of 3,000 "little Eichmanns" on 9/11. Where does it end, then?; 3/09/2008 3:41 PM
Mr roT said...: Ten blocks!? You moved to a good neighborhood!; 3/09/2008 3:51 PM
Mr roT said...: You wanted Churchill thrown out of his job for that, AI.; 3/09/2008 3:57 PM
Pepe le Pew said...: AI, I am not arguing that the murderers in that stupido-masochistic scenario I made up shouldn't be prosecuted. Just that I encouraged (and only have myself to blame) for my own demise.; 3/09/2008 4:01 PM
Pepe le Pew said...: I moved exactly across the street from the house we used to live in on Ursulines - 'member?
Yeh, 10 blocks was an exaggeration - it's more like 2. Didn't want my kids to have to cross town & run the risk of being run over by a bus to be able to score.; 3/09/2008 4:15 PM
Mr roT said...: Funny. Ursulines I have forgotten except for a decrepit KZ1000 in the front yard. I am thinking you were close to Esplanade.; 3/09/2008 4:33 PM
Pepe le Pew said...: Yup, 3 blocks from esplanade.

Ah, my KZ1000... But, however reluctantly, we all have to grow up someday.; 3/09/2008 4:55 PM
Mr roT said...: You haven't gone and done that, have you?; 3/09/2008 5:19 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: Damn, I leave for a couple hours and it breaks the 25+ post marker.; 3/09/2008 6:56 PM
Mr roT said...: yup. today's big hit. got anything to fight about in here?; 3/09/2008 6:57 PM
Mr roT said...: Here's a publication that offends everyone. See if you have the stomach for it, boys. Forget Serrano; he was an amateur.; 3/09/2008 7:01 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: JJ, great link. It reminds me of the scene from Kevin Costner's "Waterworld" where he pisses in some contraption and it turns it into water. Although that flick ties in with our notions of Eco-Revelation.; 3/09/2008 7:39 PM
Mr roT said...: be careful where you click in there, mft. might need a bag; 3/09/2008 7:52 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: JJ, I e-mailed Shyster to get his ass back in here. He's likely buried in work right now.; 3/09/2008 11:29 PM
Tecumseh said...: How about AA, is he asleep at the wheel, or what? Looks like only Ukrainian babes will wake him up nowadays.; 3/09/2008 11:49 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: True, true about the Ukraine babes, enough to get anyone's attention. I chatted with AA yesterday, and he said he'll be under the radar for a little bit.; 3/10/2008 1:22 AM
Tecumseh said...: Hey, I'm taking all the flak here, manning the ramparts . Tell him to hurry up, I need someone to watch my flanks.; 3/10/2008 1:24 AM
My Frontier Thesis said...: Okay, okay. I'll pass it along.; 3/10/2008 1:38 AM
Mr roT said...: AI, no one needs to watch your flanks...; 3/10/2008 3:51 AM
Tecumseh said...: I'm like the Emperor in Constantinople in 1453, with the Ottomans climbing and climbing...; 3/10/2008 9:53 AM
My Frontier Thesis said...: Use more Greek fire, AI.; 3/10/2008 11:46 AM
Mr roT said...: this is getting worse. fire in the flanks; 3/10/2008 1:48 PM
Shyster said...: First, AI, watch your flanks, Greek fire en route. You stated: I would vote for life without parole or death penalty for the murderer(s) if called to serve on a jury. Again, I am a consistent guy: you'll never hear me condoning murder Avoiding the seemingly inevitable ad hominem of calling me pepe for this, I would submit that the death penalty is murder, regardless of whether you think it's justified or not. So, there's that.

Moving on. I'm afraid I'm entering the discussion a little late to add anything truly of value. I do agree that free speech is extremely important, but I really don't see that as being the main issue here. It's already been stated and illustrated, but I'll do it again. If I walk over to my neighbor's door and knock and say "shit you're ugly, do something about that," I may be right, but it doesn't mean I'm not an asshole. If the Dutch and Danes printed a critical analysis of the Islamic concept of Jihad, and pointed out that this was perhaps nothing more than a post-hoc rationalization of the greed-induced tribal raiding from which Islam grew, then hey, this is goign to offend the living shit out of many Muslims, but you know what? If it's a valid point, then people should be able to raise the issue; offensive or not. The tripe that was printed by the Dutch and Danes (that I've seen at any rate) is not even funny to me; not because I'm offended, but as I've said before, because it's just juvenile and trite. Piss Christ is at least provocative, if nothing else. And as to this holy free speech, yes, it is important and should not be infringed upon out of fear (I'd say the same for decrying a war; I'm sure many who stand up for the Danes would disagree with me there: sorry, cheap shot I know). But as has been pointed out, free speech doesn't mean we should go around saying whatever stupid shit pops into our head simply because we can.

Finally, I'd like to address the "war on terror." We do have a significant problem to deal with here. It is also reasonable to point something out that was actually best expressed by a bumper sticker: we're making enemies faster than we can kill them. Sure, let's go kill everyone we define as a terrorist, and let's have a very loose definition of terrorist and turn a blind eye to our margin of error. Fine. Can we at least stop expending extra effort to create more enemies?; 3/10/2008 3:01 PM
Mr roT said...: Thanks, shyster for your addition. as you pointed out, jumping in after the kegs is floating is not the best time, still, I read your thoughts (unlike mft, but give him a break) and think we're similar disposed to assholes, as is Pepe, though he is one.
AI is wrong as always.
Thanks again. Welcome and sorry for the shot.; 3/11/2008 12:48 AM