home

Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread

Open Thread.

< Leadership | Results Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    From Truthout, story + pics of BP Spill (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:02:10 PM EST
    Here are 40 pics of spill from Boston Globe; see also,
    story from today: Killing Our World:
    "I wanted to destroy everything beautiful I'd never have," wrote Chuck Palahniuk in his novel,"'Fight Club." "Burn the Amazon rain forest. Pump chlorofluorocarbons straight up to gobble the ozone. Open the dump valves on supertankers and uncap offshore oil wells. I wanted to kill all the fish I couldn't afford to eat, and smother the French beaches. I wanted the whole world to hit bottom ... I wanted to breathe smoke. I wanted to burn the Louvre. I'd do the Elgin Marbles with a sledgehammer and wipe my ass with the Mona Lisa. This is my world, now."

    This is our world now, indeed. All those terrible things Palahniuk's protagonist wanted to do, well, most of them are happening or have already happened. The Louvre is still there, for now, and neither the Marbles nor the "Mona Lisa" have been violated, but as for the rest of that rant ... yeah, they're pretty much fact.



    " I abhor nature. (none / 0) (#39)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:30:38 PM EST
    I should like to upset it's plans, to thwart it's progress, to halt the stars in their courses, to overturn the floating spheres of space, to destroy what serves nature and to succor all that harms it; in a word, to insult it in all it's works, and I cannot succeed in doing so."

              De Sade

    I'd say we're getting there.

    Parent

    I can go lower: La Bas- Down There (A Study ... (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:08:29 PM EST
    ... in Satanism) by JK Huysmans:

    With extraordinary lucidity [Durtal] revisualized the picture ... the Christ rose before him, formidable, on a rude cross of barky wood, the arm an untrimmed branch bending like a bow under the weight of the body.

    This branch seemed about to spring back and mercifully hurl afar from our cruel, sinful world the suffering flesh held to earth by the enormous spike piercing the feet. Dislocated, almost ripped out of their sockets, the arms of the Christ seemed trammelled by the knotty cords of the straining muscles. The laboured tendons of the armpits seemed ready to snap. The fingers, wide apart, were contorted in an arrested gesture in which were supplication and reproach but also benediction. The trembling thighs were greasy with sweat. The ribs were like staves, or like the bars of a cage, the flesh swollen, blue, mottled with flea-bites, specked as with pin-pricks by spines broken off from the rods of the scourging and now festering beneath the skin where they had penetrated. [...]

    This lockjaw Christ was not the Christ of the rich, the Adonis of Galilee, the exquisite dandy, the handsome youth with the curly brown tresses, divided beard, and insipid doll-like features, whom the faithful have adored for four centuries. This was the Christ of Justin, Basil, Cyril, Tertullian, the Christ of the apostolic church, the vulgar Christ, ugly with the assumption of the whole burden of our sins and clothed, through humility, in the most abject of forms.

    It was the Christ of the poor, the Christ incarnate in the image of the most miserable of us He came to save ...  He entered upon the unspeakable torment of the unceasing agony. Thus, dying like a thief, like a dog, basely, vilely, physically, He had sunk himself to the deepest depth of fallen humanity and had not spared Himself the last ignominy of putrefaction.

    from the (complete online!) 1924 Keene Wallis translation of JK Huysmans' La Bas (in the original French and also online in all its glorious S!ck F*ck entirety.) Still creepy after all these years.

    Parent

    You weren't kidding.. (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by jondee on Wed May 19, 2010 at 02:54:34 PM EST
    Against the Grain is another good one.

    At least the French make art out their perversity: I think we may have too much of a tendency to act it out.

    Parent

    Killing our World, but (none / 0) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:00:15 PM EST
    help is on the way from BP--maybe.  But so far, 'on the way' is the operable description. The latest ploy, the piping one, is good from several perspectives: it gives hope, makes it sound like BP is on it, and the oil is recoverable for sale.  In reality, reducing the spill by 1000 barrels a day is either a drop or two drops in the bucket depending on what constitutes the actual gush rate. Any idea is as good as the one BP and Minerals Management has to offer it seems.  The worst idea and the one dismissed out of hand is to blow up the well since the BP investment would be lost. The Obama administration is also on the job, with the Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, convening as soon as last week, a blue ribbon committee of scientists to take a look (just figuratively, so far), although there was a slip up not caused by the oil. It turns out that one of the scientists is somewhat controversial and was fired. Jonathan Katz, professor of physics, with specialization in astrophysics and gamma rays, was belatedly found to hold some troubling opinions including his defense of homophobia, disdain for educational extremists who believe in dealing with learning disabilities, and believes global warming has only good effects. He also does not believe students should do science, and advises accordingly. Guess the objectivity required can be wearing.

    Parent
    Fox, I appreciate the links (none / 0) (#67)
    by ZtoA on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:41:17 PM EST
    and Wow, unbelievable. The burning sea (and someone said oil spill= metaphorical blood loss) and the oil tipped waves.... truly shocking.

     "Capt. Lyle Dehart of the shrimping vessel Rocking Angel caught oily shrimp around midnight on Friday in Bayou Severin, near Sister Lake. Shrimpers on the boat reported that their fingers stuck together when they touched the shrimp." - from your second link.

    I started messing around with water (not sea) and oil and dry shampoo and mineral spirit solvent this morning and by now my cup of what started out as clear water with oil floating on top is a cup of gooey gelatinous muck. Much of the oil is dispersed. So I googled to see what chemicals are used in the gulf and it seems Corexit uses two solvents and a surfactant. I have NO chemistry training whatsoever, so if anyone understands this I'd love to know more. I do, however, work with materials such as solvents, oils and others. And pouring solvents into an ocean does not strike me as a good idea.

    Then, in my cup there's goo on the bottom of the cup and its milky, making me think that a new set of microorganisms will likely want to eat it and it will change everything in the food chain (we're in that chain too) and found this:  "But the dispersed oil can also collect on the seabed, where it becomes food for microscopic organisms at the bottom of the food chain and eventually winds up in shellfish and other organisms. The evaporation process can also concentrate the toxic compounds left behind, particularly oil-derived compounds called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs." (good article btw, and OK for the lay person - from Scientific American)

    And I am wondering if the oil is being mixed with solvents if that could affect ground water in coastal areas which would mean drinking water. Luckily it looks like BP is discontinuing using dispersants - both on the surface and at deep levels.

    Parent

    polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (none / 0) (#74)
    by ZtoA on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:55:31 PM EST
    Often smelly and decaying blobs? Not quite...

    PAHs

    On top of all that info this caught my eye:

    "PAHs possess very characteristic UV absorbance spectra. These often possess many absorbance bands and are unique for each ring structure."

    I wonder if that means it could exaggerate warming in the gulf.

    Parent

    Here's the mother of all links on BP Spill (none / 0) (#113)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue May 18, 2010 at 10:36:18 PM EST
    Go to EcoEarth.Info; the search options are currently preset to show all major reporting on the BP Oil Spill in chronological order -- most recent stuff is listed first. Hey ZtoA, (in support of your experiments in oil absorption and concern over dispersants), here's a HuffPo story from May 17, How to Clean Up the Oil (misleading title):
    Chemical Dispersant: According to Riki Ott, marine toxicologist and author...spraying Corexit 9527A (which contains 2-Butoxyethanol) in the Gulf, as BP is currently doing, in an attempt to minimize damage to the coast, will kill the shrimp eggs and larvae and young fish that are in the water column now. The chemicals in them can linger in the water for decades, especially when used in deep water, where low temperatures can inhibit bio-degradation. The use of this chemical was responsible for the collapse of the herring fishery in Alaska after the Exxon Valdez. What is so counterproductive about this is the fact that this chemical will also kill the very micro-organisms that would otherwise naturally break down the oil.

    As we now know, BP's use of chemical dispersants at source has driven much of the oil beneath the surface making it impossible to boom or mop up with absorbent materials. Anyhoo, for the oil that makes it to the surface:

    Absorbent materials (corn cobs): a Michigan woman named Adria Brown (her company is Recovery I Inc.), has developed and patented a product called Golden Retriever that is designed to recover oil from water. It is made from corn cobs which are especially effective in this task; they are buoyant; and they tend to spin in moving water, which exposes their entire surface to the oil which clings readily to it. The absorption occurs quickly...As an added benefit, the oil can be completely recovered by centrifuge and the cobs can be reused. Brown has been working with an extensive farm network across the Midwest...they have amassed a stockpile of close to 34,000 tons of material that is ready to be deployed to the Gulf. That is, as soon as someone down there asks for it. Sen. Chuck Grassley has also been involved, helping to move the paperwork in Washington.

    I just found the Eco.Earth site -- will start scanning the headlines ASAP.

    Parent

    BP leak (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by waldenpond on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:33:49 PM EST
    Here's the latest video with the straw.  If that straw is picking up 1000 barrels per day, it looks to me this backs up those who are saying the spill is much worse than 5000 per day.

    Video.

    Tar balls on the beach in the FL keys. (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:52:11 PM EST
    Shades of Santa Barbara.

    Parent
    Thanks, waldenpond (none / 0) (#36)
    by Zorba on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:06:37 PM EST
    for posting this link, and thank you, Senator Nelson, for releasing the video.  

    Parent
    The BP WORM may be turning... (none / 0) (#115)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:03:40 AM EST
    Times-Picayune headline from May 18th: BP has been allowed too much control of response to Gulf of Mexico oil spill, critics say. Evidently, some Democrats and environmentalists have started criticizing the Obama Administration (mostly "the administration") for kow-towing to BP in the aftermath of the spill:
    Almost a month of failed efforts and marginal progress, some critics are asking whether the administration is relying too much on the oil company, particularly on what the administration says is the No.1 mission: stopping the oil at its source nearly a mile beneath Gulf waters.

    Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chair of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment: "I think that there are experts from Woods Hole to MIT to Cal Tech down in the universities in the Gulf region who are ready, willing and able to move in and give the long-term scientific expertise to solve these problems"...

    Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass: asked Jane Lubchenco, Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, about the use of the chemical dispersant Corexit, which is banned in the United Kingdom because of its toxicity, [but was nonetheless approved by NOAA for use on the BP Spill]...

    Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson: "the bottom line remains that this administration has been content to sit back and point the finger at others while shielding federal agencies that were also to blame for this disaster"...

    Heather Emmert, Gulf States field organizer for Environment America: "It seems as if the Obama administration is pretty much letting BP run the show...And some of the things they are agreeing with are very contrary to what some scientists on the ground are saying."

    Mary Landrieu, D-La., in defense of the administration, said the response has been "comprehensive". She is particularly impressed that "this president has sent his Cabinet time and time again for the last three and a half weeks".

    Parent

    Here's a new way not to really (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:59:54 PM EST
    apologize:  NYT
    ]"On a few occasions I have misspoken about my service, and I regret that and I take full responsibility," Mr. Blumenthal said at a news conference Tuesday at a Veterans of Foreign Wars post in West Hartford, "but I will not allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country."

    Mr. Blumenthal said he had been unaware of "those misplaced words" when he said them. He said that the errors were "totally unintentional" errors and that he had made them on only a small number of occasions in hundreds of public appearances.



    PTSD (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:05:51 PM EST
    It must be that his imaginary stint in Nam caused a severe case of PTSD, and it has affected his memory.

    Happens all the time...

    Parent

    Oh, it's gonna be interesting (none / 0) (#5)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:11:05 PM EST
    on a local discussion board of Viet vets, many with PTSD (I know many, so I subscribe and support).

    Did you see the presser?  What a scene. . . .

    And the media are digging up the guy's quotes from the past, as when he infers that he was subjected to "taunts and insults" for his service.  In the reserves?  

    CNN reports, to be fair, that his unit was famed for . . . its Toys for Tots drive.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:13:14 PM EST
    As TPM puts it, this is one of those cases when a 20% lead comes in handy.

    Parent
    Hmmm ... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Robot Porter on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:14:58 PM EST
    CNN reports, to be fair, that his unit was famed for . . . its Toys for Tots drive.

    Maybe the "taunts and insults" he remembers were from children disappointed with the toys they got.

    ;)

    Parent

    Perfect line! (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:44:46 PM EST
    Wish I had said that. :-)

    Parent
    Blumenthal is just another vet (none / 0) (#14)
    by Farmboy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:28:37 PM EST
    who got caught trying to sound like a vet who saw combat by applying the "VietNam era Veteran" term to himself. Not much difference between him and some of the gang at the VFW. Just ask 'em where they were stationed and the conversation moves to a new topic pretty quickly.

    Parent
    "Greatest Generation" politicians (none / 0) (#87)
    by esmense on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:55:47 PM EST
    and, I'm sure, others less elevated, have been know to inflate their service a bit too.

    Ronald Reagan claimed that while serving in Europe in the Signal Corp he was on hand to film Buchenwald shortly after it was liberated. Of course, he never left the states.

    LBJ, who spent his time in the Navy Reserves in Congress and never saw combat in WWII, finagled a Silver Star for a highly questionable  "observation" mission. His biographer, Robert Caro, has said  "The most you can say about Lyndon Johnson and his Silver Star is that it is surely one of the most undeserved Silver Stars in history, because if you accept everything that he said, he was still in action for no more than 13 minutes and only as an observer."


    Parent

    Well, it seems his record is well (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by jes on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:20:12 PM EST
    known in CT and that he has made 100s of appearances where he made his record quite clear.

    He did not apologize. The vets shouted down any attempt to get him to apologize.

    Parent

    It is important for me to hear (none / 0) (#101)
    by christinep on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:09:39 PM EST
    about the positive regard in which Mr. Blumenthal is held in Connecticult. For some inexplicable reason, the story reflecting his embellishments/exaggerations hit me hard in the sense of my wanting to give him "the back of the hand" etc.  Whereas the Souders and kazillion Republicans in recent times are guilty of hypocrisy--no small matter--the Blumenthal situation suggested cowardice while others actually fought, were injured and died in Vietnam. Its my age; it hurt (again.) I'm trying to pull back--me the lifelong Democrat who can and will defend just about any Democrat alive (yellow and blue dogs)--and not be so judgmental, to be understanding that we all tell a fib here and there about our backgrounds. But.... I want him to redeem himself here. It would help if I didn't have to hear--in addition to the now common Nixonian "misspeak"--that there were a "few misplaced words." So guys...help me get behind him again.

    Parent
    OK (none / 0) (#108)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:11:07 PM EST
    Don't much like the guy myself, but...

    For the few times he appears to have distinctly "misspoken," there are many more occasions, apparently, when he's been quite clear about the fact that he was in the reserves and never saw active duty.

    Parent

    He has a 75% approval rating. (none / 0) (#114)
    by AX10 on Wed May 19, 2010 at 12:01:23 AM EST
    Will it hold up?  We will see.
    It will be unfortunate to see him leave public service.  His 20 years as AG have brought great good for the state including fighting the utility and insurance companies everytime they want to raise our rates.

    Parent
    Okay, why did the NYTimes cut the video (none / 0) (#139)
    by jes on Wed May 19, 2010 at 02:32:55 PM EST
    to just include the part of the speech where he missed the "during" instead of "in" Vietnam? Here is the speech from the start. Note, in the beginning, he says clearly "in the Vietnam era."

    I agree with Dean, this was a hit job.

    Parent

    So you just listened to the first seconds? (none / 0) (#143)
    by Cream City on Wed May 19, 2010 at 09:33:25 PM EST
    You need to go to 2:45 to hear him say "since the days that I served in Vietnam."

    Parent
    Well, I'd already heard that part (none / 0) (#145)
    by jes on Thu May 20, 2010 at 09:27:22 AM EST
    from the "edited" NYTimes version. And I did listen to the whole thing. You may not think that he just misspoke and forgot the "during" in the part you quote. I think it is possible he was trying to mislead, but it isn't the only interpretation possible - given that he spoke the truth in the intro.

    There was a decent rebuttal on Orange yesterday that lays out opinions of people from CT.

    I have friends in CT that are outraged at the NYT so I'll admit I have a tendency to side with them.

    Parent

    Looks like Connecticut didn't know (none / 0) (#126)
    by Cream City on Wed May 19, 2010 at 10:47:43 AM EST
    about his FIVE deferments from going to Vietnam.

    Saw some editorial in a Connecticut paper that said tidbit was not known before about him.

    Isn't that even more deferments than Cheney got?

    Do what you must do, but I lost too many classmates in Vietnam and have too many family and friends who came back scarred forever, so that I simply could not pull the lever for a guy who made them go in his place -- and then "fibbed" about it.

    Parent

    As someone from CT, I will defend Blumenthal. (none / 0) (#12)
    by AX10 on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:26:51 PM EST
    He has done much good for the state.  He has gone after the thieves of the corporate world.  Similar to Spitzer, just no where near as prominent.
    I do NOT want to see Linda McMahon in the Senate.  She has seen nothing beyond the wealthy enclaves and hedge fund mobsters of Greenwich.  She has no idea of what the working class does.  From Torrington, to New Haven, from Norwich to New London, Richard has been the one fighting for the working class.  Linda McMahon has done no such thing.  She still has to explain the those many 'wrestlers' who died at young ages during their time at the WWE.  The steroids matter among other things has never been investigated much.

    While all of you bad mouth him, I will remind you as someone who has lived in CT for most of his life, you are wrong to throw in under the bus so quickly.

    Parent

    Bad Mouth? (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:32:01 PM EST
    WTF are you talking about? No one is bad mouthing him. He may in fact be fine, given the choices. But I would think that most, including all but cultists, would find his faking Viet Nam vet status, as at least a curiosity.

    Parent
    Cultists? (none / 0) (#62)
    by AX10 on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:24:30 PM EST
    So this is what you call supporters of Mr. Blumenthal?  We support him because of the work he had done on behalf of us.  Perhaps you would prefer Ms. McMahon who openly supported the TARP scam bailout and opposes regulation of the financial sector.  She also supports offshore drilling and sees nothing wrong with what happened in the gulf.

    Parent
    Sorry. I really know nothing of Mr. (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:43:30 PM EST
    Blumenthal but found his apology somewhat amusing.  "Misplaced words"?  

    Parent
    he meant to leave (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by CST on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:45:37 PM EST
    them in his @ss.

    Sorry I couldn't help myself.  I'm sure he'll make a fine senator.  He can't be any worse than the ones we've already got...

    Parent

    2010: Warmest year on record (none / 0) (#4)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:08:26 PM EST
    Two separate sources of temperature data - the National Climatic Data Center and NASA - report that, through April, 2010 is the warmest year ever recorded.

    The climate center (NCDC) reports that the Earth's combined land and ocean average surface temperature from January-April was 56 degrees, which is 1.24 degrees above the 20th-century average.

    El Nino -- a periodic natural warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean -- is partly to blame for the unusual warmth.

    NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies also reports that 2010, so far, is the warmest out of 131 years. Both NCDC and NASA use data that goes back to 1880.

    Last month, NASA issued a report that predicted 2010 would likely end up as the warmest year on record, due to the combintation of global warming and El Nino. The report states that "a new record global temperature, for the period with instrumental measurements, should be set within the next few months

    Sen Inhofe could not be reached for comment

    'You know who' will respond (none / 0) (#8)
    by waldenpond on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:19:42 PM EST
    I've been waiting for our resident "there's no such thing as global warming"  to give his interpretation of how the data proves his 'global cooling' ideology.  ha!

    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:21:57 PM EST
    gets hard to deny when its the warmest on record and its only May.

    Parent
    Yes, but you do need to remember ... (none / 0) (#11)
    by Robot Porter on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:24:19 PM EST
    half the earth has already had its summer.

    Parent
    mixed feelings about this (none / 0) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:27:51 PM EST
    but most of me thinks they asked for it.

    Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!

    in two days.  may 20th.


    No mixed feelings here... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:45:22 PM EST
    I love it...I can barely manage a stick figure, but I'll do my best on Thursday...maybe a pork chop in one stick hand and a bottle of Jim Beam in the other.  Maybe another immodest dress day while we're at it...show the overly superstitous world we mean business when it comes to freedom of speech and ideas.

    Parent
    Ideas (none / 0) (#23)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:50:09 PM EST
    where are they..And who's "we"?

    Parent
    "We" meaning... (none / 0) (#25)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:52:34 PM EST
    those who believe in the inalienable right to draw cartoons that mock anybody and everybody, real or imagined.

    And great ideas can be found on Talkleft everyday:)

    Parent

    If only we had iPads! (none / 0) (#26)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:53:35 PM EST
    Heres an idea (none / 0) (#29)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:55:30 PM EST
    how about we work the kinks out of our ideas and problems with freedom HERE before we automatically jump on the lets-all-mock-other-cultures train..

    Parent
    Sh*t bro... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:58:42 PM EST
    all I do is mock Uncle Sam and Buddy Christ...wouldn't want Cousin Mo to get jealous:)

    Parent
    kdog, I just read the Wiki entry (none / 0) (#33)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:01:50 PM EST
    re Ruby Ridge.  Thought of your continued advocacy.  Scary stuff.  

    Parent
    Well done Patawan ... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:02:26 PM EST
    most pleased in your training I am...Jedi Master of Liberty you soon shall be:)

    Parent
    It's "padawan" ... (none / 0) (#54)
    by Robot Porter on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:06:53 PM EST
    I say revealing my Star Wars geekery.

    Parent
    Thanks for the reference. Too obscure (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:55:14 PM EST
    for me in either version.

    Parent
    I have read some of Gerry Spence's (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:05:05 PM EST
    take on it that has been in his books.

    Parent
    honestly (none / 0) (#35)
    by CST on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:04:35 PM EST
    at this point I think it's become a bit of a problem here.

    I'm on the "they kind of asked for it" bandwagon.

    And shoot, I'll make fun of the Jesus freaks too any day of the week.  Equal opportunity mocking.

    Parent

    I noticed that (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:09:19 PM EST
    People who draw Mohammad are asking to be killed too.  And next will come women wearing "that shirt" are asking to be raped and women who speak out of turn are asking for that black eye.

    Parent
    the second thing (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:15:30 PM EST
    on Bill Mahers list of thing they need to understand:

    women can work.  and you cant beat them.  
    NOT negotiable.


    Parent

    I look a little askance (none / 0) (#18)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:44:29 PM EST
    anytime anybody says: "now, everybody do.." anything.

    Parent
    Simon says.. (none / 0) (#22)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:47:55 PM EST
    do something to offend the Muslims..

    Reminds me a little of all those neocon putzes who jumped up and down because EVERY newspaper wouldnt print those cartoons.

    Parent

    Cool muslims... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:55:07 PM EST
    won't mind...as for the whackjobs who try to intimidate cartoonists with the threat of violence...well they're not happy unless they're offended by the West, so give the whackjobs what they want.

    Parent
    It also has to do with respect (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:03:47 PM EST
    and manners..Free Speech is one thing, but there are other reasons why people dont say everything they think always: do you say to your friend "wow, your fiancee is really hot..I wouldnt mind.." or to your Mom "..that dress looks hideous on you, Mom"?

    Parent
    I wouldn't say those things... (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:50:59 PM EST
    because ya just don't mess with your best friends girl or your moms:), that being said I might if we were having a horn-bustin' session...mockery and self-mockery, maybe its a cultural thang.

    Crazy muslims who put the hit on Rushdie and killed Van Gogh otoh...mess with my way of life, my culture, sh*t the least I'm gonna do is mock yours...I'm too nice a guy to throw down or kill over it, like some people.

    Gotta say, I'm kinda taken aback by your stance here my man...always had you pegged as having no patience for frail sensibilities...you're the king of the zing...its why I love ya.

    Parent

    I see it as propagandizing (none / 0) (#49)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:03:55 PM EST
    in a volatile situation.

    And Im not particularly arrogant about further mocking people after already killing, maiming and making refugees of so many of them in the last decade. Borders on sadism to me -- and makes us look further like the bunch of going-off-half-cocked yahoos more and more people in the world perceive us as being.

    But that's just me.

    Parent

    I get that (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:08:49 PM EST
    but heres the thing.  I am all for Muslims going main stream in this country.  but there are, as Bill Maher says, some things they need to understand.  like some things are not negotiable.

    freedom of speech being one.  the main one it seems.
    we are all, as citizens, insulted or maligned in some way or another every day.  its part of being a citizen of this country.  get used to it and get over it or STFU and live someplace else.

    Parent

    So you'll be at Rev Phelps next God Hates F@gs (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:33:06 PM EST
    ... funeral protest, applauding his "test" of the 1st?

    I'm an ACLU hardass, but I don't think that just because you can, it manifests, always, as something that you should (by default.)

    Let people be, too. Let them -- all of us -- live our lives, order our souls and when it's time, bury our dead.

    Parent

    since you (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:40:37 PM EST
    dredged up the most vile analogy, I will go with it.
    no, I will not be applauding Fred but I will be defending his right to do it.  IMO Fred is on the front lines of free speech.  
    they are the canary in the coal mine.  they say the most vile and repulsive things anyone could imagine.
    and, yes, that speech is protected.  and I would not want it any other way.

    Parent
    I go one further... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:52:53 PM EST
    Fred comes when I bury my dead you'll see some violent extremism, but he should not go to jail or be forbidden by law...no siree bob.

    And drawing a cartoon no one has to look at is a far cry from crashing a funeral to be a major-league arsehole.

    That being said, of course "can" does not mean "should".  I just like me some mockery of religous whackjobery...we should, wherever it rears its ugly head..

    Parent

    one more thing (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:45:19 PM EST
    as something that you should (by default.)

    we did not start this fight.  they are making death threats to freaking CARTOONISTS.

    to compare that to Fred Phelps is sad.


    Parent

    Sad why? Why revere SthPark's deliberate (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:02:17 PM EST
    ... targeting/baiting of a religious group as most excellent humor -- (haw haw haw) -- but revile Phelps precision baiting as, well, vile?  

    Parent
    actually (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:07:53 PM EST
    the one people are actually worried about is this guy Lars Vilks.  he could actually, you know, die for a cartoon.

    Parent
    Yabuttt p!ssing off fanatics from SthPark megabux (none / 0) (#84)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:24:37 PM EST
    ... estates, where it's safe, during sweeps is righteous cool even if there's collateral damage.

    See, it's good fun cause it involves CARTOONING, which PC/stick in the mud people refuse to get even when the targets are the ones that are okay to bait that particular month.

    That's why all that Mohammed goofballery is funny but the G0d Hates F@gs stuff gets everyone all up in a bunch ... this particular month.

    Either way, most of the people that are p!ssing themselves laughing won't bother taking ten minutes to understand why those who are p!ssed ... are p!ssed. [/yeah deliberate obtuseness is a right]

    Parent

    Collateral Damage? (none / 0) (#86)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:39:18 PM EST
    Like some kid didn't do their homework because they were watching South Park?  I mean ya can't pin any death threats on Parker and Stone.

    Sh*t sister I ain't got 10 seconds for Phelps or some two-bit cleric who vents their frustrations by waving signs in people's faces at a funeral or putting out hits on cartoonists who have offended their frail belief systems...now if they wanna sit down and talk gripes like human beings I got 10 minutes...I got some of my own.

    Parent

    No coll'ral death on South Park Bushies/Repugs? (none / 0) (#90)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:38:19 PM EST
    I mean ya can't pin any death threats on Parker and Stone.

    Surely you jest. They laughed those humorless, DFH anti-war libs clean out of the debate for a decade.

    Parent

    The difference my friend... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:11:54 PM EST
    is you have to tune into South Park, log on to the internet to see a cartoon mocking religion...Phelps delivers to a loved one's funeral...huge difference.

    If Phelps just did his "god hates f*gs" schtick on a website or public access channel I'd have no problem with him, I'd just mock his sorry arse.

    Parent

    personally (none / 0) (#81)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:15:00 PM EST
    I have absolutely no problem with this:

     

    targeting/baiting of a religious group as most excellent humor

    to think that gives someone the right to even threaten someone let alone kill them is, to me, completely insane.

    Parent

    There's also such a thing (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:19:32 PM EST
    as yelling movie! in a crowded firehouse.

    Parent
    D'They kill anyone yet cause of the SthPark toon? (none / 0) (#106)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:43:33 PM EST
    No? Only saber rattle?

    That strikes me as equally dangerous to the incendiary South Park missive (and about as dumb.)

    Parent

    a (none / 0) (#78)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:11:51 PM EST
    btw (none / 0) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:42:38 PM EST
    since you seem in the mood to "curtail" free speech how would you feel about Mahers second item.

    maybe we should not get upset when they beat women or wont let them work?

    Parent

    Clitorectomy.. (none / 0) (#71)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:48:11 PM EST
    throwing acid in the faces of little Untouchable girls in India because they swam in your Upper Caste pond?

    Why no discussion, ever, of these things? Because Richard Perle didnt vet the info first?

    Parent

    I think those things are discussed (none / 0) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:50:07 PM EST
    I read about them all the time.
    this is a small thing that everyone can to do say shove it.

    this far.  no further.


    Parent

    They're discussed on Monday (none / 0) (#75)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:57:19 PM EST
    and Muslims on the other six days, in my experience.

    Parent
    Who's curtailing? Do the crime, do the time ... (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:50:35 PM EST
    ... if/when the free speech extends beyond reasonable protections.

    Right now, what's reasonable isn't what's protective of the public arena but crap like what protects the Politician in Chief's image.

    I'm for eliminating double standards based on fashion and whims of the moment.

    Parent

    That's a load of horsesh!t from Maher ... (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Ellie on Tue May 18, 2010 at 10:00:11 PM EST
    but there are, as Bill Maher says, some things they need to understand. like some things are not negotiable.

    freedom of speech being one.  the main one it seems. we are all, as citizens, insulted or maligned in some way or another every day.  its part of being a citizen of this country.  get used to it and get over it or STFU and live someplace else

    That's just a latte'n'arugula friendly version of America, Love it or Leave it.

    The 1st amend't is argued in courts daily -- who's saying leave the country and get stripped of citizenship ... except Lieberman and now Bill Maher!

    Speech is currently a 'sexy' amendment that superficial South Park fanboiz bat around in the Socratic Caves while boring rights (eg, repro rights, search & seizure) get let slide -- as long as it's primarily icky types, who aren't chic at the time, that are getting burnt.

    Parent

    yeah (none / 0) (#123)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 08:59:48 AM EST
    oops - yeah (none / 0) (#124)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 09:00:32 AM EST
    speech is "sexy".
    that is really the only reason anyone cares about it.
    fuc*ing pathetic.


    Parent
    I wouldn't mock... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:19:11 PM EST
    anybody killed, maimed, or displaced by our wmds brother...guilty as charged for chipping in for it, but never mock.  

    Freaks who kill over cartoons, same as freaks who kill for politics or money or power or religion...the epidemic is worldwide, lets mock it on all fronts.

    Parent

    I dont know (none / 0) (#63)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:31:53 PM EST
    if the connection is automatic to people that mocking Mohammed is really about mocking people who kill, for whatever fanatical reasons..

    Personally, I think everyone went astray when they lost sight of the fact that God is a jokester.

    Parent

    An androgynous (none / 0) (#66)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:41:07 PM EST
    one at that..who can throw together a desert sunrise like God Eye for the Straight Landscape.

    Parent
    Dawg, you talk like Eminem (none / 0) (#117)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:17:28 AM EST
    when you conversate. Amiright? Does you look like him too? Just bustin' on ya my man.

    Parent
    Ha! (none / 0) (#119)
    by kdog on Wed May 19, 2010 at 08:19:08 AM EST
    Well I am a skinny cracker known to rock a white T and blue jeans who has busted a ryhme or two in my day, but I associate more with Ad-Rock.

    "I be smokin' roaches in the vestibules,
    in the next millenium I'll still be old school."


    Parent
    Ad- Rock, Adam Horovitz of the Beastie Boys... (none / 0) (#134)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:47:33 PM EST
    I like the 'musicality' of eminem and the Beastie Boys. But the whole wigger phenom is a little inky to me (in the original meaning of the word).

    In the late 70s-early 80s I was listening to (dancing to) hip hop/rap/funk acts like Kurtis Blow; Sugarhill Gang; The Gap Band; Fab Five Freddy; and Grandmaster Flash. Those guys had some commercial success but they were more widely known in the underground scene.

    Then along came the Beastie Boys and, with "Licensed to Ill" in 1986, rap went mainstream, big-time. Of course, I'm not the first person who finds it problematic that the Beastie Boys were so much more widely accepted, and financially successful, than any of the black rappers back in the day -- owing largely to support from white kids (same for eminem).

    Here's a funny video of the Beastie Boys, from 1984, when they were still wet behind the ears (i.e. Horovitz was still in high school, another was at freaking Vassar College -- oy, or more like goy): The Scott and Gary Show, feat. The Beastie Boys: Cookie Puss Interview . Enjoy.

    Parent

    Beasties are great... (none / 0) (#136)
    by kdog on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:59:24 PM EST
    I can barely listen to "License to Ill" anymore though..."Paul's Boutique" on is where its at...I think I know every rhyme on that record.  Such gems as "Knucklehead deli tried to jip me on the price, so I clocked him off the turban with a bag of ice." Or decribing a NYC subway ride "Overworked and underpaid, staring at the floor. Prostitute's spandex caught in the sliding door."  Pure genius.

    Never a big Eminem guy...but I can appreciate his talent.

    Thanks for the linkage...I'll check it out later with sound.  

    Parent

    Ad- Rock, Adam Horovitz of the Beastie Boys... (none / 0) (#135)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:58:01 PM EST
    I like the 'musicality' of eminem and the Beastie Boys. But the whole wigger phenom is a little inky to me (in the original meaning of the word).

    In the late 70s-early 80s I was listening to (dancing to) hip hop/rap/funk acts like Kurtis Blow; Sugarhill Gang; The Gap Band; Fab Five Freddy; and Grandmaster Flash. Those guys were all AMAZING and had some commercial success, but they were more widely known in the underground scene.

    Then along came the Beastie Boys (solidly upper-middle class white guys) and, with "Licensed to Ill" in 1986, rap went mainstream, big-time. Of course, I'm not the first person who finds it problematic that the Beastie Boys were so much more widely accepted, and financially successful, than any of the black rappers back in the day -- owing largely to support from a white audience -- especially college kids (same for eminem). Enough said.

    Here's a funny video of the Beastie Boys, from 1984, when they were still wet behind the ears (i.e. Horovitz was still in high school, Mike D was at freaking Vassar College -- oy, or more like goy): The Scott and Gary Show, feat. The Beastie Boys: Cookie Puss Interview . Enjoy.

    Parent

    Sorry, I didn't mean to say it twice. (none / 0) (#137)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:59:44 PM EST
    Bull (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:53:04 PM EST
    Art is art and nobody has the right to stiffle such expression.  I'm for the chocolate Jesus too, and a chocolate Buddha.  Abusive freaks don't get to run my life, not now, not ever.

    Parent
    I want a (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by ZtoA on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:04:56 PM EST
    chocolate secular humanist.

    Parent
    Look no further.. (none / 0) (#58)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:09:49 PM EST
    Although, given a key tenent of Islam (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:52:56 PM EST
    is that thou shalt not depict Mohammed, wouldn't it be respectful of the Muslims to refrain from doing so?  Analogy, one of the Ten Commandments forbids taking God's name in vain.  Go ahead and do so; but maybe refrain from doing so within earshot of practicing Jews and/or Christians.  

    Parent
    here's how I see it (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by CST on Wed May 19, 2010 at 08:37:20 AM EST
    and for what it's worth, my Muslim sister agrees strongly with me on this point.

    It's a key tenet of Islam, so Muslims shouldn't do it.  If you are not Muslim, who cares?  You can do whatever you want.  It's like how they serve alchohol to foreigners in Afghanistan.  Or how you don't have to wear a scarf if you're not actually Muslim.  Now, if I am on someone else's turf, I might not drink or I might wear a scarf to not draw attention to myself.  But in fact, I wouldn't be required to because I am not actually Muslim.

    Same thing with drawing cartoons.  That's fine if you can't draw a cartoon because it's against your religion.  It's not my religion though, so don't tell me what I can and cannot draw.

    Just like it's fine if you're not supposed to have sex before marriage, or take God's name in vain.  I don't believe in your rules, so I'm not gonna play by them.  If it offends you, sorry, but frankly, I am sick and tired of religious people trying to control how the rest of us live our lives.  No one is forcing anyone to read or look at the cartoons.

    People offend me on a daily basis and I don't go around threatening them.  That's part of the deal living in a free country.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#127)
    by squeaky on Wed May 19, 2010 at 10:51:44 AM EST
    The other side of the story is that Daniel Pipes had a very close relationship with the right wing Danish Publisher...  The intention of publishing the cartoon was somewhat different from South Park, as its irreverence was extremely selective and intended to enrage the extremist Muslims.

    Yeah, takes two to tango, and I agree with your muslim sister, but Pipes and his crowd are reprehensible.

    Parent

    Oh Great Muslim Expert (none / 0) (#98)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:04:23 PM EST
    Although, given a key tenent [sic] of Islam is that thou shalt not depict Mohammed..

    That is not a key tenet of Islam. It has been debated through the ages. The ten commandments version is thou shall not worship graven images.

    And a strict jewish law is never to utter the name of god.

    I would say that the both ideas are related, in both Islaam and Judiasm.

    The idea stems from the notion that once you name god or make an image of god then it loses its power in that it is limited to a word or an image rather than a deep concept that is undefined.  

    Parent

    First you insult me. Then you agree (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:08:06 PM EST
    with me.

    Parent
    No I Do NOt Agree (none / 0) (#103)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:12:59 PM EST
    But I do tell you the principal from whence it comes. THe principal has many resolutions. Depicting Mohammed is not against Islamic law. To never depict Mohammed has been interpreted by some as a rule derived from the principal I stated, but for many other devout Muslims through history depicting Mohammed is not against the principal.

    Parent
    Interesting factoid: (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:31:15 PM EST
    Muhammad figures frequently in depictions of influential people in world history. Such depictions tend to be favourable or neutral in intent; one example can be found at the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C.. A frieze including major historical lawgivers places Muhammad alongside Hammurabi, Moses, Confucius, and others. Because of a 1997 controversy surrounding the frieze, tourist materials have been edited so they call the depiction "a well-intentioned attempt by the sculptor to honor Muhammad" that "bears no resemblance to Muhammad."[18]
     [Wiki excerpt.]

    Parent
    Bears No Resemblance to Mohammed (none / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:09:56 AM EST
    Nope, sorry, just feeds their intolerance (none / 0) (#120)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 08:22:03 AM EST
    problems.  They are free to observe whatever religious practices they want.  That is where they leave off though and I begin, I will not feed intolerance.  This has been a consistent problem with me though on all levels.  And if you think you can make me observe your religious practices by killing me if I don't, I feel compelled to kill you back.

    Parent
    When was the last (none / 0) (#140)
    by jondee on Wed May 19, 2010 at 02:39:18 PM EST
    time invading a country fed tolerance?

    All you're doing is throwing people back into their mammalian - reptilian survival and territorial imperatives brains. Good luck with that.

    Parent

    "earshot of practicing . . . " (none / 0) (#128)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 11:58:53 AM EST
    heres the thing.  if a jew or christian hears you "take the lords name in vain"  they do not usually issue a fatwa.

    we make fun of religion all the time.  its part of this culture.  people dont like it they complain about it.  they do not try to kill the people who do it.

    we are not going to allow a bunch of thugs acting on the part of ANY religion to shut down free speech.

    its just so "sexy" you know.


    Parent

    Hey, lets all draw pictures (none / 0) (#141)
    by jondee on Wed May 19, 2010 at 02:42:35 PM EST
    of the board of Monsanto..

    After seeing Food Inc last night, I cant get Steadmanesqe images of humanoid forms in suits with horsefly larvae faces sitting around a table out of my head..

    Parent

    So (none / 0) (#53)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:06:50 PM EST
    make your own art. And dont wait till some twit says "Hey everybody, lets draw pictures of the Dalai Lama.."

    Parent
    So what if someone does (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:15:06 PM EST
    pick one day and everyone draws him?  It is called boundaries, and abusive people have a problem with them and try to kill people for doing things differently than they do.  I'm fine with making complete and utter fun of murderous lunatics.  I don't know who they will need to kill first after the 20th.  They might have to grow a boundary and even find some tolerance because there's just too many that need killed now to get the job done.  It's called civil disobedience.

    Parent
    I prefer the Piss Jesus to the chocolate one. (none / 0) (#118)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:20:45 AM EST
    There is a piss Jesus? (none / 0) (#121)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 08:22:49 AM EST
    Well, God is in everything :)

    Parent
    Gee, Guess You're Too Young (none / 0) (#125)
    by squeaky on Wed May 19, 2010 at 10:47:23 AM EST
    Jesse Helms shut down the NEA because of "Piss Christ", among other things...

    Parent
    Yeah, that was how the NEA (none / 0) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 12:44:24 PM EST
    took a hit.  It hadn't been on ongoing bone of contention for years.  So please, nobody draw Mohammad tomorrow or global art will be obliterated forever.  Don't rock the art boats people.

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#130)
    by squeaky on Wed May 19, 2010 at 12:55:30 PM EST
    I suppose you were supporting Helms, Meese and moral majority over Karen Finley et al.

    makes sense, in a way

    Parent

    Heh, I see I have now earned myself (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 12:58:58 PM EST
    the award of a constant Squeaky.  Remember, I'm no where near as nice as anyone else you have awarded yourself to in the past :)

    Parent
    Don't Flatter Yourself (none / 0) (#132)
    by squeaky on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    I have had little interest in what you have to say for some time now.

    And if you need to harsh out, it will be my pleasure to facilitate your nowhere near as niceness.

    Parent

    You are a laugh (none / 0) (#133)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 19, 2010 at 01:15:08 PM EST
    Piss Christ is a 1987 photo by Andres Serrano. (none / 0) (#138)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed May 19, 2010 at 02:13:49 PM EST
    He wasn't part of the NEA Four incident, which made it all the way to the SCOTUS:
    The "NEA Four", Karen Finley, Tim Miller, John Fleck, and Holly Hughes, were performance artists whose proposed grants from the United States government's National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) were vetoed by John Frohnmayer in June 1990. Grants were overtly vetoed on the basis of subject matter [sexuality and gender] after the artists had successfully passed through a peer review process. The artists won their case in court in 1993 and were awarded amounts equal to the grant money in question, though the case would make its way to the United States Supreme Court in National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley. In response, the NEA, under pressure from Congress, stopped funding individual artists.


    Parent
    respect (none / 0) (#37)
    by CST on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:09:31 PM EST
    is a two way street.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:15:59 PM EST
    you first..

    Parent
    AQAP and all their friends and allies (none / 0) (#70)
    by Spamlet on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:46:13 PM EST
    are laughing at people like you.

    Parent
    You should know (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:11:53 PM EST
    Meaning what? (none / 0) (#88)
    by Spamlet on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:13:37 PM EST
    That because I'm laughing at you, too, I'm with AQAP?

    Just sayin' that while you're giving yourself a wedgie over bruising the delicate sensibilities of homicidal religious fundamentalists--which is not to say Muslims as a group, but rather the homicidal fanatics stuck in the 13th century who murdered Theo Van Gogh and threatened to execute a Danish cartoonist--they are laughing at you as a fool. They don't give a cr@p about your putative respect for the Prophet.

    Parent

    As Rumi says (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:22:13 PM EST
    he's a mirror: when an ape looks in, no angel looks out. Laugh away..

    While we're on it though, Im also not big on West Bank thugs and emotional blackmailers who start talking about Holocaust deniers every time someone points out Perle and Wolfowitz's garden slug trail. But we'll table that discussion for another time..

    Parent

    What's next from you? Godwin? (none / 0) (#91)
    by Spamlet on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:44:02 PM EST
    Im also not big on West Bank thugs and emotional blackmailers who start talking about Holocaust deniers every time someone points out Perle and Wolfowitz's garden slug trail.

    You and only you brought up Israel here. Not sure why, since the topic is the (fundamentalist) culture-jamming prank of drawing the Prophet en masse.

    But since you did bring up Israel, did you know that the religious fanatics whose delicate sensibilities have you in such a protective, patronizing swivet are in the habit of referring to you as a "Jew," regardless of whether you actually are one?

    Parent

    That's only before (none / 0) (#92)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:51:22 PM EST
    I turn on the charm full blast.

    So, whats the solution: kill or round up every single one of the hyper-sensitive nuts for the next fifty years on China's dime until a dirty bomb (inevitably) goes off; or is there some other way nincompoop nation can come up with of defusing religious mania other than writing on bathroom walls?

    Parent

    Btw Open Thread (none / 0) (#96)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:55:22 PM EST
    means there's no "the topic is..".

    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#102)
    by Spamlet on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:10:45 PM EST
    what "the solution" is, just that there's very likely no "final solution," and that's the way it should be.

    I also think there's a case to be made for these fundamentalist f^ckers as freedom fighters. I don't think it's a particularly good case, given how they treat the women among them, just for starters. But the case can still be made, on the basis of much wrongdoing against Islamic cultures by Western interests, going back many centuries.

    And yet I don't see you making that case. I just see you giving yourself a wedgie over "propagandizing in a volatile situation" and fretting about a "dirty bomb" going off if we make the fanatics mad again, for whatever reason. You don't seem to grasp that they are already so pissed that they may be past all desire for anything but what they would see as vengeance, richly deserved. It would not be an illogical position on their part.

    Personally, I wish Bush and Cheney had seen 9/11 as a matter for law enforcement, and I suppose that puts me in tune with most others on the left.

    In any case, I love the idea of Draw Mohammed Day. So do my Muslim friends, by the way.

    And it's fine with me that you don't know "if the connection is automatic to people that mocking Mohammed is really about mocking people who kill, for whatever fanatical reasons." But the fact that you don't know this is not, IMO, a reason for you to tell everyone who's down with drawing the Prophet to basically STFU.

    Parent

    You can do what you want (none / 0) (#104)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:18:59 PM EST
    I can say what I want. And can still think Im living in moron nation; that cant spell diplomacy, and just finished with eight years of someone who wouldnt be my first pick for manager at the local Home Depot.

    But, by all means dont STFU. And neither will I.

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#93)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:51:53 PM EST
    And did you know that many of so called "jews" are calling all Muslims terrorists?

    Parent
    I thought it was "the Arabs" (none / 0) (#97)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:01:44 PM EST
    Them Too (none / 0) (#99)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:06:46 PM EST
    Oh, I don't know... (none / 0) (#82)
    by sj on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:17:12 PM EST
    ... I kind of get a kick out of Talk Like A Pirate Day even though I don't participate.

    Parent
    If it were "talk like a sailor day", (none / 0) (#85)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:36:07 PM EST
    I'd say fu@k yeah, now you're talkin'.


    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:55:09 PM EST
    Must be the companion holiday to Mother Mary dildo day, or is Yowling Yaweh day, in between bites of Suckling pig day..

    Free speech is so much fun.

    Parent

    That's the spirit... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:53:54 PM EST
    I gotta think Lenny Bruce woulda been all over these special days.

    Then get locked up over it...talk about Taliban.

    Parent

    It's clearly just some kid ... (none / 0) (#30)
    by Robot Porter on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:57:25 PM EST
    trying to get attention.

    But, if he cares about free speech, why is he using Facebook?

    Parent

    In what way is using Facebook (none / 0) (#32)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:00:16 PM EST
    inapposite to free speech?

    Parent
    Good question... (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:57:51 PM EST
    anti-privacy, hell yeah...wouldn't surprise me if they censor users too just hadn't heard of it...not my scene...and I was in-n-out of Howdy's link before they algorithmed my DNA...I hope.

    Parent
    I was wondering that myself (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:05:40 PM EST
    if the terrarists want they will not only know where everyone who draws one lives but when they are on vacation, or shopping, or walking the dog, or scratching their butt . . . .

    Parent
    Fricken hilarious (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:49:57 PM EST
    Well I can tell you what everyone at Fort Rucker will be doing on the 20th.  Let's get all the stupid reasons to kill each other though out of the way now :)

    Parent
    Joe Sestak wins Democratic Primary in Pa (none / 0) (#109)
    by hairspray on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:59:12 PM EST
    Much handwringing going on at MSNBC.  Everyone who was anyone in D party supported Arelen Specter. Why? He was an opportunist, jumping to the D side when he was going to lose the R primary. He has been on the train too long and has not really been an old soldier.  Forty six years as an R and he loses his first Democratic primary.  Makes sense to me.  I hope Sestak is better, he certainly should be.

    Makes sense to me too (none / 0) (#111)
    by ruffian on Tue May 18, 2010 at 10:17:26 PM EST
    how could a Dem pull the lever for Specter in a primary? Mindblowing to me that he even got 100 votes.

    I don't follow everything Sestak does, but when I hear him interviewed he always makes sense to me. hH seems to think about things logically and not just spout talking points. I'm sure I won't agree all the time, and pols are pols, but I sure hope he wins in Novermber.

    Parent

    I heard Keith Olberman say (none / 0) (#112)
    by hairspray on Tue May 18, 2010 at 10:29:27 PM EST
    that he was a centrist, so I went to Wikipedia and read his positions.  If he is a centrist, I am Helen of Troy.  He supports gun control, pro choice including supporting late stage abortions, strong education positions and union positions.  I think he is a very progressive D and I hope that he can take PA.  I lived in PA once and they love the military, so here's hoping.

    Parent
    Maybe Keithie was making a prediction (none / 0) (#144)
    by Cream City on Wed May 19, 2010 at 09:38:48 PM EST
    since progressives turn into centrists in the Senate.

    Parent