Think about the suicide bombers who listen to the wackos in the radical mosques. When a connection is established between the rhetoric and action, aren't you all up in arms against the hate-mongerers? So here, doesn't the ideological proximity with the incessant paranoid nonsense spewed make you feel just a lil'bit queazy ?
Obviously the Norwegian massacre doesn't come from here - AA sees to it that no more than 4 people at a time will ever care to contribute to this blog, or follow it. But the anti-the-other-guy rhetoric is in the air and occasionally some wacko acts on it, sometimes with and sometimes without a beard.
The Trouble with Charly is that he won't think. And so he has many uses to those who would be Leader. Such uses include being the propagandist via the methods of "moral equivalence" ["Yeah, sure, Hitler slaughtered millions of Jews among the 12 million slaughtered in the Death Camps. But, hey, Israel tries to stop flotillas from Turkey going to Gaza, so it's just as bad as Hitler"]. Good for you, Charly.
Charly: "Think about the suicide bombers who listen to the wackos in the radical mosques. When a connection is established between the rhetoric and action, aren't you all up in arms against the hate-mongerers?"
AA: Yup
Charly: "So here, doesn't the ideological proximity with the incessant paranoid nonsense spewed make you feel just a lil'bit queazy ?"
AA: Nope. And even you admit that there is no reason why it should when you draw back and cya with:
Charly: "Obviously the Norwegian massacre doesn't come from here"
AA: Charles admits the Obvious. This is an improvement....but then all this cya is just to bring back that ol 2+2=5 "Moral Equivalence"
Charly: "But the anti-the-other-guy rhetoric is in the air and occasionally some wacko acts on it, sometimes with and sometimes without a beard."
So you see, it's all due to rhetoric in the air, and anti-other-guy'ness, and sometimes its shaved and sometimes unshaved.
In the Gospel according to St. Charly, rhetoric and tonsorial mode are all sort of about the same in being the hand behind the Evil That Men Do.
There is an instinct to respond with seriousness to what you write, and to lay out the emptiness, in evidence and in logic, of your idiotic "argument". But what you write is so idiotic that the probability you are just playing at Court Jester of Versailles is too high. And if your intent was indeed serious, the probability you will then try to hide behind "irony" once a serious response is given is too high.
So, by all means, continue down your River, Charly, singing to yourself about your life that is but a dream.
You are just constructing a patently idiotic strawman-oid statement -israel and the 3rd reich are indistinguishable- which you conveniently attribute to me to illustrate the notion that hate speech of the Lisbon sur Montana variety doesn't lead to the same events as that of the bearded wackos.
Fortunately, your mindless agitation has little resonance in the civilized world, hence the low number of McVeighs. Yours is a rhetoric that finds its true audience among the hopeless, in the soup that combines lack of education with economic despair, hence the larger number of illuminati in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, … But in substance, there is no difference, just another scapegoat. Take heart, another few years of Bush-bama's economic mess and you will surely find a following outside of survivalist camps.
Re: Don't you know that speech and action ain't the same thing ? Uh, yeah. Some people agitate from behind keyboards, others give the same ideas shape. It's not the same. Right on.
Now that, Charly, is a perfect little piece of Pepeana. The champagne-flecked spittle of the Bleus musta taken some time to clean off your screen.
The brute fact is, Charly, that yours is a policy of "The Ends justify the Means"-- so all means to a desired end, however unjust, or just, however evil, or good, however Pepean, or rational, are justified simply because you, Versaillean, desire them. This is profoundly incompatible with a Free Republic, where men are to be equal under the law, and are to have Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness as the natural order of a rational, self-interested, citizenship. In a Free Republic, evil means are simply that, evil. And this is not dependent on whether or not the stated reasons for that evil are for Ends you can agree with. You would have everything be political, and Good and Evil subsumed simply into a world of "alternative tactics" for what you would stamp on the human race. So perhaps you would consider the Red Army, or Danny the Red, or the Weathermen, as easily as Princess Nancy and The Obamaklean One, as fellow travelers to the Radiant Future. For their End is yours End. But it is not so, outside of the hovel that passes for your mind. Breivik is a monster, and deserves death. He claims he killed children at Camp on an island in order to "save the West". Reflect, if you can, on the sheer Evil of that. Jean-Louis Revel lived a good and honest life, and wrote books of deep intelligence aiming to "save the West". Reflect, if you can, on the sheer Not Evil of that. Let us take at face value the assumption that they, Breivik and Revel, had the same 'End". It is not just abysmally stupid, but profoundly corrupt, on your part, to then claim that Jean-Louis Revel is "responsible" for Breivik. It is more than corrupt. It is evil in its own right. Charly, do not make the mistake of assuming that the miasmas that pass for air in your realm are natural outside its boundaries. Your incoherence, your imbecility, your moral vacuity, is the expression [loosely derived expression, as you would] of your own self. But then, be Proud. For you are all you can be.
The sight of a man perched atop a pile of turnips fancying himself Diogène and distributing intellectual (or other) satisfecits is a surrealist occurrence that every man should be privileged to witness once in their lifetime.
Could it be there is a reason why you've been dealt this hand ?
7 comments:
More nonsense from the pinko multiculti paragon. In what sense is this mass-murderer a "hero" to anyone but himself?
Think about the suicide bombers who listen to the wackos in the radical mosques. When a connection is established between the rhetoric and action, aren't you all up in arms against the hate-mongerers?
So here, doesn't the ideological proximity with the incessant paranoid nonsense spewed make you feel just a lil'bit queazy ?
Obviously the Norwegian massacre doesn't come from here - AA sees to it that no more than 4 people at a time will ever care to contribute to this blog, or follow it. But the anti-the-other-guy rhetoric is in the air and occasionally some wacko acts on it, sometimes with and sometimes without a beard.
Charly mean-girl.
The Trouble with Charly is that he won't think. And so he has many uses to those who would be Leader. Such uses include being the propagandist via the methods of "moral equivalence" ["Yeah, sure, Hitler slaughtered millions of Jews among the 12 million slaughtered in the Death Camps. But, hey, Israel tries to stop flotillas from Turkey going to Gaza, so it's just as bad as Hitler"]. Good for you, Charly.
Charly: "Think about the suicide bombers who listen to the wackos in the radical mosques. When a connection is established between the rhetoric and action, aren't you all up in arms against the hate-mongerers?"
AA: Yup
Charly: "So here, doesn't the ideological proximity with the incessant paranoid nonsense spewed make you feel just a lil'bit queazy ?"
AA: Nope. And even you admit that there is no reason why it should when you draw back and cya with:
Charly: "Obviously the Norwegian massacre doesn't come from here"
AA: Charles admits the Obvious. This is an improvement....but then all this cya is just to bring back that ol 2+2=5 "Moral Equivalence"
Charly: "But the anti-the-other-guy rhetoric is in the air and occasionally some wacko acts on it, sometimes with and sometimes without a beard."
So you see, it's all due to rhetoric in the air, and anti-other-guy'ness, and sometimes its shaved and sometimes unshaved.
In the Gospel according to St. Charly, rhetoric and tonsorial mode are all sort of about the same in being the hand behind the Evil That Men Do.
There is an instinct to respond with seriousness to what you write, and to lay out the emptiness, in evidence and in logic, of your idiotic "argument". But what you write is so idiotic that the probability you are just playing at Court Jester of Versailles is too high. And if your intent was indeed serious, the probability you will then try to hide behind "irony" once a serious response is given is too high.
So, by all means, continue down your River, Charly, singing to yourself about your life that is but a dream.
You are just constructing a patently idiotic strawman-oid statement -israel and the 3rd reich are indistinguishable- which you conveniently attribute to me to illustrate the notion that hate speech of the Lisbon sur Montana variety doesn't lead to the same events as that of the bearded wackos.
Fortunately, your mindless agitation has little resonance in the civilized world, hence the low number of McVeighs. Yours is a rhetoric that finds its true audience among the hopeless, in the soup that combines lack of education with economic despair, hence the larger number of illuminati in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, … But in substance, there is no difference, just another scapegoat. Take heart, another few years of Bush-bama's economic mess and you will surely find a following outside of survivalist camps.
Re: Don't you know that speech and action ain't the same thing ? Uh, yeah. Some people agitate from behind keyboards, others give the same ideas shape. It's not the same. Right on.
Now that, Charly, is a perfect little piece of Pepeana. The champagne-flecked spittle of the Bleus musta taken some time to clean off your screen.
The brute fact is, Charly, that yours is a policy of "The Ends justify the Means"-- so all means to a desired end, however unjust, or just, however evil, or good, however Pepean, or rational, are justified simply because you, Versaillean, desire them.
This is profoundly incompatible with a Free Republic, where men are to be equal under the law, and are to have Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness as the natural order of a rational, self-interested, citizenship. In a Free Republic, evil means are simply that, evil. And this is not dependent on whether or not the stated reasons for that evil are for Ends you can agree with.
You would have everything be political, and Good and Evil subsumed simply into a world of "alternative tactics" for what you would stamp on the human race. So perhaps you would consider the Red Army, or Danny the Red, or the Weathermen, as easily as Princess Nancy and The Obamaklean One, as fellow travelers to the Radiant Future. For their End is yours End.
But it is not so, outside of the hovel that passes for your mind. Breivik is a monster, and deserves death. He claims he killed children at Camp on an island in order to "save the West". Reflect, if you can, on the sheer Evil of that.
Jean-Louis Revel lived a good and honest life, and wrote books of deep intelligence aiming to "save the West". Reflect, if you can, on the sheer Not Evil of that.
Let us take at face value the assumption that they, Breivik and Revel, had the same 'End". It is not just abysmally stupid, but profoundly corrupt, on your part, to then claim that Jean-Louis Revel is "responsible" for Breivik. It is more than corrupt. It is evil in its own right.
Charly, do not make the mistake of assuming that the miasmas that pass for air in your realm are natural outside its boundaries. Your incoherence, your imbecility, your moral vacuity, is the expression [loosely derived expression, as you would] of your own self.
But then, be Proud. For you are all you can be.
The sight of a man perched atop a pile of turnips fancying himself Diogène and distributing intellectual (or other) satisfecits is a surrealist occurrence that every man should be privileged to witness once in their lifetime.
Could it be there is a reason why you've been dealt this hand ?
Post a Comment